This is a must-see talk by Sir Ken Robinson about how our schools are failing to meet the educational needs of a large number of people.
Sir Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity?
Take 20 minutes (OK, 19.5), and take a watch. He’s a good speaker – entertaining, but managing to stay on topic and covering many aspects of the problems with our schools.
The talk was hosted by TED (technology, entertainment, design), a group dedicated to idea-swapping and sharing.
I recently had a discussion with another educator – someone who did not know me or my views on education. The conversation reinforced an idea that has been slowly growing over the past few years. Nobody (Really: nobody) seems to think that the rote learning methods that are currently in vogue in elementary schools are any good.
Sure, everyone agrees that there are facts that just have to get learned – especially in Math (like multiplication tables), but everyone that I have spoken with over the past few years has insisted that it is more important for the students to learn the concepts behind the material. Once they know the concepts, simply using them will teach the kids the stuff that is currently trying to be taught by rote. How many of today’s adults were force-fed multiplication tables? Probably most of us. How many of us were force fed “math facts” – addition and subtraction tables? Probably none of us. But I’d bet pretty good change that most adults can add without having to actually “figure out” the problem – we have internalized the concepts, and then the “facts” part gets embedded in our brains by simply using the skills. If we don’t use the skills, the “facts” fade, but hey, thats OK because we still have the basic skill, and can solve a problem if we have a sudden need.
So, lets take a look at how our school kids are taught. If you are in elementary school, you spend a lot of your time filling out math worksheets – with the stress being on your ability to quickly spit out the correct answer. It is very unusual to have something presented in a way that requires the student to actually solve a problem or apply the underlying principle. As long as they can fill out the worksheet quickly and accurately, they are doing great. Unfortunately, this same methodology is often used on older kids as well. I don’t know how many chemistry classes force kids to memorize large portions of the periodic chart. The kids end up learning a bunch of trivia. It has as much usefulness as memorizing the final scores of every baseball game ever played by the local little league. Most Biology classes take the same approach, as do most middle and high school math, science, history and social studies classes.
What would happen if the time spent memorizing the trivia was used to teach the student to do something that required them to use the periodic table (or a classification system, or derive a logarithm, or geometric proof? The kids would learn a skill, and after they had to look up the valence of Oxygen for the 750th time, they’d know it (it happens to be 2). The difference is that they wouldn’t have wasted a ton of time memorizing stuff on the periodic table that they will never use – like the valence of the synthetic elements. And of course, if they run into a situation where they need to find the valence of some element, they’ll know how to do it.
I chose to use valence as an example, because I used to teach an Introductory Biology class at University. As part of the class, the students had to learn to ballance some basic chemistry equations, be able to predict structures of certain important compounds, and be generally aware of basic chemistry. Many of my students were incensed because my exams never gave points for knowing the trivia. Students earned points by being able to actually apply what I had taught to solve problems that they had never seen before. It turned out that many of the supposedly “best” students were nothing more than young Vomit-O-trons. They could regurgitate anything I had ever said in class, but they were completely incapable of applying the information to solve a problem. These students were livid when they found out that I would provide periodic tables and other similar resources at the exam. After all, it wasn’t “fair” to them because the other students hadn’t memorized all that trivia (I actually had students tell me this). When I explained to the class that I was not interested in the volume of random facts that they had accumulated, but was much more interested in how they used those facts, there was always an outcry. One of my favorite (and highly predictable) after-exam discussions usually boiled down to the student stating “But you didn’t cover that in class”. The reply usually was an explanation of how it had been covered in class, but that the examples used in class were not the material on the test. Sure, we discussed how to predict the molecular structure of a sugar in class, and drew a bunch of them on the blackboard. But on the test the students were asked to predict the molecular structure of a small protein.
These were the students with top SAT scores, High school GPA’s in the high 3 to 4.0 range, and they were nothing more than biological tape recorders. Unfortunately, many of them suffered huge emotional stress because they were suddenly being expected to do something that they had never learned to do, and they were failing miserably at it. Did their schools do them any favors by ensuring that they had learned all the trivia they would need to ace their SATs? Sure, they got into their first-choice University, but about half of them couldn’t handle having to learn to actualy think, and dropped out.
Another population of my University students came from a local non-traditional school. These kids (for the most part) knew how to think – their school was a more-or-less self directed program of study, so when they decided to auger into something, they really did. Of course, many of them lacked the discipline to truly auger in to something they weren’t particularly interested in, but hey, every program has its weaknesses.
So, what is a teacher (or parent) to do? First of all, throw out that pile of worksheet masters. All they really do is give you an easy way to get the kids sitting around doing busy work. Same thing for all of those feel-good art-project-thinly-disguised-as-learning type projects. Accept the fact that if you are going to truly teach your student will ask question – many of which you will not be able to answer. This is a good thing. Yes, it means you have to do the extra work to go find the answer – or better yet: teach the kid how to go find the answer, and let him/her teach you something. Parents, you’re pretty much in the same boat. You can’t really expect the schools to change the way they work just because you want your kid to get a good education. Public schools (and many private schools) teach to the slowest, least prepared kid in the class. They simply are not equipped to do anything else. So, accept the fact that your school is really simply a daycare facility, and that you will have to be the primary educator in your kids life. Yep, we’re all tired at the end of the day, and vegging in front of the tube is easy. Suck it up. Kill the TV, cancel one of your kid’s after school activities, and spend some time every week teaching your kid. Find something that is interesting to him/her, and encourage them to explore it. If it’s something you don’t know about (good chance), go to the library. If you love near a college or University, call the faculty in the appropriate department. Make sure that Junior is involved in all of these activities, because what you are doing is showing (Read: teaching) your child that even if you don’t know something, you can find it out.
It is impossible to know everything, so we have to teach our students (and children) how to figure things out for themselves. If we are doing anything else, we are not teaching, we’re simply filling time and brains with trivia.
It seems that everyone has heard of home schooling, and that everyone has their own ideas about what it is and who does it. That said, this being a blog, here are my thoughts on the rational and reality of home schooling.
Let me start by saying that I home schooled my oldest daughter for part of high school, I currently volunteer in an elementary school, I tutor a number of students, and I teach in my religious school. I spent over a decade teaching at University. In other words, lots of teaching experience in a bunch of different venues.
Having said all that, home schooling has gotten a pretty bad rap. The stereotype of the bible-thumping nut who insists that they re going to raise their kids “on the bible” is pretty pervasive. To be fair, there are a lot of home schoolers that pull their kids out of school because their ethics do not match what is taught in the schools. However, all of the kids I know that are home schooled for “religious” reasons have been provided with a science education that is pretty comparable to what the high school kids in the local public schools get. I know there are exceptions, but I have been recruited by home school groups to write curriculum and teach science (including evolution, which I teach as fact). What most of the parents of these children tell me is that home school because they do not want their children exposed to the sexuality, drugs, and general lack of morality that pervades the public schools.
I have to admit that I cannot argue with them. It is common for fourth graders to have “boyfriends” and “girlfriends” – at an age when most o them have absolutely no idea what that really means. Anyone who has walked into an elementary school will see little girls dressed like the cheapest whore you’d ever find on a New York corner. Junior high school and high school are even worse. There isn’t a public high school in the country that doesn’t offer its students a wide array of illegal drugs, and almost all junior high schools have the same problem, as do many elementary schools. To many of these kids, drugs are the modern day equivalent of cigarettes in the 60’s. Everyone knows they’re bad for you, but everyone who’s cool knows about them and expects to at least try them someday. None of these problems are new, and the american public has always done a great job of pretending that their school is different. The home schoolers decided that instead of pretending, they’d protect their kids from an environment that they feel is unhealthy.
Another major reason for home schooling (the one that drove my daughter to decide to home school) is a common trend in many Junior and senior high schools. Any kid that is an A student and an athlete has it made. Special privileges, instant access to faculty and administration, extra help if they need it – whatever the school can provide to make sure that this model student remains at the top. Any student who is not an A student and an athlete is pretty much left on their own (as long as they stay out of trouble). If they can figure out how to make it on their own, they’ll stick around and graduate. If not, who cares?
My daughter (A good student with absolutely no interest in athletics) got sick of the whole system. After a teacher accused her of plagiarizing a paper because the teacher disagreed with my daughters politically incorrect conclusions, she decided to punt the whole thing and asked me to home school her.
So what does home schooling entail? First of all, you have to accept the fact that your local public school will do everything possible to convince you not to home school. They’ll lie about the laws, threaten you with Social Services, insist that it is impossible for a parent to educate a child, and insist that you are ensuring that your child will be a social reject and a failure for life if you home school. Once you accept the fact that the school is really threatened by the idea that you can do as good a job (or better) than they can, you can dig into what you need to do.
The details vary from state to state, but in general you have to put together a program, and occasionally convince some one that you are really making progress. Usually, you have to demonstrate that your child is meeting the state education curriculum goals. Of course, in most states that means that a high school graduate has to have mastered what most of us would consider to be a 3rd or 4th grade education. In any case, look up your state’s requirements. I guarantee you will be appalled at how low they are (then stop to think that probably 1/4 of the schools in your state are failing to meet these goals).
Now, you have to figure out how you’re going to teach your kid. If you have a young child – elementary school age – you probably don’t need anything special. You can teach everything an elementary school curriculum includes without much more than normal day-to-day interaction with your child. In middle school you may actually have to do a bit of work, especially if you have let your basic math and science skills slip. For High school, it is a good idea to see about working with a home school group, enroll your child in courses at the local community college (most of them operate at a high school level anyway), or even better, at the local University.
If you think back on what you did in high school, you’ll realize that there just isn’t that much material that is covered – especially if you elect to leave out the stupid PC crap and actually concentrate on academics.
One issue that is real is the social impact home schooling can (Note: can not will) have. If your child has been attending public school, and is in middle or high school, they are used to spending about 6 hours a day socializing. This is the main activity at school (no, it isn’t studying or learning, it’s socializing). Your child will be cut off from the majority of peers that (s)he is used to. If you are lucky, there are enough home schoolers in your area to allow your child to socialize with them, but you will never be able to replace the constant social activity that takes place at school. It is up to you to decide if this is good or bad. Expect it to be tough on your child – the older they are, the harder it will be. If you are starting young, and your child has never attended public school, you shouldn’t have these problems. All of the home schooled kids I know are well adjusted, and can interact socially – usually better than their counterparts that attend school. Think about it. A kid in public school has a social circle comprised entirely of other kids the same age. A home schooled kid is going to be interacting with adults, older kids, younger kids, and the entire age range of the local population. Who would you expect to be better adjusted? Yes, as a parent you will have to expend a bit of extra effort to ensure that your child has adequate social interaction, but it really isn’t that hard. Besides, once you are free of the “school schedule”, you won’t have the time constraints that most parents do – your child will be in “school” 24/7/365.
So, is home schooling right for you? Only you and your child can answer that. Chances are pretty good you are already providing a lot of home schooling, you just don’t realize it. If you aren’t, your child is almost certainly not learning much at all – the schools certainly aren’t teaching the kids much except how to pass a standardized test.
If you do choose to home school what are the likely results? Overall, home schooled kids do better at University – so much so that many top universities actively recruit home schooled students the same way they recruit top athletes. Because home schooled kids usually develop good study and learning habits, a higher percentage of home schooled kids complete college instead of dropping out. A University class of “traditional” incoming freshman class is expected to have a 50% failure/drop out rate. The percentage of home schooled students that fail or drop out is in the single digits. All evidence suggests that a parent who is committed to home schooling will do a much better job of preparing their child for life in the real world than any public school will. Yes, it takes a lot of time and effort. Yes, one of the parents will have to stay home to teach. But, you will be raising and educating your child. The ethics and mores that are important to you will be what your child learns. In other words, you will be a full time parent.
This is the culmination of a bunch of different discussion, blog threads, and years of using and getting grades. I’m talking about the old-fashioned A B C D F +- grading system that most of us grew up with, and which many of us still deal with today.
When I was kid, a letter grade was supposed to be a reflection of how much of the given material in a class you had mastered (or at least mastered well enough to take the test, but that’s a different subject). If you learned everything, you got an A. If you learned less than 60% of the material, you got an “F”. The breakdown was pretty easy to understand, and in all of the many school systems I attended, were pretty much the same:
97-100 = A+, 93-96 = A, 90-93 = A-
The 80’s were worth a “B”, 70’s a “C”, 60’s a “D”, and anything less an “F”.
Simple, effective, and everyone knew what it meant. Of course, if you moved from school system to school system as I did, you quickly learned that the material in classes with the same names can be completely different. The “good” school systems can cram an awful lot of material into a class, but the same class taught in a crappy school will have maybe 1/4 of the content. Of course, the grades are the same (more on that later)…..
So what is the purpose of the grade anyway? From my point of view, there are a couple: first and foremost, a grade should indicate the level of mastery that a student has achieved in a given class or subject. If it does this, a grade will automatically meet the second requirement, which is to communicate this information quickly and efficiently to other people, who may or may not know the student. These people could be parents, staff at a school the student is transferring to, the admissions group at a college the student is applying to, an employer, or anyone else that cares about (and has the right to access) this information.
The problem with letter grades is that they reduce students to a percentage. If they are used properly, all the letters mean is that the student mastered X% of the course material. It doesn’t tell anything about how much the student learned – (s)he may have known everything taught in the class before ever entering that particular classroom. But is this a problem? If I am looking at a students transcript (either on a University admissions board, or as a potential employer), and the transcript shows that he student got an “A” in English Composition, Creative Writing, and Masterpieces of Western Literature, but got Cs and Ds in Chemistry, Biology, Algebra and Geometry, I have a pretty good idea that I don’t want to place that student into a technical job or college program. On the other hand, if I’m looking for someone to write manuals, fill a slot in an English Department, or some such, this candidate may be OK. The letter grade has made it very easy for me to perform an initial sorting of this candidate, and make an initial determination as to his/her appropriateness for whatever slot I am looking to fill. I don’t care where the student learned the material, what I care about is that the student actualy knows it. If the student took a class knowing full well that (s)he already knows all of the material, so what? They get an easy “A”, and their transcripts reflect the fact that they have mastered that set of skills.
Similarly, if a student entered a class with none of the prerequisites, works his/her butt off, and actually manages to catch up a bit – learning a lot of material in the process – what I want the grade to reflect is the portion of the course material that the student mastered. If Joe takes calculus, but doesn’t know how to add, subtract or multiply, and by the end of the semester has mastered basic math, algebra, and geometry, that’s great for Joe, but he didn’t learn any calculus, which is what his grade in the calculus class should reflect. In other words, an “F”. Is this fair? Joe has definitely demonstrated the ability to master mathematics, the dedication needed to learn a lot of material in a short time, and the willingness to stick to it and get it done. Shouldn’t his grade reflect some of that effort, diligence and ability? Absolutely not. His grade in calculus should be a reflection of his performance of calculus. If he wanted to get a good grade, he should have taken the remedial math, algebra and geometry course, then taken calculus. Given his performance, it is extremely likely that he would do well in calculus – if he come to the class with the proper basic skills. If we feel sympathy for Joe, and give him an inflated grade as a reward for his effort and progress, all we are doing is undermining the usefulness of grades. It doesn’t matter how you report a grade in a case like that, unless you give Joe his “F”, you are simply making whatever grading method you use meaningless.
Here’s another example: You are teaching Spanish, and a student comes to you and tells you that they are doing poorly in Spanish because they skipped the pre-requisite to chemistry and have to work really hard to pass chemistry. They are doing well in Chemistry, but in order to catch up in Chem, they have had to cut back on their Spanish studying. Is this grounds to soften up your standards and give them a better grade than they have earned? Of course not (at least I hope that was your reaction).
The fact that different schools have different curriculum and grading standards (good vs. bad schools) does cloud the water a bit, but if I’m sitting on an admissions board, the board is aware that an “A” from this crappy school is the same as a “C” from that good school, and believe me, we take that into account. If I am an employer and I’m looking at recent graduates (about the only time academic transcripts really make a difference), I’m either fairly familiar with the Universities and colleges that have programs that provide my employees, and know what their grading (and probably their curriculum) means, and adjust accordingly. (A least that was the case when I was hiring.) In the event an Admissions group or employer wants more detail about the students ability, an interview, essay, or any other more personal follow-up can easily provide much more information than something a teacher wrote.
So where do letter grades really fail? Well, the students that simply cannot take tests will tend to get bad grades – at least in situations where tests determine the grades. Is this a problem with using grades, or a problem with how the grades are generated? An unfortunate reality is that most of our schools are test centric, and programs like “No Child Left Behind” only exacerbate the problem. The students that do not test well do get poor grades. However, rather than blaming the reporting mechanism, blame the evaluation that generates the report. No matter what grading system you use, a faulty evaluation will always provide faulty grades. Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO).
So this nice, pat answer works for you science, math, and engineering types, where it easy to quantitatively evaluate what a student has mastered. What about the “softer” subjects? How do you evaluate a students ability to perform in an art class, or a music class, or give a speech? Once again, this is not a part of the discussion about using grades – it is a discussion about how to generate grades. And, once again, my answer is that someone teaching in those venues should be capable of evaluating their students using whatever methodology they find effective, and transform those results into a letter grade. A student who has truly mastered what the course was meant to teach would get a good grade. One who has not, won’t. What percentage of the course material has the student mastered?
Sure, a nice rambling narrative about the students style, strengths and weaknesses provides a ton of information, and gives the student a tool to improve their weak areas, but that is not the purpose of a grade. The details are irrelevant, and the student should have had the feedback and chance for improvement during the class – providing that information at the end of class (when the grades are finalized) isn’t doing the student any favours – either they already know what the teacher is trying to get across, or the teacher failed to communicate it during the class. The narrative bogs down the people that need the quick evaluation that a letter grade provides, and doesn’t really provide much additional usefulnes – if anything, it makes things harder – different people writing narratives about the same student will usually produce drastically different results.
I will not pretend that letter grades do not have problems. The variation between schools, courses, and curriculum all make it harder to know precisely what a given grade means. On the other hand, an accurate letter grade gives an indication of how much of the course material the student has mastered. This is a simple, effective method of communicating the students performance in a manner that provides an awful lot of information in a very concise manner. It does not provide complete details of the students performance, but it does provide a pretty good high level view of the students skills.
Note that this essay assumes that grades are not artificially inflated, curved, or otherwise doctored to make students, teachers, or school boards feel good. The premise is that a letter grade is direct indication of the percentage of the course material that the student learned. Not what the student learned compared to his/her classmates (curved grading), not boosted 20% to make the teacher or school disttrict look good (or to pass a certain percentage of the kids). If you are using grades accurately, you should occasionally get a class of all A’s. You should also occasionally get a class of all F’s. Usually, you should get a bell curve with the median solidly in the 73-76 range (that would be a “C”). The kids folks might be upset that their kid earned an “average” when they know their kid deserves an “A”. but if you have well-established grading rubrics, and the appropriate records, your grades should stick.
The more time I spend in early elementary classrooms, the more I realize that reading is one of the truly essential skills that we can teach our kids. Some kids come to kindergarten already reading fluently. Others don’t really get the knack of reading until the third grade, some never really do. So what can a parent do to teach their kids to read?
Some of the answers are obviouse. Read to them. Often. When they try to ‘read’ a book to you, let them. Don’t correct them when they don’t read verbatim, or even when they wander completely off the written page. Early on, ‘reading’ to them is having a story that goes with the pictures. The words on the page have nothing to do with the pictures. Eventually, they will start realizing that the words are, well, words. By this time, they should know, or have a good start on their alphabet. The move to ‘what sound does this letter make’ and ‘what letter does this word start with’ is a natural. There are tons of resources out there to help parents understand how kids learn to read, and to help them teach their kids to read. Phonetics, songs, whatever, pick the method that works best for you and your kid.
One thing that seems to be missing from almost all of the self-help methods is the simple fact that your kid should enjoy reading. How do you encourage that? there are a couple of things that I think make a big difference in how kids perceive reading. Many kids view reading as something they have to do, and as such, it becomes a chore. They will read when they have to , and will probably even get pretty good at it. However, the kids that really excell at reading are the ones that truly enjoy it. How to make your kid enjoy reading? easy. Make sure they know it can be fun. How? here’s my method.
First of all, once your kid is starting to learn to read, don’t stop reading with him/her. I still read with my kids, and they are excellent readers. Having a 15 minute or 1/2 hour reading session before bed is not only excelent family time, but it also shows your kid that reading can be recreational. Read to your kids, but also let them read to you. In my family, each of us has a book that we read to the rest of the family. We pick our books, and take turns reading. Another important part of encouraging reading is to make sure your kids know that you read. If it is Saturday afternoon and you’re sitting around reading a book, you are showing your kid that reading is OK. The more you read, the more your kids will read. As your kids reading skills grow, they will begin to want to read on their own. Let them. Encourage them. Maybe pick an evening a week and leave tyhe TV off to encourage reading time (this is also a great way to encourage game time, interaction, and good family time). A silent living room with 3 or 4 people sitting around reading together is incredibly cozy.
Finally (and this is important) if you want your kid to enjoy reading, don’t force them. There is no rule that says a kid should be reading when they start kindergarten. Some do, some don’t. Don’t try to force your child to be an early reader. Most kids will start reading when they are ready (with your help). Of course, the more the kid sees reading as a good thing or recreational, the more motivation there will be for the kid to read. Naturally, you will have to have books around for the kids to read, so budget for buying books, make regualr trips to your local library (with the kids of course). $25 a month goes a long way to building a library, and the books will get used by all of your kids. Keep books around the house – we have bookshelves in every room. Almost all of the books in our home are ‘family property’ they are not owned by an individual. This means that we share books. Of course, there are a handfull of books that are ’special’ and are owned by one of us, but they are the exception.
I guess the bottom line is exposure and encouragement. Make all kinds of books available to kids, encourage them to read, and teach them early on that reading is fun. Prove this by reading a lot yourself.
“Critical Thinking” “problem solving” “deductive reasoning” these are all nice phrases, but what do they mean? Everyone I’ve spoken to agrees that the public schools completely fail to teach these skills. The problem is, no one seems to be able to actually define what they are. Sure, the schools pretty much only teach “facts” (many of which are simply opinions, PC ideology, or simply wrong), but they can’t really be blamed for that – they are evaluated based on how many of these ‘facts’ a kid can vomit onto a standardized test in a given time period. The schools rating, budget, and the staffs job security depends on the students being able to perform on the test, so the school teaches exactly that.
So, Back to all those cool phrases. I think people agree that they are not the spewing of factoids that the schools teach. That’s a start, but still isn’t a definition. Exactly what is it we want our kids to be able to do? For me, the answer is actually fairly simple. I want my kids to be able to apply what they know (facts and experience) to real world situations. I want them to be able to use their knowledge and skills to figure out how to do something they have never done before. I want them to be able to approach a new situation or problem rationally, and apply a set of skills and tools to achieve the goal that they want. Having a library of facts at hand may make this a bit easier, and is probably an essential part of it. But by itself, the library of facts is useless. The critical skill that is not being taught is the ability to apply those facts to new situations. My daughter knows beyond doubt that 10+10=20. She learned this is school as a fact. As a matter of fact, she learned her addition and subtraction tables up to 15+-15. What she did not learn at school is how to add other numbers. Or why A+B=C. She learned that at home. She also learned (at home) why AxB=Z, and understands the theory behind multiplication. She has not learned her multiplication tables yet, but I’m sure the schools will drill those facts into her. If they don’t I know I can teach them to her at home.
Well, we still haven’t figured out how to teach “critical thinking”. The methods I use at home will probably not work in a classroom, as they are customized to meet the abilities of my kids. One thing I do know for sure, is that when a school or a teacher says “your child could not possibly understand/do that because (s)he is not developmentally ready for it”, what they really mean is “I’m not going to spend time teaching that” (or quit possible “I don’t know that”). I have had numerous conversations with educators, school administrations, and “learning specialists” who have explained to me time and again that a child that age couldn’t possibly learn about that. Some examples?
· supposedly, a kid is mentally incapable of understanding the concepts of multiplication before the third grade. The fact that my kids figured out counting by groups (count by 5, count by 2, etc), and had grasped the concept that counting by groups could be represented by the number of times you counted (“if I count by 2s 6 times, I’ll get 12”) by the time they were starting 1st grade is irrelevant. Kids can’t possibly really understand that stuff.
· A child simply can not understand how to break a task down into its component parts (steps) before the 4th grade. They haven’t developed the skills yet. Of course, the fact that my second grader can program her lego robot simply proves that my kid is a super genius. (Yeah, right, like I believe that)
The reality is that the kids don’t have the skills, but it is not because they are not developmentally capable of it – it is because they have never been encouraged to develop the skills. As a matter of fact, in most cases, they have been actively discouraged. Think about it. Spend some time with a toddler – say a 2 or three year old. How often do you say “you can’t do that yet” or “you’re too little for that” or some other phrase that could really mean “stop trying to figure out how to do that”. Now, take a look at a daycare, preschool or elementary school classroom, and see how often that message is driven home to the kids. Kids have a natural curiosity, and a natural tendency to experiment and try new things. If we want our kids to learn to problem solve, we have to let them actually do it, and encourage them to do so. As your kid grows, it the parents job to ensure that there are always challenges available. Of course, you also have to be willing to let your child fail – trying something that doesn’t work can provide as much useful information and skills as trying something that does work.
Blocks, legos, and other building toys automatically teach critical thinking. When your child wants to build something, work with them, but let them make the design and construction decisions. When they gat halfway through the construction, and it falls to pieces, or something doesn’t work, or whatever, don’t point out why it failed. Ask them why. Ask them if/how they are going to fix it. You’ll be amazed at how quickly they start figuring things out for themselves. And that’s what it’s all about isn’t it? Teaching them to figure it out.
The recent media blitz about The Dangerous Book for Boys has triggered a number of interesting discussions with other parents. It turns out that almost all of the parents that I talk to agree that our current Fear and Terror on the behalf of our children is viewed as stifling, ridiculous, and pretty much a waste of time. Is the world really that much more dangerous now than it was 30 or 40 (or dare I say it 50) years ago? Turns out that most people don’t think so. They think that the perception is that our kids are more at risk now than we were when we were kids.
Think about it. How common was a skinned knee when you were a kid? Scabs on knees and elbows were considered a standard part of being a kid. There are many kids in the second grade classroom I work in who have never had a scrape that a band-aid couldn’t cover. Stitches? Unthinkable. A broken bone? Not unless you want the local Child Protection Agency knocking on your door. Think about the things you did as a kid. Would you let your kids do them today? Here are some examples from my youth.
The list goes on and on. And I’m not even including controversial things like guns (BB or otherwise), dirt bikes, fireworks (often home made) and the myriad of other things that would probably get a kid arrested today. Were all of these things completely safe and without risk? Of course not. My friends and I had our share of stitches, scrapes, and broken bones. It was part of being a kid. It also taught us a lot about evaluating risk, and gave us a good education regarding our environment and what the world around us was.
So is all of this safety making a difference to our kids? It turns out it is, but its not all good. Sure, there are plenty of kids out there that have never had stitches or a trip to the ER. These aren’t bad things. The problem is, the same kids are completely out of touch with how to do *anything*. When was the last time you saw a bunch of kids working together to build a fort or tree house? How ‘bout making a kite? (What do you mean make a kite? That would involve using a dangerous pair of scissors or maybe a saw or knife. We buy our kites at the store.)
Remember playing Pirate, or Knight, or whatever, and using a trashcan lid for shield and a hockey stick for sword? At a recent party for one of the kids, we had a knights quest. We made foam swords, and the kids got to have swordfights. Imagine a bunch of 5-12 year olds all running around with foam swords actually hitting each other? They loved it so much, both they and their parents have contacted me and asked to do it again. Kids need to have ways to take risks. This is part of how they learn that there are consequences to their actions. It also lets them know that they have some control over their situation and environment.
Another interesting observation from our little Knights Quest: some of the best behaved kids at the Quest are also some of the kids that present constant problems in the classroom and in structured environments. My personal theory is that kids need a place where they can push their horizons and take risks. When we protect our kids to the point where they have no risk in their lives, they will look for another way to get the adrenaline rush. What could be easier (and more natural) than pushing the limits at school? The risk is there, the danger is there, the possibility of repercussions is there – everything that a “protected kid” is “safe” from. As with most behavior in kids, if you stifle something in one place, it will express itself someplace else. Maybe all that those ADHD and “problem” kids really need is a bit of time outside where they can just play, take risks, and be kids – without mom, dad, or teacher hovering over them making sure they don’t actually do anything fun or risky.
How do you teach a kid the underlying concepts of math instead of forcing rote memorization? Here’s what has been successful for me so far (note that this is aimed at parents working with their own kids. Folks working in education or group settings need a different approach. I’ll blog that later)::
It is best if you can catch them young. Really young. Like around two or three. At that age kids want to learn as much as they can. Start with counting – not just rote “1,2,3,4…” but also counting of physical objects. Once they can count physical objects fairly well, have them start to make the connection between the number of physical objects and their fingers (how many fingers is that?) Integrate the learning into their daily life in a way that they can relate to (how many peas are left? How many blocks can you stack, etc). this will accomplish a couple of things:
You also have to make sure you keep the kid challenged. One of my biggest complaints about the public schools is that they spend way too long on one thing without introducing something new. Once your child can count to 10, start having them add single digits (with the sum always coming out <10). At the same time, keep working on counting from 10 to 100. Addition is simple. Start out by having them count out 2 piles of objects, then put them together and have them count them all together. Once they are comfortable with that, have them count the two piles, then show them how to add them on their fingers Example:
Pile 1 has 4 items, pile 2 has 2 items. How many fingers is pile 1? (kid counts 4 fingers). OK, now on the other hand, how many fingers is the other pile? (kid counts 2 fingers). So how many all together? The first couple of times, you’ll have to help your kid count across both hands to get 6.
By using a method like this, you’re not only teaching your kid how to add, they are intuitively building an understanding of combining groups. The same approach works for subtraction (4-2: put up 4 fingers, now put 2 away (down). How many are left?). For subtraction, using “take away” instead of minus seems to help them get the concept – use language the kids know: they’ll get the jargon later as you slowly slip it in.
As your kid starts to get the concepts, you can easily expand it to include multiplication – make 3 stacks of 5 blocks. How many is that? Now make 4 stacks –how many is that. Have the kid start counting by 5s (or 2s. for starting out, these are the easiest intervals to use). Once they’ve reached the point where they can accurately count by 5 or 2, you can start introducing the concept of multiplication. What you have done is taught your child that multiplication is really just adding in groups. They’ve learned the concept of multiplication without ever having studied what multiplication is. At this point, your child may not be able to recite “math facts” by rote, but they will be able to solve addition and subtraction problems (I know I skipped over multi-digit and carrying problems, but the concept is the same). As you transition your child to solving problems on paper, they will easily move from the physical (object based) to the abstract problem solving skills. Let the child drive – they are curious and want to know how things work and what things do. Keep your eyes open for (or create) opportunities for teaching. Making a batch of cookies is a great way to introduce fractions. Blocks can teach shapes and basic geometry (Please hand me the octagonal column). I use my woodshop to teach geometry (hypotenuse of a triangle, angles for cuts, etc). I use Lego robotics to teach linear step thinking (My daughter is finishing up second grade and can do basic Lego programming). A lot of what is taught as “math” is really simple life skills. Get yourself an analog clock (if you don’t already have one). Spend a little bit of time teaching your child to read a clock, then make sure you have them tell you what time it is. It shouldn’t take more than a couple of weeks before a 1st or second grader can read a clock accurately (within 5 minutes) – it does help if your clock chimes on the ¼ hours – the auditory cue helps a lot, and the kid will actually get up and go look at the clock to check…
I guess the bottom line is that you have to spend a lot of time with your kid. Accept that fact that making cookies (or bread, or whatever) is going to take a lot longer when you have them decide what measuring device to use, figure out how many scoops etc. Yep, they will decide to use a teaspoon to measure out 3 cups of flour (be ready with the conversion). Let them spend the time with the teaspoon, then show them that they could have used a cup a lot quicker. Accept the fact that (for now) it’s more fun to use the teaspoon…..
As for rote learning, I really don’t think its needed. The idea of memorizing the multiplication tables may make sense at first (it takes *so* long to figure a problem out), but as your child finds uses for multiplication, they’ll learn the ones they need simply by using them a lot. Same goes for learning the symbols on the periodic table, structures of sugars, foreign language vocabulary, and almost everything else that the schools teach by rote. Instead of rote learning, try application learning – here’s a chart/list/source for the facts. Now here is a bunch of stuff to do that needs those facts. The facts that are commonly used will get learned, and the ones that aren’t can always be looked up or solved. Just like in real life. Oh yeah, and by using this approach, you’re teaching your kid to use the resources around them to find the information they don’t have. Tool use is good…
Will these methods work for all kids? I suspect not. The message here is the philosophy, not the details. What worked to teach my kids algebra may not work for yours. The approach should work for anyone. You need to know your kid, use what interests them, and always make sure that they have new things to investigate, figure out, and discover. Forget all the crap that the teachers, shrinks, and schools tell you about your child “not being developmentally ready” for those concepts. All that really means is that your child is ahead of (or behind) the one-size-fits-all track that they have created. I know second graders that can easily handle long division – something that isn’t in their curriculum until the 4th grade. You know your kid. Its your job to make sure that they keep learning.
