skip to main | skip to sidebar
Education Outrage

Share and discuss this blog

Tweet


Monday, August 30, 2010

Our Schools are all Religious Institutions, only the religion has changed

When we think about education, we typically imagine that its purpose is to teach students how to think. This is a very nice idea that has very little basis in fact. School was never meant as a means of teaching thinking. Schools have their origins in religious education. It is well to remember that Harvard and Yale started off as divinity schools and that until recent times nearly all universities required religious training as part of the curriculum.


If we think about religious education for a moment, it doesn’t take long to realize that pretty much regardless of the religion, religion is about telling people what to believe and is not about questioning those beliefs. All religions know the truth and all religions attempt to dictate that truth to their followers. Most religions also run schools. No one criticizes them for this.


In our public schools we have adopted the basic tenets of religious schooling.


  1. there is a truth that cannot be questioned
  2. there is no real choice in what a student learns about
  3. you can be punished for failure to attend school
  4. you will learn by being told
  5. there are official sacred books that everyone must know



What are the sacred books of our schools? Shakespeare, Dickens, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Great Gatsby, are some of them.


What truths cannot be questioned? Algebra teaches you to think. You must know science to have a job in the 21st century. All of U.S. history as depicted in textbooks.


Over the years I have been quoted as saying all of schooling needs to be re-thought. What we teach now was determined in the 19th century and was meant to turn the few people who actually attended school at that time into intellectuals. When I say “get rid of all of it” the response is usually: you are right about subject X but subject Y is sacred.


Sure, let’s get rid of balancing chemical equations but we can never get rid of history.


Sure, let’s get rid of algebra but literature is very important.


We can’t get rid of science because it is important for knowledge workers.


This is what religion sounds like.


Curiously school is still teaching religion. But now the religion is about the sacred texts in which one finds the quadratic formula, or SP3 binding (you can look it up if you like), or what Julius Caesar said to Brutus.


None of this teaches children to think any more than the catechism teaches children to think. School ought to be a place where open minds can explore. This doesn't happen because schools are simply the places where modern day religious instruction can be found. (It is a very odd religion -- one in which Shakespeare, Archimedes, Fermat, Descartes, Millville, and George Washington are gods.)

Posted by Roger Schank at 9:08 AM 2 comments:

Monday, August 16, 2010

A fun day in education land...

Today was a wonderful day for this observer of the education scene. First, I noticed an article in an Italian newspaper reporting something I did last week:

http://milano.repubblica.it/cronaca/2010/08/16/news/l_america_vuole_il_prof_italiano_dell_anno_e_pensare_che_la_gelmini_mi_ha_tagliato-6317729/

What happened is that a teacher in Italy wrote to me to say he had won the teacher of the year award in Italy and was immediately fired. He had written to me before about what he was doing in his school. Since I needed someone to help build our Alternative Learning Place, I offered him a job. The above article says all that. The Italian school system is, of course, as stupid as ours.

The second event was the usual stuff from our system. I heard from my daughter who has decided to try out public school kindergarten in Brooklyn for Milo this fall. The ALP is meant for first grade in 2011, so she decided to try out the system while we build Milo's future school. She lives two blocks from a school and it has a talented and gifted program so she had Milo tested. Milo tested at 99% which was no surprise. Equally no surprise, the New York City School System in its infinite wisdom, decided to offer Milo a place in a school in a rough neighborhood, not in the one he lives near. One of the reasons that New York has such terrible schools is, of course, that they seemingly encourage the best and brightest to leave. Milo won't be there long. As someone who was in the New York City schools all through his childhood, I can tell you that they were always very good at making smart kids miserable there. Not much has changed.

The third thing was an incredible article in the Washington Post written by Dana Milbank:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/13/AR2010081303197.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

It is amazing because it is right on about the stupidity of the Obama administration in education and tits nonsensical testing obsession. The Washington Post is owned by Kaplan testing or the other way around, (I forget which), so the truth about testing is usually hard to find there.
Posted by Roger Schank at 3:59 PM 1 comment:

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

P.S. 247 and the absurdity of the idea that college is a necessity

For a speech I am giving I was looking for a picture of the man who was principal of my elementary school many years ago. So, I went to the P.S. 247 (Brooklyn) web site and discovered that it is now a "New York City College Partnership Elementary School." When I finished laughing, I started to wonder when this "everyone must spend their entire childhood worrying about getting into college" nonsense would end.

Then I saw a very nice article called "7 Reasons not to send your kid to college" by James Altucher:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/seven-reasons-not-to-send-your-kids-to-college/19572537/

which I recommend to anyone who wants to think carefully about this issue. Of course it is followed, in the mode of the day, by the usual vitriolic comments about how he is an idiot and how college must have taught him to be able to write his column. This again had me in fits of laughter as I recalled how I had to teach writing to Ivy League graduates who were my PhD advisees because they had never learned to write in college.

In any case, I agree with the writer. College has become, in people's minds, something it was never intended to be: a job training ground, and it fails miserably at that, since professors don't give a damn about job training.

P.S. 247 was not a great bastion of learning nor a fun place in the 1950's, and I can only imagine how awful it is now.
Posted by Roger Schank at 1:01 PM 2 comments:

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Why Students Cheat

Lately there has been a great deal written about student cheating. Today there was an editorial in the New York Times, which as always gets education wrong. Why do students cheat is usually answered by mentioning that it is the fault of the internet or else by listing the big three reasons which are:


The pressure to get good grades

They are lazy and didn’t do the required work

They thought they could get away with it


The Times editorial quotes a professor who says: “This represents a shift away from the view of education as the process of intellectual engagement through which we learn to think critically and toward the view of education as mere training. In training, you are trying to find the right answer at any cost, not trying to improve your mind.”


The editorial goes on to mention “more than half the colleges in the country have retained services that check student papers for material lifted from the Internet and elsewhere.” And then the writer adds: “parents, teachers and policy makers need to understand that this is not just a matter of personal style or generational expression. It’s a question of whether we can preserve the methods through which education at its best teaches people to think critically and originally.”

I wonder if there could be a better explanation of why students cheat? Perhaps the answer is that the professors and their universities encourage students to cheat. Let me explain:

Consider the Motor Vehicle bureau’s approach to education. Why aren't we hearing about rampant student cheating in driver’s license exams? Perhaps there is cheating on the written tests, I don’t know. But I am pretty sure there isn’t cheating on the actual driving test. Why not? Because that test is a test of performance ability, not competence. The driver’s test tests to see if you can actually do something and there is a person looking to see if you can do it.

Now let’s think about the university model of education. Universities don't actually ask professors to see if their students can do anything in a one on one encounter as the motor vehicle bureau does. Why not?

Because the universities are cheating. They are cheating in two way. First they are claiming that education consists of one professor talking to 100 students in a series of lectures and then passing a test. That is not education. That is a way that universities can have 50,00 students while only hiring 2000 professors, a model that really doesn’t work for the students at all. Listening and regurgitating is not education. Suppose we actually tried to teach every student to think for themselves. Wouldn’t we have to individually assess their actual thinking, by engaging them in a real conversation, to see if they can think clearly?

But way more important here is the plain fact that for the most part, we aren't teaching students to do actually do anything. We are teaching them to write papers about what they know which is very different than actually doing something. You can’t cheat in a an engineering class if your job is to build plane that flies and the professor’s job is to watch it fly. You can’t cheat in a music class if your job is play the piano and the teacher’s job is to listen to you. You can only cheat if your job is read and write and the professor’s job is to grade essays as fast as he can.

As long as doing is subjugated to a secondary role in education, cheating will occur regularly. As long as being educated means being able to write an academic essay or being able to fill in dots on a multiple choice test, students should cheat. They are being cheated of an education and they know it, so they should cheat in response.


This is all a silly game and all students know it. What do they have to do to get a degree is their question. No one is really providing them an education. Professors can claim that they are teaching students to think but they are more typically teaching them how to look at the world in the way the professor looks at it.


Perhaps it is time to start producing people who can do things and to stop worrying if students rip off essays from the internet. The simple solution: stop having them write essays. But then someone might have to actually teach someone to do something and then watch and see if they can do it. That thought is horrifying to universities because it implies a different economic basis for the university, one not based on research contracts, as well as a de-emphasis on academic research for students who will never do it as adults.


When professors stop cheating students of an education perhaps students will stop cheating as well.


As an aside, in 35 years as a professor I never once assigned a research essay or gave a multiple choice test. I did, however ask students to think and write about things that had no right answer. And I asked them to build things. I actually expected them to think.

Posted by Roger Schank at 1:59 PM 2 comments:

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Colleges laud new national standards! Wow! Really?

This just in from the Chronicle of Higher Education:


New National Standards Seek to Make All Students Ready for College

Higher-education groups praised a set of a national standards for elementary and secondary education that governors and state education officials announced on Wednesday, saying the guidelines would help improve college preparedness and accessibility.


Right. Because if everyone in the United States went to college, then things would be so much better for....


for whom exactly? --- for the colleges? for professors?


I need an explanation of how this would matter in any way for our country. Most college graduates are unprepared to do anything in the real world.

Posted by Roger Schank at 7:08 AM No comments:

Saturday, May 22, 2010

I nominate the 13 year old Mt. Everest Climber for Secretary of Education

“I am happy to be doing something big,” Jordan wrote before heading up the mountain. “If I wasn’t sitting here at base camp, I could be sitting in the classroom learning about dangling participles.”

Right you are Jordan. Good choice.
Posted by Roger Schank at 7:03 AM No comments:

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Only Harvard and Yale Lawyers on the Supreme Court? Oh my

It is not everyday that I feel the need to defend our educational system but I heard something so outrageous on the Today show this morning that I am afraid I must do just that.

The question was discussed between Matt Lauer and Joe Biden of the problem of having a Supreme Court full of people who had attended Harvard and Yale Law Schools. They agreed this was "elitist."

I have heard stupid stuff come out of the mouths of politicians and news anchors before but this one breaks new ground. Maybe in 1920, when Yale and Harvard kept out people who weren't WASPy enough or rich enough for them such a statement might have made sense. But, while I am the first to criticize our universities for making the entire high school systems insane, our problem does not stem from professional training which is where those institutions shine.

Harvard and Yale are creating all these constitutional lawyers because they have a competition and select the best and the brightest from all over the country and, these days, are no longer discriminating against people who were not born rich and white. It is their job to take in the brightest people they can find and produce the best legal minds they can produce.

No one willingly attends the University of Alabama Law School when they could have attended Harvard.

Producing the elite is what these schools are good at. Why shouldn't the Supreme Court be composed of only our smartest and best educated lawyers. What is Biden thinking?
Posted by Roger Schank at 3:59 PM No comments:
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
View mobile version
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2020 (10)
    • ▼  July (2)
      • Online teaching not working?
      • When can students return to the classroom?
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2019 (5)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2018 (6)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2017 (16)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2016 (32)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2015 (23)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2014 (32)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (4)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2013 (34)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2012 (30)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  September (4)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2011 (28)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2010 (28)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2009 (35)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2008 (14)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (6)
    • ►  July (1)

Admins

  • Ezra
  • Roger Schank

More about me

  • My web site