Nowadays, we're in a day and age of open-mindedness. More and more people, as the days go by and technology becomes much more advanced, are beginning to realize that traditions aren't holding; the original orthodox ways of going about things aren't sticking, and truth be told, they aren't working. College, and more importantly, education in general, is one of these areas of social advancement. Nowadays, people are realizing that the fool-proof "getting your high school diploma and then attending the mandatory four years of college" mold isn't one size fits all after all. Now that people are valuing the creative side of things, like working in the film industry and pursuing artistry, as well as athletics, the idea of college has acquired a certain connotation with it, despite what one's major is. And now, parents have started to specialize their kids from a young age: will my child end up attending college, then med school, and become a doctor, or will my kid end up attending art school?

All of this is fine and good. Arts and athletics are certainly something that should be valued and rewarded for among children, just as much as academics are. However, issues arise when everything starts to blend together. For example, the high school I attended is a strict science charter school, and heavily emphasizes academics and the like. As a result, many students ridicule the school for not offering enough arts and athletics and such; in fact, parents of children who attended the adjoining elementary school accused the school of being "too academic."

See, this is the problem: if you're attending or affiliating yourself with an education or organization that heavily concentrates itself in one area of study, or in a certain specific way, why do you shame the organization for being that way even if you knew it was that way in the first place?

Don't get me wrong, I totally get it. Every school should have offerings in every academic subject; this is a given. But when you attend a science school, especially a school that is renowned for its academics, why are you upset when its focus is, oh what a surprise, academics? I mean, my high school did have arts and athletics for those who craved them, but they weren't the focus because, lo and behold, it was a science school, that did science things!

I'm sorry, but the problem doesn't lie with the school--the problem lies with YOU.

This doesn't just go for schools. This goes for the concept of education in general. When one goes into the world of academia, one has to know that it's not easy. It's very much difficult, and involves a lot of studying. And when you commit yourself to pursuing such a path, you can't just say that you won't do it. You knew about it, you accepted it, and so you must keep on keeping on. That's what I did, and my high school allowed me to do just that by successfully giving me the arduous academics I needed to thrive at a top-twenty university. So why do you jeer at me when I defend such an institution, just because I followed and fully support their methods of education?

Moral of the story: if you don't agree with it, then just leave. There are thousands of educational institutions in the United States. Maybe my high school, or high schools like it, didn't cut it for you. I'm sure there's a school out there that will. But when you mock an education that you don't agree with just because of the way it is, the education is not in the wrong; you are.