{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027384324834749764, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.935574229691877, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Reflective Abilities of Schoolchildren

The question asked here is not a rhetorical reference to what we have said up to now. The choice of goals and, accordingly, methods of elementary instruction depends on how it is answered. We have only formulated one possible answer: not knowing what one does not know, it is impossible to set targets for self-education, to teach oneself, to be the subject of one’s own learning activity. But there is another possible answer: not knowing what one does not know can be an excellent topic for study, prompting one to avidly absorb any knowledge, abilities, and skills. Children can be taught to read, write, and count perfectly; they can even be made into experts, highly qualified specialists who can solve any problem within the bounds of their competence. But is it possible, without knowing the limits of one’s competence, to go beyond these limits and set fundamentally new tasks, without waiting for “life itself” (in the person of a teacher, boss, or leader) to prod one? We have no wish to engage in unproductive, purely confessional debate about which school is better: one that nurtures the subjects of instruction, or one that looks at the child as the object of its tender pedagogical concerns. Both approaches to the instruction of primary schoolchildren are acceptable, but they are incompatible, and the main thing is not to confuse them: not to impute to a school oriented toward the training of specialists and technicians, the cultivation of learning to learn, which it cannot attain; and not to judge a school that cultivates learning to learn, only by the skillful achievements of its students. And each school should proceed according to its internal laws, not applying alien and even harmful approaches from a different educational system. For example, for knowledgeable adults who invest their knowledge in children’s minds (“the reasonable, the good, the eternal”), academic discussion about learning is not useful: there should be one truth, clear and not corroded by doubt. But teachers who encourage students to learn on their own simply cannot do