Opinion — Schools becoming unnecessary because children can learn online at home

Any ten-year-old with a phone can now reach more information than the best school library ever held. It does not follow that schools have become redundant, and I strongly disagree with the claim that children can learn just as well at home.

The statement is right about one thing: knowledge itself is no longer scarce. Free platforms such as Khan Academy explain mathematics well, and a motivated pupil can use them to learn at her own pace. But information is not education. A child must first know which sources to trust, what to study next and when an answer is wrong, and these are exactly the judgements that young learners are not yet equipped to make. Nor do most children have the self-discipline to choose algebra over a video game when no adult is watching. What a school supplies is not facts but structure, sequence and correction.

Schools also do things that have nothing to do with information. In a classroom, children learn to wait their turn, to argue without quarrelling and to work with people they did not choose, and such skills cannot be acquired alone in a bedroom. A teacher who sees a pupil's face can tell that an explanation has failed, and can offer immediate feedback that no recorded lesson provides. Schools are also a great leveller: learning at home depends on having a quiet room, a good connection and an educated parent with time to help, so abolishing schools would hand a larger advantage to privileged families. The closures during the COVID-19 pandemic were an unplanned test of the idea, and studies in many countries found that pupils, particularly the poorest and youngest, fell behind.

In conclusion, the internet has made schools better equipped, not unnecessary. For children, who need guidance, company and a structured routine, online material is a valuable supplement to the classroom and a poor substitute for it.