What is the purpose of going to school? Most people would respond with something along the lines of getting a good education so you can become a responsible adult who works and contributes to society. While there is nothing wrong with that result, is it really the main reason to go to school? What about learning how to learn, critical thinking, analyzing and forensics (the art or study of argumentation and formal debate)? Our schools do not focus on these skills! Their focus is on the end result. Why? Would you build a house without first building the foundation? Of course you wouldn't! We commonly refer to that as "putting the cart before the horse." Here are some examples of this problem.
The most common approach to teaching children to read today is the "see and say" method. This actually isn't reading at all. It is memorizing that a certain group of letters arranged in a certain order is this particular word. The children are not taught that letters represent sounds, so it would be pointless to ask them to try to sound out a new word. They are expected to guess what a word might be! What frequently happens is the child says nothing because he doesn't want to look foolish in front of his friends. After a few seconds of silence the teacher tells him what the word is. What the child actually learns is that, if he waits long enough, someone else will give him the answer. This system was developed because some genius (I'm being facetious) observed that adults read too quickly to be sounding out the words. Obviously, they were reading by whole word recognition. Our genius then waged a campaign to teach every child to read using the whole word method. I guess it was too much to consider that an adult might have already read thousands of books, magazines and newspapers. Do you suppose he might have seen enough written words to recognize most of them on sight, thus eliminating the need to sound them out? Reading is an aural exercise. Why are our schools not teaching the forty-four sounds of our language first, followed by the letter combinations that make up those sounds, and finally the seventy-two rules that govern reading? A common argument against this method of teaching is that our language has too many words that do not follow the rules. The truth is that the rules apply to approximately 85% of our words. The average first grade student has a vocabulary of about 20,000 words. Would you prefer that your child enter second grade being able to read 17,000 of those words or only the 850 words contained in most first year reading text books? The whole word guessing game simply does not work! We cannot teach results. There is a natural progression from basic skills to experienced practitioner. It is no wonder that so many children have no interest in reading.
Writing is barely even talked about in our schools anymore. The common thinking is that with today's technology, it isn't important. Our computers can check our spelling and grammar. Wood ewe bee happy two sea you're sun right this way? Spell check doesn't have a problem with the previous sentence. The fact is writing goes hand in hand with reading. The two subjects should be taught together. The act of writing words that one is learning to read helps reinforce the rules that he is being taught. As for using computers, I am not a big fan. I know that children need to become competent at using them, but I think it is better to first learn how to read and write. A young friend of mine grew up using his computer for everything. His computer skills and his understanding of math are incredible.However, he does not read. Consequently, his working vocabulary and his overall vocabulary are virtually identical, and he struggles with effective communication. When he has to write papers for his college courses, he needs to have someone else proofread them and make suggestions on better ways to express his thoughts and ideas. I find that very sad. Our school system failed him.
Let's look at arithmetic. When I was in seventh grade my math class was part of the test group for a new program called Modern Math. The tracking system was still in use at that time, so everyone in the class was an "A" or "B" student. This class was a breeze for us. After two years with remarkable results the experts declared the program was a success. Then, in typical fashion, they put the cart before the horse and started teaching the new math to first graders. The class was easy for my class because we didn't have to learn basic arithmetic. We already knew it. Why would you try to teach set theory or different base number systems to a child who barely knows how to count to a hundred. Children must be taught basic arithmetic first, without calculators or computers! Most people will not use advanced math in their careers, but everyone uses basic arithmetic on a daily basis. They should not have to stop and think that 6 x 8 = 48. It should be an automatic response, but it won't be if our schools do not cease their current practices.
These are merely the three most basic skills that our public school system is not teaching properly. Without these skills how can our children learn anything more advanced? Where are they going to find the information they need to make intelligent choices. How can they learn to think critically or to analyze data. Will they be able debate the different sides to any given issue? Will they even understand the concept and the consequences of "putting the cart before the horse"?
The most common approach to teaching children to read today is the "see and say" method. This actually isn't reading at all. It is memorizing that a certain group of letters arranged in a certain order is this particular word. The children are not taught that letters represent sounds, so it would be pointless to ask them to try to sound out a new word. They are expected to guess what a word might be! What frequently happens is the child says nothing because he doesn't want to look foolish in front of his friends. After a few seconds of silence the teacher tells him what the word is. What the child actually learns is that, if he waits long enough, someone else will give him the answer. This system was developed because some genius (I'm being facetious) observed that adults read too quickly to be sounding out the words. Obviously, they were reading by whole word recognition. Our genius then waged a campaign to teach every child to read using the whole word method. I guess it was too much to consider that an adult might have already read thousands of books, magazines and newspapers. Do you suppose he might have seen enough written words to recognize most of them on sight, thus eliminating the need to sound them out? Reading is an aural exercise. Why are our schools not teaching the forty-four sounds of our language first, followed by the letter combinations that make up those sounds, and finally the seventy-two rules that govern reading? A common argument against this method of teaching is that our language has too many words that do not follow the rules. The truth is that the rules apply to approximately 85% of our words. The average first grade student has a vocabulary of about 20,000 words. Would you prefer that your child enter second grade being able to read 17,000 of those words or only the 850 words contained in most first year reading text books? The whole word guessing game simply does not work! We cannot teach results. There is a natural progression from basic skills to experienced practitioner. It is no wonder that so many children have no interest in reading.
Writing is barely even talked about in our schools anymore. The common thinking is that with today's technology, it isn't important. Our computers can check our spelling and grammar. Wood ewe bee happy two sea you're sun right this way? Spell check doesn't have a problem with the previous sentence. The fact is writing goes hand in hand with reading. The two subjects should be taught together. The act of writing words that one is learning to read helps reinforce the rules that he is being taught. As for using computers, I am not a big fan. I know that children need to become competent at using them, but I think it is better to first learn how to read and write. A young friend of mine grew up using his computer for everything. His computer skills and his understanding of math are incredible.However, he does not read. Consequently, his working vocabulary and his overall vocabulary are virtually identical, and he struggles with effective communication. When he has to write papers for his college courses, he needs to have someone else proofread them and make suggestions on better ways to express his thoughts and ideas. I find that very sad. Our school system failed him.
Let's look at arithmetic. When I was in seventh grade my math class was part of the test group for a new program called Modern Math. The tracking system was still in use at that time, so everyone in the class was an "A" or "B" student. This class was a breeze for us. After two years with remarkable results the experts declared the program was a success. Then, in typical fashion, they put the cart before the horse and started teaching the new math to first graders. The class was easy for my class because we didn't have to learn basic arithmetic. We already knew it. Why would you try to teach set theory or different base number systems to a child who barely knows how to count to a hundred. Children must be taught basic arithmetic first, without calculators or computers! Most people will not use advanced math in their careers, but everyone uses basic arithmetic on a daily basis. They should not have to stop and think that 6 x 8 = 48. It should be an automatic response, but it won't be if our schools do not cease their current practices.
These are merely the three most basic skills that our public school system is not teaching properly. Without these skills how can our children learn anything more advanced? Where are they going to find the information they need to make intelligent choices. How can they learn to think critically or to analyze data. Will they be able debate the different sides to any given issue? Will they even understand the concept and the consequences of "putting the cart before the horse"?
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_A_Bryan |
No comments:
Post a Comment