As education reforms run their course, as political initiatives founder, as watchwords fail to galvanize, and as frustration has increased, finger pointing has begun.
The recent attempt by the Los Angeles Times to evaluate that city's teachers by the level of improvement of their students on certain standardized tests and then (apparently) to shame them into action by publishing the results takes missing the point to a whole new level. Never mind the fact that these tests are antiquated and incredibly narrow in scope, or that success in taking these or other similar tests requires consistent levels of emotional wellness and stability that may not be available to many of these children, or that these tests do not reflect creative "right-brained" learning experiences that may be of even greater value to the child, or ….I could go on, but first, let's consider just one aspect of this attitude: responsibility.
As a teacher of 35 years experience, I find myself asking the same question I have asked myself at some point during every one of those years: "Who is ultimately responsible for the education of the child?" This question is usually followed by another: "Why am I doing this by myself?"
There has been a general abdication of responsibility for educating children over the years by the communities to which the children belong. What used to take a village now takes only an individual, it seems. And now the village is blaming the individuals whom they have abandoned on the front line with the responsibility to teach what that community wants taught, how they want it taught, where they want it taught, and (worse) when they want it taught. Because even the most effective teacher can not overcome a poorly constructed or archaic curriculum or respond to outdated teaching aims. Teaching is best done as a team effort, in concert with fellow teachers and administrators and parents, taking advantage of the latest gains in technology and neuroscience. The single autocratic teacher in a classroom with the responsibility to shape the lives of 35 or 40 students for good or ill is a dinosaur. It does, indeed, take a village.
It is time to look beyond traditional teaching methods to discover the real reasons that education in the United States is beginning to lag behind other nations. First, consider teaching aims. It is no longer sufficient to attempt to motivate students or teachers with economic goals. The narrow and competitive mission to crank out doctors and lawyers and engineers who can then collect a big paycheck and experience the American Dream doesn't work anymore. Americans recognize that there is more to life than that. Nell Nodding has put forward the aim of teaching toward happiness. That seems closer to the mark. I would respectfully suggest the aim of fulfillment, to learn to become and to experience all that you can, to expand your individual horizons in particularly their most difficult directions, to find unsuspected talents and abilities within yourself. Perhaps happiness would follow.
Second, examine the school wide curriculum to determine its compatibility with neuroscience. It is the brain that learns, after all, and our effectiveness at teaching is dependent upon understanding its growth and development. We are discovering more about the brain on an almost daily basis. The stages of development of the brain dictate the readiness of the brain to learn. Any experienced teacher can tell you that learning happens only when the child is ready to learn, not before. And neuroscientists are discovering that some stages come earlier than thought and some later and that in some cases specific windows of opportunity are presented and in other cases opportunity continues indefinitely.
Third, allow the teacher to truly teach, which means to have a part in the creation of that which is to be taught and how and when it is to be taught. This is the area of the teachers' training. It is not the area of the parents' training, in most cases. Give the teacher a larger part in determining the curriculum and syllabus.
Fourth, supply community support for teachers and schools. Be a part in determining teaching aims and mission and objectives. Attend meetings and conferences. Learn from the professionals what is effective in education today and help schools to effect positive change.
Finally, consider an attitude change. Education should be viewed in the same way we do our businesses. We should be hiring the professionals who supply the best abilities and are the best fit for the job and the school and then paying them accordingly. We should be always looking forward to new paths, rather than backward to old 'proven' traditional methods. The way in which the world communicates, collaborates, and connects has changed and continues to change and schools should be on the leading edge of that change, not protected from it. The way in which we were taught may have been good enough for us, but it is not now good enough for our children.
