|
I wander off to get a glass for my half of the Friday night toast, and find that you're stirring up the anthill yet again. I'll go ahead and drop the other shoe, 'kay?
First: YES. We should educate every American child. With public funds. To the fullest extent that they are capable. Whether that means teaching them to blink for a drink, or sending them on to MIT.
Now for the other shoe:
Inherent in this statement is the acknowledgement that not every child is equally capable. That doesn't just apply to the profoundly disabled; it applies to all of us. We all have different talents, and different areas that are more difficult. I will never dance like Baryshnikov, sing like Billie Holiday, run like Jackie Joyner-Kersee, or look like Sophia Loren. But I've enjoyed dancing, singing, some athletic recreation, and a little admiration here and there.
Not all children are equally academically capable. There. The shoe dropped. And, therefore, legislation/policies/politics/programs/mandates/philosophies/curriculums/methodologies/techniques/systems/etc. / that demand that all children be equally "proficient" are unrealistic as well as harmful. What we see happening is the "dumbing down" of opportunities for the academically advanced/gifted/talented, and the guaranteed failure of those whose gifts lie elsewhere, who will not ever make the bar set before them. We don't all start at the same starting line, and we are not all going to reach the same level of skill in every area.
This is reality, but it is also dangerous meat in public education. Because as soon as you admit that not everyone is capable of achieving academic honors, you've discriminated. Sure, there is an understanding that kids with certain labels or disabling conditions will not achieve on the same level as their non-disabled/labeled peers. But there is no acknowleging that every single human is an individual, with individual differences, strengths, abilities, and weaknesses. It's part of the contradiction inherent in the one-size-fits-all systems public ed is built on. If you acknowledge the differences, you are somehow limiting personal growth or achievement.
If our competition obsessed culture could let go of the constant comparisons, and measure individual growth no matter where the individual happened to start, we'd be better off. If we could structure our systems to individualize all instruction as the norm, kids working at different levels, skills, or activities would be the norm. Kids comparing their performance to their own previous performance, instead of to the other people around them, would be the norm. I've seen this work. I've done it. Successfully.
So...who's willing to support public policy that recognizes differences?
Right now, our special ed classes, housing kids with profound disabilities, are forced to present grade level standards in grade level texts to kids who can't spell their own name. Our 8th grade special ed class is required to spend their days doing all the same things the other 8th grade classes are doing, with the same materials. Just a smaller class size and an aide, to provide more individual attention. Except that these 8th graders can't read, and probably never will. They aren't learning practical living skills; they're spending their days immersed in incomprehensible academia. They used to learn how to garden, shop, cook, do laundry, etc.; those activities have been banned in favor of more time with the algebra text.
Who's willing to let the academic goals go for these kids, and teach them skills that will help them be partially self-sufficient as adults?
Who's willing to let the illiterate 12 year-old learn how to read simple little words and sentences, instead of demanding that he pass tests on whole novels?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
