In the quest for understanding education, one of the more unusual, and therefore worth understanding approaches is the Waldorf/Steiner schools. Their most interesting oddnesses to me are:
- A cohort which advances together with a teacher. 8 years together. Almost family. Unlike in normal schools...the kids don't really know one another much better than the teacher knows them.
- Pursue the arts, and avoid academics for a LONG time (up to 14 for some subjects)
Most recent datum, cribbed from slashdot, is this one. Summary:
In sum, Benezet showed that kids who received just one year of arithmetic, in sixth grade, performed at least as well on standard calculations and much better on story problems than kids who had received several years of arithmetic training.Go figure. It at least supports the Waldorf, and incidentally the Sudbury/unschooling model. I'm not all the way on board with the approach, though, because I've taught a class of 5th&6th graders algebra...and I've helped tutor kids as young as 8 who did very well in college algebra classes. Regardless, it indicates that the scope of the problem with our current system is much bigger than you thought it was, unless you already think (like me) that public schooling is one of the horseman of the apocalypse.
Posts
5 comments:
I was just reading about Waldorf schools a few months ago, and they are full of interesting oddnesses — some of them unusual but reasonable, like offering children a home-like environment and emphasizing arts, crafts, music, and experiencing nature and the season, and some moonbat-crazy, like the entire foundation in anthroposophy:
By 1907, a split between Steiner and the mainstream Theosophical Society had begun to become apparent. While the Society was oriented toward an Eastern and especially Indian approach, Steiner was trying to develop a path which embraced Christianity and natural science.[10] The split became irrevocable when Annie Besant, then president of the Theosophical Society, began to present the child Jiddu Krishnamurti as the reincarnated Christ. Steiner strongly objected and considered any comparison between Krishnamurti and Christ to be nonsense; many years later, Krishnamurti also repudiated the assertion. Steiner's continuing differences with Besant led him to separate from the Theosophical Society Adyar; he was followed by the great majority of the membership of the Theosophical Society's German Section, as well as members of other national sections.[9][10]
By this time, Steiner had reached considerable stature as a spiritual teacher.[11] He spoke about what he considered to be his direct experience of the Akashic Records (sometimes called the "Akasha Chronicle"), thought to be a spiritual chronicle of the history, pre-history, and future of the world and mankind. In a number of works,[12] Steiner described a path of inner development which he felt would enable anyone to attain comparable spiritual experiences. Sound vision could be developed, in part, by practicing rigorous forms of ethical and cognitive self-discipline, concentration, and meditation; in particular, a person's moral development must precede the development of spiritual faculties.[1]
Anyway, delaying formal schooling is something the Finnish school system is famous for; kids don't start school as we know it until age seven, and they do quite well.
When you think about it, a classroom shuts off children from the real world as much as it exposes them to academia — and they certainly aren't being taught math and science as they relate to the real world outside the classroom door.
I'm not sure what to make of holding off math instruction, because it seems like many kids might need it, and some certainly don't. I know most kids are terrified of word problems and see no connection at all between the math they've been taught and solving real-world problems, but those problems always struck me as the only interesting ones in the whole assignment.
I know I could have learned much more advanced math much earlier if it had been (a) taught at all, and (b) taught by someone who understood it. Instead we were taught arcane algorithms for random mathematical tasks. When I finally got to algebra, I felt like I'd wasted the last three or four years of math, because I suddenly had simple, generalizable rules for fractions, rates, etc. that made all my previous learning obsolete.
So, yes, public schooling is one of the horseman of the apocalypse.
Well, yes, there are the moonbat-crazy parts, but I was ignoring those, and hoping no one noticed.
Sudbury has an example of a 6-months long 1 hour a week class to replace K-6 Math...and I'm currently teaching a similar thing to a pile of young teens.
My quick analysis is that aptitude varies substantially, and teaching either before an individual is ready, or before they're interested, has potential negative returns.
This has the virtue of explaining all the cases that I've seen and most that I've read about. Though it doesn't explain the success of something like Direct Instruction very well.
True Waldorf schools can actually be quite cult-like the closer they follow Steiner. A lot of parents who place their children in a Waldorf school are unaware of the "spiritual" side of things, which may not be formally part of the day-to-day school experience. The teachers do a significant amount of inculcating, however, not unlike the batshit-crazy Scientologists. I have no primary research to offer, obviously, but did have that one interesting conversation with a former-Waldorf friend...several years ago.
No offense to the batshit-crazy Scientologists who may be reading your blog.
Also, not to pick your nits, but Pluto, strictly speaking, is probably a Kuiper Belt Object. He may yearn to be lumped in with his planetary peeps, but tough nuggets, dude.
Btw, I found your post very interesting. It's funny how all educational roads might lead to Oz, but the most heavily traveled "popular" ones are the least effective. No big surprise, right?. The long, meandering tour or the path suffused with danger will get a person to Oz as a more complete, whole being.
It seems to me that you could get this result by just making the test to easy.. such that it limits the math being checked thus removing the high achieving children from being relevant to the results. Were fractions even tested?
If you start with a good instructional model what level of math should kids be doing at the end of sixth grade? (I am happy if you break it down by IQ group)
As you demonstrated, for the high IQ group, it should be college algebra at least. If you had had them since kindergarten what might it have been? (P.S have you written the definitive story of your 5-6th grade teaching experience yet?)
It would be interesting to know what instructional model was used for the control group and if the results would be robust if compared against different models. (is there a link to the actual study?)
A sudbury/summerhill like school model was in the project follow through study and it finished in the bottom third.
More broadly, I think its a matter of ratio's and marginal benefits. I want about 30 min to 2 hours of DI, and the rest to be basically sudbury like (without perhaps the political system).
KABee,
Thanks for visit. I hadn't known that they actually implemented their crazy on the kids. That's not so good.
On Pluto...this is mere nominalism, and has no bearing on actual facts. The fact that the scientists are not unanimous makes this something of an arbitrary distinction. As per my preference, I denounce said arbitrary distinctions. I will continue to call Pluto a planet, and just to be annoying, I'll probably call Pluto-Chiron a double-planet.
Post a Comment