|
|
School Philosophy | Page 2 |
|
|
THE FORMAL PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION There are three principles underlying this program:
I. Discipline of formal learning This is the traditional notion of "order" in learning. Only through an ordered procedure can the aim of education be reached. "Interest" and "pleasure" are important in learning but they backfire if allowed to direct formal education or become its only motivation. Satisfaction and success in learning will be attained only when the child's intellectual potential is realized. This means that immediate pleasure or interest, important as they are, must often be subordinated to "order" or "intellectual discipline." Only through discipline of this sort can the child learn to go further. Moreover, allied with this idea, so-called "rote-learning" or memorization - so much in discredit nowadays - is significant for two reasons:
The truth of the latter statement is clearly demonstrated by a simple example: the sound "cat" does not mean "elephant" in English. It could - but doesn't. It is a matter of rote learning in infancy that the sound "cat" means one particular kind of animal and no other. Obviously, then, rote-learning is not a dirty word - it is an indispensable part of learning.
The basis for learning is established by the school in two ways:
Note the first of these. It is for this reason that the curriculum must never become a catchall for all sorts of other things. When the child comes to school he comes to learn and to work and he should be allowed to concentrate his efforts in a field he can understand. By "concentrating in area" is meant that instruction should not be "spread thin" over a multiplicity of subjects. The child should be neither frustrated nor bored. He should not be expected to do tasks obviously beyond his grasp - but neither should he be bored by allowing him to set what he considers to be his "own pace". He should always be required to reach just a bit higher than he thinks he can. Accordingly, instruction will be concentrated in such necessary areas as:
Efficiency falls off rapidly with fatigue. The school day is far too long, especially in primary years. The principle of "concentration in time" (traditionally known as "attention") means that the child who works hard and at peak efficiency for a short time will accomplish more - will learn more deeply - will acquire better study habits - than the child who drags on at low efficiency induced by boredom and fatigue. As a basis for learning the child must be provided with information from authoritative sources. This is the way, for example, that a child learns to speak. And it should be the way he learns to speak. Every parent knows the amazing ability of the child to "find out for himself." It should be the primary aim of the school to help develop and sharpen his faculty - though too often our schools have destroyed it. But at various stages of learning there is a time and a place for authoritative information. To ignore this time and place is inevitably to frustrate the learner and even to close the door on future learning.
In this day of emphasis upon "induction" and "scientific method" it is essential to point out the absolute importance of logical reasoning from principles which the learner has already grasped. Again, the teaching of reading is a case in point. If the child is given information on various letter and phonic combinations, he rapidly learns to decipher for himself the whole of the written English language - a language which (in spite of its critics) does lend itself very well to logical treatment. In contrast it is the "inductive" method whereby the child is expected to memorize a large number of word shapes and then to "induce" his own rules from this bewildering array. This may be a good method for a chemist exploring an unknown world of chemical compounds. It is completely unnecessary at the primary level, and completely unsuitable for tiny children learning the basic skill of reading. Induction - the gathering of bits of information and the development of general principles from this data - is obviously of great importance. Its significance has been spotlighted by the tremendous advance of modern experimental science. But this very advance has also led to an unfortunate overemphasis upon this method as if it were the sole basis for learning. There is a further unfortunate result. Many educators have concluded that, from the very earliest stage, children must be taught that the "experimental method" is the only sound way of learning. So we have, for example, the "inductive" method of learning to read. But we have also the spate of so-called "science" courses in primary grades - courses which in reality have no relation whatever to true science and true scientific method. The true basis of the "scientific method" (that is, experiment and induction) is the brilliant flash of insight, painstaking design of experiment, and followed by equally painstaking care and accurate observation. The school can, and should, impart an understanding and appreciation of the necessity of thoroughness, of care, and of accurate observation. Training in auditory and visual observation thus becomes one of the more important tasks of school. The intellectual nature of the school's instruction has been stressed. But the very nature of intellectual accomplishment is itself aesthetic. For example, the fascination of mathematics is really aesthetic. Similarly, in reading and writing, in geography and history, in literature, the aesthetic and artistic is integral and vital. Without it the world would indeed be a dull utilitarian prison. It is, then, quite understandable that the primary school should concern itself with the fundamental aspects of aesthetic observation. But, at the same time, formal furtherance of artistic ability must be left to the artist in each field who alone is competent to instruct and to inspire. There has been a disastrous overemphasis upon so-called "creative expression," "creativity," or "self-expression," which has all but wrecked the orderly development of the child's reason. But we should recognize that it is a matter of overemphasis which has produced this thoroughly bad system of education. Unless "creativity" is at the service of, and restrained by, reason it becomes merely license. The development of expression and of real creativity is one of the primary aims of Tempo School. But it should never be forgotten that real creativity is not easy or even pleasant. It is one of the most difficult and painful activities a human being can endure. A mother brings forth her child in pain and suffering. It is not at all fanciful to point out that the true artist who "creates" also "groans and travails" in the birth pangs of his creation. Creativity demands its price - and it is a high one! II. Cyclical nature of learning The school curriculum will be based upon the idea that learning can be considered as taking place in three stages:
In the matter of speech Dr. Penfield has demonstrated clearly that, if the "speech area" of the brain is destroyed before the age of 12, other brain areas can take over the job so that the child learns to speak well again. In other words, in early life the brain cells might be considered to be in a "plastic" state. But after the age of 12 a sort of rigidity has set in and, if the speech area now be destroyed, the person will never learn to speak properly. If such "deadlines" should exist in other areas of leaning as well, then it is obviously of the utmost importance that learning in these areas should not be put off. Does this not suggest why "remedial" reading is so generally unsuccessful? And might it not explain why, if arithmetic is muffed in the early grades, the student never becomes really proficient? Although Tempo School proceeds on the assumption that one should "strike while the iron is hot," nevertheless it is well known that many exceptional individuals who had no formal education in childhood later taught themselves and reached a level of education far beyond that which any of us have attained. Since it is true that individuals of ability can, through their own determined efforts, make up for the worst gaps in their early formation, it is evident that a "deadline" does not necessarily apply everywhere and to the same extent to every human being. Determined effort can allow a second chance. This calls to attention another element which might explain the poor results of much "remedial" work - an element which is here termed "fossilization." A piece of soft wood is fossilized by the steady drip of calcium-containing water and literally turned to stone. By fossilization in educational formation is meant the rigidity of mind and habit induced by the steady drip of wrong and harmful methods in infancy and youth. Experimental psychologists are today demonstrating that experiences undergone by animals in infancy (corresponding to the first six months of a human's life) become irreversible. Their effects cannot be undone. Similarly, there is good reason to believe that poor methods inculcating harmful study habits in primary school may have far-reaching effects which cannot be undone by any amount of "remedial" work undertaken after these habits are set. Good habits cannot be initiated too early. "Later" is often too late. Although modern educational practice and method makes much of "respect for the individual" and of "individual differences," there is every reason to suspect that it conceals, in reality, a disdain for the individual. The real aim of modern pedagogy appears to be that of "socializing" the child - of training him to become a conforming member of the "group." It seems that if the child is "educated" or adjusted to fit himself into the group then his education is considered to have been successful. Social development is important - certainly. But only through a real development of his own personality can a man be of any use to himself and to society. In Tempo School each child has his "own" desk and his own books for which he is responsible. Each child has his own position and status in the class - and his own responsibilities. Classes are taught as a whole - but with attention and "remedial" teaching provided from the very beginning for those who require it. Nevertheless, it is quite impossible that sufficient individual attention can be given in any classroom. There is only one efficient source of individual attention - the intelligent parent. Only parents can give the necessary attention - only they can do the necessary "remedial" work if the child should be falling behind. And, in fact, it is often the parent who spots the difficulties that even the best of teachers may have missed in a class of 15 or more children. With the family and school working together, actual "individual development" can be obtained in school work. top...
|
|
|