The modern educational "top-down"-learning paradigm is failing children in the basics of reading and math. And this has serious consequences downstream. The top-down paradigm is well intentioned, but it just doesn't work. This is especially so in the formative 7-11yo years, when the young brain is primed for "bottom-up"-learning through repetitive practice with an authoritative figure. Instead, the modern educational paradigm is inadvertently teaching kids to "avoid the struggle" that is necessary for transferring base-level material into banked knowledge. This post details this beautifully in regard to early reading: https://eduvaites.org/2019/10/21/the-trouble-with-common-word-recognition-strategies/
I worry that these equity-gilded pushes against gifted programs are just another subconscious diversion among the educational-leaders to evade the hard glance inward, and recognize that educational pedagogy is fundamentally broken. The active ingredient in successful learning, is development of one's ability to "confront the struggle." And you don't develop this ability via buddy sessions with a school counselor, outside-yourself activism, nor race conscious math (none of which are inherently "bad," they are just not the active ingredient). You develop the ability to successfully work through struggle via tedious inside-yourself repetitive practice. And this practice can take place at school, at home, and in the community, and can transcend multiple subject domains (e.g. piano lessons after school). The failing students are those that don't get this repetitive practice in any venue, or if they do, it is so compartmentalized within a single domain they don't get the opportunity to have this ability generalize across all learning.
There is a great old SNL skit with Phil Hartman, in which he plays a 1950's era doctor blaming "lung fever" on dirty cigarette holders, and of course meanwhile everyone is smoking. I wish there was a video of it, because it is such a great metaphor. Education, as an organizational entity, is too invested in its own self-image of goodness to see where it is the primary source of failure. Quite sadly, successful students are being pulled into this dirty-cigarette-holder red herring because they and their families have found a way to compensate.
I was fortunate growing up. My parents provided moral support to excel in school and I felt an unspoken threat that something bad would happen if I disappointed them, that I would lose their respect or something like that. Father only completed 8th grade (lived on farm) and mother as immigrant came from different education background. I went to church and Sunday school and Saturday night revivals at age 7-9, which was activity and skills that transferred to school performance. The religious text had English words from another language use era, requiring mental focus, thought analysis and focus. And family moved out of inner city, where I had been pushed down entire flight of stairs at 2nd grade.
Absolutely. There are so many ways that families and communities compensate. Religious communities have definitely been a way for children to develop a commitment to dedicated practice and learning to do something because it is worthwhile (not necessarily fun). For some reason, your description reminds me of this quote in Life at the Bottom (recommended by a long-ago Glenn Show guest): "This is where the baleful effect of education as mere entertainment makes itself felt. For to develop an interest requires powers of concentration and an ability to tolerate a degree of boredom while the elements of a skill are learned for the sake of a worthwhile end." https://www.city-journal.org/html/we-don%E2%80%99t-want-no-education-12348.html
The modern educational "top-down"-learning paradigm is failing children in the basics of reading and math. And this has serious consequences downstream. The top-down paradigm is well intentioned, but it just doesn't work. This is especially so in the formative 7-11yo years, when the young brain is primed for "bottom-up"-learning through repetitive practice with an authoritative figure. Instead, the modern educational paradigm is inadvertently teaching kids to "avoid the struggle" that is necessary for transferring base-level material into banked knowledge. This post details this beautifully in regard to early reading: https://eduvaites.org/2019/10/21/the-trouble-with-common-word-recognition-strategies/
I worry that these equity-gilded pushes against gifted programs are just another subconscious diversion among the educational-leaders to evade the hard glance inward, and recognize that educational pedagogy is fundamentally broken. The active ingredient in successful learning, is development of one's ability to "confront the struggle." And you don't develop this ability via buddy sessions with a school counselor, outside-yourself activism, nor race conscious math (none of which are inherently "bad," they are just not the active ingredient). You develop the ability to successfully work through struggle via tedious inside-yourself repetitive practice. And this practice can take place at school, at home, and in the community, and can transcend multiple subject domains (e.g. piano lessons after school). The failing students are those that don't get this repetitive practice in any venue, or if they do, it is so compartmentalized within a single domain they don't get the opportunity to have this ability generalize across all learning.
There is a great old SNL skit with Phil Hartman, in which he plays a 1950's era doctor blaming "lung fever" on dirty cigarette holders, and of course meanwhile everyone is smoking. I wish there was a video of it, because it is such a great metaphor. Education, as an organizational entity, is too invested in its own self-image of goodness to see where it is the primary source of failure. Quite sadly, successful students are being pulled into this dirty-cigarette-holder red herring because they and their families have found a way to compensate.
I was fortunate growing up. My parents provided moral support to excel in school and I felt an unspoken threat that something bad would happen if I disappointed them, that I would lose their respect or something like that. Father only completed 8th grade (lived on farm) and mother as immigrant came from different education background. I went to church and Sunday school and Saturday night revivals at age 7-9, which was activity and skills that transferred to school performance. The religious text had English words from another language use era, requiring mental focus, thought analysis and focus. And family moved out of inner city, where I had been pushed down entire flight of stairs at 2nd grade.
Absolutely. There are so many ways that families and communities compensate. Religious communities have definitely been a way for children to develop a commitment to dedicated practice and learning to do something because it is worthwhile (not necessarily fun). For some reason, your description reminds me of this quote in Life at the Bottom (recommended by a long-ago Glenn Show guest): "This is where the baleful effect of education as mere entertainment makes itself felt. For to develop an interest requires powers of concentration and an ability to tolerate a degree of boredom while the elements of a skill are learned for the sake of a worthwhile end." https://www.city-journal.org/html/we-don%E2%80%99t-want-no-education-12348.html