Here's an interesting article from Psychology today that offers some kindly support to deschooling!
A psychologist studied a number of families who removed their ADD/ADHD children from traditional school. The report came up with 3 major conclusions based a the case studies:
Conclusion 1: Most children who had been medicated for ADHD while in conventional schooling were taken off of the drugs when removed from conventional schooling, and those who were never in conventional schooling were never medicated.
Conclusion 2: The children's behavior, moods, and learning generally improved when they stopped conventional schooling, not because their ADHD characteristics vanished but because they were now in a situation where they could learn to deal with those characteristics.
Conclusion 3: Many of these children seem to have a very high need for self-direction in education, and many "hyper focus" on tasks that interest them.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
The myth of the teenaged brain
Why teenagers are growing up so slowly
This article discusses how obligatory education shelters young adults from meaningful work. The repetitive monotony of schooling leads youth to disengage and to become disinterested and lethargic: to act like 'teenagers'.
This article discusses how obligatory education shelters young adults from meaningful work. The repetitive monotony of schooling leads youth to disengage and to become disinterested and lethargic: to act like 'teenagers'.
Chomsky on Adam Smith
Chomsky on Adam Smith
Noam Chomsky discusses classical liberal thought, the problems of corporate power and mass education.
Noam Chomsky discusses classical liberal thought, the problems of corporate power and mass education.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Ted Talks: Education kills creativity
"If you are afraid of being wrong, you will never come up with anything new."
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
A tutor's dilemma
I started to wonder how do the effects of poverty on school performance interact with the development of crucial skills for success in life? As a volunteer tutor at a local inner-city school, I wonder how de-schooling applies to kids from lower socioeconomic statuses.
My first serious concern with the education system was its role in creating economic and class divisions, because children with low socioeconomic status (SES) are less likely to succeed in school and employment for various reasons. The more I look into the education system; however, the more I believe intellect and ability to be creative and independently productive is stunted even in the kids who succeed in school. In the new labour market, children need a certain level of success in school (i.e. a degree) as well as well-developed leadership and independent thinking. The kids who are most successful after school are those who have plenty of opportunity to develop creativity and to pursue their own goals outside of the structured class room.
So I became a bit confused. All the arguments I have heard so far for improving education and life outcomes of low SES children have to with improving grades, preventing drop-out and encouraging post-secondary education. But when the conversation turns to middle class and upper middle classes, I found concerns that schools are training children for a growing list of obsolete jobs and are failing to provide them with the skills required to succeed in the changing economy.
While greater levels of education are correlated with better jobs and better economic outcomes, does this relationship remain once we control for the SES? Is it increased education that causes better outcomes, or is it higher SES that leads to both more education and better outcomes? It may seem strange, but if you are interested I can refer you to many studies that are strong evidence that SES is a much better predictor of employment success than school history. So, although there is a relationship between SES and education, for employment outcomes being very good in school is less advantageous for low SES kids, and doing poorly in school has less of a negative impact on high SES kids. So what other effects of low socioeconomic status are preventing grown children from being successful, and how can we help?
As factory jobs are outsourced and old corporate models are failing, the emerging information economy is moving away from oppressive institutional structures and is increasingly rewarding leadership and innovation over submissiveness to the status quo. Adults who are succeeding today have gained the former, despite institutionalized education that have encouraged the latter.
We have to look at how we can encourage these skills in kids from across the social spectrum. Today’s teachers and employers expect children to apply skills learned outside the classroom, from family and in their communities. One big effect of SES on life outcomes could be the reduced opportunity these children have to develop their own skills and interests, independent thinking and inspiration to produce. (Another important impact of SES on life outcomes is the social connections that high SES adults access when looking for jobs that is not available to those of low SES. As someone who is also excluded from such benefits, I choose to focus on ways I can be useful.)
In the future, the truly disadvantaged child will be the one exposed to too much schooling and not enough learning. As community members who are concerned about child welfare and equality, perhaps we should direct our efforts not to improving grades, but to counteracting the negative effects of institutionalized education by providing community-based activities for children that encourage divergent thinking and self-directed discovery and that leave children excited about a life of learning. It is quite possible that this approach will be far more beneficial for these children's futures than efforts which are basically abetting their greater institutionalization.
My first serious concern with the education system was its role in creating economic and class divisions, because children with low socioeconomic status (SES) are less likely to succeed in school and employment for various reasons. The more I look into the education system; however, the more I believe intellect and ability to be creative and independently productive is stunted even in the kids who succeed in school. In the new labour market, children need a certain level of success in school (i.e. a degree) as well as well-developed leadership and independent thinking. The kids who are most successful after school are those who have plenty of opportunity to develop creativity and to pursue their own goals outside of the structured class room.
So I became a bit confused. All the arguments I have heard so far for improving education and life outcomes of low SES children have to with improving grades, preventing drop-out and encouraging post-secondary education. But when the conversation turns to middle class and upper middle classes, I found concerns that schools are training children for a growing list of obsolete jobs and are failing to provide them with the skills required to succeed in the changing economy.
While greater levels of education are correlated with better jobs and better economic outcomes, does this relationship remain once we control for the SES? Is it increased education that causes better outcomes, or is it higher SES that leads to both more education and better outcomes? It may seem strange, but if you are interested I can refer you to many studies that are strong evidence that SES is a much better predictor of employment success than school history. So, although there is a relationship between SES and education, for employment outcomes being very good in school is less advantageous for low SES kids, and doing poorly in school has less of a negative impact on high SES kids. So what other effects of low socioeconomic status are preventing grown children from being successful, and how can we help?
As factory jobs are outsourced and old corporate models are failing, the emerging information economy is moving away from oppressive institutional structures and is increasingly rewarding leadership and innovation over submissiveness to the status quo. Adults who are succeeding today have gained the former, despite institutionalized education that have encouraged the latter.
We have to look at how we can encourage these skills in kids from across the social spectrum. Today’s teachers and employers expect children to apply skills learned outside the classroom, from family and in their communities. One big effect of SES on life outcomes could be the reduced opportunity these children have to develop their own skills and interests, independent thinking and inspiration to produce. (Another important impact of SES on life outcomes is the social connections that high SES adults access when looking for jobs that is not available to those of low SES. As someone who is also excluded from such benefits, I choose to focus on ways I can be useful.)
In the future, the truly disadvantaged child will be the one exposed to too much schooling and not enough learning. As community members who are concerned about child welfare and equality, perhaps we should direct our efforts not to improving grades, but to counteracting the negative effects of institutionalized education by providing community-based activities for children that encourage divergent thinking and self-directed discovery and that leave children excited about a life of learning. It is quite possible that this approach will be far more beneficial for these children's futures than efforts which are basically abetting their greater institutionalization.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Zine Pt. 3: Introduction to the institution
There is nothing democratic about school, so why is it the formative institution in our society? Because the school system is the biggest barrier to true democracy in our society.
All this stuff is ripped off from Ivan Illich's book Deschooling Society
John Taylor Gatto, Weapons of Mass Instruction
This man's has reinterpreted, illustrated and applied Ivan Illich's Deschooling Society to the present day. The vids are long (the first only runs 2hours or so not 4), but are very interesting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)