But wait. We’re living in a time when academic achievement is flat at the end of high
school; when scads of young people emerge unready for either college or career success;
when American employers must look overseas for skilled personnel; and when results-based
accountability for kids, teachers, and schools alike hangs in the balance and “soft skills” are in
the ascendancy.
We also have ample evidence that while “playful teaching and learning” does little harm to
middle-class kids with support and structure in the rest of their lives, for children from
troubled circumstances it’s a recipe for failure. Many such youngsters already have plenty
of “play” of various sorts in their lives, even a corrupted sort of “natural state,” but
precious little formal learning—and few of the other benefits (character formation,
self-discipline, citizenship, etc.) that also flow from purposeful adult direction.
Are we—bizarrely and cruelly—to exacerbate the achievement, economic
and mobility gaps that already plague us as a nation, while turning a blind eye to the
academic mediocrity that already afflicts even those on the up side of those gaps,
all in the name of modeling America on a charming small country in northern Europe?
The evidence the authors cite is persuasive that kids need to play but not that we
should diminish the quest for stronger skills and knowledge or should try to organize
U.S. schools the way they do in Vuohtomaki, the rural village where Sahlberg grew up.
Appealing as that model is in its way, it doesn’t transplant at scale to the Bronx, nor
would it pave a path out of poverty for children who live there (or in Memphis, Houston, etc.)
I think I’ll stick with GERM—and keep doing what I can to infect others. It
may be too late to block America’s migration from one education sun to the other,
but it’s a dreadful mistake to accelerate it.
Chester E. Finn, Jr., is a Distinguished Senior Fellow and President Emeritus at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. He is also a Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution.
Since 2016 Finland itself has turned in the direction of GERM. Inquiry-based group idiocy.
Wrong again.
“The Pontus school is one of the first in the country to fully implement the new core curriculum, introduced by Finland’s Ministry of Education in 2016, which is based on the concept of ‘phenomenon teaching’ – the replacing of traditional subject-based classes like maths and history with interdisciplinary courses focusing on broader topics.”
“Under the new curriculum, children are also encouraged to become autonomous learners, for example by creating their own study plans.”
“However, the teaching methods and the use of space at Pontus have not suited the pedagogical needs of all children. Sixth grader Aino Piironen found the need to create her own study plan an insurmountable challenge, after childhood epilepsy left her with mild memory difficulties.”
“Aino’s parents believe that the school failed in its core task of educating Aino. In their view, the school’s modern learning environment made it difficult for her to concentrate and that she would have also needed more help from teachers and staff to support her memory.”
“The most difficult thing of all, according to Aino, was the lack of teaching. Students began the day by working on their own weekly plan, approaching teachers in the middle of the ‘market square’ for advice when needed.”
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/parents_file_complaints_over_failure_of_new_school/10924016
“The Pontus School has also received a lot of positive feedback from both parents and children, including praise for its good school spirit.” — um, ok then. Good school spirit, yay.
Say what you will, BA, Finland is one of the highest ranking school systems in the world and was also rated the happiest.
Why is Finland messing with success by implementing these unproven changes? Seems Finland has its own Disruptors.
Finn said: “…..when American employers must look overseas for skilled personnel;” Oh please, what a bogus fake assertion. There are a ton of skilled personnel right here in the USA but they want to work for better pay and benefits while the foreign applicants are willing to work for less pay in order to get entry into the US. The US personnel train the new foreign hires who will replace them. Irony much?
CNN ran a story about the US hiring foreign teachers. Why? We have plenty of teachers, but their wages and working conditions are poor. The foreign teachers are happy to work for US wages because they are many times more than they were paid at home.
You don’t learn three languages through play. Moore is not a teacher. I would have asked different questions.
People can learn some social language through play or from living in household where another language is frequently spoken. This does mean that a person is totally fluent in that language.
We have grappled with the issue of language competence in second language acquisition. With ELLs we see students that have some social language, but they lack the foundation necessary for cognitive academic language. As a result, these students often struggle in academics. It takes about five to seven years of language instruction before someone becomes what we consider to be bilingual.
Yes, you do learn language and multiple languages through play and there is a large body of research in early childhood that supports play based language learning.
Show me the research.
Young children acquire language quite naturally without grammar. This is social language, and it does not include reading and writing the language. https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/faq-how-do-we-learn-language
Babies acquire language differently than older children and adults. How do Finnish students learn 2-4 languages? Immersion? Play? Direct instruction and memorization?
I find that many Americans who have never made much progress at learning a second language have deep knowledge of how it’s done.
Last summer I visited Finnish friends who were vacationing in Croatia, where they have a summer place. Their two children, ages 7 and 3, speak fluent Finnish, English, and Croatian. These three languages have nothing in common.
My kids learned two languages with no problem while playing in Hungarian and American daycares. And in Hungarian daycares and kindergartens all they do is play. Our friends’ kid learned 4 languages this way, 3 of which she acquired in US daycare here in Memphis where there were American, French Canadian and Mexican teachers. Play all day.
“Show me the research.”
What research? Are the Finnish lying?
Oh FFS, how do you think you acquired your first language??? Do you think your mother propped you up in a baby seat in a room full of other babies for a teacher to lecture to you?
Second and later language are best learned the same way you learned your first one – by using them in a natural context.
Yes. Immersion.
Bob: being Methodist, I must make an argument for sprinkling.
Ponderosa : “You don’t learn three languages through play.”
Indeed, kids sit quietly in classrooms and listen to the teacher as she lectures to them on grammar and makes them memorize 100 words per day. They then go home and do homework 5 hours a day, as American kids.
The Finns lie through their teeth.
Babies and toddlers are language learning machines. They pick up languages almost effortlessly. If the people around them speak X, the will learn X. But then it gets harder. I can see how Finns can get almost immersed in English and Swedish from an early age because so many Finns use those languages. But Spanish?
Highschool kids in my neighborhood in Hungary speak and understand English very well. They have much less Hungarian accent than I have (my own kids tell me this). What do they do? They watch American movies, they play computer games. They get bad grades in school in English classes because they don’t know formal grammar. But they speak with making very few mistakes in grammar.
It’s all instinctive for them. Why formalized it? Why make learning a language academic?
I think in the US, teaching in K-12 is much more formal than it should be. We need to relax, and trus that kids pick many things up (even in math) automatically.
Hi Ponderosa. I usually side with most of your comments, but in this case my experience differs. When I was in the Peace Corps in Malaysia in the mid-1970s, I often saw Malay, Chinese, and Indian children of ages 3-5 all playing together and was impressed with how readily they picked up each others native tongues before they ever entered school. This multi-lingual experience is sadly rather rare in our country.
David,
Yes, immersing very little kids in the target language obviates formal instruction. But most kids do not have this opportunity. What’s best for these other kids? Travel to Croatia every summer? Out of reach for most. Watch Croatian TV on the Internet? I know this would not work for me. Even the languages I’ve studied (French, German and Spanish) I find it very hard to follow TV and movies in those languages –they just talk too fast. What I DO glean tends to precisely what I recognize from my slow, bookish formal study.
It’s easy to discount the value of those plodding high school foreign language classes. Kids emerge tongue-tied. But if the curriculum is rigorous enough, and the kids actually do the work, they’re gaining critical foundations. This has been my experience. I thought I got very little from my very pedestrian HS Spanish classes. But when I went to Guatemala for a month of home-stay and one-on-one classes, my Spanish took off. I made very fast gains. I left my fellow Americans who hadn’t done formal study of Spanish in the dust. That slowly-acquired foundation of grammar and vocabulary served me well. It was the starter kit I needed to start acquiring vastly more Spanish.
My European friends who’ve learned additional languages all believe formal study is indispensable. Once you’ve passed age 5, immersion/exposure alone is insufficient.
The Hungarian teens Mate mentions: I bet they start studying English early in elementary school. Without that foundation, I bet they wouldn’t be able to glean much from American TV –it’d be too fast.
This discussion points to a more general problem with thinking about education in this country: we disdain the slow, step-by-step inculcation of the basics –in foreign language study, in math, in science, in history, in everything. We insist that a pedagogy must elicit expert-like performance from novices: just start comprehending and speaking Croatian; start solving real world math problems; start designing experiments; do history; read and analyze complex texts… We We’ve tried to abolish beginner-hood. We think we can dispense with it. We’ve forgotten that learning a discipline is not the same as practicing that discipline.
“start solving real world math problems”
I don’t say that. What I am saying is that kids at every age need to learn new stuff and they also need to keep their creativity alive. We don’t want to bore them with endless lectures, we don’t want to tie their hands when they want to try out what they can do on their own without a teacher breathing down their necks, but we don’t want to make them feel left alone with a too frustrating task, either.
This is what the Finns do, and it’s futile to imagine that secretly, Finnish kids sit quietly in lectures and they do 5 hour home works to stuff their bottomless long term memory with indispensable information. They simply don’t do that, and they still live a happy, productive life.
And, btw, no, those teens I was talking about had no previous background in English. None.
No direct instruction of foreign language in Finland? You’re sure?
Hungarian elementary schools don’t teach English? Really?
I think it’s good it’s right out in the open. Because it’s always been the belief among ed reformers, that poor children need structured, rigid schools and middle and upper class children do not. What else could it possibly be?
The early “no excuses” rationale was explicitly based on “broken windows”, which is a (somewhat discredited) policing theory, not an educational one.
I think it’s better for everyone when they actually state the beliefs rather than wrapping them in a bunch of nonsense and buzz words.
“Education Next
Alumni with Influence: Former Teach for America corps members hold prominent leadership roles in education, public policy, and advocacy organizations”
I chuckled when I saw this. Yeah, we know. The echo chamber has strict entrance and speech requirements. No dissenters need apply.
They SHOOT right to the top past all those lesser mortals with actual experience and commitment. When they get there they know everyone! That’s the beauty of “clout”- it’s all about relationships.
I don’t think a public school advocate can get hired in a lot of government, but we’re sure lousy with charter and voucher advocates. We have SCADS of them. Is it any wonder that public school students get the raw end of every ed reform deal? They don’t have powerful, well connected advocates.
I watched Dan Rather’s original ice, way back when I still had contact with him. he pointed to Finland as the example of what it looks like when a country values their public education system. Watch… Dan Rather Reports, “Finnish First” excerpt
While we may not have ever looked exactly like Finland, American education was in much better shape before the “accountability lobby” got involved. We offered a much better balanced program of academics, civics and the arts. Many teachers taught across the curriculum. The program in elementary school was more comprehensive and enriched than what is available in many schools today. Art, music, P.E and libraries with real books were the norm. Students had recess at least twice a day, and most children enjoyed coming to school. This type of education enabled many students to go on to a variety of post secondary education, and it contributed greatly to the country we have today.
People like Finn are seeking to monetize our students and schools. Their rationale for what they propose has no substance or basis in fact. It is propaganda from those that want to strip us of democratic public education. As Pasi Sahlberg has said, “America has a poverty problem.” Our poverty problem can be remedied by job creators actually creating jobs instead of paying off share holders. The skills gap is a right wing lie like just about everything else that has emanated from so-called reform. GERM along with market based education needs to be eradicated in this country so that American schools can be free to provide the type of education that allow young people to thrive. We know how to do it. We need to get the politicians and corporations to stop inserting themselves in the process. They have made a mess that needs to be cleaned up.
No, it was not. Algrebra and geometry started in HS, like now. No real science in middle school, like now. Physics, chemistry, biology are one-year electives, starting in HS, like now. Nowadays many HS simply do not offer them because they either have no teachers, no funding, no tools, etc, anyway they do not offer them. No need to learn foreign language, because English is everywhere, just like now. Math was no much better even before New Math started, to the point that when WWII started, military had to re-teach recruits basic arithmetic and algebra so they could use contemporary weapons and targeting systems. ELA was in shambles since Look-and-see a.k.a. Whole Language started a hundred years ago; Rudolf Flesch wrote his seminal book in 1955, and I am truly amazed seeing modern-day ELA teachers who proudly say that they have been teaching for two or three decades, and who don’t know about this book.
Maybe the life of the teachers was easier because there were no high stake tests and VAMs. But the quality and richness of education was not much better.
BA,
You really do have a very low opinion of education in the US. How did this country become the most powerful in the world when everyone is so dumb and uneducated? How did it become the world leader in Nobel prizes in science? Your contempt for this country is really ugly.
All the major elementary school reading programs now contain strong phonics components in the early grades, so I would contend that Flesh’s argument in Why Johnny Can’t Read has won the day, there. But there are still many, many problems with how we are approaching reading, too many to go into in a post on a blog such as this. However, I discuss many of the major ones in this essay: https://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/2017/09/02/on-the-pseudoscience-of-strategies-based-reading-comprehension-instruction-or-what-current-comprehension-instruction-has-in-common-with-astrology/
Dr. Gregg Semenza has just been awarded a Nobel Prize in science, He is a graduate of Sleepy Hollow High School, a public high school in Tarrytown, NY.https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/research/about-faculty/awards/nobel/gregg_semenza/index.html
Bob, I’ve read this text before (it is way too long for what it is). Agree on phonics. Do not agree on grammar. First, they pretty much do not teach grammar nowadays. Second, explicit grammar rules are important and help both understanding someone’s speech and constructing your own phrases. For example, “Plok mooked on zicky reedsrl” makes no real-world sense, but knowing word order in English language you can easily see that plok is a subject, mooked is a verb (likely a regular one), and reedsrl is direct object. Both good books with complex language and explicit grammar are important.
Also, you don’ t get what reading is – it is decoding, that is it. Comprehension is not part of reading skill. With your example of McCarthyism, Communists and witches it would be no difference if someone who did not know about these things would hear about them from a friend or from TV news. Written or spoken, it still would make nosense. Reading is akin to playing a tape in tape recorder, make sounds out of symbols. Further on, any good reader skips the making sounds part, but it is a shortcut, not an inherent feature of being able to read. Silent reading is ability to listen to the record without anyone around you hearing it, like listening to an iPod using earphones.
I agree that ELA programs and standards are designed by people even less competent in their field than math programs. This is just one of many failures of the existing system.
“Comprehension is not part of reading skill.”
I want to see a cage match between you and Ponderosa. You’re both so full of yourselves on opposite ends of the spectrum, it should provide some great entertainment. Let me go pop the popcorn.
BA, you don’t seem to understand the difference between the incredibly complex syntactic and morphological rules that a person learns to follow automatically (there are many, many, many thousands of these that constitute a person’s grammatical competence) and the simplistic, traditional explicit school “grammars” that bear the same relation to the former that a Tinkertoy airplane bears to jetliner.
You really need to go read an introductory text on syntax and language acquisition before discussing matters you don’t seem to understand, as Coleman clearly didn’t. A good place to start is Chapter 1 of Andrew Radford’s Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English: A Minimalist Approach. Cambridge UP. The grammar in a native speaker’s head and the Tinkertoy folk model of explicit grammar taught in K-12 schools are completely different, as different as a child’s stick figure drawing of a human is from a biological human in all his or her complexity of systems. Yes, the Tinkertoy model has some minor usefulness for older students, for it gives them a simple vocabulary for discussing sentence structures with their teachers. But that’s about it. People do not learn the grammar of a language via explicit instruction in that Tinkertoy model. It’s a complex, automatic process. I explain this in that essay, but perhaps you need to go back and reread it a bit more carefully, for you seemed to have missed this bit of teaching, which is uncontroversial elementary linguistic science.
And yes, the Common [sic] Core [sic] is littered with occasional references to Tinkertoy traditional grammar (which pop up out of the blue with not coherent, foundational, underpinning), and so current curricula (current ELA textbooks, print and online) almost all have these weird, random traditional grammar activities and exercises, which is bizarre, for learning that stuff requires a cumulative course of study, not, “And now, kids, hey, for something completely different: participles!” with no preparation leading up to that.
The language system in the brain is a largely automatically functioning internal system like the neurological system or the endocrine system. Teaching explicit traditional Tinkertoy grammar bears as much relation to learning a language as learning the names of a few muscles and bones would to learning to walk. Linguists know this. Unfortunately, most English teachers and administrators and writers of “standards” do not. Clearly, Coleman didn’t.
I suggested that earlier edition of Radford’s work because of its excellent introduction dealing with the difference between schoolbook “grammars” and the grammar that a speaker of a language acquires as a matter of course in childhood. But here’s the most recent instantiation of that superb introduction to syntax by Radford: http://www.public.asu.edu/~gelderen/Radford2009.pdf
Sadly, you are very misinformed about education today. Many students take Algebra in middle school. Several of my 5th graders were taking pre algebra. I taught science to 5th and 6th graders and I hardly think I was the only one.
“You really need to go read an introductory text on syntax and language acquisition before discussing matters you don’t seem to understand” — Thanks, I am good. Studying syntax and grammar is beneficial, provided it is done correctly. It is almost not being done presently in schools, not even on the “Tinkertoy” level. You seem to find “Tinkertoy” grammar study useless, I do not. But Common Core does not prescript what and how to study in a clear and sequential manner, and instead asks for some very specific results, which I do find distressing. I’ve read the first chapter of Andrew Radford’s book, nothing earth shuttering, something like this I studied at school, although in a more simplified “Tinkertoy” form if you want. Still think it was useful. Getting to your example of Declaration of Independence, you cannot parse it if you cannot split that complex sentence into parts and find subject and predicate in each, and figuring out which clauses depend on which — this is a mechanical process.
“People do not learn the grammar of a language via explicit instruction in that Tinkertoy model.” — This is simply false. Do you know a foreign language? Have you studied the rules of the language you learned? Like, in German you put the verb at the end. Well, not always. The conjugated verb remains the second position, while the other verb goes at the end, very unnatural to me, but if you want to get up to speed quickly, you just learn this rule. Considering that you as other visitors to this side are concerned by low attainment of the poor ESL students, you should care more about formal grammar. It amazes me that on the one hand you agree with phonics vs look-see, while on another hand you discount formal grammar study as useless, preferring organic immersion. Organic immersion works in the families with higher-educated parents, as your article clearly states. But everyone else must learn grammar, just like they learn to construct and deconstruct words using phonics.
“It’s a complex, automatic process.” — When people learn syntax as immersive automatic process, they say “would of” instead of “would have”, because they don’t know formal rules. When pointed to their error they do not understand what is wrong. Is this your ideal?
Everywhere else outside the English-language universe kids use phonetic approach to read and learn formal grammar, at least in the countries that use alphabet. Why it is such a big issue in the U.S., the U.K. and Australia? I just don’t get it like Flesch did not get it.
I don’t care about Common Core because it is schizophrenic. Its craziness does not dismiss the idea that studying grammar is good (when done correctly).
“The conjugated verb remains the second position, while the other verb goes at the end, very unnatural to me, but if you want to get up to speed quickly, you just learn this rule. ”
Where do you get these ideas, BA? You don’t think about these kinds of rules when you speak a language. Those with a reasonable command of a language simply have a bad feeling when you hear bad grammar.
In fact, always thinking about grammar and rules just makes you timid while learning a language. I had a perfect score on my midlevel English exam in Hungary, and I understood absolutely nothing when I landed in New York in ’85, and people had to wait till a finished a sentence since I was constantly searching for the correct grammar. Then, at the advice of a prof, I just sat down and watched lots of soap operas and talked without worrying about grammar. 3 months later I was teaching.
When my daughter was 3ish, she always said “eated”. Nobody misunderstood her, and eventually she learned the correct way.
In some parts of Memphis, people say “eated” and “We was” and still, nobody worries about it.
When kids learn a 2nd language, reasonable speaking fluency is much more important than precise grammar, wide vocabulary. Overemphasizing these is the big mistake many teachers still make.
At the university here, I took a class in French from a French Canadian. It was all vocabulary and grammar memorization. I was adult but finished first in the class of teens. The prof congratutaled me and I told him, it was a torture for me and I didn’t feel my speach improved one bit. He told me, he didn’t like this method either, because decades of its practice showed how ineffective it is, but this is what he had to use.
Per Capita the US ranks 15th in number of Nobel Prizes awarded, just behind the Netherlands and ahead of France. Switzerland, ranked 3rd, has 28 Nobel Prize recipients from a population of 8.5 million. The US has 380 recipients out of a population of 326 million. The US would have needed to have 1,074 Nobel Prize recipients to have the same per capita rate as Switzerland.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Nobel_laureates_per_capita
The last I heard, we were allies with Switzerland, though Trump May have changed that.
Please note that our major geopolitical rivals, China and Russia, have far fewer Nobel prizes than the U.S.
The U.S. (with its allegedly dreadful education system) has 380 Nobels.
China ranks 71st of 74 countries that have won Nobel prizes. It has 9. That represents less than 1 % (0.064) of its population.
Russia ranks far below the US, though not as low as China.
“Per Capita the US ranks 15th in number of Nobel Prizes awarded”
Why is “per capita Nobel price winners” is a valid statistics to express research quality in a country?
Having more colleges per capita than any other country a good statistics or not?
The point is that freedom of research in US Academia has been the main driving force behind all these Noble prizes. When people were persecuted in their home country or didn’t have enough money to to conduct there research at home, people came here.
This freedom has been cut back recently, while in the EU its has been increased, so who knows what the future will bring.
But using per capita stats is highly questionable to evaluate quality of research.
Thank you, Mate.
It sounded on its face like a bogus point.
Mate,
Note that it was Dr. Ravitch who used the number of Nobel prize winners as a valid statistic to gauge educational quality in a country (see https://dianeravitch.net/2019/10/08/jack-covey-on-checker-finn-vs-finland/#comment-2952725).
My point is if you agree with Dr. Ravitch on this, a better measure would be Nobel prizes per capita. Do you disagree with my point or do you disagree with Dr. Ravitch’s use of the nationality of Nobel prize winners as a statistic to gauge educational quality in a country?
You introduced the idea of Nobel prizes “per capita,” a truly silly statistic.
What does per capita mean anyways? Do you divide the number of laurates by the polutaion in a given country now? What does the population now have anything to do with the population, say, 100 years ago when the award was given?
Also, Hungary had quite a lot of Nobel Laureates, but most lived abroad (mostly in the US) when they got the award and for stuff they did not do in Hungary.
https://mta.hu/english/hungarys-nobel-prize-winners-106018
It never ceases to amuse me that Checker Finn and others continue to rail about the need for “higher standards” like the Common [sic] Core [sic] while at the same time touting a knowledge-based curriculum like that proposed in the Core Knowledge Sequence. Does he have ANY CLUE that the Common [sic] Core [sic] is just a list of extremely vague, abstract skills? Does he have any notion that it has led to the creation of incoherent ELA curricula that treat snippets of content at random as “practice” of Common [sic] Core-y [sic] skills?
The guy must have been asleep for the past decade.
Finn is just a rich, old man who couldn’t cut it as a teacher “back in the day”. He probably thought that teaching would be a cushy job. My guess is that Finn thought that children should sit and listen to him blather on about a subject and the children should just sit and absorb it in all of it’s monotony so that they could pass his tests. Finn is the reason we are still tied to CC and PARCC (it now has a different name) testing in the state of MD. Finn should just go play golf at his ritzy country club and shut his big, fat mouth.
A little lesson for Master Finn:
You’ve had your “reforms”: the results are in.
Achievement gaps are with us still
The effects of Deform on these were NIL.
Your VAM, school grades, and Common Core
Have made of school a chore and bore
And vastly distorted our nations’ curricula
In Math and Language Arts in particulah.
So when you stoop to heckle the Finns,
Where does a sane person even begin?
You sound like an alchemist, aged, alone,
Still touting his silly philosopher’s stone
For miraculous, magical transformation
Of kids and outcomes in education.
We know your trumpet: if we just get tough
On poor people, that, in itself, is enough.
Somehow poverty just goes away
If you make sure that poor kids never can play.
But keep it up, Checker, keep checking in,
In hopes those checks from Gates to win.
And keep promoting the Gates/Coleman list
That solely of abstract skills consists.
It devalues knowledge, but Gates’ great plan
For “personalized” software depends on it, man.
On one hand use the Finnish model
To say, “We’re falling behind; we dawdle!”
And on the other hand say, “Finns are all jerks;
For what works is really somehow not what works.”
What works for Trump might work for you:
If you say it enough, perhaps it comes true.
You’ll still win applause from your “tough-minded” kind,
Though you’re left by the evidence so far behind.
cx:
On one hand keep citing the Finnish model
To say, “We’re falling behind; we dawdle!”
And on the other, say, “Finns are just jerks;
For what works is really somehow not what works.”
Thanks for the poem, Bob.
It could use some tweaking still, but thank you.
The Finnish model we should emulate first it to drastically narrow the wealth gap them provide healthcare for everyone, treat teachers as professionals, and then regard working class and poor people with respect instead of condescending contempt.
Exactly, Arthur.
Yes. YES.
Unfortunately, Moore starts this piece with a reference to scores on international standardized tests, but it’s still a great piece:
Our elementary schools actually do a fairly good job at educating youngsters…even in lower SES environments.
Efforts to fix the nation’s educational system should be laser-focused at middle school. That is where we lose ground, across the board, and that is where most effort should be placed.
Can you be specific? What exactly do you think they’re teaching well? Science? Phonics?
The middle school slide is a reality. I do not believe it is an easy fix. I think as academics become more rigorous, poor students are unable to keep up the pace. They lack a support system at home that can help them. I can remember my daughter struggling with middle school and high school math. My husband and I sat down with her until she mastered the topic. I can remember helping my son edit some of his compositions in middle school. Poor students have no one to guide them in the same way.
How did it happen that your daughter started to struggle with middle school and high school math?
There is so much going on at the middle level outside academics it’s amazing kids learn anything at that age – family issues, social issues, body issues. It’s a time when kids are starting to question adults rather than obediently trying to please them. Peer groups start to become more important than adult influence. Everyone feels like they are developing slower or faster than anyone else and they all feel like freaks (and they have no clue that everyone else feels like a freak too). Identity is starting to form independent of family, but hasn’t come anywhere close to solidifying in any sort of independent way, so there’s a lot of push-pull between the neediness of a little kid and the resistance of a teenager. Also, middle school kids are years away from the pressure of what to do with life after school, and it’s not like any college gives a hoot what your grades were like in middle school, so there’s no extrinsic reason for kids to care about academics.
I think most middle schools just try to ignore all of that and hope that focusing on academics will distract kids from all that, but it doesn’t work. Progressive schools actually go 180 and focus on the social and emotional front and center which actually seems to help clear out some of the ick and create space for academic growth even if academics take a back seat. More time for focusing on kids’ needs and less time drilling academics actually improves academics, just like allowing little kids to play rather than focusing on academics improves academics.
“I think most middle schools just try to ignore all of that and hope that focusing on academics will distract kids from all that, but it doesn’t work.” — It does not work because MS is not focused on academics. It is not focused on anything besides keeping the hens in the cage. Anything resembling real math and science starts in HS, and whatever they have in MS is the sort of folk tales Bob Shepherd talks about elsewhere, like “the mass of an object tells how much stuff it is made of” and density is “compactness of substance”. MS is educational desert. If there is a consensus that kids this age should not be taught anything important because they go through puberty, then don’t call it “school” and don’t pretend teaching these kids.
My 14 year old nephews learned a lot of Spanish in their public middle school. (I recently went over their HW with them; I was impressed how much vocabulary and grammar they knew).
New science shows that middle school age is a prime time for learning. The brain goes through a brain-cell growth spurt then. What they learn then is learned solidly. I learned a ton in my private middle school.
The challenge for teachers is to redirect that vast learning capacity from their peers to the subject matter. This is why I think group work at this age is perilous. Kids are too interested in each other to resist the temptation to socialize instead of doing the assignment.
I actually agree that children from stressed backgrounds have not had the opportunity to learn by playing. Parents of stable families have spent hours talking to their children about interesting subjects, instructing their children when they need behavioral adjustments, modelling stern vs joking behavior, and any one of a long list of other things that tires people out. Poor folks just ain’t got that kind of time. I knew those kids when I was in school. Most of them were the sons of farmers who barely had enough cows and worked a job in town too. They did not eat together at night because their father was working night shift.
In places it is way worse now with families torn apart by economic and personal problems (where does one start and the other stop?) I see it in my classes. One kid recreates by discussing the latest novel she has read with her friend and another plays fortnite. One cannot keep still and another can sit all day, absorbed in hisrher thoughts.
But experiencing this does not mean that we should treat some children the way we used to think all children needed to be treated. Old timers thought all children needed to be beaten, lest they turn out to be unruly. The old timers somehow missed that the really successful people were treated with equanimity most of their life. Back in the “good old days” the high class people knew their place and the low class people knew their place. Somehow this utopia got all messed up when we decided to insist that people deserved to be respected. What were we thinking?
This is all turned on its head. We should give the kids of poor folks more time to live without stress, if not in school, perhaps I life. If we want to “close the achievement gap”, perhaps we should appropriate more money for the poor, who would benefit more by smaller classes and more personal attention. We already do this for the wealthy, who buy their children schools where teachers rarely see more than 60 kids a day.
I’ve worked in a lot of Early Childhood Education (ECE) classrooms in low income inner-city neighborhoods and the worst one by far was where the teacher gave her 3-5 year old Preschool students no voice whatsoever and jam packed their full day program with academics and a lot of drilling, including a 1st Grade phonics curriculum. Most kids were compliant, but they were clearly not very happy campers and it was evident that they did not like school very much. They were never allowed to remove a toy from the shelves and they had no freedom to select what centers they wanted to play in, because that class was a very struct environment where play and choices were not highly valued.
Since I supervised the teacher but she didn’t want to listen to me, I contacted the powers that be, who came in, observed and confirmed my misgivings about the teacher’s inability to work appropriately with little ones, Fortunately, I succeeded in getting the teacher removed from that class and she has been prevented from working with such young students ever since.
And thank G-d for that!!!
Those kids needed a teacher who is an expert in ECE, not someone who teaches little kids as if they are the same as older students and has no idea about how to facilitate learning through play.
Finn does not know what the hell he’s talking about!
Let’s reiterate the main Finn secret as it is spelled out their Secretary of Education: No homework.
“BA, you don’t seem to understand the difference between the incredibly complex syntactic and morphological rules that a person learns to follow automatically”
The same is true about learning math, not just a language. Some people here believe, learning is done datapiece by datapiece that are put into the kids’ head—excuse me, into “long term memory”—by the teacher.