Another area that I just can't agree with Dewey in is how he resorts to experience as the primary way for a student to learn. Without a doubt, I believe that his method of inquiry can add a lot to a student's education. In his school, the kids were doing so many amazing things that I wish I could have done in my years as a young boy. But, looking at the big picture, there seems to be so many things that a child must learn over their lifetime that they cannot possibly discover and "do" everything. Yes, you can learn math when measuring out the flour required to bake a cake, but can that form of math be applied to everything? There are other things out in the world like measuring liquids or counting coins. How would one child have the time and the means to experience every single thing? I think that at some point, students will need to use some form of memorization of information or facts as a basis of knowledge that they can then use to learn about other things. A quote from a parent that had a child in Dewey's school really sums up this problem saying, "We have to teach him how to study. He learned to 'observe' last year" (Storr).I think that Dewey had the right idea, but he had everything backwards. First, the student should learn a foundation of knowledge, from something like a textbook, and then they can go out and experiment and apply that knowledge to real everyday situations.