| Books |  The Puzzle The Puzzle Lessons Learned Lessons Learned The Priority The Priority The Sunshine Book The Sunshine Book |
| Articles |  About Dyman Associates About Dyman Associates Commentaries Commentaries Deejay Systems Deejay Systems Essays Essays Letters on Education Letters on Education Restructuring and Transforming Education Restructuring and Transforming Education Study Tips Study Tips Think & Achieve Think & Achieve Think & Achieve Poster Commentary Think & Achieve Poster Commentary Think & Achieve Poster of the Week Think & Achieve Poster of the Week |
|
| The Puzzle - Sample Chapter | |
Chapter 1
The most important entity in education is the student. While “No Child Left Behind” may seem to be a worthy directive signed into law on January 8, 2002, perhaps because of it, many or even all children are being left behind. In its wake, countless well intending though self-limiting interferences along with the recently set into place state standards are restricting the potential of schools and their teachers. Consequently, while some test scores may show a measure of improvement, students nonetheless, are more at risk.
The progress welcomed as it is out of some perceived need may be only a product of regulation. Rather than what might have been, any of the results as they are, had been determined by self-preserving but system restricting manipulation. The recent attempts that were proposed to force schools to do better are in effect oppressive and likely will cause a regression in substantive performance. In all things, free enterprise leads to better outcomes.
How is it that before the last few generations the children apparently did not get left behind? Could there have been issues that went without attention, had been unnoticed, or were ignored?
Regardless, recent surveys of academic performance confirm that the children of the United States as they approach graduation into the marketplace have fallen behind in language skills and mathematics as well as in science, areas of relevance that affect global participation. At least one survey of performance confirms that while elementary school age children of the United States lead in performance, they are lagging by the time they matriculate into high school, ranked as low as twenty-sixth among the so-called advanced nations.
Does that suggest anything? What is happening during those few years? What might be the cause of this noted shortfall? How significant are these evaluations? Are any of these gathered insights at least in some way selective? Are any of these discernments applicable developed more out of an interest to maintain a righteous competitive edge, a proclivity to be in front, or out of a real desire to be individually as good as good can be?
Only the latter is a pursuit of merit.
After all, our comparative lackluster worldwide rank may be only of secondary importance and that the prescription for honorable improvement is within our grasp only to be teased apart from among many ordered impositions, rules, and regulations.
Given the bottom line, unless in some way deprived during pre-birth development, children are born with inherent curiosity. They exhibit the fundamental inclination for learning but along the way for some this inherent quality apparently yields to no doubt a variety of subconscious prohibitive perceptions and assumptions.
Enthusiasm for learning gradually fades away. Fortunately among these now older school age individuals most are at least politely submissive to the classroom structures. They try. While acceptable, within this group many exhibit a cooperative behavior only because they are driven by a specific praiseworthy motivation or even an externally imposed incentive. On the other hand, some are outwardly disruptive and deliberately resistant to the processes of commonplace teaching that can result in learning. Their justifications are more than they are in number pouting over supposed losses or coping with exceedingly complex hardships.
From this broadened perspective, the school processes and their impact upon an assortment of individual needs now require careful examination. Arriving at new realizations could positively change the interactive teaching/learning practices and yield compelling results that are beyond comparison.
How does the system of education get fixed so that self-fulfilling individual outcomes are attained? That is the puzzle.
Quite a few years ago, with a liberal arts degree in hand and a teaching assignment in a parochial school, my career in education began. The young people welcomed me and appreciated what together we were able to accomplish. Perhaps I learned more than the students.
On that foundation, I have come to realize that those in the profession need to be given the responsibility for its success and they need to become learners themselves so that quickly they can make assessments and appropriately implement the needed adjustments enabling the next generation to be personally accomplished as well as marketplace competitive and productive. This can be achieved if the prescribed learning is attainable and success is possible as well as rewarding. However, the external pressures and demands that grow out of authority and an assortment of biases appear to be counterproductive, working against the all enabling teaching and learning enterprises.
More time in class, additional pages to cover with homework assignments, plus more tests are not producing the incentives for learning. More of “this and that” may be resulting in less of everything. In the teaching and learning enterprise, it has to be quality over volume predicated upon a ration of sensibility. As has been well established success grows from a nurturing environment rather than from one that can be described as overbearing and perhaps even fearful.
It is time to lighten up. The demands for results that are placed upon teachers and students are ever increasing. A camel might respond after a full load, “Every straw does count.” Nonetheless, the questionable notion prevails that if schools are to measure up, if student performance levels are to improve, then the bar must be constantly raised. Subjected to these widespread notions some students will persist and prevail, many others can be expected to give up and quit. Significantly, those who have tossed in the towel on education are counted among the coveted averages or are they?
Should any average score be seen as an absolute? Truly, is it not blurred by countless mitigating causes that somehow need to be factored into or out of the result?
Education for all that it is needs to be seen as more than some bottom line average score.
Why not try some other approach looking to achieve some other realistic outcomes?
Albert Einstein is quoted as having said, “Make everything as simple as possible but not simpler.”
We learn best when knowledge is structured into relevant concepts, into big ideas. We learn best when we have time to ponder and conceptualize. We learn best when we are filled with wonder.
Schools that are not so enabling fall short in making things understood. In their zealousness these schools mentally beat up their students and psychologically divorce them. These schools then become the “sorters and weeders” of students who prosper only with a toolbox of “factoids,” the product of a single resource, the ability to memorize.
Perhaps Benjamin Franklin said it best, “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.”
“Tell me” is often what goes on in a classroom. “Involve me” is not commonplace if it occurs at all. However, students need those who immerse them in the processes derived from creativity that motivate interest and truly lead to learning. Individuality surfaces, diversity emerges, a totality of wholesomeness materializes. The benefits for each and for all will be the best that can be realized.
Is this kind of involvement and immersion possible in the present context and structure of our schools?
Good things as a consequence of learning have to be perceived by the learner. Each recognized achievement can then serve as a step stone to the next higher order accomplishment. But, learners first must be able to achieve. Reasonably falling short in the achievement sequence leads to frustration that dilutes the will and poisons the spirit. Undesirable outcomes are the results determined and compounded by way of confrontation seeded with a morsel if not a spirit of indignation. The continuous raising of the academic challenge coupled to all of its ramifications in effect may be the underlying as well as justifying cause. It is painful to be set aside essentially left behind.
Out of competition, textbook publishers rule. They at least indirectly set the standards. Most if not all of the determined levels for academic achievement are the result of publisher influence inadvertent as that may be. Rather than call upon those who teach and involve students who might have an insight about what should be presented and how it should be taught, publishers fill books with what is perceived as the summation of subject area knowledge. Afterward, they seek approvals from noteworthy figures in the field. The list prefaces the text. Subsequently, the publishers present the “best there is” into the marketplace with each a virtual “look alike” of all the rest.
The “not much to select from” group is basically “more of the same” under a slightly different title. Ultimately, if asked, why “this” or why “that” is included in the curriculum at any grade level, the answer is likely that nobody knows. Search any curriculum area that is to be covered by teachers and learned by students. Justification is limited for both the content to be considered and the extent of its coverage. It seems that publishers have usurped the prerogatives of teachers. They lead the way. However, for best results, the role of the book publishers needs to be altered at least if not reversed.
Classroom teachers who enable positive outcomes need to be involved in curriculum development. Absolutely! They need to be involved. They need to show the way. They need to determine what elements are assigned to various grade levels that may serve as foundations for dependent learning especially at the secondary level.
Yet, with grass roots teachers out of the loop, how can they be responsible and subsequently liable? With an array of non teaching related responsibilities, how is a principal to account for learning and for what is or is not included in any course as well as know the justification should anyone inquire?
Secondary school courses especially should focus on more than a likely by chance blend of “this” with some of “that.” If a course is not a prerequisite for some higher level of learning in that subject or some related subject area, it ought to be structured not to give glimpses of esoteric traditions but rather in positive and permitting ways that give students understandings of their world here and now.
Courses need to begin with what is current. Everything included needs to be put into a relevant context, the complexities of a global marketplace.
While on the job at one school, for a parent night open house, the principal imposed upon all teachers the requirement of posting on the chalkboard or marker board the goals of the various courses to which they were assigned. At the time, I was teaching a course in environmental science. While I might have listed many of the goals or the standards that the course addressed, I wrote a paraphrase of a credit card commercial:
Textbook $89.00
Notebook $2.95
Pencil $0.29
To become Good Citizens of Earth - Priceless
A few parents were impressed. One with a musing smile and a supporting nod did stop to say, “Interesting! Interesting.”
Indeed, education should concentrate on the development of Good Citizens of Earth, equipped with a reverence for the political and social structures of other cultures, the foundations that allow for the equitable distribution and use of limited resources, and the wherewithal to cope with the impact of day-to-day discoveries from research and exploration. In addition, Good Citizens of Earth would understand the principles of their country, the dynamics of its origin, and its position in relationship with other countries. They would understand the consequences of the aggressive use of resources in a competitive but limited world. They would be marketplace-ready.
Thus, schools need to focus on the enhancement and enrichment of individual inherent talents. Schools should work to develop the four communication skills, reading, writing, speaking, and the overlooked dimension, listening. They should impart knowledge derived from science as well as the operational skills of science. They should develop skills in mathematics especially those that are relevant to everyday interactions. And, they should give insight into the processes of social, political, and economic relations including an understanding of historical development as a foundation for the structures of government operating for the good of all.
Accountability can no longer remain founded on the number of correct responses out of any given number of criteria. Well intended outside influences and demands have to be relinquished to those with the job of teaching. Schools with their teachers must be left with the primary responsibility of getting the job done surely with their success tempered only by the background and environment of their clientele, the students. Success in one environment may be a leap and a bound whereas success in another circumstance may be just a nearly imperceptible nudge.
It may be that rather than focus on relative scores more concern should be directed toward the development of the individual in school. More emphasis should be directed toward the improvement and augmentation of the individual enabling opportunity and access. More importance should be placed upon the development of marketplace-ready individuals. That seems to have overriding significance. That may be the ultimate test. With the world changing rapidly, society and communities need to rethink what is needed. Schools with their teachers need to figure out how that can be accomplished most efficiently and effectively.
What over the years has changed, what during this time has remained the same, and what ideally should be configured for the individual in education?
We have one opportunity to do the tasks of education that are before us. We have in our midst examples of both failure and success. It is our responsibility to tease out what works and implement those teaching methods and techniques with an eye on continuous improvement.
Creation date : 25/10/2008 @ 12:59
Last update : 25/10/2008 @ 13:04
Category : The Puzzle
Page read 527 times
 Print preview
 Print the page
|
|
|
visitors online
Top