If a student in my class said and did that, I’d think, “you little prick…get back here!”
I wouldn’t say it, of course….I like my job, and want to keep it. But I would think it.
You know, though, Calvin has a point. Certainly, some students I rub shoulders with are absolute gems. These youn’uns truly are the salt of the earth, and they make my job worth it. Even in the worst schools, there are a plethora of these students, often lurking in the shadows, dwarfed by the “drips.”
It’s also worth mentioning that we shouldn’t unduly blame public schools…they aren’t the only, or even the primary, things making students drone clones. Since public schools are an extension of our culture, the institution shares in the problem.
For every student of true genius and character, there are a cloud of others aptly described by Calvin in the cartoon. On most days, trying to engage with them is like talking to a painting. After I sent the above cartoon to my Stumbleupon friends, several emailed me back wondering how we got like this in education. Why does a withering boredom characterize such a wide swath of our public education (and, sometimes, private ed.) student population?
So here I is, answering that qwestyun.
Our students’ “dripiness” has many origins:
1) Rampant autonomy and individualism in American culture–This isn’t a problem with the American Public School system per se; it’s a problem with our culture. Our public schools, because they are an arm of the culture, are merely particular outgrowths of the trend.
Face it; individualism is the air we breathe. Just utter the word “choice,” and that’s often all you need in order to justify a certain behavior in the eyes of the public. Everyone wants to be unique; everyone thinks he’s unique.
Here’s the problem: what happens when each member of a group of people attempts to look, act, and seem unique? That’s right–they all end up looking unique at the same time and in the same way. All the non-conformists dress, act, think, smell, and spit alike. Strange, but true, especially when each member subconsciously holds the word of the peer group
as law (this is the case in high school culture; the peer group replaces the parents as the most important thing in the teen’s life. I should know–I once was a teen, and I hang out with teens 10 hours a day now.).
I’m with Pastor Mark Driscoll: fellas, you wanna be unique? You wanna be “counter-cultural?” Get a job.
Granted, the “get a job” one liner doesn’t exactly apply to most high school students, but the overall principle still is valid: stay chaste until you are married. Show up to class on time. Do your homework. Take an interest in what you are reading in English. Put down the game console. Earn your keep. Display uncanny dedication to a cause higher than yourself. Give yourself away. Keep clean and uplifting speech. Fellas, honor and protect the girls. Girls, learn the meaning of true character beauty.
This won’t make you famous…but at least you won’t be a “drip.”
2) The philosophy of Naturalism–Naturalism is a worldview that comes in many varieties and flavors, but most flavors hold that the hard sciences are the only or best way to gain knowledge about the world. With this view, ethics, values, character, religion, and politics cease to be ventures in which you can gain knowledge. Instead, they are relegated to the realm of emotion, preference, and opinion. It’s all equal. Blech.
Naturalism has reigned in public schools for some time now. There are many consequences to this worldview monopoly, but one that is relevant to this discussion is that no one has any clue as to how to grow students in virtue and character. If character and virtue are areas of mere preference (as opposed to knowledge), its hard to see how someone could actually grow in them. Knowledge would be required for that, but that’s exactly the thing that’s missing from our view of character.
A good character is *the* quality that would make a student truly unique. Virtue is the “stuff” of beauty. Because we teach that it’s a matter of preference and emotion, though, it is obviously not very important to us.
Oh yes, we certainly talk a good talk at times. Really, though, we can post all the anti-cheating posters or teach all the sex ed. seminars we want. Until we adopt the view that ethics, values, character, etc are areas in which students can possess true knowledge (i.e., some things are really, factually wrong, no matter who disagrees and no matter what another culture says), it will do little good. Students will continue to be “drips.” But this will require a major paradigm shift in that we’ll have to dump Naturalism as the reigning worldview of choice. In the words of C.S Lewis, we castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.
BTW, this in no way violates the “separation of church and state.” The phrase is a phantom anyway, but suffice it to say, the current worldview of public ed. is NOT neutral at all in regards to morality and religion. Naturalism isn’t a stance based on liberty; it is a worldview that seeks to privatize every other view. Any view that is opposed to to is it automatically shoved into the private (read: “emotions and feeling…not real.”) closet. This started in the science classroom but has since crept then stormed into all other classrooms. It is a worldview like every other one, and it’s an especially pernicious one. “If I can’t see/hear/taste, it, etc, then I can’t know it” is actively taught, and that’s not neutral.
3) Destruction of the family–the family is the most effective crucible in which character is built. It is there that a boy learns what it means to be a man, and it is there that a girl learns what it means to be a woman. Our government policies and cultural norms, have, however, greatly eroded the strength of the family.
4) The self-esteem curriculum–The last 30 years or so we have taught that feeling good about yourself is the primary virtue. In the words of sociologist Jean Twenge, The last few generations have “never known a world that puts duty before self.” Focusing on yourself is actively encouraged to the point of narcissism. When you are so busy admiring yourself in the mirror, you miss an incredible amount of beauty in the outside world that would truly deepen your life. Plus, why strive for true achievement when you already know you are the bestest?
5) *Unduly* shielding our students from failure, propping up their grades and performance at all costs. There are times when a type of shielding is needed, but things have gotten quite out of hand. The loonies are runnin’ the asylum.
A student’s performance is always someone else’s fault. This has squashed much of the natural responsibility for learning that is inherent in being a student and put it on the shoulders of administrators and teachers. We have taken much of the good and necessary striving that comes with being a student. The thing is, in the past such striving functioned to deepen character, which is the all-too-important fuel for uniqueness that I discussed above.
By taking responsibility away, we’ve drained the life and vitality out of student life.
Here’s an example that demonstrates this: during my student teaching, I had a real downer of a class. They were the hardest students to get excited about anything academic. I wondered why. Then I found out: in their junior high years, they were allowed to fail EIGHT classes but still go on to the next grade.
No wonder they were comatose! They had been taught that they didn’t have to strive hard at all; it would all work out in the end.
Just in case you aren’t convinced, here’s a hypothetical scenario. You have a 20-page research project is a real humdinger. You stay up many a night, toiling in the library, searching for relevant sources. You sweat blood when it comes to synthesizing all the information and putting it in writing. During the presentation, a panel of very intimidating judges grills you, probing to find out if you really know your topic…this is quite a harrowing experience!
Afterwards, when you look back on it, though, you have something you can really be proud of. Going through that experience is be a true achievement, and you can take great joy out of it. Plus, think of how striving has shaped your character!
Reality: 20 pages has become 5, you get 90% of the research done online, and if you do a presentation at all, it certainly isn’t a grilling. What’s more, if you bonk, the teachers will give you extra credit assignments to catch back up. In fact, you are entitled to them. Your parents will see to that.
Adults have to take more responsibility for their students’ performance, but this has been twisted. Now, far too often, if a student fails, doesn’t measure up, displays a lack of discipline or lack of respect, it is automatically someone else’s fault.
The test was unfair. The teacher is biased. The principal is a buffoon. The classmate provoked him. The teacher didn’t fill out the proper discipline paperwork. Transfer the student. Give him extra credit. Don’t administer the natural consequence. Bump up his grade. Pass him to the next grade, despite his abysmal performance. In all this, the student hears (whether implicitly or explicitly) that he bears no responsibility in the matter. As I mentioned above, this takes much of the deep satisfaction out of being a student, and the result is “dripiness.”
Notice that I haven’t even mentioned the “bubble testing mania” that has engulfed schools. Hey, I’m not much a fan of these tests either, but they became law long after the “drip” syndrome was established. They might exacerbate the effect, but by no means did these tests start the deluge of melting snowflakes.
Some of you will no doubt give an anecdote or two about a few students who shine like stars despite all these factors. I have already acknowledged that some, even many, beat the odds. The exception doesn’t disprove the generality, though.
Well, that’s my take.
How’s that for an ending line?
Check out the following related posts on education.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
If you liked what you read, please consider subscribing to my RSS feed (RSS button at the top right in the sidebar).
Pingback: Character « Rediscovering the Church
Rich;
Rampant individualism? I believe it is more accurately described as a culture of “rights.”
True individualism like the individualism expressed in the first lines of our founding document, the Declaration of Independence recognizes a Creator and, at least by implication, it recognizes the rights of others.
As government grows and dispenses favors; and decides upon the allocation of those favors; it tends to define them as as rights. (sorry about the sloppy generalizations) The popular culture absorbs the formula. And it says, “you can’t do that, I got rights”
Duty they forget about.
It gives true individualism a bad name; but then, that’s a useful thing for the state. Liberty is so, well, noisy and unruly. The drips get to be, well, drips. And wear droopy pants & stuff.
Right on. Nicely done.
Wow… This describes almost all of my students perfectly as well as the situation here in Malaysia. A whole bunch of students here are ‘drips’ and much of it is due to the cushioning effect by schools which allow students to sail through even when they don’t deserve to – like your example where students can pass a grade even though they failed 8 subjects. It is the same way here and it is producing students who no longer think nor appreciate going to school… And I’m teaching college kids, which is even sadder…
All right, I’ll do to restate what I’ve already told to Rich. I could talk about what i dislike about the current school/educational system, so I will do my best not to digress and be straight and to the point(as i write a paragraph intro
). To put my feelings in context, i’m talking as a Senior from JJ Pearce High School, Richardson, TX.
Ok, so, I think Rich does an effective job of catering to the “sub-par unmotivated person”. It seems like the article is primarily directed at those who just sit in class, fall asleep, and fail. I think the most powerful part of the article is the part on responsibility. Much of school is very political, anything that goes wrong, the teacher better be ready to hear from mommy. Any possible responsibility that could be in the hands of the child, is handed to the parents instead. It’s somewhat natural, parents have always checked up with their children to make sure they’re doing they’re HW and keeping up with their studies. However, we have created and allowed a culture where we feel a sort of entitlement to get good grades. I mean hell, we DO get the good grades, even if we don’t do shit in the class, there’s always some sort of extra work we can do half-asses and end up with an A. Some kids just don’t care about grades at all. The one’s who end up with 50′s at the end of the 6 weeks. We all know em. Yet they still pass on to the next grade. What are we really teaching these kids? Why do we keep creating more and more losers?
One of the worst things to learn, but everyone ends up learning it from school nowadays, is how to cheat the system. Cheating on HW, on tests, on projects, and even how to bypass it all and go on to the next grade without doing anything. I don’t participate in the cheating anymore, although i have, because i just don’t give a damn about grades anymore. The smartest people at my school just realize how dumb of a system is so we resist it. We play the system. Do just enough to get by. Get by with A’s at that. A sad thing when you can sit in class, half awake, do all your HW in the period prior(minus projects of course), and ace the tests. Maybe my friends are just an elite group of lazy asses who don’t have to do anything but listen to the teacher jabber on about whatever subject and BS the system. However, we’re all in mostly if not all AP classes. Each taking 5-8 AP tests this week. Sometimes we feel bad for not doing the HW that they assign all the time, make jokes in class, do the best on all their dumb ass tests…One of my friend insists he’s going to apologize for not doing what his teachers asked of him. I couldn’t do that though, not without being totally rude about it heh.
So yeah, i think that not only have we taken all the responsibility away, but we have adjusted to this. We expect that there will be people that just can’t keep up. And we can’t just “leave these people that we fucked up behind”, we have to marginalize. We have to play to the average student. The student that is supposedly trying super hard to ultimately do nothing…cept take a bs 50-80 question test. I think our schooling needs another look at. It’s too slow, it leaves those like me(although i don’t think that i’m unique, i think that everyone can do what my friends and i do) in a dull rut, waiting for everyone to catch up.
AGH it’s so frustrating, i don’t even know what to say anymore. Sorry if this was somewhat incoherent. I’ve got so many thoughts in my head and they get mixed up when they come out. It’s not like i’ve reviewed or re-read what i just typed either so ENJOY XD
Pingback: Twenty Items of Interest (v.56) | Caffeinated Thoughts
I think that your post is quite contradictory.
First off, your blame is spread, like a shotgun blast, at so many subjects, that it looks like you are still seeking the proper problem to aim at. As an example, some of the subjects, like Individualism and then School Indoctrination, are at odds with each other. You either have one or the other.
I think you’ve started on the right path – you just need to focus a little more.
My thoughts, and research has proven my hypothesis to date, is that it really is the Public School system. The curriculum and methods of training from ground up are designed to shove everyone in a mold. The drips, as you call them, are those who figured it out and don’t care: the joy of real learning has dried up from lack of nurturing.
I recognized this early on in my school years and was grateful to be pulled out and home schooled starting in the middle of 4th grade. I love learning, but for a few years I felt drained and depressed. Only through actually exploring things at my own pace, and my own choosing, did I start to enjoy learning. In fact it is the start and secret to my success as a freelance programmer.
Becuase of this my three children were homeschooled for the first few years of their lives, and after they had a semi grasp of the important subjects, then we put them in a private school. The first year in they were top of their class in nearly every subject. This year a new teacher has come in and started instituting pointless homework and piling it on so thick that a good amount of student’s parents have complained. She was teaching like a Public School teacher (no offense intended). We were ready to pull our children out and homeschool them again. The growth of our oldest child (who was being taught by the child) had dropped to nothing and she worked 90-100 hour weeks between school and homework. To top it all off, none of it mattered to the grades. After the Parent revolt, and enough talking to by the Principle, I believe the teacher figured it out. She lessened the load and the children started to enjoy school and learning again. Growth happened.
So to echo the Highschooler above, Public School is the problem. You guys start reforming there and you will see the “drips” (isn’t that a bit condescending?) will become active participants again – at least the ones young enough to still care. None of the other changes will matter since you guys have more time with the children than we parents even get.
M.S,
Thanks for stopping by and offering your thoughts.
My post was intended to be general.
I don’t find any contradiction at all in saying that students are “indoctrinated” (to use your term) into individualism. While countless do buck the trends, many students are simply conforming to what they are being taught day after day after day, and in this case, they are being taught straight from the self-esteem playbook…which, when you examine it, is more like narcissism.
I lack space to give data on that, but just check out Twenge’s work that I link to above for data.
Ironic? Yes. Contradictory? No. What would show that I’m wrong is if a mass wave of students were to question the gospel of individualism, but I don’t see this. Most just accept it like its self-evident.
I guess I could have defined “individualism” more, and that might be a cause of confusion. The individualism I refer to is a thin individualism. Morality and a good character play no role in it. Things like being famous, getting attention, and having the latest gadgets are more central.
Naturalism reinforces this thin individualism; it’s all that’s left when things like ethics and morality become not arenas where one can possess genuine knowledge, but are matters of pure choice and preference.
What could be called “thick individualism,” on the other hand, means that true uniqueness comes from living life well and having a good character. Again, this requires a worldview where character is an area of knowledge, and this isn’t even on the radar in public schools. We might give lip service to it and individual teachers might operate that way in their classrooms, but at the meta-level, the worldview resources aren’t there to foster such a thing.
Next: is it condescending to call students “drips?” I suppose so, if I painted every student with that brush. I don’t do this in the post, however (re-read the first few paragraphs). I acknowledge there are many students of character and genius in every school…but there is an epidemic of apathy and boredom, and this can’t be swept under the table by saying I’m being condescending. At worst, I’m condescending, but this does not mean I’m wrong. Better to ask if my portrayal is accurate or not. You seem to think so…its just we disagree ever so *slightly* on the cause.
I agree that our public school system is causing much of this. I don’t know why you thought I was saying otherwise in the post. I think public schools share part of the blame, but not all–many of my points in the post apply to the culture at large as well. Public schools are merely an extension of our culture, not outliers from it, so its inaccurate to heap all the blame on public schools and not talk about the other cultural culprits lurking out there.
I’m with you when you say the system needs major reforming. I’m not sure how to do that, though. I can reform my classroom…I know how to do that. But I’m clueless when it comes to the institution at large.
Lastly, you are right when you note that public schools get children for the majority of their waking hours. This is why I want to home school my own children when I start a family–I have seen first hand what public schools tend to produce, and I don’t like what I see. For example, even kids who go to church weekly, attend youth group every time its held, come from very conservative families with two parents, etc, etc–even these kids end up being thoroughgoing relativists. Answering the simple question “where do they spend the most time?” will show you how that can come about. HOWEVER–still–don’t discount the influence of parents! If a parent actually *engages* with a kid (family eats dinner together, there is an abundance of family time, father and mother both are intentional in teaching their kids and taking advantage of teachable moments, etc) does wonders…by the way, dad watching TV, son on his IPOD, sis on her cell phone, mom on internet chatting with other moms–even if all are in the same room, this doesn’t count as *engagement.* Neither does shuffling your kid from program to program after school, though that is certainly laudable in many instances.
**(gets off high horse)**
Ok, I think I’m done.
PS–When I used the word “you” above, I wasn’t referring to you, specifically, MS. I was just speaking loosely..gotta make that clear.
MS–one last thing, a question:
can you clarify what, exactly, was the problem with the teacher you talk about? Was is mainly the *amount* of homework s/he was assigning, or something deeper? Along the same lines, what made the homework “pointless”? What, exactly, characterizes a public school teacher?
Kevin Ryan Mooney wrote a comment, but for some reason it got caught in the spam filter. I spotted it and thought that I approved it, but I guess I didn’t because it got deleted instead. Fortunately, he left his thoughts as a review on Stumbleupon. They aren’t as well organized as they were in the comment, but they contain the jist of things, so I’m just gonna copy and paste his S.U review here:
Nobody buys it when Christians say they want a dramatic paradigm shift in schools so that they can teach their own versions of morals and ethics, and somehow it’s not going to violate the Separation of Church and State. Nobody seriously believes Christians when they say they just want schools to be “neutral” in regards to religion and morals, just like nobody believes Muslims when they say that they want European court systems to be “neutral” as to whether they practice local vs. Sharia law. It’s like when Creationists suggest they just want to let students “make up their own mind” whether humans evolved, or whether they were created by God in their present form. First of all – BS. We know exactly what they want students to believe (the plea for neutrality is merely the tip of their “wedge strategy”). Secondly, there is no debate. The two sides are not even close to being equally legitimate. A school that teaches that “the moon may or may not consist of cheese – we need to teach both sides” is not being “neutral,” it’s lending undue credit to stupidity, and burdening the truth with doubt.
The responsibility of teaching ethics, morals, and religion is with parents. Primary education is for imparting knowledge and thinking skills. It’s for teaching things society agrees on, things we can see empirically, that we have a consensus about. There is no wide societal consensus that your personal religious and moral values are the correct ones to be taught to all children. I doubt very highly that we are going to overhaul the whole concept of the public school system to include teachings of your particular ethics.
Incidentally, you’ll see the term “Naturalism” pejoratively thrown around a lot by UFO believers, astrologers, ghost hunters, crystal healers, theists, etc. – basically anybody who is really tired of people who keep reminding them about those pesky facts, “hard science,” the observable world, empiricism, etc. It’s an old tactic of those who preach departure from reality – if your opposition has facts and evidence on their side, give your opponent a name which implies that facts are just one [contested] viewpoint. In reality, there is no true contest, but you can make it look that way. When the founder of homoeopathy (a radical egression from reality and sanity) did it, he derisively renamed traditional evidence-based medicine “allopathy.” An aide to George bush dubbed liberals the “reality-based community.” It’s all pretty amusing linguistic monkey business.
Re: #3: “Destruction/Protection of the Family” is a cute and oft-used euphemism for intolerance. For instance, let’s say that some people are born with a gender expression or sexual orientation that does not match yours. They aren’t hurting anybody – at most, they merely demand equal status as human beings – but they do make you a teensy bit uncomfortable. Unfortunately, it’s not considered acceptable to use epithets or stone them anymore, so you propose the idiotic and insulting notion that they are “destroying families.”
It’s code for wackaloon bigotry. Oddly enough, anybody who truly values the beauty of love and family should realize that those concepts transcend stingy, narrow definitions. People who want to come together, love each other, and raise a family aren’t “destroying the family;” petty, prejudiced sycophants – who think that their kind of love is the only right kind of love – are the ones destroying it.
For a final irony, you use a Calvin & Hobbes strip to annotate your opinions. Throughout his career, Mr. Watterson created work which espoused tolerance and inclusion. He consistently showed a high regard for intellectualism. I’m pretty shocked myself, but if Mr. Watterson came across his strip in your article, championing the teaching of your particular religious morals and acceptable gender roles to children, I cannot imagine that he would be anything other than completely saddened and appalled.
Pingback: Wackaloon Bigotry « The Pugnacious Irishman
@Rich,
I think we are generally in agreement here. I do disagree on the parental front being a parent myself, and seeing many good parents fail to protect their children from the general effects from public schools (and even bad private schools). I have never seen any positives come from public schools and I have family friends that are public teachers that pulled their children and put them in private schools, for the same reasons and purposes as I described above.
I think I was a little unfair in the grating tone of my post though; and especially in that bit about the private teacher teaching like a public teacher. My definition of a “Public Teacher” does not include the public teacher that sees the problems in teaching methods, general student engagement, and a care for the students problems and concerns about their work. These are things good teachers are interested in.
As far as homework goes, I think it’s generally useless to pile work with tight deadlines on anyone who doesn’t understand the work yet. I know that professionally, when I’m leading teams of programmers, that if I treated my programmers the way that a lot of teachers have treated their students, that there would be a much higher level of mental breakdown and failed projects than there currently is. Instead I treat all my junior programmers as apprentices. I review their work carefully, find where they have a lack of knowledge, constantly develop friendly relations with each, even though I have up to 40 programmers in my care at one time over multiple projects, and try not to treat their ability to complete a task due to lack of knowledge by piling loads of more deadlined tasks on them and more studies to correct their holes. Instead I lessen their load and get more programmers involved in the same tasks. Together with the other programmers we try to help guide that programmer in the sense of common community.
If any of that makes sense to anyone else I’ll consider that good enough. I find my approach to teaching much the same as good teachers that I know personally. I find corporate project managers tend to be just as bad as most public school teachers. I think it has to do partially with the corporate conglomeration, but I’m not absolutely sure on that. It’s just an interesting parallel.
Pingback: The Parent Revolution « The Pugnacious Irishman