|
NUMBER 21 NOVEMBER 2000 |
LISTENING IN
Gail Russell
Chaddock recently interviewed Diane Ravitch on the publication of her
new book Left Back: A Century of
Failed School Reforms. We listen in on a current debate in a nearby
profession
Moving beyond good intentions in schools
If at least three authors hadn't already claimed the title
"Paved with Good Intentions" for their books, it would have served
well for Diane Ravitch's latest and best history of education reform
in the United States. turns on a simple idea: that children learn when
they are taught intensely and well. Not when they are coached. Not when they
are appeased. But when they are systematically instructed in a rigorous,
academic curriculum.
Sounds old-fashioned, and it is. While she insists that
there never was a golden age for American schools, there were periods when
schools had a compass. They were centers of learning, and knew it. Her book
is an effort to find that compass again. Fairly read, it could help frame
the education debate for the 21st century.

Diane Ravitch
Photo: KEN CEDEΡO
Here's a preview of what that exchange could look like.
Author Alfie Kohn, a leading advocate of progressive education, has yet to
read this book, but commented on its core message:
"Most of the trouble we are experiencing with education is a result of
a stultifying traditionalism regarding many aspects of school structure and
assumptions about learning," he says. "The history of 20th-century
education is the history of a refusal to implement sensible, research-backed
ideas in a progressive vein that take children seriously and see them as
meaning-makers rather than passive receptacles into which facts are poured.
"The problem, in short, is that progressive education
has had far too little impact, rather than the bizarre notion that it has
taken over our schools."
Use Mr. Kohn's comment as a point of reference as you read
this book. Test what you're reading on the experience of your children or
those of people you know. Talk about it with teachers and those who face
these issues daily and who (surprisingly, for a book so critical) emerge
as some of the most courageous thinkers in the narrative.
Ms. Ravitch has been both activist and analyst on these
issues. A senior research scholar at New York University, she was an
assistant US Secretary of Education from 1991 to 1993. She helped draft the
California K-12 history curriculum, a model for the high academic standards
she urges. Excerpts of her conversation with the Monitor follow:
On the decline of academics:
The one thing that school-reform movements across the
20th century have in common is the idea of reducing the academic
curriculum, of making it less important, of making schools more fun, of
making it easier, and pushing children into vocational education whether
they want it or not, pushing them into job training when they were too
young. And I thought: This is a story I want to tell.
At the beginning of the century, there was a widely
shared understanding among educators, parents, and local school boards
about what schools were supposed to do. There was also tremendous
restriction of educational opportunity, especially among minorities and
poor kids. But the fundamental understanding on the part of educators was
that as long as kids stayed in school, the poor kids would get the same
education as the rich kids. And that's the understanding that came under
attack at the beginning of the century.
On whether all children can learn:
Where the progressive movement went wrong was when it
had different goals for different groups of children. The theme I keep
coming back to is having the same goals for children, but recognizing that
they will reach those goals at different rates of speed. They may need
extra help to meet the same goals. They may need different materials. But
the goal should be the same: to have a solid liberal education that allows
people to make choices in their own lives.
On the role of parents:
One thing I noticed throughout the century is that time
and time again, when education theorists came up with what were ultimately
very harmful schemes for kids, such as directing kids into industrial
education when they were much too young, parents somehow even though
they were not educated had the good sense and the wit to rebel.
In the African-American community, there was this
longing to have a classical education from parents who were themselves the
children of slaves. What they wanted for their children was what the
children of the elite had. Somehow, this fundamental common sense came to
the fore and protected them.
On a common goal for schools:
My own hope would be that some day we would reach a
point where parents and educators would both say that we want to make sure
that all children get what children in the most favored community get
the same kind of education. It may be that kids will take different
amounts of time to get there, but we'll make sure that they all have
access to the best education.
On the power of a good example:
One of the amazing things in education is that you can
often find that a small school or a single example has a very large
resonance. Such as the Kipp Academy [a public charter school in Houston]
or, at the other extreme, Summerhill, which was [a progressive school in
England] for about 50 children.
It's usually not a school system that causes everybody
to sit up and look, so much as it is a single school. What's encouraging
about education is that it doesn't take an enormous activity to make a
huge difference. It takes one wonderful school.
On what to do if you're a kid in a bad school:
If I were speaking just to the child or the child and
parent, there are two things I would say. The first is: Change schools.
And if you can't change schools: Read. The most important determinant of
SAT scores and other kinds of test scores is reading. Try to read the best
books you can. Expand your vocabulary. Regardless of what is happening in
the school, the individual who does this can rise above that, although you
hope that as a system you don't put kids in that situation.
On achievement gaps:
I was surprised to see [from recent data from the
National Assessment of Education Progress] that the achievement gap
[between black and white students] is widening, especially for the
children that had the best-educated parents.
This is not about bad schools, it's about kids that have
access to the better schools.
What I would say is not based on research, but based on
having lived over these years: There is something about the coarsening of
the culture that must be having an impact.
I am thinking in particular of the anti-intellectual
message of the powerfully influential lyrics that kids listen to all the
time, where they are not taught to aspire and not encouraged to read and
not encouraged to challenge themselves intellectually. This deeply
anti-intellectual, anti-academic message has got to have an impact. It's
almost a form of advertising, and we know that advertising influences
behavior.
Gail Russell Chaddock is a Staff writer of The
Christian Science Monitor
|