Professionals who dispense information (Teachers, Doctors,
Lawyers come to mind first) tend to HATE the Internet in
general, except those sites which they approve of, because of
lack of control.
In short, it's competition. Children saying, "Wikipedia said"
goes against what the teacher's textbook says. The teacher works
with the textbooks (or if they care about what they teach,
themselves) for the curriculum and Wikipedia does not follow
academic curriculum. [I could rant about the assumptions of
19th-21st century education but then there'd be a Tome so I have
to be care when I get started on the subject tongue emoticon The
Progressivist movement of Dewey was very fruitful. That was a
child-centered, child-driven philosophy that was supported by
the system. The Internet as it functions without adult
supervision functions similarly by providing an abundance of
resources, in a sense.
But Dewey's ideals were abandoned around 1940 as the country
geared up to enter WWII and hasn't looked back since, the only
leftover bits of Dewey are among School Librarians, oddly
enough, unless they're encumbered by local figures to remove
certain books. Oh well. I can't fix school. I have to tell
myself that whenever I start on the subject. You're both right
in a sense that it's not _entirely_ credible, but neither are
the very textbooks the teachers are teaching from / the kids are
learning from.
So in that sense you're also both mistaken.
Putting a black hat on Wikipedia and a white hat on textbooks
doesn't solve the issue of thinking critically.
Example: In 6th grade, there were pictures of cavemen in my
history book with blond hair and blue eyes. This was 1983 - not
that long ago. The methodologies used then in school are the
same as today - Bell Curves and such, statistical methodologies
and whatnot for grading. Even Common Core isn't _that_
fundamental of a change [although I have some nit-picks about
it]
Ok, not the best example. Still, critical thinking needs to be
applied _across the board_. Otherwise it is simply "This is
authority. Period. This is not authority. Period." That's not
critical thinking. That's dogma. My apologies and you're
correct. Within the school system itself, that is correct.
Surviving school is an important skill for children to learn at
a young age and knowing how it works is important so for that, I
applaud the 2nd grade teacher.
It does not help them as adults but it _does_ help them while
they go through a school system that has its own special ways
about it. Socio-historical critical readings are, unfortunately,
out of fashion at the moment. "Fact" and "Authority" are in
fashion, wrapped under the umbrella of a
critical-thinking-that-*isn't*.
I admire the "ideals" of Common Core but it's unfortunately
going to be a fad, like all of the fads that came before that
each of us got stuck with in our schools growing up, that
they'll abandon in 10-12 years for something new. Lots of
hoopla, lots of money, then all the criticisms and dismantling
of it for the "next new thing to replace "Grit" with.
Ok. I almost launched into my Common Core rant. I'm not going to
do it....
Your daughter has to survive school.
For school survival, knowing what _they_ find acceptable and
unacceptable is important.
But _YOU_ are in a place to let her know that, "This is how
SCHOOL does things. It doesn't mean it reflects reality."
I had to have the same type of discussion with my nephew when he
was 8 yrs old and complaining about the way they taught math.
[it's gotten worse now that he's in 4th grade].
I explained that Yes, the school system you're in is flawed just
like you think it is. But if you learn to give the teacher what
they EXPECT from you, you'll survive. You can get good grades
while still thinking for yourself.
He does very well in math - I told him how to "show his work"
while still calculating in his head at the same time.
Socio-historical critical readings are, unfortunately, out of
fashion at the moment. "Fact" and "Authority" are in fashion,
wrapped under the umbrella of a critical-thinking-that-*isn't*.
I've been ranting about the way schools do things since I was at
least in 4th grade that I remember.
I wrote letters to the school newspaper - even one to the local
paper when I was 12-14... I'm 43 now and it *still* bothers me
that nothing's changed. Can't be fixed though. Just survived.
Thriving is possible too. I wish it wasn't that way... but it's
too big to change, too much invested in too many places. Unless
you want to form parental education groups, there's not much you
can do for them. But you *can* do something to help your
daughter. One well rounded person is far better than 10,000
biased people who speak with a singular voice, imo.
But I'm an individualist... a product of my upbringing which
included my mother, who was supportive of my odd way of looking
at the world that she didn't understand herself but supported.
My 10 yr old nephew just popped out here, talking about Five
Nights at Freddy's 3 and where he's gotten in the game.
Children's culture [entertainment, friends] have greater
influence on their way of thinking than school does anyway,
[1]Erek Tinker - so try not to stress too much about it. You'll
learn more about "how kids think" by understanding Five nights
at Freddy's or Minecraft than you will what they learn at
school, unless they're obsessed by school.
Whatever the obsession is, that's the real curriculum. But I'm
biased as I tend towards a Dewey / John Holt-Unschooling / JS
Neill Summerhill outlook on things. I believe children learn far
more math and algebra, war and compassion, by a Pokemon
obsession than by learning the arcane 17th century short-hand
for mathematics. Myself, I learned more math by getting a Tandy
Color Computer 2 at age 11 and teaching myself to program in
BASIC than I ever learned in school.
References
Visible links
1.
https://www.facebook.com/erektinker?hc_location=ufi
