Jean Anyon concurs with her observations taken from sample schools. In her report, “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work”, she conducted research at schools which she classified into four categories: Working-Class, Middle-Class, Affluent Professional, and Executive Elite schools. Of the two first schools listed, Working and Middle Class, the work done in the classrooms was dull and more detail heavy; not relying on intuitive thinking and apprehension at a stimulating level. Anyon reveals, “Most of the rules regarding work are designations of what the children are to do; the rules are steps to follow,” in the Working Class schools (173). In the Middle Class, the chain lengthened only slightly. “Answers are usually found in the books or by listening to the teacher… answers must be given in the right order, and one cannot make them up,” (176). Nevertheless, the separation of education, into different social classes, is beginning to look less and less opaque. Of the most influential theories of the rift in the education of different social classes in America, is that it is to benefit the wealthy and keep the less fortunate down at the bottom rung. Gatto boldly claims that the powers on high do not want well educated people, but rather, mindlessly obedient workers. He goes on to mention Woodrow Wilson in his address to the New York City School Teachers’ Association in 1909: “We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want another class of persons… to forgo the privileges of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.” Gatto then continues stating that schools have done a remarkable job at keeping children “children,” never growing up with personal responsibilities or independence, thereby acquiring traits of avarice, jealousy, fear and envy (154). Heading on back