I was talking in the physical world today about a discussion I had in the virtual world about AP College Board courses and their reliance on the memorization of facts in order to prepare for a test (presumably for college credit).
Aaron, I don’t get how you can hate the College Board so much but still teach AP US History?
I get this question a lot, and my answer is rooted deeper than just AP courses. It pretty much sums up my view on a lot of things in life, but I’ve learned to answer this question with a question.
How does everyone feel about non-educators that ridicule the educational system and point out its flaws?
No one has the right to ridicule from the sidelines. If you want to make change, you have to be involved in the system to change it. It doesn’t matter if it’s critiquing AP curriculum, the educational structure, or any other facet of life for that matter.
If you want to change the rules, make sure you’re playing the game first. No one wants advice from the player who never even tried out.
Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.
I understand where you’re coming from Aaron. I agree that you need experience in a system for insight into how to change it, but while I’m still an educator, I no longer teach in a traditional system for a reason. I’ve seen how it can corrupt those who enforce it and I’ve been corrupted myself. The system socializes you into making assumptions about what the real problems are and there comes a point when you’ve been teaching that way for so long that it almost inevitably becomes tied to your ego. I love #edchat, but it can be depressing sometimes too. Seeing the wrong questions being asked over and over again (and hey, I’ve asked them too!) is a reminder of how far we really have to go.
My advice to most educators is to stay in the system long enough to figure out what needs to change, push with everything you’ve got for first-hand experience on its potential to change, then actually find a way to teach uncompromisingly according to your values. That might mean securing tenure or it might mean working with a different organization. I just don’t think it’s possible in the long term for one’s actions to stay so far out of alignment with one’s values without either going crazy or adjusting one’s values and world view to better fit the actions.
I see your point and I tend to agree. However, this is public education. It belongs to the public. We serve the public. It should be democratic and that should mean the public has a right to offer constructive criticism and provide basic ideas. I have friends who work in the non-profit sector or in business and I need their input if my goal is for students to think well about life.
Yes, as educators, we have a certain experience and authority. But that comes with a cost. We can get myopic. We can move toward groupthink. The input from non-educators is valuable as long as it is civil, thoughtful and relevant.
I’m split on this question. On the one hand, I’m totally with you on being part of the solution rather than just criticizing. In previous careers, I’ve seen enough instances of people who can’t do (or won’t try) giving advice. I tend to put weight on the opinions, in Seth Godin’s words, of people who have “shipped.” It’s for this reason that I’m pursuing my teaching certification – I want to understand teaching from the inside out.
On the other hand, I’ve also seen an attitude from many educators that totally discount the contributions of those who haven’t taught in a classroom. Education is special, but I’m sorry, the profession is not so unique that no one else has a voice.
I’m also wondering if those who have been in the educational system for years are in the role “market leaders” from Clayton Christenson’s Innovator’s Dilemma (talking about his original ideas, not specifically the Disruption In the Classroom proposals). That is, as much as those in the system may want to change, there is simply too much vested interest in the way to allow that to happen – too many antibodies kill off deep structural change. In this model, disruption has to come from outside the system, and that means building on ideas from those not traditionally thought of as K12 educators.