Been learning about the KIPP school system — singular goal of getting students to college. They've had tremendous success but I'm struggling to reconcile that goal with the point paulg made about "unlearning" the bad habits of schools.

Let me start by saying KIPP is incredible for taking underserved students and helping them unlock new potential. In the end, I'm picking at a nuance to the impact they've had for my own selfish thought experiment.

KIPP achieves their success by intensely focusing on good habits and rigor — obedience, silent study, longer hours, respect. A core premise is that hard work will outdo intelligence (IQ), which is supported by Dweck.

The counterargument to this is that it leaves little room for exploration, discovery, and creativity. It will make you very good at taking tests, but might not help create a desire to learn for the sake of learning.

When I think about the goal of college, it comes down to getting a job. Grades and internships are the proxy. But studying for tests and solving ambiguous problems at work at totally different worlds.

So what would happen if KIPP's mission changes to "get a great job"? Why not skip the middle step? How would that impact their approach and curriculum? I don't know what the answers are but can't help but feel like there's a "there" there.

If anyone has interesting stuff to point me towards, please comment!