Archive for the ‘memorize’ category

NCLB: Change is Past Due

March 6th, 2011

“What we can do — what America does better than anyone else — is spark the creativity and imagination of our people. “

State of the Union 2011

President Barack Obama

Where’s the nation’s educational learning plan for this?

Where in all the nooks and crannies of schools spread across America can we find what America does better than anyone else?

Is it in:

  • the increasing standardization of curricula, assessment and instruction?
  • the hundreds of millions of multiple choice test items that young people take classroom by classroom, grade by grade, school by school, district by district, state by state?
  • state standards that prescribe info-trivia at the most rote levels of recall making for school work that’s easy to measure and cheap to test?
  • the textbooks, worksheets, and practice tests that constitute the nation’s test prep curricula?
  • the accountability 1.0  measures and sanctions designed in the last decade of the 20th century and implemented in the hallmark year of NCLB,  2001?

The Elementary Art of Science

I don’t hear many educators talking about sparking creativity and imagination anymore. I fear budget reductions in school districts all over the nation have left creativity and imagination on the cutting room floor.  The one thing not in short supply happens to be over-the-top multiple-choice tests that have sapped sparks of innovative teaching out of classrooms everywhere.

Despite the pressure to raise scores as a result of mostly sanctions, the last ten years of current accountability sanctions have done little to change student performance against international benchmarks or longitudinally against our own NAEP data. Student data’s about as good or bad as it’s ever been, depending upon IRS Effect at work in a school.

Now the mantra’s pretty much the same everywhere, “Raise test scores or else.” Or else what? Will the educational beatings continue until America’s teachers and kids improve?

Secretary Duncan spoke to the nation’s superintendents recently and said if we don’t “do” something about NCLB,  “In two years, 98% of the schools in America will be labeled failing.”  Really? I think every educator I know said that about ten years ago.This administration’s at almost three years and counting to accomplish the transformation of NCLB ala ESEA reauthorization that was a campaign promise. Congress has sat on changes to NCLB across two administrations. Educators continue the march towards a label of failure even if 99% of the children in their school meet AYP benchmarks.

Change is past due.  It’s time for a spark of innovation and creativity in Washington.  Get rid of NCLB. Make the National Educational Technology Plan the core of ESEA. If the USDOE staff actually was to implement the NETP, its best work, rather than leave the plan gathering dust on a virtual shelf,  America’s learners would get access to what President Obama says our nation needs.

And, our learners and those who serve them might start to design, create, build, experiment, invent, and innovate our way back to what America does better than anyone else.

Engineering and Design

Here’s a Thought: Let’s Banish Critical Thinking

February 4th, 2010

I’ve been thinking about thinking lately, and I’ve had it with critical thinking. Note the italics. I’ve had it with the term critical thinking, not the actual practice. From a recent immersion in thinking-related research, I’ve concluded that critical thinking is like the weather: everybody talks about it but few do anything about it.

No arena bandies the term about as widely as education. Few conferences fail to include at least one session devoted to the topic, and book vendors at these events hawk the latest tomes dedicated to it. Educators seem to agree on the need for students to learn to think critically, but that seems to be the end of their consensus. Ask three different educators for their definition of critical thinking and you’re likely to get at least four different ideas, and at least half of them will include a nod to Bloom’s Taxonomy. Somewhere in our history, many of us were convinced that if our questioning climbed a ladder and we called on students whose names we wrote on popsicle sticks and pulled randomly from a styrofoam cup, we were teaching students critical thinking.

Because of the confusion all these preconceived notions create, I propose that we stop talking about critical thinking and instead just think about thinking. To that end, I’ve started referencing a different model. Imagine thinking as a target. As any marksman knows, the center of the target is where you aim if you want the best result. However, though the center of this target represents the ultimate goal, the outer circles are not without value. Let’s examine the first of these outer circles: memorize.

Wait, don’t stop reading! I know memorizing lacks the flash and appeal of the target’s other circles, but our brains do indeed memorize information, sometimes without our consent. For example, I know every lyric to the 70’s classic but somewhat mind-numbing “Funkytown.” I never intentionally sat down and used flash cards to learn the lyrics. They just got stuck in my head, which is one way to define memorizing. We memorize when things get stuck in our heads, on purpose or otherwise.

When educators talk about memorizing, it’s usually with a scowl on their faces and the taste of battery acid on their tongues. Memorizing is so beneath us. We don’t have students memorize anything. Everything we teach is meaningful. It’s all the others—teachers who teach other disciplines—who make students memorize unnecessary information. We’re above such an approach. We climb questioning ladders and pull popsicle sticks, for pete’s sake!

But let’s be honest. Despite the fact that most everything factual can now be found quickly via technology, some information still possesses its greatest value when it’s memorized. At its best, memorizing enables efficiency in thinking and acting. For example, knowing how to spell the words critical and thinking saved me plenty of time in developing this post. If I didn’t know instantly how to spell most of the words I use in writing, I’d probably have far less to say. (I know what you’re thinking: that’d be a bad thing?) Can you imagine trying to compose any significant passage of writing if you had to stop and check your wireless device for the correct spelling of every word?

I once had an experience that provides a picture of what this might be like. My wife and I love going to the theater for live performances. One time, just before the curtain was raised on a new drama, the announcer spoke via the public address system: “Today the role of Countess Calista will be played by Jane Smith, script in hand.” Apparently the lead actress and her understudy were unavailable. Sure enough, Ms. Smith waltzed onto stage with “script in hand,” and read her lines throughout the performance. It was disjointed and distracting. So much so that I can’t even remember the name of play, let alone what it was about. Memorizing has its place, even when technology that can provide the next line or correct spelling exists.

However, at its worse, memorization becomes merely testable material that lacks any use beyond the end of an instructional unit. With such material, its measurability is often its sole benefit, and it’s a benefit for the teacher not the student. Unfortunately it seems that many schools would rather aim for this outermost circle, decreasing the likelihood of hitting any part of the thinking target. But if we aim for and even hit this outermost circle, we have problems. Memorizing, while valuable when engaged selectively, has its limits.

First, students who only memorize remain subject to dogma’s sway. Parroting is evidence of memorizing, and a student who has highly developed memorizing capacity without equally developed processing abilities will tend to repeat the ideas of others, often without understanding.

Second and relatedly, students only equipped to memorize tend to accept without question. Such individuals tend to take the words that fall from the mouths of people they like and repeat them whether they are true or not. Since they lack the ability to process the ideas the words represent, accepting and repeating those words become the individual’s way of “thinking.”

Third, individuals who rely solely on memorizing as thinking cannot entertain or even understand conflicting ideas. That which they’ve memorized becomes their sole reference, so anything new must conform with the previously memorized information.

In short, merely memorizing severely limits an individual. So, while hitting the outermost circle represents one element of mental activity, always aiming there produces individuals I don’t think most schools and teachers would claim as their intended outcome. We need to consider the inner circles (and we will in future posts) and actually teach students the cognitive skills associated with them. Popsicle sticks and questioning variety alone won’t get us there.

Let’s think about thinking—teaching it, increasing it, developing students who actually can do it—but let’s leave our confusing dance with critical thinking behind.

Top Image: ‘la linea della vita, nichilismo’ http://www.flickr.com/photos/32347849@N08/3269623518

Switch to our mobile site