Do we even teach the right thing?

Why do we teach the way we do? In fact why do we structure our educational systems in the way we do? Three thousand years ago the Greeks and the Turks would educate with tutors in a way that benefitted the student and their life to come. While the children on farms learnt how to plant and reap, the offspring of skilled artisans would pore over a battery of skills to set them on the course to continue their family trade. The rich and the powerful were given lessons in how to be leaders of men: Alexander the Great walked with Aristotle and learned philosophy; Julius Caesar was given lessons in oratory.  Their lives and their education were fit for purpose.

Are we missing a trick? If Gardener believes there are 9 different intelligences (though I’m sure some could be doubled up), are we failing to cater for 7 of them with a curriculum in the western world that rewards only the ability to form coherent expressions in either written or mathematical terms?

How many students out there have an ability to recognise colour and aesthetics that are not covered in an art class, an ability to calculate risk in an intuitive manner no maths lesson will help them develop? The lessons taught are functional skills based classes that get students understanding language, maths and then the ability to use those skills in a wider setting – Physics, Chemistry, Economics for example are all mathematics based, while History, Business Studies, Theology all need a skill with the spoken or written word.

Students see the world in different ways as well – they have learning differences that mean some will have the focus to concentrate on language for a prolonged period, while others will not. Our rigid educational structure determines who will win out in schools and who will not and this blindness to the value of anything not ticked off by a mark scheme hurts those with the most to offer. We set no store by confidence or kindness when marking exams, the ability to influence or emotional intelligence:  soft skills that businesses now crave across the globe are left as peripherals when they should be encouraged.

So what’s the conclusion? We need more diversity and to change our ideas about what is and isn’t important. But because of the exam structures in the west we must encourage these elements in the spaces between exams or outside the classroom. Perhaps that is what we have done; cursed our students with the same 9 to 5 we all suffer through: working during the day on what the world says is important while outside engaging with what we truly love.

So let’s engage with the learning differences, let’s value the ability to smile and make people feel comfortable. While we can’t get them class credit in emotional intelligence, we can certainly allow them to express themselves in a varied way and gain confidence in themselves while we help them tick the strict, anachronistic boxes, of modern education.

http://howtoteachandlearn.blogspot.com/