These are fundamental concepts — it’s not a matter of the next generation having better quality materials or a higher resolution screen or faster processor or a new innovative app. We are limited in this area by the physical qualities of fingers, wrists, and eyes.

Take a problem like “You have $5 and Sally asks you for $1, how much do you have left?” The test answer is $4. The creative answer is, of course, $5. Or maybe the creative answer is $0, because you could tell that Sally needed more than that and you gave her the whole $5, or you didn’t have change so she just said she’d owe you. Or maybe you remember that you have some change in the bottom of your bag, but then Sally remembers she does, too, and you both laugh and say “nevermind, then”.

Math makes for easy examples, but how many times has a literature teacher told a student that the teacher’s preferred interpretation of a work is the interpretation that’s really true and dismissed the student’s interpretation? How many students asked if Pluto really qualified as a planet and were told that, for the test, Pluto will be considered a planet, because bubblesheets don’t allow for students to explain their reasoning that Pluto shouldn’t be a planet?

Paul

Kids learn a lot by example (here I mean that they observe others and behave in similar fashion), and when in grade school they spend most of their learning time in the classroom. If their role model lacks imagination and curiosity, the result is much more likely to be a child that, outwardly, also lacks imagination and curiosity (there are going to be exceptions of course to this general influence). But place kids in a vibrant, imaginative, curiosity-driven environment, and you will see a lot more kids engaging in curiosity-driven activities.

There are lots of good teachers out there. There are also lots of well-meaning teachers out there. And there are lots of poor teachers out there. What we need are fewer of the last two types, and more of the first. A good teacher realizes that they teach and lead by example. I teach in a.university environment where you might think that these issues are much less of a factor. That may have been true a few decades ago, but today students even at this level seem to lack an innate curiosity regarding the world around them. Delayed maturity may be partly to blame. This has been fostered by society though, and is not the fault of the kids; it is something we either need to correct (preferably), or adapt to.

I’m not convinced that the major (or sole) problem with education today lies in the curriculum or in delivery methods, rather, it seems to me that it is the combination of delayed maturity and a lack of inspiration from teachers who would rather blame the curriculum, or the delivery methods, or some other pedagogical red herring.

Just an opinion.

I’ve had several conversations with teachers at different levels and at different schools recently about student apathy. I haven’t noticed it but many others seem to have done so. I wonder if our constant assessing, not just the state mandated tests but the practice tests and the common assessments for our PLCs and the classroom tests are doing this to them. Why care at all about school if it is ALL about a test?