In A Brief History of American K-12 Mathematics Education, David Klein makes the remarkable observation that "[i]t would be a mistake to think of the major conflicts in education as disagreements over the most effective ways to teach."
Such are the perversions of progressive/constructivist educational practice that what would seem obvious is nothing of the sort.
The money quote:
It would be a mistake to think of the major conflicts in education as disagreements over the most effective ways to teach. Broadly speaking, the education wars of the past century are best understood as a protracted struggle between content and pedagogy. At first glance, such a dichotomy seems unthinkable. There should no more be conflict between content and pedagogy than between one's right foot and left foot. They should work in tandem toward the same end, and avoid tripping each other. Content is the answer to the question of what to teach, while pedagogy answers the question of how to teach.
The trouble comes with the first step. Do we lead with the right foot or the left? If content decisions come first, then the choices of pedagogy may be limited. A choice of concentrated content precludes too much student centered, discovery learning, because that particular pedagogy requires more time than stiff content requirements would allow. In the same way, the choice of a pedagogy can naturally limit the amount of content that can be presented to students. Therein lies the source of the conflict.
Monday, January 03, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment