The Education Post, Part One
Mar. 8th, 2007 11:40 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
queenbookwenchI know I'm being very posty tonight, but the computer lab in my building is pretty empty (a rare event) and I'm taking advantage of it while I can. Anyway, I've had thoughts brewing on the topic of education that I've wanted to post for awhile, but I just haven't found the right moment.
Anyway, the state of our education system is a perennial topic in all sorts of circles, and although there are people, notably Gerald Bracey, who writes for the very good education magazine Phi Delta Kappan who have pointed out that a lot of the constant claims of "crisis" are overblown (for instance, part of the reason that SAT scores have declined is that a much larger number of students take the test than used to, but do you ever hear about that?). But nobody can deny that there are some major problems--I get up close and personal with some of them every day. I mean--I work in a building that's not that much younger than my grandfather, and my grandfather is 89. But I don't think that the problems are limited to relatively poor, urban schools--they're just more visible there.
And I believe that at least some of the problems are built into our system of education at a level deeper than most people seem to consider: the level of our assumptions about what "education" means. For a long time, it seems like we've been working with what somebody dubbed "the factory model of education". That is, the idea that schools should be large, organized by an efficient system of periods and bells dividing everything into little bits of knowledge. Teaching is telling, learning is listening and memorizing. Kids should be in a largish group of only students their own age, learning pretty much the same thing at the same time in the same way. If they don't learn well that way, something is wrong with them and they need remediation. If they learn much more quickly, all they need for stimulation is to do more homework and move through the courses faster. I was talking with a friend who teaches first grade, and she pointed out that education isn't all like that today, that there is a greater emphasis on tailoring lessons to a variety of student learning styles and skill levels (this is called "differentiated instruction" in educationese). I said that that was true, but that the factory model is so often the background assumption, the water that we swim in.
I don't think that every feature of the factory model is always terrible, but at it's worse, it does violence to teachers and to students, and I do think that alternatives need to be available. Lots of alternatives. And some are, but on a very limited scale within the public system. And charter schools, which could really be a viable alternative, are too often "more of the same, but different".
Anyway, the state of our education system is a perennial topic in all sorts of circles, and although there are people, notably Gerald Bracey, who writes for the very good education magazine Phi Delta Kappan who have pointed out that a lot of the constant claims of "crisis" are overblown (for instance, part of the reason that SAT scores have declined is that a much larger number of students take the test than used to, but do you ever hear about that?). But nobody can deny that there are some major problems--I get up close and personal with some of them every day. I mean--I work in a building that's not that much younger than my grandfather, and my grandfather is 89. But I don't think that the problems are limited to relatively poor, urban schools--they're just more visible there.
And I believe that at least some of the problems are built into our system of education at a level deeper than most people seem to consider: the level of our assumptions about what "education" means. For a long time, it seems like we've been working with what somebody dubbed "the factory model of education". That is, the idea that schools should be large, organized by an efficient system of periods and bells dividing everything into little bits of knowledge. Teaching is telling, learning is listening and memorizing. Kids should be in a largish group of only students their own age, learning pretty much the same thing at the same time in the same way. If they don't learn well that way, something is wrong with them and they need remediation. If they learn much more quickly, all they need for stimulation is to do more homework and move through the courses faster. I was talking with a friend who teaches first grade, and she pointed out that education isn't all like that today, that there is a greater emphasis on tailoring lessons to a variety of student learning styles and skill levels (this is called "differentiated instruction" in educationese). I said that that was true, but that the factory model is so often the background assumption, the water that we swim in.
I don't think that every feature of the factory model is always terrible, but at it's worse, it does violence to teachers and to students, and I do think that alternatives need to be available. Lots of alternatives. And some are, but on a very limited scale within the public system. And charter schools, which could really be a viable alternative, are too often "more of the same, but different".
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Slightly random Yuletide-related comment
Date: 2007-05-03 11:32 am (UTC)