Wednesday, September 20, 2006

The 3 Rs: Rantin', Ravin', & Rippin'


The older I get, the less patience I have with complacency, especially when it comes to education. I've seen two news items in two days that have gotten my blood boiling - that's a lot of blood!

One article was an op-ed piece by Johan Huizinga (not of Homo Ludens fame). You can find it here.

It wasn't the article per se that I disliked - I rather liked it - what I disliked were the troubling situations he brings up and how they're dealt with - or not dealt with, as it were. It was also the one comment by a reader who simply got the wrong idea about it. Satire can be quite subtle, and it seems she missed the irony. I posted a rebuttal there that was...well, sharp and lacking in subtlety. (It should go up in the next few days, I expect.)

My problem was in unraveling the subtleties of Huizinga's article for my response. There's quite a bit going on there; he touches on the complexities of things today, which is why it's hard to just say he means the opposite. One thing we often do is equate simplicity with ease; really, we should know better. They are not the same thing, not by a long shot. Some of the most difficult things are the simplest. Try just sitting in one place for ten minutes, and focus on your breathing. Nothing else going on around you, just sit and concentrate. That's about as simple as you can get, but I don't believe for a minute you'll find it easy.

In my opinion, talk about education problems has no place for subtle wit that can be (mis)taken at face value. That's my only qualm with the piece. It's too easy for someone to misread it, and if that someone is a school admin - well, they could walk away thinking they're doing a good job. I doubt that would happen, but it's apparent that misinterpretation of the satire does happen.

The other piece has to do with a new book that argues against homework. There's an interview with the one of the authors of The Case Against Homework on MSNBC.

In the book Sara Bennett argues that homework is a waste of time. Any homework. The claim is that the quantity of homework has no correlation to achievement, which is measured by teachers' tests. But if the interview is any indication of the content of the book, it has a wildly off-target thesis.

The interview centers on reading. Her example is that reading novels for school is bad because of the attendant tasks - looking up words, answering questions after each chapter. The reasons it's so bad is that there is a method imposed on reading, a method which has no place. More precisely, it's the teacher's view on reading that gets imposed. As Ms. Bennett puts it, "You don't want to be interrupted every five minutes when you're reading or when you're watching a great movie." The reading experience is being taken away from the students.

Am I the only one who sees the glaring contradiction here? First they're talking about the worthlessness of homework - how invalid the very idea of homework is - and then they're talking about the kind of homework that's being doled out! Ms. Bennett doesn't have an issue with homework but with the quality of the homework, but in making her case she's throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

According to her, teachers don't have a clue as to why they assign any homework. They weren't trained on it, they weren't told its importance. They were told to just do it, and they just did it. (What good little Nike-wearing sports.) What does that tell me? The homework lacks any direction, there is no purpose to it. But who's to blame, the homework, the teachers who thoughtlessly assign it, or the trainers who never bothered to explain its purpose, or how it's to be done?

Ms. Bennett says that American schools are currently in "testing mode" (which she never explains), and homework is the teachers' way of foisting unfinished lessons onto the students. Does this sound like homework is inherently evil, or is the current practice evil?

Now I don't disagree with everything Ms. Bennett says. She does state that a family dinner is the most important factor in academic success. I don't deny this; in fact I agree that families don't spend enough time in the same place at once (dare I say it?) communicating and getting along. I also agree there is a profound problem with the way education is being conducted. But I also think that she's wrongly diagnosed the problem.

OK, here's where my unsolicited advice comes in.

Problem #1: teachers don't know what homework's all about. Solution: teach them!

Problem #2: Educators don't know what would constitute good homework assignments. Solution: find out! Ask what you want students to get out of a lesson, and what they want to get out of a homework assignment. Then ask how to get those results. Do research, experiment with different approaches, formats, exercises, etc. Then and only then are you in a position to judge homework as a whole.

Problem #3: Students see homework as a waste of time. Solution: explain it to them! and give 'em meaningful assignments, for cryin' out loud. Kids aren't stupid. Of course they'll complain about how meaningless it is, because it is meaningless. They don't see the point because there isn't any point. Craft the assignments with a little bit of care, tell them how it should be done, and why. If possible, demonstrate the payoff.

Problem #4: Teachers palm unfinished assignments off as homework. Solution: stop it, stop it, stop it! How freakin' hard is that to figure out? If you don't finish a lesson, something has to be changed - the timetable, the class hours, the number of students, whatever. But expecting students to teach themselves is irresponsible when it's done in this manner. Yes, you want to get students to be independent thinkers. This is not the way to do it.

Now I know what one objection will be: "But we don't have enough teachers, and the ones who are there are overworked and underpaid." Sounds like we've finally got some real problems. Part of the difficulty is a lack of funding, true. But throwing money at something won't solve it (though it will make teaching more attractive from one point of view). There are a number of things to be attended to, all at once, which means there's no easy solution. Practical matters, such as the number of teachers or the size of classrooms, need to be juggled alongside pedagogical matters. I cannot say there's a quick fix; I can only say that the case against homework is but a symptom of a crisis in the schools, and we need to do something about it pronto.

A deeper problem is the very attitude we have towards schools, education, and teachers. This is no small matter: it goes right to the core of our value system. It is well known that America has an anti-intellectual streak a mile long, which does not speak well for us as a culture. People of an intellectual bent face strong opposition (usually subtle, sometimes not so subtle).

Take nerds, for example. You know them, the ones who actually like chemistry class, the ones who enjoy doing (yeccch) math. The stereotypes of these guys getting picked on by jocks - it's true! Granted, several can hold their own, but they've got support from family and their environment; many don't have that. Where does all this happen? The good ol' U.S. of A. Now here I am in Belgium, have been for a few years now - do I see nerds? No. Why not? The bias against intellectual pursuits isn't there. I won't say kids here are perfect, but they don't have to deal with the sort of thing I grew up with; either it's such a minor happening or it doesn't exist here at all.

Now if we red-blooded Americans took a sober look at ourselves, and asked what really counts for us, what are we going to say? If we ask, What sort of future do I want my children to live in? how are we going to answer? It's time to start thinking about where we want to go, rather than complain about how we're not getting anywhere.

(Image shamelessly stolen from www.hellofriend.org/parents/homework.html)

No comments: