Nobody is Unteachable
Any reader expecting a book targeted toward a young audience titled The Unteachables to argue on the theme that some students simply cannot be taught really has not been paying attention to the way fiction works in America. If there is one thing that can be guaranteed without so much as opening the cover of the book it is that the ultimate message of the narrative is going to be that no matter how resistant the pupil or how uninspiring the teacher, there really is no such thing as an unteachable student. (Within reason, of course.)
Redemption
This theme applies equally to students and teacher. Mr. Kermit is nearing the end of his career which has been unfortunately blotted by a cheating scandal. What is interesting about his redemption is not it is not one which derives from actual being guilty but rather the consequences of that scandal which essentially transformed him from a dedicated teacher into just another educator showing up for the paycheck having lost his idealism and fire. In addition, because the students deemed collectively “the unteachables” all arrive with their own problems to deal with, they too become part of the tapestry of the author’s latest exercise in revealing the possibility of redemption even among those so young it seems unlikely they have done much to be redeemed for.
Standardized Learning
At its most elemental level (tossing all the “unteachables” into the same class) the book is a corrosive critique of the foundation of the American education system: standardized learning. Usually termed standardized teaching, the book illustrates the reality of the wrongness of that term. Teaching is not really the problem with standardized education in America because most teachers either are or will eventually become burned out like Mr. Kermit and race for what is the easiest solution: teaching every child in the same way. Obviously, this is a profoundly bad structural system but only because of how it is applies.
The kids in Room 117 reveal that standardized teaching could—in theory—present the solution to education in America if classrooms were divided not according to age and class but learning strengths. In other words, if all the kinaesthetic learners were taught by a kinaesthetic teacher and all the verbal-based learners were taught by a verbally strong teacher and all the visual learners—well, you get the idea. A classroom of troublemakers seems like it destined for disaster when the reality proves that the effect rather than the consequence of those who are make trouble might be a key binding agent make them more susceptible to learning.
