Ok, teacher triggers/movers & shakers in the world of education, here come my thoughts on the first bit of John Taylor Gatto's book Weapons of Mass Instruction that I've finished, as well as the PBS site on education innovators and Gatto's site with regard to the "real 'makers' of Public School" featuring my personal choices of John Dewey [what school teacher doesn't love the Dewey decimal system? - different Dewey: ah, I digress] as an innovator and Henry Ford as a maker. First, I see the "innovators" as (primarily) good, civic-minded folks who truly want to initiate change for the bettering of schools and youth. On the other hand, "makers" are depicted as power-hungy, money-hungry elitists who want to keep a system of haves and have enough to satisfy and keep compliants (who feed & foster the haves). In other words, the makers like Henry Ford have wanted changes in the American public school system that help to foster the fruition of their own coporate/financial goals, a school system that breeds good factory and assembly line workers who do what they are told when they are told without questioning authority. In addition, makers like Ford are depicted as wanting the school system to teach kids to be consumers of their products. Do I believe there is some truth in this? Well, I doubt that the makers weren't consciously selfish and preying on America's youth, but yes, you bet. Otherwise, why do we not have safe, ecologically sound electric cars by this point in history? Yes, I choose Henry Ford as a maker because I truly believe that industries as big as the automotive & oil industries not only want, but do have a say in how schools are run. If ideals are taught in schools that fuel (pardon the pun, I couldn't resist :-) ) these industries, these industries and their CEOs keep getting richer. If I am speaking too politically and stepping on toes, I apologize. I cannot write about this and be totally apolitical as, in my opinion, the Gatto book is political. School systems are political. I choose John Dewey as an innovator because he believed that "education should be based on the child's psychological and physical development, as well as the world . . . ," and this is a philosophy I buy into wholeheartedly as a teacher.
Gatto is right when he talks about reading being fundamental to education. He mentions that schools have left off teaching reading phonetically. I believe he is right that the best readers are taught using phonetics. Do I also believe in using whole language methodologies? Yes, of course! However, do we throw away the proverbial "baby with the bath water?" No, how truly absurd a thought! Throwing out phonetics as a methodology for teaching reading is, in my opinion, throwing out something fundamental in the baby's makeup. As a teacher of English and foreign lanugage, I see kids who can't read aloud and pronounce the words, kids who can read aloud but don't know what they have read, and kids who can only read silently and absorb what they read. Then, there are the kids who can' hardly read at all & hide the fact through a veil of beligerance. This is sad. To me, this says that we must teach using both phonetics and whole language methodologies. I use this example in teaching to say that some of what the makers want is good. What do I mean by this? Memorization of facts such as multiplication tables and spelling/phonetic rules is not only adviseable but necessary. Without the basics, it is impossible to move on to higher order thinking skills. Kids need to be able to trust their teachers when they are told that memorization of some things is not only adviseable but crucial to their continued wellbeing in American and global society. We use the basics in order to form those higher order skills. For instance, we must use basic mathematic memorized skills in order to know when we are being manipulated by false statistics. We must be individualized and free-thinking enough to speak out when we see manipulation through false advertising/statistics, etc., and WE MUST TEACH OUR YOUTH TO DO SO!
http://eduscapes.com/tap/topic69.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting and detailed site entry. Your paragraphs though are long and make demands on the reader that could be mitigated by dividing the longer paragraphs at some point into shorter paragraphs for easier readability. Since you have already posted entry 32, you might consider dividing that entry into shorter paragraphs.
ReplyDelete