In the world of racing, you will never see a race between a Ferrari, a Volkswagon van, and a bicycle. The reason you will never see this is because the three vehicles are in completely different classes with regards to maneuverability, performance, and power. But if for some reason such a race were to take place, it’s pretty easy to determine the outcome. Barring unusual circumstances, the Ferrari would come in first, by a long shot, while the Volkswagon would come in second some time later. Eventually, the bicycle would cross the finish line too, but by then most of the spectators would have already gone home. There are no surprises with this outcome either, as most sensible people would not expect the van to perform as well as the Ferrari or the bicycle to perform as well as the van. This is an example of Common Sense at work.
The analogy of the race exposes the reality of our educational system today. One size fits all education ignores the realities that everyone has a different capacity and desire to learn. For some students, learning is both easy and fun. For others, learning is hard and unpleasant. And for the many in between, learning is neither easy nor hard, nor fun or unpleasant…it just is. But our school systems lump all students together, categorized primarily by age, and teaches them together as if they were all the same. Sure, we have some accelerated classes for the brighter students and remedial classes for the slower kids, but on the whole, the schools attempt to teach and promote kids in age groups with gained knowledge being secondary as criteria for advancement. The result is a student who either lacks the necessary skills to continue learning or one who is hopelessly bored by the relatively slow pace of learning. Yet the overriding concern to build a students self-esteem by pretending that all are equal in every way, which trumps the process of education.
Much of the problem lies with the false notion that kids who are the same age should learn at the same rate. But since all children are different, this is a generalization that is weak at best. We must also refocus our sights on the type of education that our students receive and have a clear-cut objective regarding the knowledge they are expected to obtain at certain points along their educational careers. By addressing these basic building blocks of education, we can begin to put our children back on the path towards an education that is appropriate to their abilities and desires, and in the process, we could probably more effectively use our education tax dollars.
With regards to the grade based system of classifying students, while from a social perspective this idea makes a lot of sense, from an intellectual viewpoint, we may be hurting kids more than we are helping them. At some point in their education, kids will begin to separate themselves according to their academic ability, creating amongst themselves a caste system of sorts that serves to segregate the students from each other. Those who are academically gifted may be shut out of the mainstream social activities, while those who fall below the academic norm may lose all interest in further education. Meanwhile, those in the larger middle go blissfully along, hardly being challenged to exercise their intellect or being pigeon-holed into pre-determined academic plans derived by parents and counselors who are determined to push students along the “college path” regardless of that students desire or aptitude. Rather than help our students master certain necessary areas of knowledge, we instead funnel them through to the next grade, hoping that they will catch up and flushing out their lives with abundant extra-curricular activities to make them appear better rounded as college prospects.
But the numbers of high-school dropouts, the low level of adult literacy comprehension and mathematic skill, the masses of remedial college courses necessary for students to get up to speed, all affirm the failures of our current structure. We need to find another way to categorize, instruct, evaluate and advance students so that they can all achieve the level of education they are capable of achieving. So where do we start?
Beginning at the earliest ages, from pre-school through the second grade, basic evaluations should be taken on each student as they begin to learn how to read, write, recognize shapes and colors, and perform simple mathematical calculations. Based on a students progress, beginning at grade three, students could then be separated according to their learning capabilities, offering students who are faster learners to move at a more accelerated pace while slow learners could be taught at a slower pace. By separating these groups from the students who are average achievers, we could remove the stigma and social cruelty that pits students against each other, giving all students an opportunity to focus on learning and not on jealous or insensitive peers. Such a move would also permit teachers to spend less time dealing with students who are disruptive due to boredom and less time helping individuals who were seriously behind the other students and more time teaching at a common speed that fits the capabilities of the class as a whole. All the while, students could shift from one learning path to another if their capabilities show that they have become more or less adept at learning. As students progress in their scholastic years, they would be periodically assessed to ascertain that they had mastered the skills necessary for a person with their capabilities and of their age group before they could move on to middle or high school.
Once in middle school, students could begin to explore the opportunities that await them as adults by engaging in more “real life” educational opportunities. (An interesting concept for instruction of these courses can be found in this post at Educational Whisperer.) Students would also begin to learn about civic responsibilities and ethics courses in middle school along with their academic lessons in math, literature, science, history, and art. At the end of their eighth year of schooling, students would be assessed again and interviewed to determine the course of their further education. Some students will not have the skills or desire to pursue a career that required a college education and could be steered into a course of education designed to teach trade skills necessary for life in the working world after high school. Other students would continue along the college path and go on to become scientists or doctors or teachers, among other things. In both cases, high school education would become more individually tailored to each students goals, while still imparting the necessary life skills like personal health and finance, and basic “living on your own” information. From high school, students would follow their paths to a university, a specialized trade school, or directly into the work force.
Finally, we must recognize that all students do not learn in the same way. Some are good at learning through the written word while others are good at learning through tactile experience. As such, schools should try to be more flexible with regards to the methods a student uses to gain his or her new knowledge. The goal is to learn, so the rigidity of how something is learned should be dissolved and the focus should become that it was learned at all. Teachers and parents should help their students develop learning methods that work for best for them and be judged on the final outcome.
Most children want to please their parents, and by extension, the other adults in their lives. As young children, this desire allows us to instill the qualities of respect and responsibility in them. But we must at some point return that respect when they become capable of choosing their own interests in life. By nurturing these abilities and desires, we help create a happier, more pro
ductive adult member of society. We must stop pretending that all children are the same, or that they can all learn the same skills. That simply is untrue and only blinds us to the real goal of giving our children the kind of education that they deserve.
This entry was posted on Thursday, April 21st, 2005 at 6:22 am and is filed under Common Sense, education, Government, Reform, Social Programs.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 21st, 2005 at 10:15 am
The problem with education is too much government involvement. There is no accountability and there never will be, because there is no bottom line. I am in the Army, which is one of the few government bureaucracies that even has a perception of accountability, but I can assure you that there is none. I have seen schools in very poor areas – Bosnia-Herzegovina and Iraq – the funding for schools is non-existent, but the children learn multiple languages and have better math skills than American schools that get infinitely more money. The reason is that our society is so prosperous that many people have the time and inclination to be busy-bodies and do-gooders and they channel their energy into legislation to force their socialist vision upon the rest of our children. Poor countries do not have that. Is impoverishing us the solution? No, that is not my point. The poorer nations can afford gov’t involvement, because of their lack of busybodies. As a nation grows more prosperous, the effect of gov’t intervention grows more problematic.
April 21st, 2005 at 1:32 pm
I think there is a lot of good points here. The need for more attention, specialization and idendification. Identifying how different children learn and assisting that learning method. Less government and politics in schools. Going along with concept of commons sense I think the biggest help would be to be open minded and respect the children in the schools as people and not forget they are there when we get involved with the politics and programs. If we listened to them and not just to what we want to hear rather then drive them and tell them what to do, it might all be that much better.
April 21st, 2005 at 5:03 pm
Thanks for the link up Ken…a rarity in your posts, so I am especially grateful for the mention. On to your ideas in the post.
Having taught myself (High School Math – five course, four preparations), I noticed that most of my time and attention was spent dealing with the bottom 10 % of the classroom. That said, these were the discipline problems.
Some schools are also good at dealing with the top 10% of the classroom, mainly by shuffling them off to “gifted,” or AP type classrooms. So, where does that leave the middle 80%? Left behind.
The difficulty in dealing with classroom dynamics is that, oft times, parents relegate the teaching of both academic subject matter and instilling of discipline to the teachers…which is borderline teaching of values and ethics.
A wholistic approach to education would also include ethics, values, and learning skills coruses into the curriclum. That said, we will have to at some point, enter in to that difficult conversation about whose values should we be teaching…then we get into it with the reichwingers because the genuinely have some extreme viewpoints on values and ethics.
Anyway, I’ll have to think a bit more on your thoughts on this, yet another fine post, and perhaps reply on my blog.
Incidentially, I am wondering, what is the “Airborne Hog Society?” Moreover dear Editor, would you rather live in Bosnia or the good ol’ US of A?
April 22nd, 2005 at 5:19 am
(responses)
AHS Editor- I’m not quite sure where you are going here, but I think that you are right about a lack of accountability, both in schools, and also in society and government from a broader perspective. Thanks for dropping by.
Blogcruiser- Thanks for the comments, but I’m not sure that ceding more authority, or even the appearance of doing so, to students is the answer. In fact, it is this propensity that has degraded the system of respect that allows classes to function.
It is one thing to prepare curriculum with the best interests of the students in mind, or to expect teachers and parents to help students identify the path of their learning, but that is not the same as letting students control the reins of education.
Students who are minors must be made to understand that their main task is to become productive adults. Much fun can and should be had along the way to this goal, as well as much learning. For that to happen, young people need to be taught the concepts of respect and responsibility and be taught to apply them in situations that are less than enjoyable rather than expect to be accommodated at every turn.
Windspike- I rarely link because I rarely deal with topical issues and rather work on larger abstracts from the “bigger perspective.” At least for the time being anyhow. But your post fit in nicely and I wanted to link over. Glad you don’t mind.
As for the teaching of values alongside more objective material, I think that we need to keepo that relatively simple and stick to instilling those character traits that are most useful to society. Morality can be taught in the home or church or somewhere else, but there are (I think anyhow) a few values that are nearly universal: respect people in positions of knowledge and authority, or at least respect the position they hold; develop and maintain personal integrity through responsible actions and behavior; don’t lie, steal, or cheat your way through life; and one which I’d like to make more universal, tolerance for those who hold differing subjective opinions than you do.
All other ethical, moral, or relativistic values can be learned outside of public schooling and their applications should be applied outside of the schools too.
April 22nd, 2005 at 2:16 pm
I have a 13 year old Grand Daughter that has been learning about civic responsibility since she was 4 or 5. She started going to concerned citizens meetings with me. She is now talking about trying to get some of her class mtes interested in coming to the meetings.
God Bless America. God Save The Republic.
April 23rd, 2005 at 5:16 am
another articulate, thoughfully written post.
i myself recieved a far better education ten years ago then what passes for modern-day school. that shouldn’t be. we should improve as we go, learning along the way.
let us not forget the overly-competetive parents who demand teachers teach their child in a certain way….
enjoy your saturday, Ken!
April 24th, 2005 at 1:50 pm
(responses)
David- That is great! I only wish more people would start teaching civic responsibility at an early age.
Woodenshoe- Well said. Thanks for the comment.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:46 am
Great points! I completely agree with one small change: The trade school/college decision should be made at the end of tenth grade. This would give two more years of education and maturing before decisions were required.
My sister in-law has taught elementary school for twenty years and might quietly agree with most of your points, although she has become too closely aligned with the school unions to publicly admit this. Short of abolishing unions altogether, how would you suggest we make the changes you described? Competition is doing this for the auto and airline industries, but popular education ties federal money to unions too closely for an similar adjustment.
A friend and I have recently started a common sense themed blog as well, http://www.considercommonsense.com. There is an education article there from a different perspective. Once I figure things out more I would be interested in linking with your site in some manner.
Keep up the great work.