Changing Education Paradigms

DISCUSSION FOR “CHANGING EDUCATION PARADIGMS”

Our candle burning inquiry group is: Isabel A Hees (secretary for brainstorm and discussion); Sarah A Shehab (group moderator and reflection design); and David L MacCornack (blog posting specialist). This blog discusses the video “Changing Education Paradigms”. We each contributed to the discussion in our brainstorm, during the discussion we agreed on what we wanted to say in our response. Isabel took notes and wrote out our answers, Sarah coordinated the discussion and designed the format for answering the questions, David took the information gathered and posted it for the group.

1. What did you think of the video? What were some of the main points?

The video was a very thorough analysis of the education system. The analysis of ADHD in regards to the education system was an interesting and accurate link but it did not mention anything about why we see more medicated children as we go east across the map. The idea about manufactured children as a way of educating them is an argument I have never heard of and it makes a powerful argument when you talk about educating children like manufacturing cars.

Main points: Public education reform (how do we educate our children); the current system was designed for a former generation (assumptions of social/economic structure based in Enlightenment); ADHD medication “plague” (medicate children to get them to pay attention); Aesthetic experience vs. Anesthetic experience; factory system of education (production line); divergent thinking (aspect of creativity) changing with age; genetics of education and the human capacity for learning.

2. What parts of this video do you agree with? Are they instances in your educational background or experience that were represented in his presentation?

We agree that there are disagreeable aspects of the education system. In terms of aesthetic experience age is less important but there are certain aspects of social skills that are probably best learned with people in your developmental group, which usually corresponds to age.


3. What part of this presentation to you disagree with or have some question?

It is really easy to agree with Sir Ken Robinson, and we do as a group, agree with the growing problems he mentioned but he fails to suggest a solution. This makes it difficult to agree with him fully when at the end of the presentation we are still left with our education system and with that in mind we are more inclined to discover the positive aspects of the system he leaves us with.

4. Did this video have any impact on you as a teacher and/or learner?

The argument is very well articulated and what had the greatest impact was the concept of manufacturing children into “production models” for a society that places emphasis on conformity. We also were very interested in the concept of divergent thinking as an aspect of creativity and how this is lost as students grow older because it is smothered by the linear model of education. The tendency of education systems to stagnate in one concept of the "correct" answer lends itself to the current neglect creativity receives.

5. Should we consider any part of this video in terms of structuring our learning and class framework?

In light of public education reform we should reconfigure the education system to correspond more with our era and not that of the enlightenment. Forming a more inclusive idea of what abilities and skills are important to society could not only help to establish programs to focus on more alternative programs, as well as not demanding that all students perform similarly or be judged as sub par in scholastic ability.