US Education: There Is No Silver Bullet

For @rortian and @yvsoler's discussion on education. :)

Seriously. F*ck Ken Robinson

“Creativity is being educated out of our children.” That’s the line and the point that Ken Robinson continuously returned to both in his viral-hit 2007 TED talk as well as the numerous books, seminars, and the like that he rode to a knighthood and a life on the lecture circuit. Creativity is the buzz word that he’s thrown out so many times it’s surprising that he hasn’t attempted to copyright it. But it’s still the word that he believes is that one that will fix Western education, the idea that children and students from Pre-K to college are denied the opportunity for student expression. At first blush, it makes a lot of sense, as it’s intended to, but once you get past the fallacy-ridden 20 minute TED talk, you realize there’s no methods given to implement. Robinson in his TED talk is like the kid who rings the doorbell and runs, who rants that the building’s on fire but won’t tell you where the fire is nor offer any help in putting it out.

Robinson responded to that criticism from many educators (who he almost gleefully pillories during his lecture) that his solutions are all laid out in his books, which you can purchase for the price of $24.95. The thing is, as a young (for the profession) educator, and a holder of a creative degree, I bought in at first, to the tune of $75 to get his books.

And he does not, in fact, offer strategies or solutions for educators. Most of his books are primarily on how educators have failed our children, and anecdotes of how rich, white alumni return to their former high schools to sink money into STEM education and miraculously everything’s fixed within a year. He’s not cherry-picking, after all, he has a knighthood. Still, he promises what most hucksters do: a silver bullet. A panacea that will solve all ills in education by simply prioritizing creativity over all else.

There are a few longer essays that address the failings of Robinson’s argument, but simply put, this idea that creativity can relieve all educational woes is insultingly simplistic, even to a creative educator like myself.

Still, his argument attracted a lot of attention in the United States, otherwise he wouldn’t book so many speaking engagements or sell so many books, because he takes advantage of a common American failing: The need for instant gratification. (I’m American, so I can say that. 😊 )

I Want It All, and I Want It Now

A difficult concept to accept for Americans (not grasp, we understand it), is that of generational solutions. It’s the knowledge that the cause isn’t lost, or hopeless, but that it won’t be solved in a short period of time. The environment isn’t a lost cause, but it’ll require a lot of steps and regulations, and we likely won’t see visible result for decades, or, until the next generation. Education is similar, as demonstrated by the pushback to the most vilified educational policy in recent years: Common Core.

Common Core, to simplify greatly, is applying the same public educational standards to schools throughout the United States, and leaving the methods for getting there to the states themselves. As children and students are held to higher standards, and uniform standards at that, it’s expected that test scores and performance will rise gradually until the United States is able to compete on the world stage against the juggernauts of the Scandanavian and Asian education systems. It was passed and applied during the Obama administration, and it’s still generally in effect today.

It’s also vociferously hated because we aren’t at global academic competitions chanting “USA! USA! USA!” yet. It’s also hated because some states experiment with new pedagogies and don’t fund or give proper training beyond required Professional Development days (which any educator, no matter their level, likely despises). Because of this experimentation, most often with mathematics, we end up with viral articles of engineers ranting about how they can’t solve their 8 year old’s math homework, because the homework is using new methods that are somewhat accelerated, but seem foreign to those instructed in traditional methods.

Several years later, American education has quieted about Common Core somewhat because the progress is starting to take root. (It also might be because our current Secretary of Education is a walking worst case scenario for public schools.) When children who started Common Core in Kindergarten or 1^st grade are finishing high school, their progress might be much more obvious. For now, I’ve had adult students remark that their child in 3^rd grade is doing math they didn’t do until 4^th or 5^th.

The issue for Americans is that the problem wasn’t solved immediately. Today, “critical thinking” has replaced ”creativity” as the soft skill du jour, but it’s still running along the same idea that simply focusing on one intangible that can’t be taught, but rather must be developed, can fix all of American education, and by extension, Western education (We still like to think we lead the world in this matter).

The problem is that, again, those soft skills can’t be taught. And that makes it easier to blame educators, but educators do have knowledge on how to develop those skills through assignments, lessons, discussions, and exercises. We even have them sit in chairs and call it a “class”. It’s a radical, revolutionary idea, I know.

Student Engagement is a Step…

Anyone who thinks there isn’t a problem with student engagement in the United States simply has to peek in on a college course in session. No matter the pedagogy of the instructor, you’re going to have some students who will be staring off into space, on their phones, or watching the clock and trying to will time itself to go faster.

Paolo Freire addressed this in his masterwork, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, the second chapter of which is practically issued to those seeking degrees in education. (The rest is mostly on how to properly run a revolutionary movement without becoming oppressors yourselves. It was for that reason it was banned under penalty of imprisonment in several countries.) In said chapter, Freire describes the Banking System of Education, which, to summarize, means that the students are thought of as empty vessels for the instructor to fill, or “bank” with his own knowledge and lessons, without question. It’s commonly referred to as “the lecture style”, but does not necessarily apply to all lecture series and subjects.

The failing of the Banking System, to put it bluntly, is that it’s boring as Hell. While there are some students who diligently take notes and recite them perfectly on exams, it’s also common to find students who lose motivation, drift off, and adopt “Cs Get Degrees” as an education philosophy. Student engagement, namely students who raise their hands and ask questions, is low to none. In fact, some instructors don’t even want students to ask questions until the end of the lecture. It’s a behavior that, for many American students, reaches back into the beginning of secondary school, where they would sit quietly, listen to the teacher, take notes, and pass exams required by the state. That sort of conditioning lasts over many years, so that when they reach college, it can be jolting to find educators who don’t share that philosophy alongside other educators who do.

Freire suggested that this could be solved by implementing a “problem-posing” system of pedagogy, which amplifies student engagement by involving them more in the process beyond the Socratic method. By granting the students more autonomy and not only allowing, but encouraging them to question and critique an instructors lessons and points, the student becomes more engaged and invested as now their input is valued and considered rather than cast aside or dismissed.

It’s an admirable system, but difficult to implement in higher education in the United States, as mentioned before, because of the Banking System of education being largely dominant at first glance in American education, which makes it easy for professed “silver bullet” theories to find fertile purchase. However, student engagement isn’t simply about fostering soft skills like creativity or critical thinking (it helps, but not in entirety), it also required that a student be invested. Rebecca Cox advances this in her treatise The College Fear Factor, when she examines the issues that affect the difficulty in a student transitioning from high school to college. She name-checks Freire several times, but mentions that even the instructors who champion his methods often find their lessons falling on deaf ears.

…But It’s Not the Solution

Increasing student engagement would be a godsend in public education, but it’s not going to fix all of the problems. Only recently have educators even had to consider the term “non-cognitive issues” (issues outside of intelligence, often related to family, employment, or other involuntary constraints on time) when looking at a student’s success and if their performance is salvageable (because sometimes, tragically, it’s not). Teacher pay is still a problem, as educational qualifications as well as other skill training are becoming increasingly necessary even with pay stagnation. Public school funding, policies for student safety, administrative bloat, student debt anxiety, all of these affect education and none of them can be solved in an instant.

But that doesn’t stop someone with a TED talk and a book deal from trying.