Haim
Posts:
7,807
Registered:
12/6/04
|
|
Re: Maybe Youtube is not the answer
Posted:
Jul 24, 2012 1:11 PM
|
|
Robert Hansen Posted: Jul 24, 2012 10:49 AM
>This goes for all three R's. They were always taught for
>performance, not appreciation.
They were said to be taught for performance. Consider writing. Once upon a time, the little tykes were instructed in expository writing. Remember when students had to write book reports, eg? Expository writing is actually important, and it would be very good indeed if the students could do it.
But, the results were not too good, especially in light of The Prime Directive. Good writing is really tough, the Gaps were huge, and it has been a while now since the schools have left off expository writing, with mastery of spelling and grammar and orthography. Remember orthography? These days, kids are not even taught cursive lettering. And spelling has long gone by the board. "Inventive spelling", anyone?
Expository writing has gone by the board, and the schools heavily promote creative writing. Why? Well, creativity is in the eye of the beholder. In this case, it is in the eye of the Education Mafia and, guess what, everybody is creative, and earns "A's", and is promoted in grade, and graduates high school, even if they cannot construct a simple, correct English sentence.
I am pretty sure I told the story, in this forum, of my son's 4th grade teacher who fancied herself a writer. One day, my son brought home a note from this teacher. Her writing was so defective that she actually wrote the exact opposite of what she meant. I could know this only because I knew what was going on in class.
I gave this note to a colleague who was not a native speaker of English, knew nothing of what transpired in that 4th grade class, and had to depend upon the grammar to infer meaning. That stunned look of amazement on his face was priceless.
From that moment, and through the 5th grade, my son and I played a game every time he brought home a note from the Education Mafia (ie, from his teacher, or the principal, or the superintendent). My original intention was only to comb through the notes to find errors in grammar and usage. Ie, I seized the opportunity to instruct my son in English.
However, my son being a pretty funny kid, from the first instance he would spin a story to explain why, what the teacher (or principal, etc) wrote, is what she actually meant. All his constructions were funny, and some of them were hilarious.
Finally, there was his 7th grade social studies segment on American Indians. Having read on the subject, the class was then supposed to do some activities with stuff: blankets and musical instruments and I don't know what else.
One of the main reading exercises was this absurd book, "Light In The Forest"
http://www.amazon.com/Light-Forest-Paperback-Conrd-Richtsr/dp/B001T73AFK/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1343149134&sr=1-2&keywords=light+in+the+forest
that painted a picture of aboriginal life that never existed.
I asked the teacher if, instead of blankets and feathers, my son could write a paper. The teacher agreed, and my son (with my guidance) produced an excellent paper on the American Indian way of war and why nobody was "running free through the forest", as the book suggests.
Such a writing exercise is enormously instructive for middle school kids. My son benefited. Too bad for all the others.
My advice to you, Bob, is be careful. Bad as math instruction is, in the public schools, everything else is much worse. After all, school mathematics is, hands down, the easiest thing they do. Contrary to the mendacity and obfuscation of the Education Mafia, we know everything there is to know about school mathematics and how to teach it. Literature? History? Not so easy. These things are complex, messy, contradictory. Really, how does anybody actually teach writing?
Well, if they can't do the easy stuff, like mathematics, how do you think they are doing with the really tough stuff, like literature and history? Not well, I think.
Haim
Shovel ready? What shovel ready?
|
|
