Publish at December 16 2013 Updated November 07 2024
From one country to the next, from one authority to the next, government education policies are inspired by much the same concepts and models, with a few variations. For example, they define "core curricula", "knowledge bases" and "transversal skills" that everyone should master.
However, when they leave school, everyone has different levels of knowledge - because you only really learn what you want to learn - and many have not mastered entire sections of the "common core" at all, even after 12 years of teaching. But all have been subjected to the same "compulsory" logic, in a kind of obsession with management, comparison and evaluation, an obsession that now extends even beyond borders with PISA and other rankings of educational institutions and systems.
It is politically difficult to break free from this logic; many people's interests depend on it, and the arguments in its favor are almost unanimous, even if most of them are prejudiced (mathematics is essential) or traditional (I was subjected to this system and I succeeded). The only likely way to change it is to transform mentalities: "this way of doing things, which used to be acceptable, is no longer acceptable for various reasons".
If a common body of knowledge seems necessary to be able to function in society, defining it precisely and making it compulsory is counter-productive almost by definition, since it is already "necessary" and, what's more, it is dynamic and variable over time and territory. Necessary" cannot be decreed; it must be defined in relation to what we want to achieve.
The country's "Minister of Education" wants to add a compulsory history course here, compulsory English at primary level there, a course in ethics, philosophy, science, art, computing, physical education, ICT, cooking, etc., and he's encouraged to do so by all possible lobbies; even if it means increasing the number of hours at school.
Will a little more of the same produce different results?
This "a little more of the same" almost always means a little more "certified material" to assimilate, and a little more time locked in a classroom, with little movement, little communication and little learning, whatever you think about it. This regime is not good for anyone, not even physically. Students have almost no control. And yet this is what is almost exclusively discussed.
Elsewhere, what's burgeoning in many places is more choice, more communication, more movement, more interaction, exchange, connection and autonomy. Necessity is on this side. Soles (Self-Organised Learning Environments) are a good example, as is the popularity and success of the "inverted classroom".
In this spirit of continuous comparison and competition, what politician would reduce disciplinary time in favor of free activities? Who would dare transform school into a place of open study with available teachers? Who would offer a choice of language, art, science or physical education courses for those who reach the basic standards? One that looks beyond PISA and arbitrary standards. This choice can now be offered, rather than subjecting all students to the diktat of group, age or performance.
Conscientious teachers are usually open to anything that can improve the success of their teaching while making their lives easier; if there is resistance on their part, it usually comes from a lack of support from their administration.
But surprisingly, it's the students who are the most resistant to change; if they've been given little confidence so far, it's undoubtedly because they're incapable of controlling themselves and making the right decisions for themselves. Even as teenagers, the answers they give to surveys reflect a real lack of confidence in their judgment. They prefer to trust the authorities and the job guarantees offered by a standard recognized diploma.
"When we asked the (300) students their preferences before the course, 75% said they preferred a traditional method. At the end of the course, 86% said they preferred the inverted format. We reversed their preferences".
"9 out of 10 of these students said their learning was enhanced, and nearly 100% that this model helped them develop skills useful in their careers."
Harnessing the potential of e-learning at school is still almost utopian in 2013. There is an incongruity between, on the one hand, the ambitions for personalization and autonomy displayed by most education systems, the economic benefits and improved success rates, and on the other, the ban on its use in the formal education system. In fact, using it allows us to offer choices and greater autonomy.
The question of what common knowledge to master comes down to defining what we want to do collectively, without restricting individual freedoms.
The common denominator looks like "communicating, reasoning and... loving". This is what we all normally do and want to do. What fosters communication (language, expression, art), what fosters judgment (including mathematics, culture, play), what fosters tolerance (diversity of viewpoints, experiences). Common standards are established, aiming at basic autonomy, and then the choice of interests is allowed, which has no limits. It doesn't have to be long or complicated.
In this way, constraint is kept to a minimum. Necessity and interest replace it so much better.
References
PISA - OECD - http://www.oecd.org/pisa/
Flipped classroom boosts exam grades, flips perceptions - eCampus News
SOLEs as Innovation - Self-Organised Learning Environments - Sugata Mitra
Children less fit than their parents at the same age - Le Figaro
Minister Malavoy turns a deaf ear - Communiqué Féépeq - .pdf
The internet can harm, but can also be a child's best tool for learning - Sugata Mitra - The Guardian -
Primary school hours cut - Blogue Lire-Écrire
L'école, cabane à lapins - in Questions de classe(s) by Bernard Collot
School time: stop the catastrophe! - Mediapart blog
Test Scores Sink as New York Adopts Tougher Benchmarks - New York Times
Mandatory history course at college - FECQ
The "socle commun" in France - MEN
http://www.education.gouv.fr/cid2770/le-socle-commun-de-connaissances-et-de-competences.html
You might also like:
Adapting texts and websites for neurodivergent students
Understanding what surrounds us requires the ability to decode what we see. Some students, known as "neurodivergent" or having a "dys" disorder, have to try every day to grasp texts and websites designed for typical profiles. How about improving their accessibility?
Preparing the educational future in incubators
Many institutions want more educational innovation in the classroom. However, imposing technologies on a teaching staff carries more risks than benefits. Educational incubators or labs are ideal in this sense to allow for discussion, analysis, and planning of what to do next.
Packaging distance learning courses, or the art of selling the immaterial
Offering a well-packaged, tempting course...
Teaching music at a distance: an achievable challenge
Are some subjects impossible to teach at a distance? Some, including music, seem more difficult. Yet, with the covid-19 pandemic, music teachers have had no choice but to start teaching classes without attendance. An obstacle, to be sure, but one that can be partially overcome with many online tools.
Promoting local arts through education
The arts and culture are formidable anthropological traces to be studied in order to develop in students a desire to create. Consequently, arts and culture education (EAC) enables learners to understand art, to make art and to come into contact with local artists.
