The GWT Blog

The Road to Hell?

Posted on September 26, 2009

By Howard Gardner
Howard Gardner

Copyright Howard Gardner 2009

If the proverbial inter-planetary visitor observed educational policymakers around the world, she would soon infer their single preoccupation: “How to raise scores on international comparisons like the TIMMS or the PISA tests.” This mentality also dominates the United States. A focus on standardized tests, how to raise scores, and what consequences follow there from, has become a national, as well as an international, obsession.

That ‘road to hell’ is paved with good intentions. Concern with performance grew out of a consensus that American youth were not getting properly educated. Since the 1980s, leaders from across the political spectrum have joined forces to focus sharply on test performance.

I don’t question their motivation. Policymakers were concerned with the mediocre education in most inner-city schools, the lack of preparation (and sometimes motivation) of teachers, and job applicants who lack skills and a sense of responsibility.

And yet, the consequences of this testing mania have been mixed at best. Impressive, widespread improvement has not occurred. Scores may improve on familiar items but rarely on measures that are differently conceived. Classes focus on preparation for high stake tests, while less attention is paid to the arts, history, current events, humanities—indeed, anything untested. Educators with discrepant philosophies or approaches abandon the public sector, or education altogether. Teaching is becoming de-professionalized; students construe education as a winner-take-all tournament, rather than the opening of the mind and the imagination.

It need not be that way. No country need conceive itself in a ‘league table’ competition. And certainly the richest and most successful can chart its own course;

Visitor: What form might that course take?

My answer:

Start from the kinds of human beings that we desire. We want adults of character: persons who care about their family, their neighbors, the larger, society, the planet— good workers and good citizens. Perhaps at one time, these ethical, moral, and character issues could be addressed at home, on the street, in religious settings, in the media. But no more. If schools do not develop individuals of admirable character, the society won’t have them.

We want individuals who love learning, want to learn in (and outside of) school and will continue to learn throughout their lives. The current system stifles more than it stimulates. Young people gravitate toward learning when the older persons around them love learning and invite the youth to join them. In an age of exciting media and sundry other temptations, we adults have to be their heroes, their role models, their inspiration.

Finally, what to learn? Here I differ most sharply from those who favor fixed curricula, with lists of so-called important facts. Given the ubiquity of digital information sources, there is no need to prescribe materials. Once basic literacies have been achieved, it’s most important to master the major ways of thinking: historical, mathematical, scientific and artistic. Armed with these tools and suitably motivation, learners can achieve disciplined, synthesizing, and creative minds.

Lest one think that a misguided course is restricted to education, consider the current American quagmire in health care. Too many of our citizens, and too many of our leaders are blind to what is expected in other societies—affordable health care for all. Much of our population lacks compassion for fellow citizens and for the ills to be faced by future citizens.

Faced with such thoughts, I take heart from Winston Churchill who once observed “The American people always do the right thing—after they have tried every other alternative.”

Comments

Name: Debbie Hobin

Posted at September 29, 2009 at 11:44:46
Comment: I couldn't agree more. As a charter school developer, teacher and part-time administrator, I only hope that our school is doing its part to create the kind of schools where students will be just as you have described; good citizens who are compassionate, lifelong learners. I look forward to reading about and being involved with your "good work" project.

Name: Chris Dinneen

Posted at September 30, 2009 at 12:27:17
Comment: It's not called it the 'human race' for nothing. The competitiveness in our education system (Australia) mirrors the cut throat attitude prevalent in society. I think society does accept just about anything and poor standards of decency, behaviour, acceptance and good will seem to prevail too often for my liking. I am in early childhood education and I won't be derailed. The Good Work Project and the values it promotes are those I intend to share and model with the children, parents and fellow teachers in my setting. Chin up.

Name: Annabelle Quesada

Posted at October 05, 2009 at 07:15:08
Comment: I totally agree that competition has taken away the real meaning of teaching for what really matters. What I see is that out there in the world, students see that success is connected with competition at any price. As simple as the choices one has in the supermerket for every item. Will we have to wait until our little ones become adults with the hope we taught them to create a better world?

Name: David Huisjen

Posted at May 28, 2010 at 11:41:32
Comment: Pursuant to speaking with Prof. Gardner today in Helsinki about my passion for trying to encourage pre-college philosophy in the US, and seeing much in this blog's "My answer" bit that corresponds with this passion, I re-post here a letter I sent to the "We Are Teachers" organization in reference to their call for contributions to their "preparation for the 21st century" initiative: "Getting ready for a century that we've already done 10% of is a pretty lame form of teacher preparation! How many finish planning their 2 hour lessons 10 minutes into the class time? O.K., I admit, that has happened to me once in a while, but I still don't consider it to be a defensible practice. But then again, sometimes those have been the lessons in which the students found most interesting and learned the most from. Great preparation can sometimes be a substitute for actively listening to students and addressing their needs and interests, and tuning in to the atmosphere in the classroom. While there's no substitute for careful advance planning, there's also no substitute for active spontaneous engagement with the learners and with the lesson material. Our spontaneous engagement with the lessons of the 21st century involves recognizing that things are changing far faster than many of us old farts (which here means pretty much anyone over 30) are ready for. Accepting and adjusting to classroom IT and real time international interaction by video link within the classroom is part of this. Recognizing that we're training kids for jobs that we don't even know are jobs yet is another huge part of this. Adjusting to these realities "on the fly" is part of what every teacher must be doing these days. The advance planning that we should have done decades ago, but which the US education system in particular is way behind on, is providing kids with tools to do what professors in the field call "meta-cognitive analysis": Rather than feeding them facts and formulas to temporarily memorize, we need to be teaching them to stop and think about the question "how do you know" a bit more often, and across the full range of subjects that we teach them. There are many names that can be given to this area of belated preparation: Critical Thinking, Thinking Skills, Theory of Knowledge, Analytical Reasoning, Key Concept Awareness... but I would recommend that American schools catch up on this preparation by giving this endeavour its old fashioned name: (Pre-college) Philosophy. In so labelling it we also find room for adding another sorely needed skill set into the same package: an awareness of basic ethical principles. This in itself isn't rocket science. The hardest part about developing and implementing the sort of pre-college phliosophy curriculum that is needed to "prepare for" the century we are now 10 years into already is getting teachers out of the authoritative mentality where they punish students for challenging their expertise. How many teachers are capable of saying to their students, "I might be wrong about this, but if I am you'll have to prove it to me. Who here wants to try?" If they can say that without bluffing they would probably already welcome a class which equips the students to do just that: challenge their ideas and attempt to prove them wrong. Currently philosophy teachers are rarer in the US public school system than left-handed albino Navajos. What does that say about the national level of preparedness for the current century? What do you think are the biggest roadblocks to confronting this challenge? If that makes you stop and think, then maybe I've done my job for the day as a teacher."

Name: howard gardner

Posted at May 28, 2010 at 03:51:43
Comment: It has been very instructive and reassuring to spend a week in Helsinki and to encounter many educators who care deeply about expanding the minds of their students. Finland seems to be in a very small class of countries that take teacher preparation very seriously and I was pleased to discover that ethics and other philosophical areas are on the minds of educators. In the US today, the NCLB pressures are so great that there is virtual triage for the rest of the (non reading/writing/STEM) curriculum. The brightest hope at present is the International Baccalaureate which is growing in popularity worldwide and whose "Theory of Knowledge" course is philosophical in tone. There is talk now in Finland of 'exporting " Finnish education. I dont know how practical it is, but it would be a gift to the world if critical thinking and questioning were given pride of place in education in the future.

Submit a Comment

Return to the Blog dot_clear