Why our kids have lost faith in school (Part 2)

“The more things change, the more they stay the same”, it seems.

Fresco student

Boy reciting (Pompeii)

So, this is the education revolution? You could be excused for not noticing anything but a mild westerly breeze blowing in your face. If you are a student in a mainstream education, you might not have noticed anything at all, in fact.

The point I am trying to emphasise is that very little has come of the epiphany that occurred since Sir Ken Robinson’s ground-breaking TED presentation in February 2006. ‘Personalisation’ has become a generic catch phrase for anything that encompasses a variety of initiatives, from a wide range of options and elective courses offered by schools and districts with deep pockets, to students using their own electronic device (BYOD) in a formalised classroom setting. As laudable as these initiatives may be, they have, in actual fact, very little to do with personalisation. Allow me to explain …

Schools, like shopping malls, are expanding rapidly; state-of-the-art classrooms, art-and-media studios, and sports facilities abound. The only limit seems to be the extent of the capital campaign that the school’s community can muster … Those that have, get more, and those that don’t, well … they just don’t. Despite their struggles, these very communities often offer the highest level of personalisation. Continuing on with the analogy of an expanding shopping mall, clients may love the options and choice available to them (what I call ‘customisation’); but may long for the personalised level of service that the corner-store owner offered, before it was demolished to make place for the consumerist expanse.

What, and whom, do we serve? The students are our clients, and it would be useful to ask them a few questions:

  1. Does your teacher know you?
  2. Are you able to use your personal strengths to achieve the goals in any given course, or are you expected to do ‘the same’ as everyone else?
  3. Do you have a choice as to which content you would like to study in depth in any given course?
  4. Are you relying on tutors to help you get through your academic program?
  5. How many students should be in your classroom in order for your teacher to provide you with the personal attention you deserve?

In the midst of escalating levels of stress and pressures among our learners (the topic of the final post in this series), we do not seem to realise that ‘small is everything’ when it comes to education. Ask any teacher in any academic program whether he would rather teach 24 students or 12.

While we all may concur on the value of ‘personalisation’, it would be hugely beneficial if we could actually agree on what the concept actually means. Does it mean that we can just offer more courses along the same old lines; or does it mean something else entirely, something smaller and more … personal?

Why our kids have lost faith in school (Part 1)

A road less travelled: the realities of education that we are not yet facing

I have been pondering on this blog post for a number of months now; not due to the uncertainty of ‘what’ to say; but rather ‘what not’ to say. The raison d’être of this blog has always been to serve as a sounding board for innovative initiatives in learning and teaching, and the last thing I want is to alienate our dedicated contributors and followers. While restraint might be the best policy; many will agree that “enough is enough”.

Facilitating the ultimate success of our students (as all teachers strive to do), the collective patience is being stretched beyond reasonable limits. How much longer are students, teachers and parents to endure the political platitudes of certain senior administrators and educational glitterati who claim that, after all has been said and done, ‘our system’ (emphasis on ‘system’) is not flawed after all? They proudly proclaim that, apart from a few minor adjustments to alleviate pedagogical constraints such as report cards or “to provide more fun”(!), the current approach to education is actually one of the best in the world. How do we know this? Well, because they tell us so … Ironically, such claims are often based on the results of the exact standardised testing that bears the brunt of their criticism. In all fairness, it is hard to quantify ‘engagement’ and ‘love of learning’, but still …

The one notion that all seem to agree upon is that ‘personalisation’ lies at the very heart of successful learning. Given the vast extremities between current mainstream systems of education and authentic learning, there can be very few grey areas … minor adjustments will not suffice (and superficial changes in curriculum are just downright insulting). As teachers have been stating for what seems to be ages, the fundamental issues revolve around student/teacher ratios and subsequent imbalances. Over the coming weeks and months, my goal is to look at a number of those issues.

As you may have noticed, I am going to wade in beyond ankle deep …Personalisation

On the British Proposal of bringing the Armed Services into the School-system

In their article of 9 July in The Telegraph, the British shadow ministers for education and defence put forward the idea that the military (especially its veterans and reservists) ought to have a stronger role in the British education system.

While this may seem a rather radical idea, it does make some degree of sense. As the shadow ministers (equivalent to the critics in Canadian legislatures) point out, reservists already use civilian skills to do good in military contexts; surely ‘the reverse should also be true’. The armed services are built on the ‘values of responsibility, comradeship, hard work and a respect for public service’, ideals which are essential in helping children to become active citizens in our modern age. Other virtues of the armed services that make them well-suited to being involved in education, but which are not mentioned in the article, are their discipline, their respect for tradition, their custom of rewarding excellence and achievement, and, of course, their strong emphasis on physical fitness.

Whatever one’s thoughts on having soldiers teaching and interacting with children, the principle behind the idea is sound. As has been said on this blog and elsewhere, the time has come to search for creative ways to teach our children. Perhaps the military ideals of discipline and loyalty toward one’s peers and one’s superiors (e.g. the teachers) are just what some schools need to help to serve their students better. As with any model, however, it will not be appropriate for every school.

I myself was at first rather alarmed by the idea of having soldiers in schools, but as I’ve thought things through, the idea has grown on me; though, of course, I would not tolerate the presence of any firearms, or even the wearing of battledress. I do think, however, that, in underprivileged communities (which were particularly on the shadow ministers’ mind when they conceived the plan), the presence of authority in a nurturing role, rather than a law-enforcing one, coupled with the promise, almost unique to the military, of promotion through the ranks for those who work hard, could be precisely what’s needed to help students to rise to their full potential.

The shadow ministers’ suggestion, while creative, is controversial: one particularly impassioned  user on The Telegraph’s website went so far as to say that it was a ‘fascist [and] authoritarian’ proposal. What are your thoughts on this? Is it a troubling recommendation that would militarise our schools and society? Or is it a worthwhile, innovative idea that could help to improve education? Have your say in the comments section below!

Sir Ken Robinson: Making progressive education mainstream

At TEDx London, Sir Ken Robinson concluded the day’s conference with a poignant reminder: “The reason why today’s conversation is so important is that we are living in revolutionary times; that’s why we need a revolution in education”.

He identifies two major drivers of change, population growth and technology, both of which are changing exponentially …

“And that rate of change is going to accelerate; it’s not going to decrease …”

Continue reading