The controversy over whether tipping toward a more nationalized institution is a wise move generates thought-provoking conversation — if education is going to be a public enterprise, where does “control” belong? The arguments for national standards are rational — “portability” is a valid concern for such a mobile society, and the need to keep internationally competitive is obvious.
What is IRRATIONAL is this current, multi-layered tax collection and rule-making agglomeration, where the feds, state and local politicians all have their fingers in the pie, isn’t working for students, parents or taxpayers. It’s time for everyone to let go of their presumptions, prejudices and prepossessions, and focus on what’s really best for families.
Although there’s a near universal acknowledgment that creativity is the foundation for the advancement of an individual, a business, a nation, or the human condition itself, the article hints that the institution of education in America is heading in the wrong direction.
Nationally, we’re focusing on “…standardized curriculum, rote memorization, and nationalized testing,” according to an Indiana University researcher, while China and the European Union, for example, are adopting the problem-solving models we seem to have abandoned.
Just how does the problem-solving educational model relate to creative thinking? The article provides a sketch of the brain processes involved, but intuitively, think of the connectivity of the problem-solving process — gathering facts underlying the problem, accessing and sorting through maybe just vaguely related information, imagining this data as an application to the problem, etc. — you don’t have to be a neuroscientist to “know” that rich, relevant, motivating stimulation is a good thing for the brain!
Perhaps we are mistakenly confusing “equal opportunity,” with “equal outcome.” The Chinese believed in “equal outcome” for years and tried to manufacture cookie-cutter citizens, but they have abandoned that approach as a national failure, and are now using the proven and successful American model, fostering individual talent. So my question is — does our public education system still value equal opportunity for exceptionalism? If so, we need to get our priorities and our policies back in alignment, ’cause they are seriously out of whack today.
Below is a link to a 5 minute video from one of the giants in physics, Richard Feynman. In his simple and direct style, he gives some great observations about how he learned to love learning, something many programs have forgotten is the ONLY thing that really needs to be fostered.
In this recent Denver Post op-ed piece, Jack Elliott and Larry Hargrave of Cognitive First discuss the importance of individual cognitive skills in a student’s academic achievement. Widely overlooked or misunderstood in the discussion surrounding education innovation, cognitive skills — how effectively an individual perceives and processes external stimuli such as visual or auditory information — are an obvious and fundamental component of one’s ability or capacity to learn.
As we learn more about brain function, doesn’t it just make sense to begin to incorporate that new understanding into our educational system? You can have an excellent teacher and the best classroom technology, but if a student isn’t proficient in perceiving or processing the information, there isn’t going to be much “learning” taking place. You wouldn’t send a child out on a track and expect them to be competent or proficient in, say, the high jump, without proper training. So, why do we send our children into the classroom, into a barrage of visual and auditory signals which the learner needs to organize, prioritize or memorize, without any regard to the child’s proficiency in those skills? On the track, some children will likely have the innate athletic abilities to successfully negotiate a high bar jump, others will need varying levels and intensity of training to obtain proficiency. By analogy, why do we expect all children to innately possess optimal classroom skills, and allow those who just need training to languish?
Education is fundamentally a brain function, and, through decades of scientific study, sound and proven strategies for improving “learning” and “thinking” have been documented. Unfortunately, very little of this evolving knowledge base is making its way into the educational system. If we’re really serious about nurturing and developing our most precious resource, our children, we need to take bold steps and re-think our educational practices.
The Wall Street Journal recently published excerpts from an interview with three heavyweights in education: Joel Klein, chancellor of the New York City Department of Education; Amy Gutmann, president of the University of Pennsylvania; and Christopher Edley Jr., dean of the law school at the University of California at Berkeley, who was also a member of the Obama administration transition team working on education issues. (full article here)
The observation that no sector, except education, has remained virtually unchanged in the last 50 years is telling. None of the cultural or ecomonic competitions which create a cauldron for ideas from which the best rise to the top for most sectors exist in education, and thus, we keep plodding along, while the rest of the world races ahead. It’s not the money, it’s outdated ideas…
The interview also points to another key factor — teacher talent. While most countries recruit from the top third of their college graduates, our teachers generally come from the bottom third. Further, science and math teaching talent, areas in which we are abysmal K-12, can’t be offered competitive wages because of union contracts, and are” lost” to the private sector.
Answers aren’t simple, but at least in New York, competition is seen as being key. Charter schools are embraced as R&D for the sector, using a business model analogy. Once best (or at least better) practices can be identified, it’s hoped lower performing schools can be pushed forward. If it’s really about the kids, it’s time to do what’s best.
The forward-thinking list incorporates a number of the learning environment strategies envisioned for the “campus as lab” concept, including (abridged form, full article can be linked to above):
1. Pull, don’t push. Create an environment that raises a lot of questions from each of your students, and help them translate that into insight and understanding.
2. Create from relevance. Engage kids in ways that have relevance to them, and you’ll capture their attention and imagination. Allow them to experience the concepts you’re teaching firsthand.
3. Stop calling them “soft” skills. Talents such as creativity, collaboration, communication, empathy, and adaptability are not just nice to have; they’re the core capabilities of a 21st-century global economy facing complex challenges.
4. Allow for variation. Evolve past a one- size-fits-all mentality and permit mass customization, both in the system and the classroom.
5. No more sage onstage. Engaged learning can’t always happen in neat rows. People need to get their hands dirty. They need to feel, experience, and build. In this interactive environment, the role of the teacher is transformed from the expert telling people the answer to an enabler of learning.
6. Teachers are designers. Let them create. Build an environment where your teachers are actively engaged in learning by doing.
7. Build a learning community.
8. Be an anthropologist, not an archaeologist. If you want to design new solutions for the future, you have to understand what people care about and design for that. Don’t dig for the answer—connect.
9. Incubate the future. What if our K–12 schools took on the big challenges that we’re facing today? It’s not about finding the right answer. It’s about being in a place where we learn ambition, involvement, responsibility, not to mention science, math, and literature.
10. Change the discourse. If you want to drive new behavior, you have to measure new things. We need to create new assessments that help us understand and talk about the developmental progress of 21st-century skills.
Bill Gates appears to be throwing his support for the $4.35 billion in “Race to the Top” funds to 15 states, and, it looks like Colorado didn’t make the cut.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is reported by Magnet Schools of America (quoting Fritzwire) to have selected 15 states to receive up to $250,000 to hire consultants to help prepare the complex and lengthy Phase I applications due this year. The selections have not yet been confirmed by the Foundation.
“Winners” are reported as: Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas.
Losers? All students whose individual potential isn’t being maximized by the public school system…
