A response paper

11 December Response paper The high school education system is out d. It is very old and was originally meant for children that would graduate from the high school two to three years after maturation whereas children today mature at least four years before graduation. The courses they are offered are incompatible with their mental maturity as a result of which, many children even from the high income families cannot find good education. High school students are fully capable of behaving like adults. Although the author’s realization of the need to redesign the high school education system is correct, the rationale provided by him i. e. physical maturity is necessarily linked with mental maturity is baseless.
Children in the present age are smarter than those in the past. This means that they are well-versed with the use of technology and are more technically equipped than children of the past. But being equipped with technical skills does not mean that they are equally well-prepared for complicated curriculum at a younger age than children of the past.
The claim that children need more complicated educational framework in the high school than the existing one is wrong. Had it been so, children should have been showing best performance in the existing framework since it is so simple. But their performance is below the mark which suggests that there is a problem with the teaching and educational system rather than the courses that are taught.
Rather than complicating the courses, a better approach would be to integrate the use of technology more in education.