On Dec. 12, 2006, the New Commission on the Skills of the
American Workforce issued a report which called for grand, new,
sweeping reforms of public education. The Dispatch reprinted a
Christian Science Monitor article on the report.
On Dec. 12, 2006, the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce issued a report which called for grand, new, sweeping reforms of public education. The Dispatch reprinted a Christian Science Monitor article on the report.
Unfortunately, the grand, new, sweeping, controversial reforms are mostly the same tired old reforms that have been tried over and over again for the last hundred years. Some are effective in certain situations. Others are responsible for the current sorry state of our educational system.
One suggestion is universal pre-school. Some studies show that pre-school does benefit severely disadvantaged children. No studies show that it helps middle class or upper class children. Targeting disadvantaged children for pre-school programs makes sense; universal pre-school would be an expensive absurdity.
Another so-called reform is continuing education for adults without high school diplomas. Neither grand, new, sweeping, nor controversial, this “reform” is widespread and conventional. It is called the community college system.
Another proposal is to create a state board exam that students could take at age 16; if they pass, they can go directly to college. In California, this exam exists; it is called the California High School Proficiency Exam. Few kids avail themselves of it.
Another set of reforms actually does sound new to me: improve teachers’ salaries by reducing pensions; pay teachers more to work with at-risk kids, for longer hours, or for high performance. Good luck getting any of these past the unions.
Another suggestion is to “create curriculums that emphasize creativity and abstract concepts over rote learning or mastery of facts.” Does this sound like a new and innovative concept? It is not. Such curricula exist; they have been used sporadically since John Dewey, if not before.
Such curricula have been used extensively since the 1960s, in between brief backlashes by parents. They are a root cause of the current educational crisis in Gilroy, in California and in America.
Let us examine what is meant by curricula “that emphasize creativity and abstract concepts over rote learning or mastery of facts.” Perhaps all regular readers of this page are tired of my rants about mathematics. Let us examine another subject area: social science.
The name “social science” is a recent addition to the educational scene. Traditionally, students were taught history: they memorized by rote boring facts such as dates, events, and biographical data. They were taught a lot of facts. They drew their own conclusions.
Students were also taught geography: national boundaries, rivers and seas, imports and exports, climate. They were taught a lot of facts. They developed a rich data bank of knowledge. They drew their own conclusions.
Students were also taught civics: boring rote memorization about how the government works.
For the past 40 years, the trend in education has been to de-emphasize the boring, rote memorization of facts. Instead we have curricula that emphasize creativity and abstract concepts. (There are exceptions, usually private schools that require the rote memorization of boring facts.)
Consequently, Americans don’t know much about history, don’t know much geography. They know remarkably little about dates and rivers. They can’t find China on a map. What they have learned is the grand sweeping abstract concept that somebody somewhere was terribly unfair to someone else.
And when someone comes along with a piece of propaganda, Americans have no backlog of facts to check it against. Consequently, Americans are widely regarded as the most gullible people in the world.
This is the antithesis of what was called, in the old parlance, a liberal education. It is not the education of free citizens. It is the education of serfs.
Now, a cynic would decide that the education of serfs is precisely what the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce wants. I prefer to take the vice-chairman of the New Commission, Marc Tucker, at his word when he says, “If you don’t like the proposals we put on the ground, come up with something that will work better.”
Fine.
I suggest we revamp the current system and put into place what has historically worked for the education of free citizens. For the next few columns, I will be addressing the application of cognitive development theory to current educational practice.
Cynthia Anne Walker is a
homeschooling mother of three and former engineer. She is a published independent author. Her column is published in
The Dispatch every Friday.
