On Education in the United
States
by Alan Nicoll
The
following two documents were posted on The Wisdom Project website (http://www.wisdomproject.net/) in late
2004.
What
is a good education?
What
makes for a good education for a child growing up in the United States?
I think that all important details can be subsumed under the following broad
goals:
· Preparation for adulthood.
· Enjoyment of childhood.
"Preparation for adulthood" is generally uncontroversial, it is
virtually a given as "the purpose" of schooling. I don't think the
schools do it wisely, however. In the pursuit of this goal the schools have
focused on developing the academic skills of the students, preparing them for
jobs and college. They have neglected the "whole child" in the areas
of emotion, values, critical thinking, and wisdom.
Children progress through school without learning how to manage their own
lives. Of what use is algebra to a girl who is pregnant at fourteen? Why should
a fifteen year old alcoholic, drug addict, or gang banger study Shakespeare?
Will reciting the "five causes of the Civil War" keep a despondent
teen from committing suicide?
Current educational practice in U.S. public schools concentrates almost
exclusively on preparation for adulthood while neglecting what I have called
"enjoyment of childhood." I think this is the basic failing that
leads to ruined adult lives.
If a child’s education destroys the child’s enjoyment of his present life, it
is likely to have bad effects. The present public school system:
· Is authoritarian and punitive rather than democratic, which is poor
preparation for living under a representative government and educates in the
ability to follow orders rather than to make wise decisions for oneself.
· Promotes conformity rather than exploration and enjoyment of one’s
individuality. Again this is poor preparation for decision making and happiness
in adulthood
· Requires "competence" in all areas, which typically means that the
student is forced to repeat things he hates "until he gets it right,"
until he "learns" it. Meanwhile, the things he loves are held back as
a reward or are prohibited altogether as being inappropriate for the school
setting or for the grade level.
· In the pursuit of efficiency it enforces a set course of study at the expense
of the child’s interests. However, it is generally recognized that learning
occurs most efficiently and effectively when it is in pursuit of one’s own
interests.
· Uses extrinsic rewards (grades, gold stars, ice cream parties) as motivators,
leading to a decline in “joy of learning” and a lack of motivation as extrinsic
rewards are withdrawn or lose their appeal. The schools are producing adults
who don't read books.
· Is driven by the pursuit of high test scores, leading to fragmented “teaching
to the test” and a general anxiety over student “performance.”
· Is invasive into the child’s personal life and space through enforcement of
dubious rules such as dress codes and “no talking in the halls.”
· Drives a wedge between parents and children by relying on the parents to
enforce school rules.
All these practices make many schools a hell for many children, and certainly
diminish the enjoyment of all school children.
I think, then, that a "good education" must be enjoyable while it is
taking place, which means that most public schools are incapable of providing a
"good education." If you've ever taken a child to a museum, a play, a
concert, or just to the beach or the park, you've seen the explosive enthusiasm
that children have toward life. And if you've seen children in most public
schools, you've seen a general lack of enthusiasm for anything other than
recess and horseplay. At the risk of sounding squishy, I'll say that when a
person's emotions are not engaged in his/her activities, the spirit withers.
Regardless of other factors, such as money, teacher preparation, self esteem
programs, or open classroom techniques, can a "good education" even
be had in an institution that requires attendance, obedience, and conformity
under penalty of law? Many school critics don't think so. But my focus is on a
"good education," not on "better schools."
A "good education" must "nourish the spirit." I take this
to mean that a child must:
· Be enabled to explore an enriched environment in his own way and at his own
pace.
· Be permitted to interact over the long term with persons of intelligence and
good will of all ages, races, and abilities, and be protected from those who
would abuse him.
· Be introduced to the adult world and adult activities as he wishes to be
introduced to them, and not according to the goals, schedule, and methods
adults have prepared for him.
· Be allowed to "get messy, make mistakes" as Ms. Frizzle of the Magic
Schoolbus advocates.
· Be allowed to engage or withdraw as he chooses.
· Get honest answers to his questions.
Such an approach will allow self reliance and good judgment to develop
naturally. And it will be fun. It is the approach of Summerhill and
homeschooling. It is completely incompatible with present public schools.
Alan
Nicoll, originally posted 9/9/04 at The Wisdom Project. Original thread at: http://www.thesearchforwisdom.com/community/boards/viewthread.php?tid=288
How
can we fix public education in the US?
This is a
difficult subject to tackle because it involves so many preliminaries to be
decided, such as: what makes a good education? how do current practices measure
up in providing a good education? what kinds of changes would be helpful toward
providing a good education? what kinds of changes are possible given the
current climate of public opinion? Without provisional answers to such
questions, it’s difficult to say anything sensible towards the initial
question.
In another thread (http://www.thesearchforwisdom.com/community/boards/viewthread.php?tid=288)
I argued that a good education must provide both preparation for adulthood and
an enjoyable experience for the child. Current practices attempt to provide a
good preparation for adulthood, but do so at the expense of enjoyment for the
child. So the kind of changes I recommend would all be directed toward
improving the day-to-day experience of the child in school, i.e., make school
less demeaning, less controlling, less punitive, and less boring, or in
positive terms, make school more respectful, freer, without punishment, and
more interesting.
Such proposals are often dismissed as “progressive” education which “has been
tried and failed” and characterized as “children swinging from the chandeliers”
by critics who doubtless think of themselves as “tough minded.” Yet the very
words come back in school mission statements and other statements of
objectives: “respectful of students” and so on.
The current trend in U.S. public education is the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
initiative of the Bush administration, and the approach is thoroughly “tough
minded”: punitive towards “failing” schools and “failing” students. Also, the
programmed lecture method of the Open Court and other modern curricula create a
rigid and controlling environment in the classroom. According to Herbert Kohl,
this top-down, authoritarian, and rigid approach is stupefying for teachers and
students alike (Stupidity and Tears: Teaching and Learning in Troubled
Times, W. W. Norton, 2003); that is, it makes students and teachers do
things the system requires even though those things are contrary to their
conscience and better judgment.
Marva Collins and other educators who have achieved great things in public
schools, within normal funding, are often held up as models of “how things
ought to be done” without “throwing money at the problem.” My take on this is
that these educators are exceptional people who succeed because of their
exceptional ability and determination. Most teachers and principals do not have
that level of ability and determination, and tinkering with their methods is
not going to produce comparable results in their schools. And, as Kohl also
points out, exceptional teachers find NCLB and its increasingly popular
top-down mind set ties their hands.
The first thing I’d do today to improve public education in the U.S. is to let
teachers teach. Junk the programmed lecture straitjacket and let teachers
respond according to their wisdom to the needs they see in their students.
Everyone seems to be against “social promotion” these days, but it is no secret
that children do not do well when they are “held back.” In school, the official
stamp of “failure” on a student is a virtually certain guarantee of future
“failure.” The second thing I’d do to improve public education in the U.S. is
to junk the idea that all students must progress in all subjects at the same
rate, and start treating them like individuals with individual interests and
needs. In other words, abandon the “factory model” of empty heads on the
conveyor belt awaiting the input of knowledge and skills.
What model, then? Open classroom. “Learning centers.” It seems to me that the
ideal model that everyone knows about is Summerhill. Unfortunately, one
important reason for Summerhill’s success was A. S. Neill, the founder, another
exceptional educator whose results are unlikely to be duplicated by lesser
beings. Even so, a Summerhill-like environment is the best environment I know
of for increasing student enjoyment of learning in school.
In summary, my recommendations for improving public schooling in the U.S. are
to immediately free teachers and administrators from the restrictions of NCLB
and programmed curricula, and to work towards turning every school into a
Summerhill.
The biggest problem in implementation is, of course, that the public is unwilling
and uninformed. And for that, the only solution is to work on informing and
persuading the parents that reform is needed in these directions. But until
public schools start addressing student enjoyment of school by changing the
very environment—and not by providing ice cream parties and candy
rewards—schools are never going to provide a good education.
Alan
Nicoll, originally posted 9/21/04 at The Wisdom Project. Original at: http://www.thesearchforwisdom.com/community/boards/viewthread.php?tid=355&page=3#pid2026