|
EDUCATIONAL REFORM PROPOSALS By
Mark S. Barnett
|
||||
| Home
Policy Policy Adv
& DisAdv of Policy |
Just as 100 years ago the nation struggled with the transition from an agrarian to an industrial economy, today we confront the transition from an industrial to a global, technological economy (Technological Literacy). Knowledge has become our key resource. It is not tied to any country. It is portable. Increasingly, an educated person will be somebody who has learned how to learn, and who continues [formal] learning throughout his or her lifetime (Drucker, 1994, pp. 4,10).
There is an old saying that goes like this, "There is so much good in the worst of us, and so much bad in the best of us, that it is rather hard to know which of us ought to reform the rest of us." This analogy can also be fittingly applied to our traditional educational institutions, who incorrectly assume that all students learn best by using one unified method of instruction. James Hillman suggests, "The more we rigidly insist upon unity the more diversity will constellate" (Mogenson, p. 4). A central problem in education has been the failure to adapt teaching to the many ways children think and learn. From this perspective, many learning disabilities have in fact been created by schools (DeVries, 1987, p. 18). The traditional method of teaching has posed problems which are magnified because less than half of the school population learn best from teacher-initiated and direct-dialogue instruction (Gallagher). For example, in the typical school, ADD/ADHD students comprise about 30-35% of the total student population (Newman, 1998, p. 4). In conventional classrooms, these students suffer "chronic and severe under-achievement," 35% drop-out rates, 50% grade-repeaters, learning deficits in core subjects, and high suspension and expulsion rates. Sooner or later many of them develop oppositional defiant behavior, probably because of high frustrations built up from being "compelled" to perform in a foreign and unfriendly environment. At worst some of these become juvenile offenders which follows them into adulthood, robbing them of their childhood. Studies demonstrate that the ability to concentrate, focus, and stay on the teacher’s task of assignments are better predictors of academic success than other measures of academic ability (p. 4), i.e. intelligence, creativity, self-discovery & exploratory skills. Polemically, studies also show that a significant number of students who display poor performance in these traditional classrooms are long on attending to their own aims. There is simply a disparity of agendas, whereby their attention is focused on things of no interest to the teacher (Keirsey, p. 2). |
Continued from left column Though by no means scientifically definitive, but for the sake of simplicity, society in America has tended to place its members into two camps—conservative or liberal; republican or democrat; introverted or extroverted; constrained or unconstrained. It is now being discovered that students (and adults) fundamentally have two sides of learning dispositions: Convergent and Divergent thinkers (Gallagher, pp. 1-8). The convergent thinkers tend to think in concrete or singularly focused terms; whereas, those with divergent mindsets gravitate toward thinking in the abstract and visualize things in broad concepts. As such, they learn in diametrically opposite ways, creating many conflicts. For instance, the primary clash between the two is—convergent thinkers normally do not question or challenge the status quo; whereas, divergent thinkers usually do, and are oftentimes very vocal in their non-conformist ideologies. As a result, the latter are viewed in the negative as weak and disruptive by the former. This hostility causes much strife in education because convergent thinkers predominately occupy the positions of teacher, principal, School Board member, and PTA member (Gallagher). Convergent thinkers also comprise roughly 40% or less of the student body. The other 60% or more are divergent thinkers (i.e. ADD/ADHD, LD, gifted, creative, edison trait, etc.), who either find a way to adapt to the convergent thinker’s method of instruction, or eventually drop out of school. Schools must provide educational experiences appropriate to the needs of all children. Divergent thinking students must be given stimulating educational experiences appropriate to their level of ability if they are to realize their potential. According to research on the nature of intelligence and the brain, we either progress or regress depending on our participation in stimulation appropriate to our level of development (Parent Information, p. 3). A new educational framework for divergent thinking students must be created which allows them great freedom to follow trails of self-interest; to make connections on their own; to reformulate ideas; to reach unique conclusions—even if they are unconventional and non-conforming—to explore and discover new territories of thinking; to question without fear of reprisal; to reshape and transform ideas; and internalize information according to their needs and aspirations.
|
||
