Being OT on RCTN (long)

I'm reading all this discussion about education with lots of interest.
In our family, three kids over a ten-period has given me a lot of
exposure to both the best and worst of public education. We've had
teachers who were "passing time" until retirement, and others who are
very energetic and engaged (happily, the majority).

I'm working on an overarching theory here, so bear with me as I think
"out loud." I suspect that the changes in education we're seeing reflect
so much of modern thinking, and the thing that differentiates one group
from another -- as much as education, money, geography, or other factors
-- is "imagination". People who live with imagination have a spark, a
hopefulness, a creativity, adaptability, humor, and a sense of adventure
in meeting a new situation. Without this imagination, we're just putting
in time.

I think a lot of people in all walks of life are just putting in time.
Wanting the things that their neighbors have or Madison Ave. tells them
they want, swallowing the "news" that's fed to them in TV soundbytes,
the ones who think they actually like Wonder bread rather than a nice,
chewy pumpernickel...it's all a failure of imagination.

"Why didn't everyone just leave New Orleans when they were told to?"
shows a lack of imagination that leads to understanding the life
circumstances others might live under; the mediocrity of so many books
that shoot to the top of the NY Times best-seller list shows a lack of
appreciation for work of real quality (ditto music on the radio, movies,
TV shows, etc., so much of which is endless recycling of old ideas); the
knee-jerk political responses of both liberal and conservative thought
show a laziness in extending thought beyond habit and a failure to
imagine new or "other" circumstances.

So education isn't challenging? Hey, for a huge percentage of the
"sheep" in our society, nothing is challenging and *they like it that
way*...because they don't have the imagination to see or appreciate
other approaches or the creativity to face problems with a sense of
adventure and solve them through thought, work, and perseverence. In my
suburban neighborhood, a Lake Woebegonish place where "all the children
are above average", I sense this all around me. Just repeat something
often enough, and it's true...and the newer and shinier something is,
the better. People can't think "out of the box." And if they have
problems, they keep them hidden, because it makes them "different", and
God forbid anything be different because different means "flawed".

My first child went to the neighborhood high school - very competetive
school, lots of homework, sends kids to the Ivies, etc. - but in this
school, where the stakes to "winning" were so high, where square pegs
are pounded and pounded to fit into round holes, while the education in
facts and figures was top-notch, the life lessons were sacrificed. The
place was soul-less and turned out clones of the parents/neighborhood.
Nearly destroyed any love of learning for its own sake.

OTOH, the second and third children went/are going to an arts magnet,
and their education was/is exemplary. NOT that the SAT scores were
higher (they're not) or they went through Calculus III (they didn't).
The school is much more mixed - racially, religiously, economically -
and they're learning to get along with all kinds of people with all
kinds of gifts and value other viewpoints and fresh approaches. This
school really emphasizes community and respect and *values* the
differences between people. Rather than being threatened by individuals,
as the schools with "failure of imagination" do, they *revel* in
individual differences and what gifts each person brings to the greater
community. WHAT a difference! The teachers are outstanding, and I think
it's because a.) the students are a self-selected group who *want* to be
in that environment, so there are few discipline problems and b.) the
teachers are a self-selected group - people with imagination who *want*
to be challenged.

(I always think of this school of "The Island of Misfit Toys" from the
Rudolph Christmas special...you know, the one with the elf who wanted to
be a dentist? Bright kids who think "out of the box" would be
*miserable* in the neighborhood schools like ours - and in this setting
they just thrive.)

(Sort of like r.c.t.n. and our collection of "eccentric aunties." Don't
most of us want that role?)

Sue (I've met my quota for "thinking hard" today and it's not even noon!)

Loved your essay! Glad somebody picked up what was on my mind but
couldn't elucidate!
Dianne

Susan Hartman/Dirty Linen wrote:

I'm reading all this discussion about education with lots of interest.
In our family, three kids over a ten-period has given me a lot of
exposure to both the best and worst of public education. We've had
teachers who were "passing time" until retirement, and others who are
very energetic and engaged (happily, the majority).

I'm working on an overarching theory here, so bear with me as I think
"out loud." I suspect that the changes in education we're seeing reflect
so much of modern thinking, and the thing that differentiates one group
from another -- as much as education, money, geography, or other factors
-- is "imagination". People who live with imagination have a spark, a
hopefulness, a creativity, adaptability, humor, and a sense of adventure
in meeting a new situation. Without this imagination, we're just putting
in time.

I think a lot of people in all walks of life are just putting in time.
Wanting the things that their neighbors have or Madison Ave. tells them
they want, swallowing the "news" that's fed to them in TV soundbytes,
the ones who think they actually like Wonder bread rather than a nice,
chewy pumpernickel...it's all a failure of imagination.

"Why didn't everyone just leave New Orleans when they were told to?"
shows a lack of imagination that leads to understanding the life
circumstances others might live under; the mediocrity of so many books
that shoot to the top of the NY Times best-seller list shows a lack of
appreciation for work of real quality (ditto music on the radio, movies,
TV shows, etc., so much of which is endless recycling of old ideas); the
knee-jerk political responses of both liberal and conservative thought
show a laziness in extending thought beyond habit and a failure to
imagine new or "other" circumstances.

So education isn't challenging? Hey, for a huge percentage of the
"sheep" in our society, nothing is challenging and *they like it that
way*...because they don't have the imagination to see or appreciate
other approaches or the creativity to face problems with a sense of
adventure and solve them through thought, work, and perseverence. In my
suburban neighborhood, a Lake Woebegonish place where "all the children
are above average", I sense this all around me. Just repeat something
often enough, and it's true...and the newer and shinier something is,
the better. People can't think "out of the box." And if they have
problems, they keep them hidden, because it makes them "different", and
God forbid anything be different because different means "flawed".

My first child went to the neighborhood high school - very competetive
school, lots of homework, sends kids to the Ivies, etc. - but in this
school, where the stakes to "winning" were so high, where square pegs
are pounded and pounded to fit into round holes, while the education in
facts and figures was top-notch, the life lessons were sacrificed. The
place was soul-less and turned out clones of the parents/neighborhood.
Nearly destroyed any love of learning for its own sake.

OTOH, the second and third children went/are going to an arts magnet,
and their education was/is exemplary. NOT that the SAT scores were
higher (they're not) or they went through Calculus III (they didn't).
The school is much more mixed - racially, religiously, economically -
and they're learning to get along with all kinds of people with all
kinds of gifts and value other viewpoints and fresh approaches. This
school really emphasizes community and respect and *values* the
differences between people. Rather than being threatened by individuals,
as the schools with "failure of imagination" do, they *revel* in
individual differences and what gifts each person brings to the greater
community. WHAT a difference! The teachers are outstanding, and I think
it's because a.) the students are a self-selected group who *want* to be
in that environment, so there are few discipline problems and b.) the
teachers are a self-selected group - people with imagination who *want*
to be challenged.

(I always think of this school of "The Island of Misfit Toys" from the
Rudolph Christmas special...you know, the one with the elf who wanted to
be a dentist? Bright kids who think "out of the box" would be
*miserable* in the neighborhood schools like ours - and in this setting
they just thrive.)

(Sort of like r.c.t.n. and our collection of "eccentric aunties." Don't
most of us want that role?)

Sue (I've met my quota for "thinking hard" today and it's not even noon!)

--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

Susan Hartman/Dirty Linen wrote:
I'm reading all this discussion about education with lots of interest.
In our family, three kids over a ten-period has given me a lot of
exposure to both the best and worst of public education. We've had
teachers who were "passing time" until retirement, and others who are
very energetic and engaged (happily, the majority).

I'm working on an overarching theory here, so bear with me as I think
"out loud." I suspect that the changes in education we're seeing reflect
so much of modern thinking, and the thing that differentiates one group
from another -- as much as education, money, geography, or other factors
-- is "imagination". People who live with imagination have a spark, a
hopefulness, a creativity, adaptability, humor, and a sense of adventure
in meeting a new situation. Without this imagination, we're just putting
in time.

I think a lot of people in all walks of life are just putting in time.
Wanting the things that their neighbors have or Madison Ave. tells them
they want, swallowing the "news" that's fed to them in TV soundbytes,
the ones who think they actually like Wonder bread rather than a nice,
chewy pumpernickel...it's all a failure of imagination.

"Why didn't everyone just leave New Orleans when they were told to?"
shows a lack of imagination that leads to understanding the life
circumstances others might live under; the mediocrity of so many books
that shoot to the top of the NY Times best-seller list shows a lack of
appreciation for work of real quality (ditto music on the radio, movies,
TV shows, etc., so much of which is endless recycling of old ideas); the
knee-jerk political responses of both liberal and conservative thought
show a laziness in extending thought beyond habit and a failure to
imagine new or "other" circumstances.

So education isn't challenging? Hey, for a huge percentage of the
"sheep" in our society, nothing is challenging and *they like it that
way*...because they don't have the imagination to see or appreciate
other approaches or the creativity to face problems with a sense of
adventure and solve them through thought, work, and perseverence. In my
suburban neighborhood, a Lake Woebegonish place where "all the children
are above average", I sense this all around me. Just repeat something
often enough, and it's true...and the newer and shinier something is,
the better. People can't think "out of the box." And if they have
problems, they keep them hidden, because it makes them "different", and
God forbid anything be different because different means "flawed".

My first child went to the neighborhood high school - very competetive
school, lots of homework, sends kids to the Ivies, etc. - but in this
school, where the stakes to "winning" were so high, where square pegs
are pounded and pounded to fit into round holes, while the education in
facts and figures was top-notch, the life lessons were sacrificed. The
place was soul-less and turned out clones of the parents/neighborhood.
Nearly destroyed any love of learning for its own sake.

OTOH, the second and third children went/are going to an arts magnet,
and their education was/is exemplary. NOT that the SAT scores were
higher (they're not) or they went through Calculus III (they didn't).
The school is much more mixed - racially, religiously, economically -
and they're learning to get along with all kinds of people with all
kinds of gifts and value other viewpoints and fresh approaches. This
school really emphasizes community and respect and *values* the
differences between people. Rather than being threatened by individuals,
as the schools with "failure of imagination" do, they *revel* in
individual differences and what gifts each person brings to the greater
community. WHAT a difference! The teachers are outstanding, and I think
it's because a.) the students are a self-selected group who *want* to be
in that environment, so there are few discipline problems and b.) the
teachers are a self-selected group - people with imagination who *want*
to be challenged.

(I always think of this school of "The Island of Misfit Toys" from the
Rudolph Christmas special...you know, the one with the elf who wanted to
be a dentist? Bright kids who think "out of the box" would be
*miserable* in the neighborhood schools like ours - and in this setting
they just thrive.)

(Sort of like r.c.t.n. and our collection of "eccentric aunties." Don't
most of us want that role?)

Sue (I've met my quota for "thinking hard" today and it's not even noon!)



As first a daughter of two teachers and a student, and now a mom of
three kids, I've seen the education system from various angles.

It's rare to find a teacher in whom the spark of imagination has been
allowed to thrive after a decade or more in the school systems. So
many really good teachers are pressured into teaching to the lowest
common denominator in their classes. Smart and gifted kids become
bored. No child left behind means that kids are taught a set of
answers to specific questions, but never encouraged to think. Teachers
are also forced not to fail students who earn failing grades, teaching
these students that it's ok to not try, because they'll still get
pushed through the system. Personally, I think these students would
benefit a lot more from the kick in the pants that getting left back or
going to summer school might give them!

My kids go to a system with a gifted program, my oldest and youngest
qualified, but only the youngest wanted to participate (oldest didn't
want to join in 7th or 8th grade, felt it was already too cliqueish for
her tastes by then) but youngest just started the 4th & 5th grade one
this year. I was thrilled by the program, they don't give grades as
such, they don't want the kids to merely learn, they want them to
THINK!!! How amazing is that? To suggest that kids should be
encouraged to actually think!

So many school systems can't support a program like this, nor the sort
of magnet school that Susan's children got to go to. The kids in these
districts are cheated in the worst way I think.

Teaching kids to pass standardized tests and only standardized tests
will probably adversely affect the quality of citizens they become
later. I'd rather have them be able to be creative and actually think
than to be good at taking tests.

Caryn

wrote:
I was thrilled by the program, they don't give grades as
such, they don't want the kids to merely learn, they want them to
THINK!!! How amazing is that? To suggest that kids should be
encouraged to actually think!

I applaud your attitude but am mystified as to what giving out grades
has to do with being able to think.

Teaching kids to pass standardized tests and only standardized tests
will probably adversely affect the quality of citizens they become
later. I'd rather have them be able to be creative and actually think
than to be good at taking tests.

There recently was a public radio show about the changes in our society
beginning with Generation Y. A tidal wave of change. The children have
grown up not to think independently. They do not date as we currently
know the term. They hook up. All of these changes will have a profound
change on our society, from novels to greeting cards to far more
important aspects, including what you are talking about above
(standardized testing . . . little robots . . . the inability to think
independently).

There is only one way to point the finger. You cannot blame it on
someone else. It is the generation right under me that started all
this. It was those in power at our nations think tanks and universities
who set about this change with their writings and their rantings, and it
was the gullible who drank it up all up without thinking. (Getting back
to your comments on the ability to think).

Dianne
--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

"Dianne Lewandowski" wrote in message
...
wrote:
I was thrilled by the program, they don't give grades as
such, they don't want the kids to merely learn, they want them to
THINK!!! How amazing is that? To suggest that kids should be
encouraged to actually think!

I applaud your attitude but am mystified as to what giving out grades has
to do with being able to think.

Teaching kids to pass standardized tests and only standardized tests
will probably adversely affect the quality of citizens they become
later. I'd rather have them be able to be creative and actually think
than to be good at taking tests.

There recently was a public radio show about the changes in our society
beginning with Generation Y. A tidal wave of change. The children have
grown up not to think independently. They do not date as we currently
know the term. They hook up. All of these changes will have a profound
change on our society, from novels to greeting cards to far more important
aspects, including what you are talking about above (standardized testing
. . . little robots . . . the inability to think independently).

There is only one way to point the finger. You cannot blame it on someone
else. It is the generation right under me that started all this. It was
those in power at our nations think tanks and universities who set about
this change with their writings and their rantings, and it was the
gullible who drank it up all up without thinking. (Getting back to your
comments on the ability to think).

Dianne

Well said, Dianne. It would be great to think it could be reversed, but
we`re too far down that slippery slope now, I think. I`m glad I won`t be
around for the next half century!

Pat P

--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

Pat P wrote:
"Dianne Lewandowski" wrote in message
...
wrote:
I was thrilled by the program, they don't give grades as
such, they don't want the kids to merely learn, they want them to
THINK!!! How amazing is that? To suggest that kids should be
encouraged to actually think!

I applaud your attitude but am mystified as to what giving out grades has
to do with being able to think.

Teaching kids to pass standardized tests and only standardized tests
will probably adversely affect the quality of citizens they become
later. I'd rather have them be able to be creative and actually think
than to be good at taking tests.

There recently was a public radio show about the changes in our society
beginning with Generation Y. A tidal wave of change. The children have
grown up not to think independently. They do not date as we currently
know the term. They hook up. All of these changes will have a profound
change on our society, from novels to greeting cards to far more important
aspects, including what you are talking about above (standardized testing
. . . little robots . . . the inability to think independently).

There is only one way to point the finger. You cannot blame it on someone
else. It is the generation right under me that started all this. It was
those in power at our nations think tanks and universities who set about
this change with their writings and their rantings, and it was the
gullible who drank it up all up without thinking. (Getting back to your
comments on the ability to think).

Dianne

Well said, Dianne. It would be great to think it could be reversed, but
we`re too far down that slippery slope now, I think. I`m glad I won`t be
around for the next half century!

Pat P

--


With the current leadership in the U.S. it's clear that being able to
think for oneself is not an asset they want in today's youth.

Nor in most of the adult citizens for that matter.

Caryn

Dianne Lewandowski wrote:
wrote:
I was thrilled by the program, they don't give grades as
such, they don't want the kids to merely learn, they want them to
THINK!!! How amazing is that? To suggest that kids should be
encouraged to actually think!

I applaud your attitude but am mystified as to what giving out grades
has to do with being able to think.

snipped to answer above question

Dianne
--


How do you put a point value on creativity? Can you quantify original
thought?

These kids are pushed and pushed hard to do as much work as possible in
each project they choose. They start each day long session with
something called "The Odessy of the Mind" in which they are put in
groups to figure out solutions to problems. They also work
individually on projects that interest them. I'll get progress
reports, telling me if my dd isn't working as hard as she should. But
no grades as you'd recognize them.

She also goes to a regular classroom 4 days a week, where she gets
grades like "normal"

Caryn

I *wish* my kids were in the gifted program! My son missed it by 2
points. Yes, yes, I know, they have to have a cutoff someplace, but he
has spent quite a bit of time bored because of it.

Also - why should interesting things be limited to gifted kids? I have
a girl in my GS troop who is LD - she is in 5th grade but still reads
at a second or third grade level. But she does amazing things, retains
lots of information and loves GS - and learns a lot there because we
spark her imagination! What a concept, huh?

You can very definitely reward creativity (and quantify it) by grading.
I do it all the time when I grade student's performances at lessons.
There's a huge difference when I put "OK" on a page (the work was
performed as written), and when I put a heart with a smiley face and the
words "WOW".

The more creativity (if that's what you're after in a class), the higher
the grade. Mediocre thinking doesn't get A's.

My violin and piano lessons in college were graded. These are
instruments which require playing more than what is written on a page.
It requires a tremendous amount of thought and creativity.

You also said: "She also goes to a regular classroom 4 days a week,
where she gets grades like 'normal'."

Do you mean normal grading system? (A-B-C et al) Or merely words on a
page to express how the teacher "feels" the student is doing?

Dianne

wrote:

How do you put a point value on creativity? Can you quantify original
thought?

These kids are pushed and pushed hard to do as much work as possible in
each project they choose. They start each day long session with
something called "The Odessy of the Mind" in which they are put in
groups to figure out solutions to problems. They also work
individually on projects that interest them. I'll get progress
reports, telling me if my dd isn't working as hard as she should. But
no grades as you'd recognize them.

She also goes to a regular classroom 4 days a week, where she gets
grades like "normal"

Caryn


--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

Dianne Lewandowski wrote:

You can very definitely reward creativity (and quantify it) by grading.
I do it all the time when I grade student's performances at lessons.
There's a huge difference when I put "OK" on a page (the work was
performed as written), and when I put a heart with a smiley face and the
words "WOW".

Well, I can speak to that, in a tangential way.

When I learned "Claire de Lune," I played it in a way that made my
mother just nuts. She said, "That's not the way it's SUPPOSED to be
played." I got mediocre scores at contest with it, even though I liked
it and did it right. I never knew what she meant, "That's not the way
it's SUPPOSED to be played."

On the other hand, once I turned my hand to baroque music (which was
not, by the way, encouraged by either teacher or mother--neither liked
baroque, I found out later), I received STELLAR performance reviews. I
liked it and it was fun and I did it right. Given my druthers, I would
have played baroque all the day long. (I won't even talk about what
happened to my stated desire to learn Gershwin and his ilk.)

I finally just stopped playing.

Then one day as an adult, I heard "Claire de Lune" played on the radio
and the lightbub came on--THAT was how it was supposed to be played.

Now that I'm not a teenager anymore and have learned enough to know
myself and to label my tastes, I realize why I excelled at baroque and
sucked at romance.

Romance requires a certain level of life experience to add to the
creativity. How can one be creative with tools one doesn't have? On
the other hand, baroque requires a certain inclination toward the
technical to make it work right, which is more intuitive and doesn't
require a whole lot of life experience to understand how it's supposed
to sound. Plus, if you have fun with baroque, there you go.

NOW, at 37, with some life experience underneath me, some loss and some
grief and pain, love and laughter that's meaningful, I could play
"Claire de Lune" like it's SUPPOSED to be played if I put my hand back
to learning technique.

Some people just get the ah-ha moment late in life. As my dad always
said, "We're a family of late bloomers and early diers."


--
Lizard-Gumbo

http://community.webshots.com/user/moonlightmojo