I can basically sum up my discussion in two phrases: idealism without reality is simply fantasy, and those who are not educators should not try to tell those who are how to do their jobs. Now before any offense is taken, allow me to unpack my statements and explain where exactly I'm coming from.
First, a little background about me: I started out as an Elementary Education major before switching to an English major. I essentially left the education side of things because of my second statement. After three years of education classes, I could see there was a dramatic gap between what and how teachers are taught to teach and how a typical modern-day elementary class is structured. I knew that I would not be able to adapt well to that gap, so I switched to a major that better reflects my talents and interests.
That gap does, however, give me a great lead-in to unpack that second statement by. I'd like to set the stage with a story. My roommate's aunt teaches third grade, but this year is going to look vastly different from what she's been used to. Recess has been cut. Not simply reduced, but cut completely. It's gone. A classroom full of 8- and 9-year-olds will no longer have a chance to run and play outside. Why? Because the powers-that-be in education have decided that it needed to go to make way for more instruction time. The teachers are to work in 'brain breaks' and stimulate situations where students interact with one another, but the primary focus is given to having 90 minutes of instruction for both math and reading.
Here are the problems I see with that scenario: firstly, they are kids. They need time to run around. Being cooped up like that all day will quickly make them stir-crazy, in turn driving each other, and the teacher, crazy. Crazy environments do not allow children to learn. So the first lesson: children are not mini-adults. They cannot be made to sit still for that long and be expected to learn anything. Anyone who has ever had kids or have worked with kids can tell you that. The second problem with having zero recess time is that children don't have the opportunity to naturally learn how to interact with one another. Where did we all form those first friendships that lasted all through school? On the playground. By taking away recess, we may be severely crippling our young students' ability to socially interact with their peers.
Recess isn't the only thing that is being edged out of our children's education experience. In schools across the nation, the time budgeted for art, music, and physical education is also shrinking. Schools used to be able to proudly say that they provide a liberal education experience, but can that statement apply anymore? With more and more attention given to classroom instruction, I see our educational vision narrowing. Lesson number two: children learn differently from one another; each mind is unique. Gardener's Multiple Intelligences speaks to that fact, and is one of the things that teachers are taught. The idea should be a 'duh' concept. Some people (and children) have natural gifts and talents in one direction, while others might have talent and natural ability in another. Without learning art, music, or physical education, students may not have the opportunity to discover and foster those natural talents, or connect the perspective that they gain from them to what the classroom is teaching. Some minds need to approach things in creative perspectives, while others need to be more logical or analytical. Therefore, taking away outlets for different approaches can really hinder a student's ability to process information.
These two lessons are the biggest ones that I would like the powers-that-be in education to recognize. They are, in my opinion, fundamental to a well-rounded, successful education. So that is where my statement of those who are not educators should not tell those who are how to do their jobs comes in.
There is another side of this that has a major impact on today's education structure, and that was summarized by my statement that idealism without reality is only fantasy. Let me explain that a bit. The big shove towards a focus on reading and math comes from the desire to improve those abilities in students. There is a gap between where the average skill level for those is and where it should be. Ideally, if we give extra attention to those skills, the average ability level should increase. There are all kinds of tests to measure that, put in place to ensure that students are reaching the skill level that is expected of them. Realistically, classroom instruction spends a vast majority of its time trying to prepare students to do well on those tests. Realistically, kids learn differently, so reading and math come easier to some than to others. The fantasy is that we can get all students to an advanced skill level in math and reading without extra help outside normal classroom instruction. The reality, however, is that we are actually lowering the average skill level by doing that. If we don't give students with natural ability the chance to truly soar in those skills, they cannot help to raise the average. Likewise, some students need extra help to master those skills, and the time for that should not and cannot be taken from regular classroom instruction without negative consequences.
Coffee is delicious, but it can stunt your growth. The same is true of education. All those ideals sound pretty good, but those unrealistic ideals are stunting the growth of our students. We want them to be able to reach for the stars, but that's pretty hard when we're leaving them short.
No comments:
Post a Comment