Tools of Teaching, Part 1

Method must follow philosophy, otherwise what you are trying to do resembles an unskilled game of darts... taking some aim, but still throwing somewhat wildly at the board.

When we start with the idea that children are persons, born with all the potentiality of adults, due the dignity of adults, and who must be afforded certain freedoms, this gives us only certain tools to work with when we teach, and excludes others that would infringe upon the child's dignity and potentiality.

Mason hits on those tools that are proper to use, which I'll discuss in a later post. It is interesting, though, how she saw such similar problems almost a century ago that we still see in the 21st century classroom. Why? Because we still haven't learned the lesson of what results from using the improper tools to teach.

Perhaps in no part of our educational service do we make more serious blunders than in our use of those desires which act as do the appetites for the body's service. Every child wants to be approved, even baby in his new red shoes; to be first in what is going on; to get what is going; to be admired; to lead and manage the rest; to have the companionship of children and grown people; and last, but not least, every child wants to know. There they are, those desires, ready to act on occasion and our business is to make due use of this natural provision for the work of education. We do make use of the desires, not wisely, but too well. We run our schools upon emulation, the desire of every child to be first; and not the ablest, but the most pushing, comes to the front. We quicken emulation by the common desire to get and to have, that is, by the impulse of avarice. So we offer prizes, exhibitions, scholarships, every incentive that can be proposed. We cause him to work for our approbation, we play upon his vanity, and the boy does more than he can.

So what's the harm in this? The children respond positively enough, right? To paraphrase, we know what happens when an athlete works one set of muscles to the exclusion of others. What happens when a child has their ambition played upon in an undue manner? But she goes on:

But there is a worse evil. We all want knowledge just as much as we want bread. We know it is possible to cure the latter appetite by giving more stimulating food; and the worst of using other spurs to learning is that a natural love of knowledge which should carry us through eager school-days, and give a spice of adventure to the duller days of mature life, is effectually choked; and boys and girls "Cram to pass but not to know; they do pass but they do not know." The divine curiosity which should have been an equipment for life hardly survives early schooldays.

Why is it that we wonder that students want grades instead of understanding? Or have we accepted this as so commonplace that we have stopped even asking this question? What percentage of students does the above excerpt describe? "They cram to pass, but not to know. They do pass but they do not know." 90%? 95%? They do not work for knowledge in school because they have been taught that the simple desire for knowledge will not yield anything without getting the grade, pushing ahead, grabbing status.

So if we do not reward good performance, put high achievers on pedestals, and encourage competitive achievement, what are we left with? Will students really learn without dangling carrots or threatening sticks?

To be continued...