jump to navigation

Thoughts on Gatto, pt. 4 – dependency September 12, 2010

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, societal commentary, teaching, Uncategorized.
Tags: ,
3 comments

At some point during my undergrad career, I contemplated switching to a math major. It’s a long story, but when I was considering it, I went to talk with my minor advisor. Thankfully, he talked me out of switching, but in the process, he made the comment that, “I was awfully dependent on my teachers for information.” He elaborated by saying that I will first go to a teacher to ask a question rather than trying to find the answer through other means, such as different books. I realized at that point that I was simply doing what had always been acceptable before, and it hadn’t really occurred to me to not rely on my teachers.

(I’m really glad he told me that, by the way.)

This is because of the lessons of emotional and intellectual dependency that are so common in schools. I think this one is probably the most pernicious. It takes the form of people assuming kids won’t learn anything unless they are being given grades. They also learn that everything important must come out of a textbook.

These are hard issues to fight. Helicopter parents are the same kind of problem: kids aren’t capable of doing things, kids need adults to make decisions for them. But what happens when those kids become adults without ever having made a decision for themselves?

They will depend on others to continue to tell them what to do, what’s right and wrong, what they should think.

The only real cure for this, in my opinion, is reading. Preferably voraciously. Get as many viewpoints as you can. Learn to study things on your own. Learn not to take everything at face value.

There’s the saying that one should only believe half of what they hear, and that wisdom is knowing which half to believe. I think it’s also important to understand one’s limitations as well as the fact that they are often more limited than they think. People who don’t know their limitations don’t have a healthy respect for intellectual authority, while people who operate far below their limits seem to give authority too much weight. (Wrap your opinion in an American flag, and someone is bound to believe it!)

On the other hand, this flies in the face of how the educational system works: teachers don’t like being questioned. When on my forays into literature on giftedness, one primary theme is that gifted children are often not recognized as such because they question authority or refuse to comply with teacher’s requests when they don’t see a logical reason for it. They are less likely to be compliant and more likely to question rules and assumptions about how classrooms operate. Because of this, they are also less likely to be recognized as intellectually gifted and more likely to be diagnosed with a behavioral disorder.

I wish I was kidding, but I’m not. The public school system does not tolerate people who question rules, and this has pretty profound implications for how our society functions.

As a teacher, this one is almost impossible to get around. I know that one part of the problem is grades. But the system is designed to work for adults, so it must therefore evaluate children. It is not designed to give children a love of learning. There are undoubtedly teachers who have done that, and I would venture to guess that those teachers are also the ones who have children who progress far above expectations. (Thus I don’t see the two goals a mutually exclusive, but it definitely comes down in favor of adults.)

It also means encouraging kids to think for themselves, to question, and to basically do all the things that tend to make teachers feel threatened. Not many teachers are comfortable with that.

Thoughts on Gatto, pt. 3 – position and indifference September 9, 2010

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, teaching.
Tags: , ,
2 comments

This is the third in a series of posts discussing my thoughts on John Taylor Gatto’s Seven Lesson Schoolteacher.

Gatto’s second lesson is that one is anchored (or ought to be) to their position. In a classroom, this basically means showing subordination to the teacher. During the rest of the school day, one learns the social pecking order and that they must stick with it. The third lesson is indifference: one must not become so involved in an idea that they resist changing or giving into the will of the authority.

I think that, of all the lessons, these two were profoundly real for me, personally. I remember transferring to a new high school in the middle of my sophomore year. I was taking chemistry, which was not a big deal in and of itself. However, when I went into my new chemistry class, I could not figure out why I was the only sophomore among juniors. Things were so confused that I was even assumed to be a junior by the other students and given an invite to attend prom. To this day, I still have friends confused about my graduation date because I had several friends graduate the year before me.

This was because the principal looked at my address and put me in the “terminal” chemistry class. Despite the fact that sophomores who took chem were generally put into one class because they would likely be taking more science, I was assumed to be taking my last science class based on the location of my domicile (a very poor area of town). The same happened with math. All through my high school career, I was told that I shouldn’t try too hard or take too many classes or hard classes or college classes. Even with an acceptance letter from Caltech in hand, the school counselors had the audacity to suggest I would be better off at a tech school.

Indifference was also something that I noticed and came to resent. I truly enjoyed the activities in which I participated after school. I got to learn programming, build my own musical instruments based on principles of physics, and learn from other people how life *really* was in their home country. I won’t say all classes and teachers encouraged indifference. I mentioned my Spanish teaching allowing me to spend hours in the resource room every day after school. I worked on art projects for hours and hours that most people slapped together in five hours during class time. And my physics teacher in high school started giving me books on quantum mechanics and particle physics…which I really wish I’d understood better.

On the other hand, I remember a programming class where we learned logo. I completed the given assignment and then spent a lot of my time learning how to draw “3D” shapes using angles and other things. This seriously annoyed my teacher because he wanted me to spend all that time on the assignment, which I had finished and done a fairly good job on. I wanted to learn more, and he was more concerned about me spending my time on busy work.

I think that, for some people, many of whom are teachers, having their kids ‘fit’ into society is very important. Position is important. People shouldn’t care about ideas but more about what people think. And it’s very obvious that this is of primary importance for most kids. The emphasis on materialism and superficiality is pretty obvious just walking into any school, especially high school.

Avoiding these lessons is easy as a homeschooler. Giving time kids to pursue their interests is one method. Allowing them to study areas in depth is another. If you are like me, you also agree that there is some ‘jumping of hoops’ involved in getting that piece of paper which states you are formally educated. I’m very honest with my kids about it: there are things that are really worth pursuing, and there are things that need to be done. Only you can decide for yourself which is which, but don’t waste more time than necessary on arbitrary requirements (no matter how justified someone thinks they may be) if they take you away from your passions and interests.

And position is easy if you’re the only one: you’re the best, but you’re also the worst. You can only compete against one person: yourself. Working with other people becomes much easier when you aren’t constantly trying to show them up and impress the teacher; it becomes genuine collaboration.

In contrast, these are two of the most difficult things to deal with in a classroom environment. Students are supposed to earn grades, which makes them compete against each other. Many are aiming for the top, which is admirable. However, they’re doing so while also living with the notion that ideas and academics aren’t important. Social status is far more important. Is it any wonder that students care more about their grades than the actual content of the course?

I think undoing the lesson of position in a classroom is nearly impossible. Probably the best way of doing so is creating a more socratic environment. I have seen this done, even in technical classes. Having students read papers and collaboratively present the material, discussion of different approaches, etc. Admittedly, these work far better in a smaller classroom. In larger classrooms, I think the best way is by incorporating things like Twitter into the classroom, allowing students to interact with the professor during class time, rather than reinforcing the notion of the teacher as authority because he/she is standing and lecturing in front of and down to the students. The point is that students need to be allowed to interact intellectually with professors to really begin to undo this lesson…something which is difficult as that is how the system was built.

Another point is creating a collaborative classroom environment instead of one in which students go for the jugular. I have noticed that this takes different forms depending on the type of classroom, but the larger the classroom, the more likely to have an environment where people are trying to show each other up. I also find that the same is true in a male-dominated classroom. Finding ways to get people to collaborate without competing is an awesome idea, although horribly difficult to implement.

On the other hand, I think colleges are one of the best places to begin to undo indifference. This is where students will finally get to focus on their passions. One of the best things a professor can do is to be passionate about what they are teaching. Nothing kills joy of learning like someone who couldn’t care less about helping a person learn. Teachers who instill interest will not just teach facts but find ways to show how their topic is relevant and compelling, giving a student a real desire to go beyond the lecture material when outside of class.

Class projects are one of the best ways of doing this. Whenever you get someone to talk about a project they did, such as a capstone, they always seem to talk about how much they learned and how much time they spent on it. Not everyone is this way, of course, but many people are. When they are encouraged (and sometimes forced) to learn a topic with significant depth, they find joy in the knowledge and the challenge.

Thoughts on Gatto, pt. 2 September 8, 2010

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, gifted, homeschooling, societal commentary, teaching.
Tags: , ,
8 comments

I don’t agree with everything Gatto says in the Seven-Lesson School Teacher, but the lessons themselves are very real. Every time I’ve read the essay, I have been able to think back on my own circumstances and see how those lessons were being taught.

I feel it’s important to say that the essay has a very paranoid tone to it. I don’t think that everyone who is a teacher or educator feels this need to mold students into sheeple. I think many educators view their job as a way to provide opportunity and equality in the classroom to those who obviously are disadvantaged outside of the classroom. However, the manifestation of equality in the classroom has become that every student must be the same and every student must conform. Despite their admirable goals, the implementation strips individuals from excelling or failing (and owning their excellence and failure). It also strips them of passion.

And that leaves us with those lessons. Those who have lived successfully within the system and its goals will deny they exist. Those who have had to deal with those lessons because they have been an impediment to achieving their goals or pursuing their passions will probably nod their head knowingly.

So how do you deal with them? How can you avoid teaching them? I think that it’s much easier to do that when homeschooling than teaching. I think it’s important to discuss how to avoid them, as much as possible, and to find other ways to educate without stifling.

So let’s start with the first one: confusion. How do you avoid teaching things as unconnected parts, separate from other academic pursuits as well as from the knowledge needed to exist daily?

At home, it’s very easy to take things we’re studying and for me to verbally put it into a larger context. When you learn something, it’s helpful to learn its history as well as its implications. This often involves taking time to look up and discuss related topics. Teachers don’t have that time. I do. And even when I don’t, I must. We discuss things in this manner not only when studying but also when talking about everything. You have to explicitly connect the dots when talking history and current affairs, science and cooking, math and…everything else when talking to kids. You teach them to look for relationships and patterns. Some people seem to do this intuitively, but I think it takes time for kids to get the hang of it. Once they do, they will be come curious how things are related and start doing their own research.

As I said before, however, teachers don’t have time to do this, in many cases. You can also be constrained by the subject matter. But the best teachers and the best books try to give a context for how the knowledge was developed, explaining where it came from. Historical context can be presented for every idea, even in technical fields. (One of my favorite books is actually a math book: “Applied Differential Equations with Historical Notes” by Simmons.) Yes, I’m one of those people who thinks that science ought to be taught with history to give a better understanding of the idea itself as well as give proper recognition to some amazing people.

To do this effectively, however, one must have a pretty good background in the related materials, which is certainly not encouraged if one has a heavy teaching and research load. However, these references to related things, a place to find context, is greatly appreciated by many students. Likewise, it is always important to talk about the implications of ideas and how they continue to affect us. Where does this knowledge lead? This can be viewed (and taught) from the perspective of society, of a group of people, or of the individual. Someone learning about transistors, for instance, really should learn how they have been important in the development of electronics, how understanding them is important to learning advanced concepts in engineering, and that, personally, one needs to know the material if they ever hope to get a job. I think most people understand the third point, but I don’t see the first two emphasized enough.

I’ll stop there and continue with the other lessons in my next post.

Thoughts on Gatto, pt. 1 September 8, 2010

Posted by mareserinitatis in education, societal commentary, teaching.
Tags: , ,
5 comments

Back in my younger years, when I was first introduced to the concept of homeschooling, I thought it was the worst thing I’d ever heard of. Granted, I’d had horrible experiences in public school, but I assumed my experiences were isolated and, hey!, they built character.

I was exposed to a lot of homeschooling as time went by because my ex’s family used this method to educate their kids. I met other families and other methods. I saw things I didn’t like and others that I liked a lot.

But I wasn’t completely convinced that you really should homeschool until I came across the Seven Lesson Schoolteacher by John Taylor Gatto.

Honestly, I don’t think any piece of writing has struck me the way that essay did.

Once I started homeschooling, I’ve been thinking a lot about the things Gatto discusses. On the other hand, I have to balance what he says with the fact that structure is built into our lives, necessary or not, and there needs to be a pragmatic balance between the structure that is expected (and which we all live with to some extent) and allowing my child to develop into a thinking adult.

The other reason this piece of writing has stuck with me so much is because I want to teach. How do I become a teacher who doesn’t turn their students into the mindless, unthinking automatons?

I think that the issues he brings up are worth discussing both from the perspective of a homeschooling parent and from a teacher, which is what I intend to do over the next couple days. Like any teacher (good or bad), I’m giving an assignment: go read Gatto’s essay. You don’t have to do it, you may or may not gain anything from it, and it probably won’t be necessary for the following related blog posts. I do think it’s worth looking at, however, because it should at least give you some things to think about.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 914 other followers