The Paideia Program

I came across the paideia program about 10 years ago. When I first read it, I fell in love with the vision these educators painted. It strongly influenced my thoughts about what K-12 education should be and what the real purpose of education is--namely, to lead individuals in the pursuit of discovery about the world and, more importantly, self.

Several nights ago, I picked up the paideia program and started reading again for the first time in what seems like forever. The ideas are as compelling now as they were back when I was feeling the sting of a stifling educational environment--perhaps reinforced by my desire to shield my son from the pain that I suffered through. The Paideia proposal and program builds on the pedagogical philosophy of Dewey by delivering specific advice on pedagogical methods and content. I feel many of you would find the Paideia trilogy by Mortimer Adler to be of interest. Please check it out if you have any interest in applying the "great books" approach in education.

Detentionslip.org

Just came across this blog.  Some intriguing reads to be found there.

Our neighborhood school here in Boston

Did some looking into the public elementary school across the street from me and Greg here in Boston, and it has some great programs & approaches. The William W. Henderson Inclusion Elementary School: http://boston.k12.ma.us/Henderson/curriculum.htm

Bill Henderson, Principal, has written up some really helpful documentation on the school's efforts to engage non-reader students and their parents: http://boston.k12.ma.us/Henderson/images/How%20a%20Boston%20School%20Boosted%20Home%20Reading.pdf

I'll be reaching out in early January to see if we can chat with Bill H. or some of the Henderson school staff.

Cyberbullying

Somewhat off topic, but we must remember that children come into the class room from another place and environment, sometimes after being exposed to a variety of stressors. Reading this article was like driving past a car wreck.

Despite how disturbing it is, I just had to keep reading. I am amazed and disappointed that children are granted the freedom to do whatever they please on the internet with no consideration for their maturity or readiness to exercise the power that comes with access to social networking and the online world in general.

On the one hand, the offending children certainly behaved reprehensibly. But, on the other hand, I found myself more shocked with the cavalier attitude that some of the parents displayed. Minimizing the incident is a natural response, but refusing to acknowledge that any harm was done seems tragic to me--tragic because a valuable learning opportunity, which came at the cost of another human being's health and safety, was lost in a sea of parental ambivalence.

When I visited the Waldorf school in Palm Harbor, I asked one of the senior teachers how they handle bullying. She told me that any students which are involved, whether bullied or bully, have to sit down face to face and discuss what is going on, why it's happening, and how it makes each person feel.

I was surprised that any school would make a victim suffer through such a process. But upon further consideration, I did wonder whether or not it was more effective than punishment or expulsion. Perhaps it taught the victim to be assertive and strong? Perhaps it taught the offender that he would be held accountable for his actions? Perhaps it is humiliating enough to have to explain yourself in front of your teachers and victim.

In any case, it seems no matter who they are or where they come from, kids today have more stress on their minds than ever before.

"Cold Calling"

Link goes to You Tube video of a woman talking about how great it is to call on students at her own whim to answer questions.

This is an exceedingly authoritarian classroom, and based on the teacher's excessive restrictions on the students, I would guess that this is a drop-out prevention school.  Generally in such a school, students have been expelled (typically just until the end of the school year or some other predefined goal is met), though sometimes they just have "ADHD" or live in a neighborhood that has been identified as unhealthy for students and serves as an attempt to turn the tables.  I've taught as a substitute for a few of these kinds of schools.  Typically the class sizes are kept much smaller than a traditional classroom (though this varies), students are restricted in what they may wear, and they are not allowed to take any items to or from school.

I wanted to show this video I just found of a regular instructor for such a class and the sort of restrictions in place.  The students must "track" her.  She is attempting to teach attention skills.  The students are wearing uniforms.  The students are forbidden from speaking out.

Something about this video just screamed out to me that this is wrong.  It's not just the obvious racial background distinction between the teacher and the students, either.

Consider what secondary lessons students learn from such a change:  You are being punished for some crime you may or may not have committed.  This crime may be merely that your opinion of my importance is low in this world or that the information I demand you learn is immaterial to you.  You are someone over whom I have legal power and authority.  You must obey me or you will face consequences that are highly unappealing to you (which may include staying longer at this school).  My ideas, thoughts, and perspectives are superior to yours, and unless you conform to them, you will continue to be subjugated.

The most common thread amongst drop-out prevention students that I have seen, after spending considerable time teaching them and tutoring and mentoring them, is that they are interested in bucking the system.  They want to be independent.  They may want to see changes made that they are, ultimately, powerless to make.  Often they have other, more mentally pressing, issues at home which override their concerns for education for the time being.

These students are identified after skipping school, stealing, using drugs, acting out in class, getting in trouble with the law, or other similar activities.  Maybe they made the mistake of voicing their true opinion of an instructor at an inopportune time.  Maybe they are too egocentric to care whether anyone else in the classroom is capable of learning.  Or maybe it's just easier for them to be somewhere else.  And then this is how they are treated.  With more force, more emphasis on conformity.

I have to wonder in what way anyone is expected to benefit from that.  Is the intention to show some of the more ethically flexible individuals how to take advantage of a position of authority?

Two of the most common pieces of parenting advice that I hear from people (and immediately eschew as ignorant and insensible) are:  "Well, he's just going to have to deal with it." and "Just tell him no."  Sure, that sort of domineering is functional for certain personalities types.  And it's great for helping generate a population of sheeple.  But it doesn't teach anything other than fear of the Leviathan.  It doesn't help to train a person to find the reasoning behind a particular action.  It doesn't communicate the concept of goodwill and sharing and kindness.  Instead, it teaches children that they cannot trust adults with their thoughts and feelings. Children learn that they must keep their ideas of rebellion at bay, in a kind of perpetual state of fear.

To a certain extent, children do need to have a level of fear of their elders.  When they are toddlers, they have learned to grasp the concept of the "food chain" and can easily identify who is weaker and who is stronger.  My own son (nigh 3 years old) demonstrates this in playdates:  any younger or smaller or weaker child (even if they are up to 4 or 5 years older) is treated by him as an inferior; anyone his size or larger, as a sort of idol.  But if we are truly to become human beings, we must learn to grow out of this toddler phase, this hind-brain-fueled mentality.  While largely emotionally charged at a young age, children are gradually capable of more and more complex reasoning skills and should be afforded opportunities of using such.

I guess the gist of what I'm saying is that it seems insensible to punish those who are frustrated by a lack of power or control in their lives by taking away any of the small amount of such they possessed before.  Wouldn't it be better, instead, to give them an outlet for expressing themselves, some means of exercising control in their lives?  I fully believe the educational system is capable of making such a change.  It's just a question of whether or not they will.

Academic Integrity - Study Guides

Link goes to story about students at university level who were accused of cheating because they used an "Instructor's Manual" as a study guide for their exam--and the exam turned out to be identical to the one in the manual.

The instructor believes this to be a form of cheating, but it's not clear that the students were necessarily aware that the questions in the manual were going to be the exact same ones as on the exam, rather than merely similar ones.

Food for thought.

The Shadow Scholar

Man who writes papers for people spills his guts anonymously.  This is a very intriguing insight into the collegiate paper-writing underground world.