'Wont' By Wilfred Kohl: Article Analysis

In this article, written by Herbert Kohl, it talks mainly about how people assume that if someone chooses not to do something, it’s taken as they can't do it.  For an example, in the article It discusses that one of his fifth-grade students grandfather, Wilfredo, wouldn't learn to speak English. Kohl asked the grandfather when he got to know him if he would be able to teach him English. Wilfredo’s response was that he didn't want to learn in fear that it would cause for his culture and language not to be passed down each generation. Kohl discussed this matter with a few friends. The response that he got from his friends was that Wilfredo is saying this as "a cover-up of either his own fear of trying to learn English or his failure to do so." This then brought up the discussion of learning and not-learning. That to learn you must have the free choice and dedication to get it done. Kohl’s main point that he tries to get off is the difference between “can’t” and “wont”. In this example,
He says “Not-learning tends to take place when someone has to deal with unavoidable challenges to her or his personal and family loyalties, integrity, and identity.” My friend Val was unable to graduate on time with us because his father and family believe that working and helping the family business is more valuable than his high school education. With this not-learning isn’t fully because of Val but because of his family loyalties just as Kohl says. One thing that I found interesting was when Kohl’s friends thought that Wilfredo wouldn’t learn English because he was fearful of failure. Which brings up the “can’t” and “won’t” learn. Kohl’s friends assumed that he “can’t” learn, but the fact is that he just decided he “won’t” learn. By Wilfredo not learning English it forces his grandchildren to learn Spanish and keep their heritage alive. In this case, not-learning protects their culture identify and/or sense of