Danny ChaiMike’s comment about education in the context of normal life versus education out of the context of normal life reminded me of this fascinating speech by John Taylor Gatto, who gave it when accepting an award for New York City educator of the year. (If it’s not obvious, I read like a maniac, so everything seems to remind me of something or other I’ve read.) Marshall has likely heard of him; he seems to have taught in Harlem. It’s not that long, and definitely worth reading.
It’s an absolutely fascinating speech that made me really reconsider the educational system. His claim is that the U.S. education system is demonstrably failing. Our kids are at the bottom of industrial countries in reading, writing, and arithmetic. He notes that schools are increasingly irrelevant to the business of society; no one really believes anymore that scientists are trained in science classes, politicians in civics classes, or poets in English classes. He also points out an interesting fact – Massachusetts led the way in compulsory schooling, around 1850. Prior to compulsory schooling, the literacy rate in the state was 98%. Since then, the figure has never exceeded 91%.
He says a lot of other interesting things, but one key point he makes is that the education system is fundamentally flawed because it removes the context of community:
Children and old people are penned up and locked away from the business of the world to a degree without precedent; nobody talks to them anymore, and without children and old people mixing in daily life; a community has no future and no past, only a continuous present. In fact the name “community” hardly applies to the way we interact with each other. We live in networks, not communities, and everyone I know is lonely because of that.
…
It is absurd and anti-life to be part of a system that compels you to sit in confinement with people of exactly the same age and social class. That system effectively cuts you off from the immense diversity of life and the synergy of variety; indeed it cuts you off from your own past and future, sealing you in a continuous present much the same way television does.
His belief is that to raise truly useful individuals, they need to develop self-knowledge, and the whole education system precludes that. And developing self-knowledge requires both independence and involvement in the community, doing more than abstract knowledge recitation.
I’m not doing his speech any justice whatsoever, so just read it. I found myself nodding my head in agreement through the whole thing. I dunno, between this and watching Season 4 of the Wire, it makes me want to work in education. Except I have doubts about whether any top-down institutional approach in education can succeed. At some point in my life though, I would love to be involved with a charter school, or something like that. Someday.
At any rate, I’ve come to believe that, especially in regards to matters of faith, but even in general, true education requires doing, action more than sequestered learning.
On another education note, I’ve long ranted against teacher tenure, and I was surprised to see the Freakonomics economist saying the same thing, although he takes it a step further, saying even university tenure should be eliminated. I’m obviously not an educator so what do I know, but it seems I’ve heard way too much from teachers about how tenure entrenches terrible, apathetic teachers, and seen schools without tenure (like Jieun’s) do very well. I think tenure does much more harm than good. When I start my charter school, it definitely will not offer tenure.