I find it most amazing to note that when I try to admire someone for their skills and want to encourage them to pursue their skills further, things actually backfire in the most horrendous fashion -- every time.
For instance, my rhetoric about exams in the previous posts, is usually met with this response, "It easy for someone who is academically accomplished to talk like this, just like it is easy for a rich person to say money does not matter."
What are the problems with such a counter argument? Well, it is more about the person making the argument than the content of the argument itself. Rather than understand something about what ails our education system, such an argument only puts me on the defensive -- as though I've committed a cardinal sin to have studied. I can't even say I am not academically accomplished, for this would just put fodder into another camp of people who like to swear by whatever narrow "achievements" they have had.
Ultimately, rather than furthering the cause of education or encouraging creativity or creating opportunities, these rhetoric only serve to make a lot of people squirm uncomfortably.
Even more radically, such argumentation are perpetuated more with the aid of rhetoric than facts. Here is one of them that is apparently about education in America:
Fifty Years of Math (in the USA )
Got this sometime back. Very hilarious and sad too ... Last week I purchased a burger at Burger King for $1.58. The counter girl took my $2 and I was digging for my change when I pulled 8 cents from my pocket and gave it to her. She stood there, holding the nickel and 3 pennies, while looking at the screen on her register. I sensed her discomfort and tried to tell her to just give me two quarters, but she hailed the manager for help. While he tried to explain the transaction to her, she stood there and cried. Why do I tell you this? Because of the evolution in teaching math since the 1950s:
1. Teaching Math In 1950s
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit ?
2. Teaching Math In 1960s
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?
3. Teaching Math In 1970s
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?
4. Teaching Math In 1980s
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.
5. Teaching Math In 1990s
A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers, and if you feel like crying, it's ok. )
6. Teaching Math In 2009
Un hachero vende una carretada de maderapara $100. El costo de la producciones es $80. Cuanto dinero ha hecho?
Clever, yes. Smart, yes. Witty, yes. Factual, NO.
It may good poke fun at the counter lady at McDonalds about the lack of her mathematical skills. But don't even get me started about the lack of design skills among highly-placed decision makers and thought leaders over here. It is not funny at all.
It has become a fashion among the so-called successful folks here to say to actually believe that American schools have question papers like #5 above. I would like to see one real evidence that American schools actually ask questions like #5 above and if so what their education department says about it.
The underlying assumption behind this is also that an argument against 3-hour assembly line exams are necessarily arguments for no rigour and a laissez-faire attitude towards education. Basically, this is a "false dilemma" fallacy where the assertion is that, "either we have the current-day examination model, or we have nothing, no rigour, no diligence, just a hippie approach towards education."
It is somewhat like asking, "Are you a capitalist or a communist?" There is no real choice; you can't be neither, you have to be one of the two. Either you are with me or against me.
Sure there may be greater emphasis on maths and science in the developing countries the BRIC (Brazil-Russia-India-China) belt in particular. But by far, much of the creative ideas still come from the former leaders in the age of reason. And no, creativity is not about telling a student, "It is ok to cry.." etc.
For all the new cars that we are having in India for example, except for small examples like Tata Indica, the rest are mainly copies of designs that have existed elsewhere. A small look into some major issue like city planning for example, will show the lack of foresight quite starkly. Our city infrastructures are woefully inadequate, mass rapid transport is non existent and generally we burn away several more litres of fuel just by waiting in signals and changing gears, than by driving.
I think we are seriously deluding ourselves if we think our education system is actually good and go about believing whatever is convenient to us by attacking nay-sayers rather than their ideas.
4 comments:
Nice post again.
To me, the example of the teaching of math in the US you gave is a joke (I had come across it before). But a joke based on what is indeed a poor educational system in the US.
Even if these schools don't use question 5 (which is probably true), many studies show that in the last 2-3 decades, the basic education there has only deteriorated. What explains its innovative ideas, strong researches, etc.? Well, two reasons come to mind: 1) their universities remain strong and act as a source of investments in many fields; 2) The US receives the best minds of many other countries (particularly India) which in turn, contribute to the country's academic achievements.
I also don't think the BRIC are any better than other developing countries (Brazil, in particular, is currently quite bad).
But I agree that this rhetoric you mentioned (and the consequent lack of counterarguments to the argument) only reinforces the problem.
There are few institutions like NCERT and KV's which have done fairly good job in School Education ,but their outreach in the entire country has been again very poor.
And one more thing I was wondering that how to educate Indian masses who are out of schools or colleges.Sometimes, or most times, I feel they need more education than kids.
A few years back when I was probably in standard 5th or so a group of teachers in Mumbai had proposed a major overhaul in the education system which meant reduction in the number of subjects, equal grading for practical and theory instead of the annoying 10-90 system still followed AND doing away with the ranking system.
The politicians opposed it because it was making the regional language optional. The reduced burden on the student didn't matter ... when did it anyway?
Majority of schools opposed it because they did not want to adopt a new system (sheesh!)
My next door neighbor opposed it because he liked it when his son stood in the FIRST 3 ranks in his class ...
Changing the mindset of people about exam-oriented education is going to take a long time :)
"Changing the mindset of people about exam-oriented education is going to take a long time."
Nobel laureate Douglass North would very much say the same thing, Big Foot. ;)
Post a Comment