Most people perceive education as the teaching of subjects
that will prepare students for life after school and will set them up for their
place in society. Whilst it is true that education is a foundation to a
successful integration into society it is not only the subjects that are taught
in the classroom that make education a great foundation. It is the atmosphere
and social interaction that students gain from a school environment that makes
schooling so important in today’s society. The hidden curriculum of the
educational institutions is just as important as the national curriculum that
teachers are asked to teach. That is why today I’m thinking about some of the assumptions that teachers
bring to the classroom.
The assumption that
getting a good education will get you a good job:
In today’s day and age where graduates are predicted to
enter jobs that require a strong technical background and an ability to work in
groups IT classes are on the rise as well as the integration of technology into
all other classes in schools. This assumption that school is just a means to an
end, in this case, the means to get a job, is why many students are dropping
out of school earlier and earlier. Sir Ken Robinson (2010)[1]
called it a ‘production line mentality’; preparing students to enter the work
force from a young age. Unfortunately studies no longer show us that getting
good grades guarantee a good job and competition for jobs are no longer based
solely on your educational background. The assumption that teaching students
basic literature will result in a higher paid job with better benefits and
opportunities is no longer an assumption that should be a foundation in a
teacher’s pedagogy. Until recently however this would have affected the way I
taught in the classroom and may still be affecting the way many teachers across
the country teach today.
The assumption that all
students have the right to learn:
It wasn’t until recently that equality was really
established in schools. Terms such as ‘gifted’ and ‘disabled’ are still used in
our classrooms regularly to describe students of differing abilities and it
wasn’t until 1972 that the NSW Department of Education revoked principal’s
rights to refuse aboriginal children enrolling in public schools[2].
That’s only 40 years ago that schools had to begin teaching indigenous
Australians and students with disabilities until recently were segregated into
schools with specialised facilities and teachers. This is not to say these students weren’t
learning, Indigenous Australians were taught by segregated schools and by
families and it wasn’t unusual for children with a disability to be taught at
home by parents or relatives. So is it that all students have a right to a
public education that we’re really talking about?
The assumption that
students should be taught with others of their age:
Schools now have students of every level and from many
cultures all being taught in groups. Whilst it has been discussed that teaching
all students together teaches them to be fair and non discriminatory, it seems
unorthodox that students of such diverse backgrounds and abilities should be
grouped together based on age. Does it really make sense that all children
should start school at age 5 and finish at age 17-18 regardless of ability? It
is now so traditional for all students to be taught with other students in
their age range and also to graduate with those same students, that it no
longer matters that the gap between the student with the highest and the
student with the lowest grades in a graduation can be enormous. This assumption affects the whole of education and may possibly be the hardest to change.
[1] Sir Ken
Robinson (2010) Changing Education Paradigms. Retrieved on the 12th
of February 2012, from http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms.html
[2] Dr
Allison Cadzow (n.d) A NSW Aboriginal Education Timeline 1788–2007 pg. 27.
Retrieved on the 12th of February 2012, from http://ab-ed.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/files/timeline1788-2007.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment