Pages

Showing posts with label EDUCATION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EDUCATION. Show all posts

Robinson: Schools & Creativity

Is it a coincidence that pretty much all children love to write stories, have fantastic imaginations, enjoy getting messy, painting, making music, inventing characters, acting out plays, drawing and making things? Why don’t we carry this natural capacity throughout adulthood? Why would nature intend us to lose these gifts?
Eight years ago, a man named Ken Robinson made a TED speech that revolutionized the topic of education. It caused many parents to pull their kids out of school, it was a matter of hot debate among experts, and it has been watched on the TED website over 31 million times to date (not including over 7 million more times on YouTube). Many of you may be familiar with this lecture, but for those who aren’t, we highly recommend you take the next twenty minutes to sit down and listen to what this man has to say.
Robinson is an expert on creativity and education, and he strongly believes that at the moment, the two concepts don’t seem to co-exist. In this speech, Robinson argues eloquently and passionately that education is destroying our childrens’ capacity to think outside the box. Ken Robinson led the British government’s 1998 advisory committee on creative and cultural education, an inquiry into the significance of creativity in the educational system and the economy, and he was knighted in 2003 for his achievements.
There were no public systems of education before the 19th Century; all of them came into being to meet the needs of the Industrial Revolution. “At school, you were probably steered away from subjects you enjoyed because ‘you would never get a job doing that’,” Robinson points out. “Many Creative, brilliant, talented people think they’re not, because everything they were good at at school wasn’t valued, or was stigmatized.”
“All children have tremendous talent and we squander them pretty ruthlessly,” he goes on to say. “Picasso once said that all children are born artists. The problem is to remain an artist as we grow up. I believe passionately that we don’t grow into creativity, we grow out of it. We are educated out of it.”
Robinson argues that society also has a very limited definition of intelligence; a definition that looks to numeracy and literacy only, and stigmatizes children who cannot read and write fluently (but may excel at other subjects) as ‘not very bright’. But is that fair, or true?
“If you visited Earth as an alien, I think you’d have to conclude that the whole purpose of public education throughout the world is to produce university professors,” Robinson says. “They’re the people who come out on top. Our education system is predicated on the idea of academic ability.”
In short, we’ve been educated to become good workers, rather than creative thinkers. We teach children to be part of the system governing our society- uniformed, respectful of authority, scared of making mistakes. “If you’re not prepared to be wrong, you’ll never come up with anything original,” Robinson points out. “Kids aren’t afraid to make mistakes. If they don’t know, they’ll take a chance. But by the time they become adults most kids have lost that capacity. They have become frightened of being wrong. We run our companies this way. And we’re now running national education systems where mistakes are the worst thing you can make.”
His opinions are not an attack on teachers or schools (who I’m sure we all agree, do a fantastic job within the boundaries of the curriculum they must follow)- they refer instead to the whole system of education, throughout the world. As Robinson points out, “Every education system on earth has the same hierarchy of subjects. At the top are mathematics and languages, then the humanities, and at the bottom are the arts. Why? As children grow up, we start to educate them progressively from the waist up. Then we focus on their heads, and slightly to one side.”
According to Robinson, our education system places so much emphasis on the academic subjects that natural gifts for art, music or acting are often brushed aside as we get older. Restless children may be stigmatized as hyperactive and diagnosed with ADHD. One moving example of this is a story Robinson tells about world-class dancer and choreographer Gillian Lynne (responsible for the success of Cats and Phantom of the Opera), whose mother became increasingly worried when she was a child because she found it impossible to sit still or concentrate in class. After taking her daughter to a specialist in the 1970’s, her mother was told: “Gillian isn’t sick. She’s a dancer. Take her to a dance school.” This was done, and the rest is history. But as Robinson points out, “Someone else might have put her on medication and told her to calm down.”
Please watch, comment and share if you agree we need a paradigm shift in the education system!


Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/this-is-how-education-kills-creativity/

KIDS CARE ABT GRADES THAN OTHERS 2014 ATLANTIC

A new study from Harvard University reveals that the message parents mean to send children about the value of empathy is being drowned out by the message we actually send: that we value achievement and happiness above all else. The Making Caring Common project at Harvard’s Graduate School of Educationsurveyed 10,000 middle and high school students about what was more important to them, “achieving at a high level, happiness, or caring for others.” Almost 80 percent of students ranked achievement or happiness over caring for others. Only 20 percent of students identified caring for others as their top priority.

In the study, “The Children We Mean to Raise: The Real Messages Adults are Sending About Values,” the authors point to a “rhetoric/reality gap,” an incongruity between what adults tell children they should value and the messages we grown-ups actually send through our behavior. We may pay lip service to character education and empathy, but our children report hearing a very different message.


WHAT’S SO SCARY ABT SMART GIRLS NY TIMES 2014


WHEN terrorists in Nigeria organized a secret attack last month, they didn’t target an army barracks, a police department or a drone base. No, Boko Haram militants attacked what is even scarier to a fanatic: a girls’ school.
That’s what extremists do. They target educated girls, their worst nightmare.
That’s why the Pakistani Taliban shot Malala Yousafzai in the head at age 15. That’s why the Afghan Taliban throws acid on the faces of girls who dare to seek an education.

Why are fanatics so terrified of girls’ education? Because there’s no force more powerful to transform a society. The greatest threat to extremism isn’t drones firing missiles, but girls reading books. In that sense, Boko Haram was behaving perfectly rationally — albeit barbarically — when it kidnapped some of the brightest, most ambitious girls in the region and announced plans to sell them as slaves. If you want to mire a nation in backwardness, manacle your daughters.

What saddens me is that we in the West aren’t acting as rationally. To fight militancy, we invest overwhelmingly in the military toolbox but not so much in the education toolbox that has a far better record at defeating militancy.

IMPACT OF POVERTY ON CHILDREN

Poverty remains a stubborn fact of life even in rich countries like Canada. In particular, the poverty of our children has been a continuing concern. In 1989, the Canadian House of Commons voted unanimously to eliminate poverty among Canadian children by 2000 (). However, the reality is that, in 2003, one of every six children still lived in poverty. Not only have we been unsuccessful at eradicating child poverty, but over the past decade, the inequity of family incomes in Canada has grown (), and for some families, the depth of poverty has increased as well (). Canadian research confirms poverty’s negative influence on student behaviour, achievement and retention in school ().
Persistent socioeconomic disadvantage has a negative impact on the life outcomes of many Canadian children. Research from the Ontario Child Health Study in the mid-1980s reported noteworthy associations between low income and psychiatric disorders (), social and academic functioning (), and chronic physical health problems (). Since that time, Canada has developed systematic measures that have enabled us to track the impact of a variety of child, family and community factors on children’s well-being. The National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY) developed by Statistics Canada, Human Resources Development Canada and a number of researchers across the country was started in 1994 with the intention of following representative samples of children to adulthood (). Much of our current knowledge about the development of Canadian children is derived from the analysis of the NLSCY data by researchers in a variety of settings.
One of the key areas influenced by family income is educational outcomes. The present article provides a brief review of the literature concerning the effects of poverty on educational outcomes focusing on Canadian research. Canadian data are placed in the perspective of research from other ‘rich’ countries. We conclude with some suggestions about what we can do, as advocates and practitioners, to work toward reducing the negative impact of economic disadvantage on the educational outcomes of our children.

ELITISM WON'T HELP POORER CHILDREN GUARDIAN JULY 2014

ELITISM WON'T HELP POORER CHILDREN GUARDIAN JULY 2014
But perhaps none is more potent – apparently plausible and yet subtly dangerous – than the simplistic idea that education can be a universal route out of poverty. The argument goes something like this: if schools can only get it right, then every child can escape his or her background or, at the very least, jump up a social class or two.
No one doubts that education can profoundly affect an individual life course. The poor pupil made good, thanks to the 11-plus, remains one of the most romantic cultural narratives of post-war Britain. During New Labour's time in office, "aspiration" became the favoured, if rather more amorphous, buzzword. The 2009 Milburn report on fair access to the professions, for example, made much of the right of parents to get their children into a better school, while failing to make clear what should happen to those unlucky enough to remain stuck in a worse one.

RURAL SCHOOLS IN CHINA





About 1,900 miles south west of Shanghai is Qiao Tou Lian He elementary school. It's an hour's drive from the town of Tengchong, which might seem a small distance in comparison, but most of the school's children have never made it to Tengchong. Providing an education for children in such sparsely-populated rural areas is one of China's major challenges. While the economic and social development of these rural regions has been remarkable, China's coastal cities are racing ahead at an even faster pace.

Pupils left behind
That fuels an endless stream of people moving to the cities - students looking for better education, parents looking for work, but also good teachers who are looking for more fulfilling careers. Shanghai alone registers 1,000 additional cars each day bought by those who have made it up the social ladder.

SEVEN MYTHS ABOUT TOP SCHOOLS IN BBC NEWS


Education Secretary Nicky Morgan says she wants England to get into the top five of the international Pisa tests for English and maths by 2020.
The man in charge of the Pisa tests, Andreas Schleicher, says the evidence from around the world reveals some big myths about what makes for a successful education system.
1. Disadvantaged pupils are doomed to do badly in school
Teachers all around the world struggle with how to make up for social disadvantage in their classrooms. Some believe that deprivation is destiny.
And yet, results from Pisa tests show that the 10% most disadvantaged 15-year-olds in Shanghai have better maths skills than the 10% most privileged students in the United States and several European countries. Children from similar social backgrounds can show very different performance levels, depending on the school they go to or the country they live in.
Education systems where disadvantaged students succeed are able to moderate social inequalities.
They tend to attract the most talented teachers to the most challenging classrooms and the most capable school leaders to the most disadvantaged schools, thus challenging all students with high standards and excellent teaching.