|
You wrote:
An eighteen-year-old acquaintance of mine (call him "M") made a couple of complaints to me one day while talking about two courses he was enrolled in as a part-time college student. His first complaint was that the classes were over too fast: he was enjoying both classes so much that he hated when the fifty-minute periods were up. His other complaint was that most of his classmates typically began shuffling their feet and packing up their books three or four minutes before the period actually ended. In one class, the low-level noise drowned out the last points the professor made. In the other class, taught by a young and inexperienced teaching assistant, the instructor's insecurity led her to accede to the pressure applied by impatient students and to end the class a few minutes early each day.
The key phrase is:
"he was enjoying both classes so much that he hated when the fifty-minute periods were up."
The organization of class time into arbitrary fifty-minute periods sends the subliminal message to students: "The subject matter of this class period is not worth any more of your time than even an hour."
I am repeating here a post I made at another thread a few days ago. The gist of it is that the school system itself, by the way it is organized, sends the message to many students that learning is for nerds and not worth serious effort.
###### I could write a book or two about education in America, including education at the college level.
The philosophical and pedagogical basis of the U.S. educational system was developed in the early twentieth century by the powers-that-be in response to the large numbers of immigrants and the rapid expansion of industrialization of that era.
In short, the ruling class needed to quickly train immigrants in at least minimal proficiencies in English and reading, writing, and arithmetic so that they could man the factories and offices of the corporations. Just enough history and "civics" was to be taught to indoctrinate the students in "patriotism".
I went to middle class public schools in a large city many years ago. They taught reading using the "look-and-say" method. We used the "Dick and Jane" readers.
"See Spot. See spot run. See Dick. See Dick run. See Jane. See Jane run..." Over and over again until your mind turns to mush.
I was fortunate to have, for my second grade teacher, a wonderful women who was planning on retiring at the end of the school year. She taught us phonics, which provided me with the opportunity to be able to read books, newspapers, and magazines beyond "grade level", as well as enable me to spell many words correctly without having to look in a dictionary.
Unlike many American children today, I enjoy reading, and developed skills in many areas of life through reading books and other types of reading matter, and applying what I read to problem solving.
In addition to the book "Why Johnny Can't Read: and What You Can Do About It" by Rudolf Flesch, there are the books of teacher John Taylor Gatto including the titles "Dumbing us down : the hidden curriculum of compulsory schooling" and "The underground history of American education : a schoolteacher's intimate investigation into the prison of modern schooling", among others.
Another set of books I read a few years ago are "How Children Fail" and "How Children Learn" by John Holt.
There are some book reviews of these books at a web site called LibraryThing.com, which I accessed through a local library web site.
A few short excerpts from reviews of Holt's books can explain better where I am coming from.
(snip) *************** {A} quote attributed to William Hull (Educator). "If we taught children to talk they would never learn."...The author and Mr. Hull shared a 5th grade classroom. The book is a series of observational memos from Mr. Holt to Mr. Hull. The author intricately describes the communication gap between the school system and the child. Children want and need to learn. School systems want to teach. But the lessons often never meet in the middle." ***************
(snip) *************** John Holt summarizes perfectly the problem with contemporary education: it emphasizes right answers rather than learning, production rather than thinking. Read this book to understand this problem and its results, as seen through his experience as a collaborative teacher and thoughtful observer. The rewards for "right answers" over thinking even persists at higher education levels. "What would happen at Harvard or Yale if a prof gave a surprise test in March on work covered in October? Everyone knows what would happen; that's why they don't do it." (p. 232) ***************
(snip) *************** Holt blames the current system, pointing out that if a system consistently fails, the problem is with it, not its inputs or participants. In the summary section, he forcefully points out the negative effects of the current system - low self-esteem, ignorance about how to learn, and a mind trained not to want to do so. ***************
(snip) *************** So far, one of the great quotations I've found is:"It used to puzzle me that the students who made the most mistakes and got the worst marks were so often the first ones to hand in their papers. I used to say, 'If you finish early, take time to check your work, do some problems again.' Typical teacher's advice; I might as well have told them to flap their arms and fly. When the paper was in, the tension was ended. Their fate was in the lap of the gods. They might still worry about flunking the paper, but it was a fatalistic kind of worry.... Worrying about whether you did the right thing, while painful enough, is less painful than worrying about the right thing to do." (74-75) ***************
(snip) *************** The main message of the book is 'trust your children' - they are natural learners, and you are not going to have to force education down their throats. In fact, the less you do the better. ***************
(snip) *************** In a similar vein, Holt also suggests that children be left alone to examine things, and given as much time as possible to get to grips with a task or challenge before receiving any instruction on it. He writes this with regard to maths and science experiments, but I think the principle could be widely applied. ***************
I do NOT blame teachers for this system. They are just as much victims of the system as are the students. The corporations, the politicians, the idiot academics, and nowadays the right-wing religious fanatics have so politicized education that it is difficult to imagine how meaningful education can be salvaged from the morass that we have today. ######
Civilization developed because people applied their brains to solving problems that interested them. Even if a student can get beyond "See Spot run." for three semesters to find some topic that interested them enough to want to learn more about it, fifty minutes a day in class, less the time for taking attendance, handing in homework, returning and discussing yesterday's quiz, provides about 25 minutes, if you are lucky, to discuss today's lesson.
Moreover, having students spend hours at home doing boring homework from five or six different classes totally on their own is NOT the same as getting instruction from a teacher. The teachers I learned the most from were the ones that displayed a love of their area of expertise, and inspired me in some way to learn more of what they knew.
The lucky students will have parents at home who are able to help them with homework. This gives students from affluent families an advantage in "getting good grades" over students from families whose parents have limited educational backgrounds.
Schemes of "grading" teachers to determine the amount of pay they get (so-called "merit" pay), and the funding of their schools, is such a fraud.
|