In fact you can teach fly fishing and tap dancing for all I care. You see, that's not the problem. The real problems are, one, who decides what kids in schools learn, and two, what should they be learning?
You can go on and on with the guru-shishya story all you want, but education is and will always be a service provided. Someone provides it, someone else receives it. In a free market the provider of a service is allowed to decide the kind, content, and price of the service he offers. Buyers can then decide if they like what's on offer, and pay for it. Meaning, education service providers are free to decide what they want to teach in their classrooms, and buyers (parents) and consumers (children) are free to decide if they want the learning that's on offer, or not. It isn't the place of government to decide what's taught or what's learnt.
So now the second question, because there are enough socialists out there who will say this will be the beginning to commercialization of education. Of course and guess what, that's the best that can happen to the business of education. In a free market, it isn't you, me, or government that decides what sells, and what price. Its consumers, and you know why that's good? Anyone in the commercialized business of education will know he needs to cater to what consumers want, else he will be kicked out of the marketplace, either by competitors or consumers. Which means he will do his best to figure out what's the best education he can provide and at the most competitive rate. You see, if he ups prices, he opens a window for another service provider to come in and give better education at a lower price.
Now what will a smart education provider put as part of curriculum? Note, learning in the end is about acquiring competencies that can be sold at a price. Meaning, its about taking the skill-sets you have acquired in the classroom (over a period of time) into the market place, and looking for buyers who are willing to pay the highest price. Buyers of your skill-sets will be ready to pay only if they believe those skills can translate into value creation for another buyer who buys from the firm (you have been hired into). In simple terms this means you get a job at a fat salary if the company hiring you thinks you can create value, that will paid for by the firm's buyers.
That's why I say the markets are the best deciders on what's taught. Not government, not regulators.
I hope someday we are smart enough to figure that out so we can leave the business of education to the best in a competitive marketplace. That's how we all can benefit.
P.S. - For all those socialist-communists in India who think this means the poor will be denied good education, listen to Thomas Swell (video above). Hey, I know you won't, but I still have to try. :)