This weekend, like a couple of million other people world wide, I began reading "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince''. In each book of the series, JK Rowling has presented a variety of perspectives on education. The practices of Hogwarts school itself, based on the English boarding school, are unfamiliar to most American readers, but the teachers are instantly recognizable: The boring professor Binn, who was so boring he died and his ghost is still teaching the same class on the History of Magic and Professor Snape, who seemingly lives only to ridicule and degrade some students while cosseting and coddling others.
One might ask why someone should take seriously the treatment of education afforded by a work of fiction. My concern is that people may uncritically adopt the framing and perspectives of education as described in Harry Potter, without carefully considering the larger perspective offered by research in education. When various approaches succeed or fail spectacularly with Harry and his friends, it tells the reader only the opinions of J.K. Rowling, yet millions of people are now familiar with these anecdotes and reflecting upon them offers an opportunity to reflect on educational policy and change.
Rowling's first books are relatively uncritical treatments of education. The students like some teachers and don't like others.
Rowling offered her sharpest criticism in The Order of the Phoenix with the character of Dolores Umbridge. Initially appointed as the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, she becomes High Inquisitor in the school, and ultimately Headmistress.
The newest book, Harry acquires a copy of the potions textbook that has been annotated by a mysterious someone who has written their name in the book as The Half-Blood Prince. The notes and hints allow Harry to perform in potions substantially beyond his ability in the class.