EDU 6120
Autumn Quarter,
2016
Final
Foundations Paper
Question #2: Taking
into consideration the three best ways by which we obtain knowledge (received,
discovered, constructed), what are the implications for achieving proper
balance in teaching and learning?
In 1916, Alfred North Whitehead wrote
“The Aims of Education” in which he stated that “From the very beginning of his
education, the child should experience the joy of discovery. The discovery
which he has to make, is that general ideas give an understanding of that
stream of events which pours through his life, which is his life” (Scheuerman,
Session 1, 2016, p. 4). What then, he asks, “…is the point of teaching a child
to solve a quadratic equation?” (Scheuerman, Session 1, 2016, p. 5). Whitehead
advocated the use of acquiring knowledge actively, through discovery and
construction, and eschewed the tradition of passive learning, or “…ideas that
are merely received into the mind without being utilized, or tested, or thrown
into fresh combinations” (Scheuerman, Session 1, 2016, p. 4). But in 1953, in response to an era clouded by
post-World War II international turmoil, Arthur Bestor claimed that American
education was not keeping up with our allies and enemies, and proposed a new
system focused on academic standards, testing, and teacher accountability (Scheuerman,
Module 8 Podcast, 2016). In short, he favored receiving knowledge through
traditional, didactic means, and it is this system of education that we are
still immersed in today through programs such as the Common Core and
standardized testing. The pendulum has swung from teaching students through
discovery and construction to teaching primarily through the reception of
knowledge. I would argue, however, that education does not need to be a choice,
nor should it be, between active and passive learning. We best acquire
knowledge through all three means, reception, discovery, and construction, and
each method of learning has its own merits and moments in the curriculum where
it will be most applicable. Given that students also learn differently, it
makes sense that teachers incorporate all three means of dispensing knowledge
in the classroom in a balanced way to most effectively engage and teach every
student.
Whitehead’s example of the
uselessness of teaching a student how to solve a quadratic equation is humorous,
but he does have a point. Many aspects of today’s school curriculum are taught
through rote memorization, lists of information, and lectures. Biology, for
example, demands memorization of the classification system for bacteria,
plants, and animals. Math, too, requires its fair share of memorization for
multiplication tables and mathematical formulas. Students are notorious for
complaining about and questioning the need for learning something just long
enough to regurgitate it on a test. But these pieces of information are
necessary; they are the foundations on which more complex ideas are built.
Lynne Cheney, who advocates knowledge as a product rather than a process,
writes about “…students who do not know that George Washington led American
forces in the Revolutionary War; that there was a World War I; that Spanish,
not Latin, is the principal language in Latin America” (Scheuerman, Session 9, 2016,
p. 3). Using students’ ability to receive knowledge is an effective and
necessary teaching tool, but I think the reason it is so maligned is because it
is over-utilized.
In his meta-analysis of attention
spans in lectures, Bligh (2000) proposes approximately twelve minutes as the
optimum period of time in which students can be expected to focus on one idea
or subtheme. In terms of planning our time, then, it might be useful to think
about ways of “chunking” lectures into a series of fifteen-minute expositions
interspersed with a number of linking or bridging activities. (Brookfield,
2006, p. 105)
If a teacher spends an entire hour lecturing to a class,
every argument proposed by opponents of didactic learning will be validated
because our attention spans for lectures are biologically limited. If, on the
other hand, a ten-to-twelve minute lecture is given followed by an activity
based on that information and driven by discovery or construction, then the
possibilities for retaining and implementing the knowledge will be increased.
Jerome
Bruner states that “We teach a subject, not to produce little living libraries
from that subject, but rather to get a student to think mathematically for
himself, to consider matters as a historian does, to take part in the process
of knowledge-getting” (Scheuerman, Session 9, 2016, p. 2). Whitehead agreed:
“To have constructed the map of a small district, to have considered its road,
its contours, its geology, its climate, its relation to other districts, the
effects on the status of its inhabitants, will teach more history and
geography…” (Scheuerman, Session 1, 2016, p. 5). They both advocate knowledge
as an active process, a journey of discovery and construction. It is hard,
though, to construct a map in this digital age when a student may have never
seen a map or does not know what a map should include. These pieces of factual
information can be taught through the reception of knowledge, giving the
student the foundation they need to be able to conduct their discoveries or
construct the actual map. In this way, all facets of the topic can be covered,
minimizing the factual gaps in knowledge that Cheney spoke of, and maximizing
the students’ ability to implement the knowledge in creative ways that will
help cement what they’ve learned in the long-term. As Don Murray, celebrated
writer and teacher, professes: “…you don’t learn a process by talking about it,
but by doing it” (Newkirk, Miller, 2009, p. 3). He’s right: the only way to
really learn something is to do it, thus the need for discovery and
construction as methods of teaching knowledge. There is no way to adequately
teach art without construction, without the student picking up a paintbrush or
chalk pastel and applying it to paper, but some basic knowledge regarding
painting or chalk pastel techniques offered as a springboard for their journey
can make the process even more fruitful.
Some
students learn well through receiving knowledge; others learn better by
discovering things on their own; still others learn best by doing. Teaching through
only one method will not reach every student in the class, nor will it give the
students the thorough foundation of learning that can be instilled by using all
three methods in balance with one another. Regardless of the subject matter
being taught, “Let the main ideas which are introduced into a child’s education
be…thrown into every combination possible” (Scheuerman, Session 1, 2016, p. 4).
By exploring a topic through multiple angles and in multiple configurations, a
much better and more permanent understanding of the topic will be gained than
by simply relying on just one.
Question #3: Of all the
individuals and philosophies we have discussed during this course, select one
or two whose ideas have influenced you the most. What are those ideas, and what
relevance do they have to your own philosophy?
Of all the individuals discussed in Foundations of American Education, I
find myself most drawn to Horace Mann, both on a personal and philosophical
level. I grew up in a single-income household where I witnessed the value my father
placed on education and following your passion. Despite trying to raise a
family on a meager salary, my father put himself through school following his
true loves: music and books. Near the first of every month, he locked himself
in his study and ploddingly paid down his loans, and I knew that was not the
time to ask for new shoes, no matter how much I needed them. Over the years I
watched as he made his career as a music professor and university librarian,
and I learned that through education and hard work, a person can be anything.
Horace Mann grew up poor in Massachusetts in the 19th century
and his schooling was erratic and poorly taught (Cremin, 2006), but he didn’t
use that as an excuse to quit learning. Instead he taught himself, reading
nearly all the books in his town library and landing a spot at Brown
University, which became a springboard for his law degree and seat in the House
of Representatives (Cremin, 2006). But his true passion led him to accept the
secretaryship of the Massachusetts State Board of Education, where a movement
of education reform was in progress. I, too, followed my passion to creative
writing and teaching, leaving behind the more valued and lucrative profession
of dentistry. No one understood my decision, just as Mann’s friends and colleagues
didn’t understand why he would leave his promising career for something that
was, in their eyes, beneath him. But I understand: he followed his passion,
which perhaps stemmed from his own negative childhood experiences in school and
a desire to remedy that for future students.
On a personal level, I am drawn to Mann because we do share some
commonalities, such as a childhood clouded by lack of money, the recognition of
the value and importance of education, and the drive to follow your passion in life.
On a philosophical level, I think Mann had an extraordinary vision of
education, particularly in his time period when there was no universal
education system, and many of the tenets he espoused then are ones I think
still have value and applicability today.
Horace Mann is the father of our American public education system. Before
him, education was for the wealthy and elite, but because he believed that no
nation could be free and uneducated, education must be made available to
everyone (Scheuerman, Session 7 Podcast, 2016). As he wrote in “On Education
and National Welfare,” “…all are to have an equal chance for earning, and equal
security in the enjoyment of what they earn” (Scheuerman, Session 7, 2016, p. 2).
To accomplish this,
Education then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is a great
equalizer of the conditions of men…it gives each man the independence and the
means by which he can resist the selfishness of other men. It does better than
to disarm the poor of their hostility toward the rich: it prevents being poor. (Scheuerman,
Session 7, 2016, p. 3)
Our nation today is
riddled with poverty and socio-economic disparity and I believe, because I
witnessed it in my own family, that a good education for everyone, regardless
of race, ethnicity, background, language, religion, socio-economic status, and
learning and developmental disabilities, is a fundamental piece of the
solution.
One of the problems we face today is that education is undervalued. We see
this in the lack of prestige afforded to the teaching profession, as
experienced by both Mann and myself, and the lower teaching salaries when
compared to other, valued professions. He understood that public apathy
devalued education, and acknowledged “…the need for proper facilities and
informed, supportive (morally and financially) local school boards…” (Scheuerman,
Session 7, 2016, p. 1). Sonia M. Nieto (2002/2003) also speaks to the
importance of adequate facilities in her article “Profoundly Multicultural
Questions”:
Language-minority students and students with special needs are too often
hidden away in the basement—or in the hall closet, or the room with the leaky
ceiling on the fourth floor, or the modular unit separated from the rest of the
school. (p. 8)
Lesser classroom
facilities send a powerful message regarding the value school places on
teaching these particular students. Adequate facilities, qualified teachers,
and community involvement demonstrate a shared value in education that students
will be able to see and learn to value for themselves.
Mann advocates a
well-rounded education. Regardless of the career directions we may find
ourselves heading in, we need to be educated in all areas of study for no topic
in a curriculum can be fully understood without the context of other
disciplines. Mann released Annual Reports on the importance of teaching reading
and writing in multiple ways, integrating the mind and body through teaching
health and physical fitness, and supporting the need for the arts through his valuation
of music (Scheuerman, Session 7, 2016, p. 1). Mann’s integration philosophy has
inspired me to consider how two seemingly disparate subjects as English
Language Arts and Biology, the dual endorsement I hope to obtain, can be used
in a way that enriches the teaching and learning of both subjects.
Mann’s legacy on our education system and his philosophy of education
itself is just as important today as it was in the 19th century.
To what extent can the resources and powers of Nature be converted into
human welfare, the peaceful arts of life be advanced, and the vast treasures of
human talent and genius be developed? How much of suffering, in all its forms,
can be relieved? or what is better than relief, how much can be prevented? (Scheuerman,
Session 7, 2016, p. 2)
I think these inherent human
potentials and problem solving abilities are limitless through education. In
today’s unsettled political, racial, and environmental climate, it is
imperative that we all value, as Mann
did, universal, publically
funded, well-rounded education for everyone.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brookfield, Stephen D. (2006). The Skillful Teacher: On Technique, Trust, and Responsiveness in the
Classroom. Second Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cremin, Lawrence A. (2006). Horace Mann, American Educator. Britannica.com. Retrieved from:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Horace-Mann
Newkirk, Thomas, Miller, Lisa C., eds. (2009). The Essential Don Murray: Lessons From America’s
Greatest Writing Teacher. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook Publishers Inc.
Nieto, Sonia M. Profoundly
Multicultural Questions. Educational Leadership, December
2002/January
2003, 6-10.
Scheuerman, R. (2016). Module 8 Podcast. Retrieved from:
https://canvas.spu.edu/courses/8929/files/274568?module_item_id=103153…podcast.
Scheuerman, R. (2016). Session 1: The
Goals and Means of Effective Education. Retrieved from:
https://canvas.spu.edu/courses/8929/files/274564?module_item_id=103111…pdf.
Scheuerman, R. (2016). Session 7 Podcast. Retrieved from:
https://canvas.spu.edu/courses/8929/files/274552?module_item_id=103150…podcast.
Scheuerman, R. (2016). Session 7: Practical and Universal
Education. Retrieved from:
https://canvas.spu.edu/courses/8929/files/274554?module_item_id=103148…pdf.
Scheuerman, R. (2016). Session 9: Readings II (Ellis).
Retrieved from:
https://canvas.spu.edu/courses/8929/files/274550?module_item_id=103162…pdf.
