I had not heard of Alvin Toffler before I read this article. After reading this article I feel validation that I am not crazy but a part of an innovative way of thinking that schools are not doing for students what they should be! I often tiptoe around these radical thoughts for fear that I will be found out and locked away for trying to change what isn't right. Toffler hits almost every idea that I have had while reading about charter schools and other school models. Other countries follow this line of thinking, students begin specialized schooling at a much younger age than the U.S. and it has not ended in catastrophe. If anything the students in these countries are far more advanced in their education. It just makes sense that if we can diversify education to meet the needs of students then they are going to be more successful because they are engaged in their learning. I have a very close friend who made it through school just fine but didn't pursue college further than the first semester because who needs general education requirements if you are trying to pursue a degree in a specific field. It didn't make sense to him that he was paying for courses that he could have been teaching for a certificate of completion. Why was it that he already knew the information, because he researched and self taught the things he wanted to know. He continues to build his knowledge base still through investigation. He is motivated to find out more because he is interested in what he is studying. This makes sense for all students.
I am pursuing my master's not only for further career development but also because I feel that it is so important for me to continue learning. I believe Toffler's point regarding teachers needing to leave the classroom for short periods of time is important. We should not just continue to do things the same way because that's how it has always been done. There is new information and discoveries being made "at 100 miles per hour". Teachers need to be current in their teaching. We need strong people to break the molds of education and develop a new way of educating that will meet the needs of children today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think allowing students to specialize would be an interesting concept but would that limit the child for the future? I think part of the joy of school is the student's ability to try many different topics out. If a student gets locked into an area too early they may grow to hate school instead of embracing the idea of life long learning
ReplyDeleteHi Bekah, your friend and my brother are identical. He made it through high school just fine and dropped out of college because he didn't see the need to take classes that had nothing to do with what his major was. I always wondered about our desire for the "well-rounded" model of a student. Yes it is important to be exposed, but by the time a person hits college shouldn't they have earned the right to choose not to learn something after 13 years of schooling. If it supposedly important for that major, then make it all about that major. I could keep going, but I will stop. I did post to Kelley's blog about the idea of specializing and that I am not sure what to think about that and never have. It's interesting to see the two perspectives.
ReplyDeleteYour specialization idea makes a lot of sense to me too. I believe that we need to make learning more relevant to student's interests. Instead of locking them in to a particular interest that may fluctuate radically over time, I think schools need to encourage students to explore topics of interest within the subject areas they are studying. If a student has a passion in music, they should be able to apply open-ended assignments in English, Math and other subject areas.
ReplyDeleteI don't have the blueprint down yet but I think we all would agree that the likelihood of a student learning and retaining information he/she isn't invested in, is fairly slim.