>
We shouldn't be blaming the school for our failures.
And what about Pinocchio at Pleasure Island? Was the fact that Pinocchio was the party animal and indulged a reflection/failure of Gepetto or more about what can happen to those who can't help themselves when the forbidden fruits are placed in front of them and they're put in to a social environment where indulging is the norm?
I guess your contention would be that Pinocchio was in fact a slacker and it was indeed Gepetto's failure.
We send our daughter to private school because we don't think the public elementary school is providing the appropriate curriculum or social environment. If we instead put her in the public school system, would it be our failure as parents if she got involved with the wrong crowd? Maybe so - but, if we have more control over the environment, we can mitigate the risk. You can't control the environment at the college - can you? You are solely relying on the kids to make the right decisions.
If you put the kids in an environment where they can so easily stray off the path, there is a higher probability that they will. The schools are making it easier for that to happen. My contention is that the schools are creating that environment to raise the possibility/probability that the kids can indulge. In the 20 some-odd years since we've attended, I don't think the objective/goals of the university have changed all that much. But, visiting the campus of our alma mater, seeing what is going on, it is clear that their focus is changing. They are encouraging/enticing the kids to indulge and partake in what they are offering outside the classroom. This is why we hear of 5 and 6 years needed to graduate.
I liken it to the similar logic that many here apply to the reasoning for not opening a UGMA - because they are afraid what the 18 or 21 year old may do with the funds.
[This message has been edited by rsinj (edited July 20, 2006).]