A New Paradigm

A New Paradigm

What does it mean to have a new paradigm?  What are the steps to achieving this?

The first step is always to examine the assumptions that we make.  Every opinion or viewpoint contains certain basic assumptions.  These can be as primal as “everything strives for survival” or as societal as “success is measured in dollars”.  The key is to try to figure out the assumptions and then to assess if we still believe that they are valid.  I would like to explore the assumptions which underlie our current system of education.  Then we can discuss if they are still valid for today’s children.

Assumption #1:

The purpose of education is to produce a productive citizen.  This is part and parcel of being a capitalist society.  It has to do with changing a young child, who is a burden on society, into an asset.  Children produce nothing of value and consume large resources of time and money.  They also reduce the productivity of the parents who must miss work in order to deal with the child.  Although this may sound harsh, it is the principle underlying why we send our children to school.  Having them in school during business hours frees the parents to work productively.  Teaching them in large numbers in a central location maximizes the efficiency of the process of turning them into productive adults.  

Validity:

Although a capitalistic society may feel that children are a drain on society’s resources, parents and others could easily argue that children are our greatest asset.  Put simply, without children there is no future for the human race.  But children are also an asset because they teach the adults around them.  We learn patience, unconditional love, pure charity in which we do things for another with no expectation of reward.  They also have an imagination unfettered by the conditioning and assumptions of our adult world.  Each of them carries within a unique paradigm based on unique needs and perspectives.  Perhaps it is time to respect the asset that children bring to our society and to maximize that asset instead of suppressing it in the hopes of creating another adult that can work, perhaps with no clear goal except to work.

Assumption #2:

Children learn best in a quiet, controlled environment.  They cannot learn in chaos.  This seems to be based on the general way that a majority of adults like to focus.  Many find noise or movement to distract them from their work.  If it is true for adults then it is true for children.  And I would agree if the goal is for them to complete given work.  Which falls to another assumption that the work given in school has value.  I am not questioning what is taught, since a knowledge of language, mathematics, history, science, etc. is necessary to understand our world.  I am talking about the work that they must do in order for society to feel that they are learning.  This includes essays, math problems, tests, memorization, regurgitation of facts, which have little or no connection to the life that they lead now or will lead in the future.  

Validity:

Ask a hockey fan at a game what the score is and who just made that great play.  He or she will be able to answer you with no problem, despite the racket and chaos around.  The truth is that we always focus on what interests us.  The same is true for children.  Everyone is distracted by chaos if the chaos is more interesting than the object of our attention.  However, chaos provides a multitude of opportunities to learn.  Out of chaos children can select the item which interests them the most.  Then they can focus on that.  They, in fact, may seek out a quiet place so that they can focus more completely but that is their choice.  By making classrooms silent we actually highlight any sound, movement, or object that is more interesting than the subject being taught.  It is not surprising that most children zone out during lectures.  Most adults probably would, too.

Assumption #3:

In order to get a good job, you need to go to university or college.  In order to go to university or college, you must have a high school diploma.  This is an assumption from the 1960’s and 1970’s because it was true then.  When the goal of every child was to get a well paying job so that they could buy a nice house, nice car, and have money for extras, then this was the well trod route.  And it worked.   

Validity:

It doesn’t work anymore.  First of all, a university degree does not guarantee a higher salary.  In fact, most students will not even be able to get a job in their chosen field, unless it is THE field in demand, which changes so rapidly that a student starting out in a given high demand field, such as cyber security, will probably face a saturation of that field by the time she graduates in four years.  Secondly, there are many well paying jobs which do not require a university degree.  Most of the high tech start-ups are led by people without a relevant degree.  Mark Zuckerberg created Facebook while in his second year at Harvard.  Steve Jobs dropped out of college.  Most jobs which still require a degree are either professional careers such as doctor or lawyer or conservative fields such as banking and accountancy.  Many others only require certain certifications, which can be taken as needed.

There is also the reality that you do not need a high school diploma.  Homeschooled children are attending universities and colleges in growing numbers.  Institutions want them because they have excellent time management and work skills.  They are also usually strongly self- motivated.  In other words, they are going to university to learn, not to get a job.

Then there is the tragic reality that most public high schools inadequately prepare students for university studies.  Students lack the necessary writing skills, time management skills, and organizational skills to succeed.  One third of all first year university students in Canada drop out during the first term.  

The final point is that many children today will not be working traditional jobs when they are adults.  The largest growth areas are in entrepreneurship and service industries.  But the services being offered were not even dreamed of yesterday.  Horse masseur, wedding attendant, traveling cat groomer.  These are just some of the careers popping up.  Who knows what the future will hold?  Certainly not the colleges or universities.  They only create programs for fields that already exist.  So, to best prepare our children for the future, we need to teach them the skills that they will need to forge their own paths: creativity, imagination, perseverance, the ability to value failure, the ability to see opportunities.  These are not, at present, being taught in school except by some exceptional teachers who go above and beyond the requirements of an archaic curriculum.

Reform Rant

I am going to rant. For most of my adult life I have been frustrated and angry. So I am going to rant. Every day thousands of children in this province (and assuredly all over the country, even world) reluctantly go to school. Many out and out hate going to school. This is not only wrong, it is a crime against our own children. Childhood gives us the best years for growth of all kinds. Children and teens are loaded with curiosity, energy, creativity and drive. So we push them into schools which kill all of these things. 

Our education system is over a century out of date and all the experts know it. Some of the greatest education reformers, who are still praised and quoted today, wrote those criticisms in the 1960's! And still we do nothing. We quietly sit here and believe that this is the only way. Just like in generations past people went to the doctor when they didn't feel well. He (and it was always a man) gave you some pills and told you to come back if they didn't work. And people did just that. But no longer. Now we take control of ourselves and our health. We want to understand what is happening. We prowl the internet. We question our doctors. We search out other possible remedies. And we blithely send our children to schools which not only don't teach them what they need to know but also kill their natural enthusiasm. 

Understand, and I will repeat this as many times as it takes for you to hear, I AM NOT criticizing the teachers! I am not even really criticizing the curriculum. I am damning the system. It doesn't work. It hasn't worked for a long time. And yet we cling to it. How many times have I heard: “Well, I survived it. He (she) can, too.” “Bullying is just part of growing up.” “School is just something you have to get through.” All along the lines of, perhaps, what doesn't kill us makes us stronger? What a crock! But the worst part is that everyone knows that it is broken and yet no one wants to do anything. 

I am very happy that some parents can find good school solutions for their children in the alternative schools, however many will find that these programs do not exist in their areas. Alternative schools are only in places of dense population. What do we call it when some people have access to certain public services and others do not? We call it discrimination.

We certainly can look at education systems elsewhere in the world, like Finland. We can learn from alternative private systems like Montessori. We can study the words of education reformers like John Gatto or Sir Ken Robinson. But ultimately we will have to find a uniquely Canadian solution. By our very nature, we are multi-cultural. We also have a small population in a huge geographical space. These make it impossible to simply transplant other solutions to Canada.

As parents we strive to get the best for our children. For many years I worked very hard to provide my children with a good education. I picked up, along the way, as many other children as I could. This is no longer enough. It is time that we think of all the children of Canada. From the smallest village in the far north to inner city Toronto, we need a better public education for all. This can only happen if we start the conversation. With parents and grandparents, with teachers and school administrators, with employers and businesses, and with our politicians. How can we claim to be an advanced modern nation when our school system is locked in the early 1900's?

Perhaps I should mention that not only am I a parent and teacher but also I have a Masters in Education. Since my children entered school here in the 1990's I have been fighting for change. My frustration at the blind adherence to an archaic system has reached boiling point. It is no longer enough to point out that the system can be changed. We need to know that it MUST be changed.

And there are things to do. First of all, get mad. For your child, your grandchildren, all the other children. Second, find like minded people. There are pockets, getting bigger, all over the place.  Search Facebook, find blogs, find others.  Watch “Beyond Measure”, a movie about groups in schools who have actually done something.  It takes place in the United States but has a lot of things we can learn.  Third, talk about it with everyone. Yes, because I have been in education for over 30 years, I do have a plan for reform. If anyone is interested, read my last blog.  Feel free to share it, comment on it, amend it.  Just do something!  But my point is not to promote my own solution, but to get others moving. Only united can we give our children the education they deserve. 

Who else is angry and has had enough?

A Guide to Education (in Ontario)

What is Education?

According to the Education Act of Ontario: “The purpose of education is to provide students with the opportunity to realize their potential and develop into highly skilled, knowledgeable, caring citizens who contribute to their society.” I would argue that this defines schooling. Education is so much more.

Education happens all the time, all around us, particularly with children. Education is a lifelong process whereby we learn. From the first words to the last task on our bucket list, we are being educated. We are educated by parents, teachers, storekeepers, police, older siblings, friends, relatives, and a myriad of other people whom we meet. We are also educated by situations and observations. Descartes said that we are thinking beings. We are also learning beings. We can't help it. We are always learning.

What is School?

School is a formal institution which teaches a given curriculum. This can be academic, skill building, career training, etc. Just as your health and your doctor are not the same, education and school are not the same. A school is a part of education but only a part.

What is a Good Education?

This has been debated for years and will continue to be debated because we all want different things from life and for our children. It is up to each parent or guardian to decide what makes up a good education for the child. But it is up to our society as a whole to decide what role our public school system should play in providing that education.

Many Goals : One System

How can you achieve many different goals under one standard system? This is the problem that the Ontario Public Education System has struggled with for many years. And it is a problem which cannot be solved within the structure of the current system. As many have explained before, the public school system is based on a manufacturing model. (Sir Ken Robinson – Changing Education Paradigms) Given the raw material, the goal is to turn out the finished product with the most efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Thus we apply theories of best practices and maximizing resources. Works with lumber, oil, cars. Not with children. It is like trying to produce a lovely wooden dining room table at a car factory. It comes out all wrong.

Children may be raw material, in some sense, but none of them are the same. So why do we keep on feeding them into the same system? Because we are shackled to this system. It is the one that failed us. It is the one that is failing our children. But it is familiar. It is time to do away with the familiar and embrace something different. In order to do that we need to change the very way in which we look at education.

Remember the characteristics of school: 1) children sorted by grade (age); 2) one teacher for each group of 30 or so children; 3) teachers deliver the material and assign the work; 4) students are to do what they are told and be respectful. That is the ideal situation, for the traditional school. And it works for some, if the goal is a child who can listen well, follow instructions, and attain outside goals for outside rewards (grades or diplomas). Listening well is a good trait as is following instruction. But I have an issue with attaining goals for outside rewards. This means that the child is not learning for himself but for others. That kind of learning does not develop the individual that he is or could be. That learning produces the end product that the society thinks it wants. What it usually does not produce is a happy child.

To get back to characteristics of school, there are some other things which seem to be constant: 1) boredom, leading to 'zoning out'; 2) confusion, leading to 'zoning out'; 3) pressure to conform, not just from peers but from the system itself which rewards certain types of learning (oral and visual) and discourages other types (tactile and kinesthetic); 4) disengagement of students because they are not interested in the subject matter or are not ready for it. All of these characteristics lead to a great deal of time and effort being spent with the net result that little learning is going on. I heard a great quote about how sitting a child in a classroom and claiming that you are teaching her is like throwing marshmallows at a child and claiming that you are feeding her. In order to learn, children must be engaged. That is so blatantly obvious. And so is the fact that children are only engaged with subjects that interest them. I don't mean teaching mathematics by using skate boards as your example or teaching writing by texting on smart phones. Children are not that dumb. They can easily spy the lesson amidst the surface paraphernalia. I mean let the children learn. What they want, how they want and when they want.

In today's schools children learn to blindly obey, without being allowed to question why. They learn to do the minimum amount of work to achieve a goal, since being punctual with assignments or doing more than asked is seldom if ever rewarded. They learn to wait while others catch up or until someone can explain in a different way what was just taught. They learn that being different is bad, being subservient to adults is good, that you can only be creative within the boundaries laid out. They do not learn to take responsibility for their work. They do not learn self-discipline. They do not learn to always do their best. They do not learn how to be happy. They do not learn to love learning. School is a necessary trial to get through. How sad.

Let's start with a whole new model. Keep the school buildings. They are institutional and bland but they are already there so we might as well use them. Ideally we could use any structure or even location. Keep the teachers. They have been trained to deal with large groups of children, a skill that many parents lack. They also have a broad understanding of the many different ways that children can learn. They are also a wonderful resource as guides for safe and purposeful education. Keep the resources. The books are another wonderful resource. The computers can be very useful as tools for exploration and information. So the physical structure remains intact. What needs to change is the imposed structure within the school day. Since it is an impossible challenge to produce many different goals with one system, let's get rid of the system. Who knows best what a child wants to learn? The child. Who knows best what a child should learn? The parent, in consultation with teachers who may have broader experience on how to achieve specific goals.

To determine how a day should go, look at most kindergarten classrooms. There are areas for different activities. The book area for quiet time. The block area for constructive play. The house area for imaginative play. And others. So design a school on the same idea. Each teacher creates a space filled with his or her passions. These would include not only the curriculum topics but any interest that any individual teacher might have, be it butterflies, hockey, fishing, stamp collecting, or zombies. But the key point is that these are the passions of the teachers, not constructed for the interests of the students. Children can spot a fake very easily. They will know quickly whether or not the teacher is sincere. It is amazing how quickly students will be drawn to a real passion, even opera. (Here I speak from personal experience with a class of Grade 7 and 8 students.) Allow students to wander as they will as long as they are in a classroom under supervision. Teachers don't teach, guide. Just stand there and answer any questions or help with solutions to problems which may arise, or talk about butterflies to anyone interested.

Total chaos is the result. I would agree. But there is nothing wrong with chaos. We seem to think that children left to their own devices will be destructive. Maybe we all were influenced too much by “Lord of the Flies”. Truthfully, children left unfettered by adult restrictions quickly work out rules of conduct. Children have a very strong sense of fairness. We are told that children need a quiet studious atmosphere in which to learn. Actually they learn a lot more when interacting with others and playing with objects. And there is always the quiet book corner to which those overwhelmed by the chaos can retreat. You will sometimes find me there because another passion is books.

Next challenge I hear coming from the doubters: my child will spend the whole day playing a video game. Which is okay, as long as they are achieving the set goals. Oh, goals, you say! That's better! But who sets those goals? Why, the child, of course, in consultation with parents and teachers. The more children control their education the more they are invested in it. They set the goals which are meaningful to them and then they are motivated to reach them. Obviously the younger the child, the more input from adults. But children as young as eight can understand the value of learning to read or understand numbers. They set the goals, they set the plan to reach the goals, they provide evidence which can be assessed to demonstrate that they have achieved the goals.

Children learn. They can't help it. Every minute they are learning. But when they are sitting in a class, being taught a subject they have no interest in, they are not learning what we think they are. They are learning how to entertain themselves without getting caught (texting each other, throwing spitballs, doodling, etc.) I remember writing many Star Trek fan fiction stories while I was supposedly learning history or literature. All of us can recall how we spent our time in class. Seldom was it being engaged in the subject matter. Yes, there are exceptional teachers who can inspire many students but there would be much more learning if the students actually chose to be there.

If you want evidence that this is so, you can look at programs in the United States like The Agile Learning Centers or Compass Centre for Self-Directed Learning right here in Ottawa. Or, better yet, talk with people who homeschool. There are thousands of them and their children are all happy and learning like crazy. Learning can be fun. Therefore, school can be fun.

Pipe Dream?

I think that we have two choices. We can continue with the existing system which provides well paying jobs for many and is familiar and has left several generations now with a dislike for school and education. Or we can take a chance and work out a system which will still provide those jobs but which will also better serve our children. Why are we so convinced that something must be hard and dreary to have value? Why do we continue to send our children to schools that aren't fun? Why do we think it is a silly dream to have fun while working and learning? Are we really so fated to be miserable? A resounding NO!

I have my own experience teaching for over a quarter of a century. Comments from past students: “Thank you for showing me that school can be fun.”(Grade 7) “I have never worked so hard in my life, or had so much fun.”(Grade 9) “Thank you for allowing me to blossom.” (Grade 9) “The best teacher that I ever had (Mrs. Holzscherer) allowed me to be me – as silly as I am.” (Grade 8) I have never worked within the public system, despite having a Masters of Education. I could not reconcile my own experiences with the way that children learn and the way that teachers are expected to teach. My own children only attended the public system for a few years.

Creating a system which treats each child as an individual and allows them to explore the world as and when they see fit is not a pipe dream. It can happen simply because we live in a democracy. The government has no incentive to change the system. The boards of education are doing their bit to keep everyone within financial guidelines and accountable. Teachers need to do what they are told to keep their jobs. The only source of change is the mass of parents who know that the child they send to school is not like any other child and should not be treated as raw material in need of molding into a finished product which will blindly do what it is told. How much are you willing to do for the happiness of your child? Learn about other systems. Learn about other options. Join groups like OPERI in Ottawa. Watch the videos of Sir Ken Robinson. Talk with other parents. The more you learn the more you will see how the Public School system in Ontario cannot work. Tell your local MPP that you want to see significant change. Not the bandages of the last twenty years.

We all have different expectations for our children. We all want them to learn different things in different ways. But I think that we can all agree on one thing. We want our children to be happy. So ask yourself this one question: Is your child happy at school?

Links:

Sir Ken Robinson http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms

OPERI – Public on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/1416370692001490/

Compass Centre for Self-Directed Learning http://www.compassteens.org/

The Agile Learning Center NY http://nyc.agilelearningcenters.org/

Socialization - What is it?

Socialization: Another one of those terms tossed around, debated, and assumed to be something "for good", often without any definition.  Well, my training in philosophy will not allow me to discuss a term without first defining it.  So, here goes.

"Socialization, also spelled socialisation, is a term used by sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists, political scientists and educationalists to refer to the lifelong process of inheriting and disseminating norms, customs and ideologies, providing an individual with the skills and habits necessary for participating within his or her own society." (Wikipedia.org)

I like this definition because it mentions a lifelong process.  Socialization starts from the moment a child is born and introduced to others in a society.  That society can be initially as small as a family unit.  They gradually learn the routines and patterns of that unit.  They then branch out to larger units and continue to grow.  My difficulty arises when a person is introduced to a unit which has little or no reference to the society in which the child will eventually have to participate.  Let me give an extreme example.  Children born in war-torn countries without any stability may not learn the skills of participating in a peacetime society.  This has proven to be a significant problem in several parts of the world.  So it is important that children learn the skills and habits which will help them to succeed in the world they will inhabit at adulthood.

The most common use of the world "socialization", at least from my perspective of education, is in reference to homeschooling.  Parents seeking to homeschool teenagers are warned that the children might not learn to socialize.  This is based on the assumption that public high schools are microcosms of the adult world.  Let us examine that assumption.

Public School (PS):  All members, with a few exceptions (teachers and administrators) are born within a few years of each other.

Real World (RW): Multi-generational and multi-aged in almost all sectors, private and professional.

PS:  Members are grouped by age.

RW:  Members are grouped by common interest.

PS:  There is one dominant culture and all students are pressured into participating or being marginalized.

RW:  There are a multitude of cultures (social, professional, athletic) and members select the groups

PS:  Members develop special language, habits, customs that are only relevant within that specific culture and are often contrary to the customs of the larger world.

RW:  Different habits and customs are developed within the context of participating in the larger world, or not, if that is the preference.

Okay, so my bias is definitely making itself known and perhaps I am not being entirely fair.  After all, students still join other groups and have home lives.  My point is that high school is not the place to learn social skills.  Those are better learned by participating in the real world.   I will not repeat what has been said before about the socialization skills of homeschooled children.   This is a topic which keeps repeatedly raising its head, even though it has been answered numerous times.  To read some of those answers I refer you to the following link : http://ontariohomeschool.org/socialization/

Children will socialize just fine.  They don't need to attend a public school to do so.  In fact, they will learn better socializing skills by visiting their grandparents or helping a neighbour rake the yard.   For anyone who confuses socialization with the ability to be popular, you might want to read the following report from Time.   (Especially the part about "popular" kids!)
http://ideas.time.com/2013/11/18/does-high-school-determine-the-rest-of-your-life/

I am not against children attending public high schools but send them for academic reasons, not because they will learn social skills to help them later in life.  You're looking in the wrong place.

To do or to just think about it

Theory or practice.  If we get stuck in theory then nothing ever happens.  If we make the bold move to putting theory into practice then we risk disillusionment.  Particularly if we are dealing with a huge immovable bureaucracy.  This is my dilemma.

For years I have read about education reform.  I even did my Masters of Education hoping to find insight into the area.  I have thought extensively about how education should be.  I have even taught in my own school in this fashion and have tweaked and polished my theories.  I think they are valid.  I think they have merit.  But what does it matter if they are not applied on a larger scale.

My theories are simple:
1)  All humans are learning creatures.
2)  The mind must be engaged in order to learn.

These are, to me, rather obvious.   Give anyone the opportunity to learn something they love and the job of the teacher becomes the job of the mentor.  A mentor guides, assists, encourages.  That is the job of the teacher.

I applied this at my little school.  I still apply this to my students who come to my house.  It works.  They learn.  I guide.  We have fun and education is achieved.

So to that extent I apply my theories.  But what about the thousands of children stuck in an antiquated behemoth of the public education system.  They are not learning, largely because they are not engaged.  Hours, days, and years of boredom are destroying any desire to learn.  Time and youth are wasted.  Teachers prepare lessons for non-existing standardized children.  Even those children who find morsels of information in this wasteland achieve a tiny fraction of what they could.  We are destroying them and our future.  Parents know this.   Children know this.  And, above all, teachers know this.  But no one does anything.  Because that antiquated behemoth rolls over anyone who suggests that it is destructive and should be destroyed. 

So I ask the question that all reformers must ask: Is it worth dying for?  Literally, probably not.  But do I give my time, my energy, my passion to pit my little, tiny David against that Goliath?  The immediate response is that to do anything else is cowardice.  But where is my slingshot?  How do I find a chink in the armor?

The answer surely lies in getting other Davids together.  There are so many out there, each choosing their rocks.  There is a tendency to want to create another Goliath to make this a fair fight.  If we can get enough people invested in taking down the beast, it might work.  Except that we might just replace it with another monster.  It is not the monster that we need to change but the very ground that it walks upon.  As long as we base any educational model on a business model, we are doomed to failure.  There are no best practices.  There are no products or methods that work for all children.  We need to stop looking out there for the perfect way to teach.  We need, each teacher, that is, to look at the children right in front of us each day and guide them. 

Parents do not teach their children to walk.  The children learn that all by themselves.  They provide a safe, conducive learning space and let the children figure it out.  That is the first school.  That should be the premise for all schools. 

Coming next:  The blueprint for educational spaces

The dangers of the Comfort Zones

Boxes.  We all have them.  They are also called comfort zones.  They are ways of looking at the world that are comfortable to us.  Perhaps one box deals with relationships.  In that we put our ideas of friendship, marriage, parent/child.  Another box deals with work - ideas of productive activities, financial security, working towards retirement.  Many of these ideas come from others.  We get ideas from parents, school, friends, mentors, media.  They become ours either because we have considered them and agree or because we have had no reason to question them because they work.  However we arrive at these ideas, they give us comfort.

The fascinating paradox about boxes is that some will stay in them even when they don't work.  When they see that the box not what they wanted.  When they complain about the results.  They still don't step out of the box.  They somehow think they are better complaining about a broken box than risking the unknown involved with building a new box.

People will stay in an unsatisfactory job rather than launch into a new venture which might be financially, status-wise, egotistically risky.   They will conform to standards with which they don't agree.  They will keep their children in the same school system even when the children hate it and are failing.  Just how uncomfortable does a box have to get before people will go out of the box?

If something is not working, change it.  Don't complain, don't accept, don't blog.  Change it.  Out of the box is much less frightening than most people think and infinitely more rewarding.  Try it!

*****

So far I have been speaking generally but I do have a specific box in mind.  The Education Box.  This box is highly structured.  All children enter at a specific age (4,5,or 6 or whatever the local school board determines).  All children are classed together by age.  They attend school for specific hours Monday to Friday between September and June.  There they will be taught lessons by a qualified teacher in a systematic way, separated by grade and subject.  Their learning will be assessed by an objective standard.  They will remain in school until they are able to take their places as adults in the outside world.  This has been the public school system for a long time.  And it sounds great.  We teach them how to be adults in the real world.  Except that it doesn't work.  And it hasn't worked for a long time.

If we take these pieces of structure one at a time we can see that it is doomed to failure.  Real life does not categorize people according to age.  In jobs people are sorted by ability.  In social groups people sort by interest.  Learning takes place continuously, not just 8 am to 3 pm on weekdays.  If these hours are intended to teach children that misery has these hours and play is only after misery, then I guess we have prepared them for miserable careers.  Is that what we want?  Why can't we play all the time - both kids and adults?  People who love their jobs do it.  Play does not equal irresponsibility.  Play is not a waste of time.  Perhaps it is the boring job that is the waste - of both time and potential.  The objective standard has fish being graded on how well they climb trees (in that popular FB post).  And lastly, life is not separated into subjects.  We all need the creativity of the arts, the precision of mathematics, the communication skills of language, the perspective of history.  And we need it all together for each situation.

It is time to rethink our education system from top to bottom.  What is the goal of education and how best to get there.  Stay tuned because I have a few ideas!

Back at it!

It has been a few years since I last posted a blog.  I used to post as part of my marketing campaign.  Not that I ever said anything in my blogs which wasn't 100% true, but the intent was to market the school.  So, although my blogs were sincere, they weren't honest. 

Many years ago I had a problem to solve.  So I found a solution and, sort of as a happy accident, I found a passion.  Now I have always had passions and I have been lucky enough to indulge several of them at various time during my life.  (To those of you who know me, I am NOT talking about chocolate!  That is not a passion but an obsession.)  To continue, this passion for teaching led to a dream of a private school to help my community.  The pursuit of the dream became all encompassing as my own children spread their wings and no longer needed teaching.  The problem that slowly came about was that the dream and the passion were no longer going in the same direction.  It took me quite awhile to realize this.  I had switched from a passion to teach to a need for the school to grow in order to feel successful.  I was striving for something that I didn't really want.  The journey had gone astray.  I found all my time being taken up with administrating and marketing.  There was no time for teaching.  And I was not happy nor benefiting anyone.  And so I stopped.  Very suddenly.  I abandoned the school.  I stopped going to networking groups.  I closed the website.  I cancelled all the social media.  And I stopped posting any blogs.  I pulled into my little cocoon and reassessed my life.

Slowly I re-emerged with the passion firmly grasped in my hands.  And now I teach.  That is all that I do.  And I am ecstatically happy.  And ready to post another blog.

Maybe I should have titled this blog "Another Life Lesson Learned".  What I have learned is that it is good sometimes, when on our journey, to stop and check to see where we are going and if we still want what awaits us there.   So I am back at blogging - because I love to write and because I still have something to say.  When I look at my tiny class of students I feel that I am helping.  But I know that there is so much more that I can do.  So this blog will be the start of my sharing my own experiences and studies to try and improve education for others.  The public school system in Ontario is not all that it could be.  Maybe I can at least give my informed opinion to anyone who wishes to listen (or read).  So I am back at it!  Stay turned for more.

Why Are There So Many Private Schools?

I just read an article that there will be three more private schools opening in the Ottawa area.  This has occasioned the usual comments about two tiered learning and schools catering to highly specialized groups.  My response?  So what.  I have news that may come as a shock to some people - rich people have more opportunities than poor.  Is this fair?  No, but it is a fact.

Shouldn't all children have a right to a good education?  Yes, and according to the Education Act, that is precisely what the public school system offers.  However, neither the Act nor most of the public can define a good education.  That is because we all have our own idea of what a good education entails.  Some want what they had.  Others don't want their children to go through what they went through.  Some want strong academics.  Others want applicable, useful skills training.  And the public system is supposed to do its best to accommodate all these different goals and ideas.

But, let's be realistic, can one system meet everyone's needs?  Can one grocery store offer all kinds of food?  Can one hospital specialize in all areas?  No.  So the society compensates by offering options.  And those options are private, because our public system is a huge monopoly that acts more like a big business than a public service.  We need to separate the concepts of  "a strong public system" and the current public system.  I am in support of the former but not the latter. 

I wonder at the people who get upset with the existence of private schools.  Do they really think that these schools will weaken or diminish the public system?  That really doesn't make much sense.  If they are only for the wealthy, then only a few will ever attend. The loss of wealthy parents from the local school will have impact only if the parents were happy with the local school.  In which case, they have no reason to leave.  Unhappy parents do not support that school which is not meeting their needs.  And, just in case you have forgotten, parents of children in private school still pay public school taxes.  Some claim that the private schools are taking the best and brightest.  If this is true, then why aren't the public schools doing something about this?  Why aren't they meeting the needs of the best and brightest? 

Why are there so many private schools?  Because parents are willing to pay for the education they think their children need.  If there weren't unsatisfied parents, there wouldn't be private schools.   As with all sectors of our economy, there is only a supply when there is a demand. 


The increase in number of private schools and homeschooling families should be a wake up call to the public system.  Is the alarm loud enough?  I hope so.  I would love to see my grandchildren get a good education at their local public school. 

Don't believe in private schools?  Then don't send your children to one.  But if you  want something different from what the local school is offering, there are options. 

What do you want to be when you grow up?

Every year thousand (more likely hundreds of thousands!) of teenagers sit down with a parent, or a teacher, or a school counselor, and try to figure out what courses to take the next year.  And these students are asked "What do you want to be when you grow up?"  A few lucky children might actually have an answer but most have no clue.

So what is a student (or parent) to do?  The key is to keep as many doors open as possible.  Take classes that will lead to many opportunities.  If there is really no direction or preferred subject then try a few of these simple tasks.

Without thinking too much, quickly write down three things that you would like to achieve in life.  There are no limits except that you have to stay a human and probably live on Earth, although that is becoming unnecessary.  Then write down three things you would get if you could have anything in the world.  No restrictions. Remember these tasks have nothing to do with reality or being practical.  This is pure fantasy land.  Next, three things you would like to learn right now.  And lastly, three people, living or dead, whom you would like to meet.

Now take your lists and find common factors.  With the achievements: are they solitary or in a team?  Do they require physical skill, mental skill, both?  Are they competitive, collaborative, or a combination?  With the things: what is the appeal of each?  Do they represent a certain lifestyle?  Is that a life based on security (house, family) or adventure (fast car, world trip) or freedom (island holiday)?  For learning: are they hidden passions?  Would they take you somewhere else?  And people to meet: why did you choose them?  What do they represent that you admire?

All of these, particularly if done over and over with no repetitions allowed, will start to show you what you would like to do.  The trick is to take these clues, explore possibilities that lie in this direction, and make this into a viable career.  If you are still wandering, then head in a direction that has a secure future, while keeping your eyes open to other opportunities.  Luck is being open to opportunity combined with the courage to go for it.

So, what courses do you take?  Mathematics, because almost every career out there needs you to be able to do consecutive steps with precision.  English, because communication skills are vital.  The best idea in the world is useless if you can't communicate it to someone else.  History teaches us our place in the world.  How we got to where we are and why others might be in a different place.  And science is crucial to understand and examine everything around us.  A second language opens up huge vistas of understanding our global community.  The words of any language reflect the priorities of that people.  Take a broad spectrum, do your absolute best, and keep those eyes open.  You will be amazed at what lies out there.

And don't worry about what you will be when you grow up.  You'll find out when you get there.

A Very Tilted History of South America

This week we were studying the Incas.  There was a line in the book which really caught my attention.  "Because the Incas had not yet invented the wheel, the mountain paths did not have to be very wide."  I thought, "Wait a minute, why can't we flip that around?  Because the mountain paths were not very wide, the wheel would not have been very useful to the Incas."

It makes me laugh when I hear anyone talk about an unbiased view.  Do you have an opinion?  Then you have a bias.  Are you breathing?  Then you have an opinion!   And guess what?  That opinion is based on several prejudices of which you may not even be aware.  We all have basic assumptions given to us by our society, but that is fodder for another blog!  Here, just let me clarify that I am not talking about blatantly prejudiced views but more pervasive tiltings which reflect the culture and motivations of the author.

Incan history is particularly fascinating because there are almost no primary sources.  They apparently hired professional memorizers (South American version of minstrels and town criers?) so they had no need for written history.  Of course, like most history, the memorizers only remembered big events involving important people.  After the Spanish arrived it would have taken some time for the Spanish to learn enough language to engage these memorizers, the few that probably were still alive.  And the Spanish had to justify their treatment of the Incas by demonstrating that these people were primitive and barbaric.  So many filters that the history recorded by the Spanish (the only written history that we have) probably had very little to do with reality.

How many of you have heard the story that the natives, having never seen a horse before, thought that the horse and rider were one creature and were the god incarnate?  This was the popular story told to me as a child in school to explain the rapid conquest of the Incan empire.  In truth, this is highly unlikely.  The Incan Empire rivaled Rome in its sophistication and development.  There was a complex bureaucracy, superb road and infrastructure system.  Huge cities and a population estimated at around 12 million.  Books like to point out that they were technologically backwards, having no wheels, or ships, or writing, or metal tools.  The geography  precluded wheeled transportation.  The only water around was an endless ocean.  They could not see islands on the horizon to indicate that there might be purpose to head out to sea.  I have explained perhaps why they didn't need writing.  Necessity is the driver of invention.  If they didn't have metal tools, then they didn't need them.  They certainly were proficient at working gold and other metals.

These were highly intelligent and advanced people.  They could easily separate a man and a horse.  Most likely their isolation and relatively conflict free lifestyle left them vulnerable both to the Spanish weapons and Spanish germs.   The truth is we will never know and that is something that I love to read in a history text.  How refreshing when the author admits that these are merely probable guesses.  Sometimes we can figure out more using our own brains and relying less on the highly coloured accounts of the conquerors.  

My point is that, in any history, unless you can examine the primary source yourself, there is a  tilt in the account.  This is not a bad thing unless it is not acknowledged.  The first thing we always do when reading a text is figure out the slant of the writer.  What is the purpose of the writer?  What world view or paradigm does the writer hold?  Are there other criteria that might be in play?  For whom is the book written?  By any chance, are the publishers trying to make the "Acceptable Curriculum Resource List"?  :) 

Honour the Parents

All parents know that moment when they realize just how fragile and vulnerable their little new baby is. At that moment they want to do everything to protect the child. We spend an enormous amount of time and energy keeping our babies and children safe. But it is more than this. We also want them to be happy and to avoid the growing pains that we went through ourselves.

But we also have to acknowledge the reality - that, if we want them to thrive in this less than perfect world, we cannot completely shelter them. No matter how much we wish to. Our job as parents, and as teachers, and as role models, is to teach them how to deal with the real world. It is no good to prepare them for an utopia that not only doesn't, but also in all likelihood can't, exist.

No matter when a child is first introduced to the larger society - daycare, playgroup, kindergarten, camp - the parent brings one critically important factor to the experience: the knowledge of the child. No one knows a child better than his parent. To anyone working with that child, that knowledge is priceless. The first insight into the makeup of the child comes from the parent. I have always felt that the first parent-teacher interview of the year should involve the teacher asking questions and the parents revealing their intimate knowledge of the students. Any teacher would benefit from this viewpoint.

Parents are always partners with the other people who help their children learn and grow. Parents should be respected for this and their role acknowledged. Just like we no longer just take the pill that the doctor gives us and stay ignorant about our own health, neither should we completely turn control of our child's education over to teachers and administrators. Yes, they know what is best for the average child, but your child is never average. In fact, the average child does not exist. It is a manifestation created from large amounts of data to provide a program that will suit most children most of the time. I would argue that that is not good enough, nor is it the way to run an education system.

Given the training and experience that good teachers have, they should be able to individually work with the parents for each child. Whenever I carefully express this opinion in the presence of teachers they always reply that there are too many children to do this. And yet, each teacher at the elementary level is only responsible for 30 children. This does not mean that the teacher needs to teach each child individually but that they first learn each child from the parent and from their own testing methods. Then they group the children for each skill at the appropriate level. They supply the tasks and the tools and let the children work it out in their own best way at their own time. With properly expressed expectations and responsibilities, this is not chaos but engaged learning - the only kind of learning that is meaningful.

Ask yourself this question: what lessons do you remember from high school? Why do you remember them? How much do you now consider useless? The curriculum has been put together by professionals who realize all the skills and knowledge that children should have to succeed in the real world. The fact that some of that you found useless is not the fault of the curriculum itself but the manner of the delivery. An unengaged student may learn enough to pass the test but will not learn what they will need to go forward in life. Many of us had to relearn what we were taught because we did not learn it the first time.

I can hear some of you now saying, "But I never needed to know the date of Confederation! I never used trigonometry!" But that is not what you were supposed to learn. Canadian history is not about the date of Confederation but an appreciation of where our country came from and how that affects decisions that are made today. Without this awareness we have no hope of understanding the factors behind the issues of today's politics - Aboriginal claims, French rights, social services, health care. And trigonometry is not about triangles and angles but about precision and multi-step procedures that require intense focus and accuracy. These are valuable skills and are the underlying reason for the curriculum.

So I repeat in conclusion that students must be engaged to learn. Teachers must know their students in order to engage them. And parents are the best source for this information. If teachers wonder why so many parents are not involved in their children's education, the system does not respect the knowledge and value of the parents. Embrace any teacher who does. They are the ones who will best teach your precious child the skills needed to thrive in this world of opportunity. 

Mathematics of Happiness

I have always been fascinated with mathematics.  When I was young I saw a sign on my grandmother's desk which read "Monday is a lousy way to spend one seventh of your life".  That got me thinking about the numbers of my life.  Bear with me while I play with them a bit.

If I live productively to be eighty years old I will have lived 960 months or 4,160 weeks or 29,120 days.  If I dread Mondays, that will be 4,160 miserable days of my life.  If I even take off the first 20 years in which I was not working and the last 20 years after I retire, that still leaves 2,080 unhappy days.  That just seems wrong.  I can't waste that many days when there seem to be so few in total.

So why does Monday get dumped on so badly?  Obviously because it ends the weekend and our society teaches us that fun happens on the weekends.  We are surrounded by messages that tell us that weekends are the time for partying, getting together with friends, we work our weeks so that we can enjoy our weekends.  This is all based on the notion that work is not fun.  If it is fun then it is not work and somehow it is not proper.

Perhaps this all ties in with a recurring idea in history that we are meant to suffer.  Life needs to be miserable in order to be "good" or worthy.  Happy people are either mentally unbalanced, intellectually challenged, or somehow unfairly supported by other suffering souls.  Our rational brains tell us that this is silly but we are so indoctrinated into the idea of salvation through sacrifice and suffering that we subconsciously are suspicious of truly happy people. 

I must apologize because I am unashamedly happy.  I have been that way for a long time.  I love Mondays as much as I love Fridays but then I don't work - at least not in terms of suffering.  I follow my passion and teach children.  I get fulfillment and energy from my "job" and have no cravings for weekends or retirement.

So why am I going on about the math of happiness?  Because I see it in children when they first enter the school.  Many are teenagers who have had an love of learning pummeled out of them.  The first joy of going to school in kindergarten has changed through a realization that school is often boring, usually irrelevant, and sometimes painful.  By the time they come to us, school is something to be suffered through in order to start living.

This is a crime of such magnitude that it makes me want to weep.  How can children ever acquire the skills to pursue their passion if they hate learning?  How can they even know what their passion is if they are not given the opportunity to explore it?  How can they learn what they need to know to turn that passion in a means of support?  Why does our society "teach" them that both school and work are necessary evils in life? 

By the end of Grade 12 a child will have spent nearly 2,500 days in school.  That is 2,500 days where they can be exposed to the wonders of the world with enthusiastic guides helping them along their own personal journeys.  Since we only go from Grades 7 to 12, we only have them for just over a thousand days.  And yet they can learn so quickly if they are happy.  They want to learn if school is seen as a million open doors for exploration and adventure.  It is my sincere wish that none of my students ever has to hate Mondays.  And so far, we are doing just great.

The Best School Year Ever

Next week million of children once again go to school.  For some it is an exciting time.  Time to see your friends, make new ones, learn new skills.  For others it is just the same old same old.  They are marking time until they can be free!  And for some it is a dreaded nightmare.  A place of bullying, judgement, and fear.  Sometimes we, as a society, just say it is all part of growing up.  That's what they used to say about getting drunk at a party and jamming kids into a car for a wild ride.  We don't call that part of growing up anymore.  An education which instills fear, dislike, or boredom should not be part of growing up either.  Education should give our children skills, knowledge, and above all, a love of learning.  If this isn't happening for your child, there are things that you can do.

The first question that all parents, and older students, need to ask themselves is : What is the purpose of education?  This is neither easy nor obvious and there are many different answers.  Some say that education is to prepare them for life.  What does that mean?  Teaching them accounting skills, how to get a job, time management, practical skills?  Or does it mean teaching them cooperation, teamwork, problem solving, people skills?  Or critical thinking, rational deduction, communication skills?  There are a lot of options.  Perhaps education is to show them how to follow their passion.  To develop that passion into a marketable skill.  Or perhaps the end goal is to learn how to learn so that education is a lifelong experience.  My point here is that there are many different purposes and they are all right.  You have to decide which one is right for your child.

After you have sorted out that, you need to figure out what the school's purpose is.  Do they have the same goal in mind that you do?  You need to know if you are both journeying to the same destination.  If you are not, then you need to supplement your child's education with the pieces that the local school does not offer.  One example which comes up all the time is in high school.  Parents have decided that they want their child to go to university.  They assume that somehow the school knows this.  They think that the school advisors will counsel their child into the best courses for going to university.  However the school counsellors actually have a different goal.  Their goal is to have all the students complete high school.  Therefore they may select courses which suit their goal and not yours.

First and foremost you must be an advocate for your child.  You must work with the school to achieve the end that you want.  Do not assume that they know what that is or, if they do, that they can accommodate you.  After all, they have thousands of students, each with their own goals.  It is essential that you work with the school, the administrators, and the teachers.  An antagonistic relationship will never work.  Your child will lose respect for the school and for education in general.  If you absolutely cannot work with a particular school or system then, for the sake of your child, you must change to another one.  How can you teach your child to respect teachers if you do not? 

This is one important step to helping your child have the best school year ever.  School should be a place of excitement and passion for learning.  And it can be.  If you are interested in more personal advice for your particular situation, send me a comment and I will respond privately.

Happy Schooling!



Education through Art!

They all work...or not.

New math, unschooling, whole language, Waldorf, flipping school, Montessori... the list of educational methods is very long and constantly being amended.  And they all work - for some children  And none work for all children.  We want all children to have an equal opportunity to get a good education and that translates into each child receiving the same education.  This is a fallacy that we have been dealing with at least since the advent of women's liberation.  We confuse "equal" with "same".

We do not need educational experts to tell us what any parent of more than one child can tell us.  What works for one does not work for all.  We need to stop focusing on teaching the curriculum and start focusing on teaching the child.  The focus of public schooling is how to process the largest number of children in the most efficient way with the best use of resources.  Sounds like a valid business principle.  Except that children are not products that can be assembled on a line.  And we don't really want what that line would produce, unless we are Orwellian in our social principles.  We want children to become the best that they individually can become.  We want them to be passionate about what they do.  We want them to be successful.  We want them to be productive.  We want them to be happy.

All of which relies on nurturing them in their own unique ways.  To letting them flourish and grow within the context of their passions, abilities, and goals.  The "best" method for that is to educate the child.  Sounds simple and yet rarely happens, despite the best efforts of many good teachers.  The system keeps mandating "best practices", computer generated tests and assessments, criteria that have nothing to do with what is best for the child, or even for society.

Let teachers teach.  Give them the latest research and let them decide how best to apply it.  Use some common sense is assessing whether a child is flourishing.  Listen to parents and employers when they complain about the fact that today's students are completely unprepared for life.  Those in charge of administering the enormous education system need to start listening.  High school should not be something that you suffer through.  It should not just be a place to make friends and learn social skills.  It should be a place of learning and a place where they learn that learning is powerful, engaging, important, and wonderful.  A lesson for all times.

Education Through Art

Education Through Art

Education through Art, sounds impressive but what does it mean? What is Art? Painting, dancing, music. These are the Arts. But what is Art? Art is creativity, imagination, something from nothing, of no practical value - these are many other definitions. But more than all of these, Art is the passion. Art is the soul of the machine.

Long ago Western man decided to understand things by taking them apart. If you could grasp the function of each of the pieces then you would understand the whole. Body became separated from Mind. Physical from Mental. Reason from Faith. Practical from Artistic. For generations in sciences, philosophy, and education, we have analyzed and struggled to understand what makes us work, as individuals, as societies, and as a species. The problem lies in that only some parts are reducible to components. So we studied those parts, the body, the physical world, reasoning patterns, practical applications. And we learned how to pass these on to our children. Through formal education.

For the rest, the intangible, the soul, spirit, or whatever term you choose, we left that to the spiritual leaders, to traditions, to culture. And as a species we have been doing okay. Except recently. Now we have a breakdown of these support networks. Most families no longer have a spiritual counselor. Many have left traditions and family networks far behind in our global wanderings. So we look to our source of learning. We look to our scientists and our educators. And we ask them to take care of our children. To find the best practices for teaching. And they do their best. They use the system that they have always used. They emphasize the practical, the applicable, the concrete. Our children learn to use machines. They explore the world through their fingertips and electronic impulses which bring everything they need to them. The world is on the screen before them and they are all knowing.

No, they aren't. They don't know this information; they merely have access to it. In order to learn children must have the skills to learn. They must know how to think and use their minds in multitudinous ways. To see things from different perspectives. To imagine that which they cannot see or access. To stretch themselves. But teachers cannot help them to do that if they do not want to learn. We call them "reluctant learners" and they are a growing epidemic.

But all children learn all the time. They can't help it. It is basic instinct founded on survival skills. Knowledge keeps you alive and allows you to flourish. So what are they reluctant to learn? The very things that the scientists and educators keep telling them they need to know. They are reluctant because they are not engaged. There is no passion in their learning.

What is Art? Art is passion. Art is the realm of engagement. When you educate through art you inspire the spirit to crave the knowledge. A chemical reaction becomes a dance. A math theory becomes a thing of structure and beauty. A history lesson comes alive through the full experience of empathy. The children dream of gladiators. They wince at slavery as they read, write, draw, perform. They engage with the information and then they know it. Their passions are ignited and they are inspired and they learn.

Education Through Art.

Vision or insanity?

One man's vision may be another man's insanity.  Recently I finished Irving Stone's biography of Vincent Van Gogh, Lust for Life.  I also saw "Secretariat", the Disney movie starring Diane Lane
 and John Malkovich.  Each piece speaks directly to the theme of a personal intense passion.  In these two cases the passion produced a monumental masterpiece, or masterpieces.  In each case we have a person obsessed with one idea and that obsession eventually leads to greatness.  It is easy to see the value of following one's passion by looking at these great historic events.  As they say, hindsight is 20x20.

But what about when the past was still the future?  Van Gogh's family considered him a monumental failure, the son who could never hold down a job, never learn any business, kept bouncing from passion to passion.  His society considered him a madman and a danger.  And the other artists generally considered him to have no technique or skill.  Penny Chenery, the owner of Secretariat, arguably the best race horse ever, risked the financial future of her entire family, her own children, and her marriage for the sake of an unproven colt.  She was considered crazy by her brother, her husband, and most of the racing industry.  History has proven them to have been right.

But what about all those passions that never worked out?  Never had books written about them or movies made about them because they didn't work out?  What about the Vincents and Pennys of this generation?  How can you tell the difference?  The truth is that you can't.  The problem is not that we can't tell the difference between passion and obsessive madness.  We are asking the wrong question.  The question that we should be asking is - Does it matter?  Van Gogh's society judged him and found him wanting.  Only future generations appreciated what he did.  I wonder if he had been living now if he would have ever painted what he did.

We are so quick to analyze and label that which is different.  We want everyone to be happy.  On the surface, a lovely sentiment, but underneath it reeks of Brave New World.  Just give everyone a happiness pill and humanity is dead.  Humans need to feel passion.  They need to be allowed to pursue their passion no matter how crazy it may seem, no matter how little "success" they may achieve.  Because success is relative.  Success is socially determined and is not the same for all or for all times.  Van Gogh and Chenery succeeded because they didn't care what others thought.  They followed their own inner voice and they risked greatly in order to achieve greatness.  They did not strive for greatness.  They merely went where their passion took them.  The rest followed.

(Just an aside, I, of course, am not condoning any obsessions which lead to the damage or destruction of others.  That should go without saying.)

Just think carefully about the world that you want.  A world of "happiness" for all or a world full of passion.  And then think about our children.  Do we want them to be happy or do we want them to be all they can be?  Passion is not about happiness or success.  Passion is about strong feelings, immense energy, and a roller coaster ride of a life.  With pain, failure, stress, anger, but what a high!  We would no longer need drugs or extreme adventures to feel truly alive.  When you follow your passion you are complete.  That is a world of which I would like to be a part.

I am a Gardener; I am an Artist

I am a Gardener.  Those who know me, know that I am not a gardener of gardens.  In fact, most plants seem to wither and die under my care.  No, I am a gardener of children.  (A Kinder Gartener!)  I take whatever young growth comes to the school and nurture it.  I give it the nutrients, water, soil, and sun that it needs to turn into whatever blossom it is going to be.  There is a video going around Facebook and YouTube about a young man named Andrew De Leon who is exactly the kind of flower which would prosper in our school garden.  He dresses like a Goth and claims to be a failure at everything and yet he has this amazing voice.  Until America's Got Talent, he was treated as a weed, someone who did not fit in the ordered, one-size-fits-all society of the masses.  Daily we see repressed, misfit children reveal hidden talents and amazing gifts.  So I am a gardener who sees a school not as a factory, which churns out productive citizens on a fixed and rigid system, but a garden where students can grow with the support and guidance to be whatever they can be.

I am an Artist.  Again, I can't draw at all, but I am a writer and I know the power of imagination.  We use the student's own imagination to gently allow them to explore, in all subjects, yes, even including mathematics, outside their box.  Out of their tiny, often fantasy, where they escape from the world,  comfort zone.  Breaking out of their shell and taking flight.  Yes, I am mixing metaphors and as an English teacher I should know better.  I do.  But the garden analogy can only be stretched so far.  Because the students may be nurtured by the concrete physical world.  We give them a safe launching pad with daily doses of mental and physical exercises.  But the final goal is to allow them to soar above the garden.  To use their imaginations, their self-confidence to pursue their passions, with firm roots in the here and now.  To dream is one thing; to realize that dream in this present world is another.  It is irresponsible not to teach them the tools they need to turn that dream into a viable, financially sound reality.  So we are a garden of flower birds. 

I am a Teacher.  I till the soil and watch them soar.  I couldn't imagine a better job.  This is my passion and I soar each day!

Where to Start?

Where do you start when you know something is wrong but have no idea how to fix it?  That was my dilemma several years ago.  I knew that there was something wrong at school with my kids.  I spoke with the teachers, the principal, even the board trustee.  I couldn't get any answers or even hints of a solution.  The problems were numerous - bullying issues, boredom, inappropriate material, awareness on my part that my children could be doing so much more.  I eventually realized that the problem was not so much the individual issues but the shape and size of the box that they were in.  Sometimes no matter how we try we can't fix a problem when the problem is an inherent part of the situation.  To be put bluntly, the problem did not lie with the teachers, the principal, or the board.  The problem was the system itself.  There was a basic disconnect between how I viewed a good education and they did.

So, when the box doesn't fit, it is time to look outside the box.  We hear this expression used all the time and, on some level, we understand what it means but, in another way, we often don't really go outside the box, we just look at the box from another angle.  Because what is truly outside the box is the unknown and that is scary.  I went outside the box to get my children the education that I wanted for them.  I went way outside the box.  It was hard; it took work; it was filled with uncertainty.  But I discovered something along the way.  Because my goal was always to have them educated in a way so that they could make responsible decisions and learn to love learning for its own sake.  Because we always strove to open as many doors to their futures as possible.  Because we always stay involved with their learning and growing,outside the box was just fine.

Every day I hear parents complaining about children being bored, teenagers hating school, a week spent watching movies.  How serious are these failures of our education system?  That is a decision to be made by each parent.  But let me ask you this: if the box they are in is not working, why are they still in the box?  Most importantly, why are they still in the box that failed you as a student?  The most common line that I hear when giving people a tour of Mississippi School for the Arts is "Where were you when I was going to high school?"  If this is the kind of school that you would have like to have attended, then why shouldn't it be a school for your children?

But even if we are willing to take ourselves into the unknown, we are very hesitant to risk our children.  But we need to.  If we don't then they will also live to regret that they did not have the opportunity to really learn what education could be like.  As Einstein said and is oft repeated, "The surest sign of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result."

A Bit of Silliness (Is Good for the Soul)

Cody and Jody

Cody and Jody live in a magical house

Not quite like any other place

With toys all around

Six feet deep on the ground

And not one inch of spare space.

Their mother just stands there

Shakes her head at the mess

"Wasn't me," insists Cody.

"Wasn't me," insists Jody.

Who'll clean up the mess? Can you guess?

Jody and Cody have a miraculous place

Where the books leap down from the shelves

They fall and they scatter

Like any old matter

And they do it all by themselves.

Their father just stands there

Shakes his head at the mess

"Wasn't me," giggles Cody.

"Wasn't me," giggles Jody.

Who'll clean up the mess? Can you guess?

Cody and Jody have a peculiar spot

Where the trucks move all on their own

Roaring and crashing

Leaping and smashing

In a ear-crashing demolition zone.

Their grandmother just stands there

Shakes her head at the mess

"Wasn't me," shrieks Cody.

"Wasn't me," shrieks Jody.

Who'll clean up the mess? Can you guess?

Jody and Cody have a mysterious room

Where the clothes are fast disappearing

The pants on the stairs

Where's the underwear?

In the kitchen it just keeps appearing.

Their grandfather just stands there

Shakes his head at the mess

"Wasn't me," whispers Cody.

"Wasn't me," whispers Jody.

Who'll clean up the mess? Can you guess?

Cody and Jody live in an unusual land

Where the sheets are ajumble all day

Beds made in the morning

In a sudden, without warning

Bunch and scrunch up any old way.

Their parents just stand there

Shake their heads at the mess

"Wasn't me," laughs Cody.

"Wasn't me," laughs Jody.

Who'll clean up the mess? Can you guess?

Jody and Cody live in a wonderful house

Not like anywhere else in the world

While everyone's sleeping

"Wasn't Me" is a-sweeping

A-cleaning, a-sorting all unheard.

The grown-ups just stand there

Smile their smiles at no mess

"A new day," smiles Cody.

"Let's go play," smiles Jody.

Who'll clean up the mess? Can you guess?

Copyright 2001 S.L. Holzscherer

 

Ah, to have ADHD

I wish that I had boundless energy. I wish I had more hours in the day, didn't waste eight of them sleeping; four would be enough. I wish I could hyperfocus on my goal and not be constantly sidetracked with distractions. I wish that fear wouldn't keep me from expanding, from trying new things, from leaving my comfort zone. I wish I could be more impulsive and not think everything to death before acting, which usually consequently never happens - the acting, I mean.

Let's see: boundless energy, need little sleep, hyperfocus on my passions, fearless, impulsive. Wait a minute! I wish I had ADHD!!! But isn't that a learning disability? Isn't it a "terrible" thing to have? Isn't it a curse? Why? And I ask again, why?

The only negative thing about people with ADHD is that as children they don't make good students. They don't sit quietly while being lectured. They don't demonstrate real, or feigned, interest in what they are being taught in school. They can't stop reacting, physically and verbally, constantly to what they experience. They want to grab life by the handful and not wait patiently while it is doled out in lesson plans.

And before you lecture me on how I know little about ADHD, let me remind you that I am a high school teacher and principal and have been for many years. I have spent hours, days, and years of joy with these so called "disabled" children. They are truly amazing. The key is to work with them. To find, as with any child, their strengths and to help them work on their weaknesses. Do they talk too much and not listen? Show them the value of listening. Help them see when their talking is interesting to others and when it is just babbling. Is their impulsivity dangerous to themselves or to others? Teach them how to judge actions and consequences. Teach them responsibility. Guide them. Nurture them. As we should do with all the children under our care. But don't suppress those very assets that will make them successful in life. Boundless energy, need little sleep, hyperfocus on their passions, fearless and impulsive.

Our future leaders in politics, entertainment, business, and social advancement will have ADHD.

If our school system doesn't destroy them first.