During the early 20th century, major changes in education were being introduced by John Dewey, and implemented across the country. The old method was rigid--one in which children sat in seats bolted to the floor, and learned from their teachers through repetition and rote memorization. The new one was flexible, it conformed to the interests of the child. "Sid, the Science Kid" is an idealistic view of Dewey's educational philosophy: Sid comes to school every day with a question, and it just so happens that his teacher has an entire lesson prepared on that very subject.
It seems like such a good idea. I would agree that people tend to learn more when they are interested in a subject. But now that most schools have adopted so many of John Dewey's methods (incidentally, he was sympathetic to communism, until he learned of the execution of millions at the hands of Communist leaders, though he continued to espouse Marxist ideals after that), why are our children still failing in school?
In reading my grandfather's life story, I learned that he, too, graduated from college enthused by the teachings of Dewey. But when he entered the teaching field, he learned quickly that Dewey's methods did not work. He discovered that without discipline, most kids never learn enough to gain an interest in anything to begin with. If I had had to wait until I was interested in Geometry, or any mathematical subject, I'd never have learned math.
Fortunately, I learned enough math to do fairly well at it--getting A's in math throughout high school, although I stopped taking math classes as soon as I was allowed to. The reason I did well enough in math classes that I did take was simply because I sat down and did my homework. And I prayed a lot!
However, there is one assignment that I remember vividly. Our young teacher, no doubt a Dewey disciple, thought that we would understand some concept of geometry better if we had to make a kite.
I hated the assignment the moment it was given. When did I have time to make a kite? Too young for a driver's license, how was I supposed to obtain the materials for a kite without my parent's help? My mom taught violin lessons into the evening, and my dad was away selling paper products--time and money were tight.
I had once seen a box kite, and so I found the simplest pattern I could find. Because my dad worked for a paper company, we had some really sturdy garbage sacks I could use. All we needed were dowels, plastic connector thingy's and kite string.
When I went to school with my kite, I was ashamed of my kite when I saw the fancy, colorful, and no doubt expensive, kites my friends had made. No plastic garbage sack box kites in sight, but mine!
The poor grade I was going to receive on presentation could only be raised if my kite would fly. Before I could fly it, however, the teacher insisted that I change the way the string was attached. I had tied the string to a corner of the kite in a secure knot. It didn't look very geometrical, so the teacher had me tie some string around two corners, and then attach another piece of string to make a triangle shape. It was windy, but my kite didn't fly. I failed.
When I went home, I reattached the string to the corner as it had been to begin with, and almost immediately, the kite lifted off the ground, and soared in the air effortlessly.
So, my question is, what was I supposed to have learned? I'm sure that there are some geometrical principles associated with kites, but to this day, I don't know what they are. I did learn that geometrical principles in and of themselves don't necessarily matter when it comes to function--at least it didn't matter to my poor little kite.
I have not been able to let that memory rest, and it is only now that I think I am coming to terms with what went wrong. In spite of whatever I was supposed to learn then, this is what I think now: That rote repetition and prayer helped me pass 10th grade geometry, and that making a kite did not. I'm not saying that it wasn't interesting for the kids who were more inclined to hands-on creativity, because people do learn in different ways. (I do still suspect that the kids who made brilliant kites had loads of help from their parents, and I doubt they learned any more geometry than I did for it.) But for me, it confirms my hunch that education needs to go back to basics, and that we need to re-evaluate modern teaching methods.
No comments:
Post a Comment