Retro-Education : Is " Modern " Really Better?
This article discusses the efficacy of modern, conceptual curriculum methods in elementary education in terms of brain function ;
particularly regarding the neural processes of noise reduction, pathway
establishment and memory consolidation.
Nostalgia
Once upon a time subjects in school were divided into discreet
categories, enabling students to have a clear expectation of the task at
hand. At the risk of oversimplifying : History pertained to what
happened in the course of time : e. g. wars, trends, politics,
movements, outcomes. Geography referred to the characteristics of places
: landscapes, mountain ranges, continents, etc. Meanwhile, English
grammar class consisted to learning about parts of speech, punctuation
and other language mechanics and math was often divided neatly into
adding, subtracting, multiplying, word problems and at higher grade
levels, geometry and algebra. It might seem amusing, yet perhaps
accurate to refer to this method as the “place for everything,
everything in its place” curriculum. In this system there were no hybrid
names such as Language Arts or Social Studies. Math curricula did not
include overlapping, conceptual approaches in which the student was
expected to assimilate from among simultaneous smidgeons of addition,
subtraction, geometry and other math operations. Now of course, modern
curricula feature such integrative, conceptual approaches based on the
notion that this will enable the child to piece together the puzzle and
end up with an enhanced level of proficiency as well as a meta-cognitive
“grasp” of the subject matter.
Two confounding factors in education theory have prevailed over the
past several decades. One is the presumption that increased technology
would lead to more skilled, enlightened students. During the 1992
presidential campaign, vice presidential nominee Al Gore said he looked
forward to a time when all students would have mega access to
Internet-generated information, including the Library of Congress. He
was right about the access part, wrong about the search part. Turns out
kids did what one would expect kids to do ; use the computer as a play
object, leading to a generation of students able to type out
transformers on the keyboard but unable to spell cat on the blackboard.
The second notion was that the mind of a child is conceptual and
capable of understanding concepts even before specific detail-oriented
neural pathways are entrenched in the brain to facilitate automaticity.
Judging by most recent results and the number of students identified
with special education needs, the latter theory seems not to have panned
out. Interestingly, every time student performance declines in the USA a
newer, more conceptual and loftier curriculum, arguably beyond the
reach of even some students with average intelligence is put in play.
To cope with the cost, as well as the academic frustration inherent
in this process, school districts have attempted to address certain
aspects of the problem. Making special education eligibility more
rigorous has been one. The introduction of RTI – which, despite the
claim that it provides a more normalized alternative to special
education, “identifies” students in much the same way via
tier-distinctions, has been another. Meanwhile the curriculum either
retains the same circular format is conceptually embellished in an
ironic (perhaps even Panglossian) attempt to ensure higher student
achievement.
The results have been both predictable and sobering. A report by
Harvard University showed that students in Latvia, Chile and Brazil are
improving their academic skills at a rate three times as fast as
American students. Students in Colombia, Lithuania, Poland and
Lichtenstein do so at twice the rate of American students. (2012) Middle
school American students are now behind roughly 25 other nations in
broad student achievement even as new thinkers are proposing more
rigorous academic standards for them. It seems a bit like asking a very
short-legged person to overcome his inability to jump over a hurdle by
increasing its height. This writer would submit – less whimsically –
that the true goal of public education is not to win some sort of
vaguely defined international competition but to reach as many students
along the normal curve as possible so that more can learn basic and
necessary skills through which to function as adults. The American
education system, which is more quintessentially public and inclusive
than any other in the world cannot be elitist and public at one and the
same time.
In some ways this reflects a logically flawed argument implicit in
the notion of the “American Dream. ” It is the idea that all American
students ought to be able to go to college in order to better themselves
and increase their living standards. Obviously if that many young
people graduated from college, the supply of college grads would exceed
demand, resulting in more joblessness and lower pay scales for those
graduates.
Thus far the argument has been somewhat pedantic - nothing more
than broad-strokes criticism that might be countered by equally
persuasive arguments in support of modern education curricula and
educational philosophy. To get beyond that, it might help to discuss the
development of brain and cognition in early childhood.
From Categorical to Conceptual
Human brain development is fascinating, because for all the talk
among paleo-anthropologists about how large brains define the human
species, it is actually a reduction in brain volume that ultimately
enhances human cognition. At several stages in early childhood and early
adolescence the brain undergoes what is often called a pruning process
(Chechik, Gal. et al 1999). During these stages, most notably at
approximately 2 years of age, 7 years of age, 11 years of age and 15
years of age, brain tissue is shed. At face value this might seem
detrimental to enhanced cognition. In fact the opposite is true. In
childhood a great deal of factual details and associations are learned
and stored categorically – these comprised the nuts and bolts of what
educators often refer to as automaticity. That is why a young child
differentiates between parents and others, why asking a four year to
process both his needs and the reactions of others through advanced
social-empathic abilities is unrealistic. Their neural wiring runs
parallel to that.
Two types of neural columns in the brain arise in brain development.
Vertical pathways allow for such categorical processing skills – and
give the child a kind of linear cognitive topography. Since
volume-learning is so essential in the early years the pruning process
is gradual. In terms of learning style, categorical learning must
precede conceptual learning. It is not a function of educational theory
but a neurological mandate.
At various points in development, horizontal neural networks begin
to intertwine with horizontal pathways. That intermingling enables
various associations to connect with one another. That in turn makes
experiential comparisons possible. Visual inputs can mingle with
auditory inputs and/or tactile inputs to create multi-sensory thoughts,
feelings and linguistic concepts. The child can then begin to gain a
gestalt of his world, including the figure-ground perception enabling
him to process both his own needs and that of others. As Kohler (1981)
and Piaget (1932) have suggested, this gives rise to the
proto-conceptual aspects of moral thought.
At the age of seven this begins in small steps. Over time an
increase in horizontal-vertical cross-grid innervations will accelerate
the pruning mechanism, giving the older child a greater reference point
for storing knowledge, that is, a back-up system with greater redundancy
and integrative capacities. At that point the child, now approaching
adolescence and cognitive brain maturation, no longer needs as much
brain tissue to retain memories. Also, due to the cross grid “meshing”
of neurons, the older child can think in terms of relationships and
concepts, not just singular categories.
Yet the brain of an elementary school student is still primarily
categorical and will remain so until the latency-early adolescent years
when pruning reaches its final stages.
Another developmental factor can be considered in advocating for a
retro-education approach. It has to do with the establishment and
reliance on categorical knowledge as a noise reducing process.
Feed-forward, Memory Consolidation and Automaticity
The mass and volume of the human brain is still vast, despite
pruning periods, which means that the establishment and retrieval of
skill memories will be subject to noise interference. Even in
post-pruning stages, the human brain has roughly 25 billion neural
connections, and due to what Lashley (1950) referred to as the mass
action-equipotentiality phenomenon much of the brain will be active for
each task. Memory retrieval would thus require a superior sifting
process, a means of selectively disregarding neural inputs devoted to
irrelevant sensations or skill memories. Such a noise-reduction
mechanism unfolds in the brain in several ways. One is through the use
of categorical language skills, especially self-regulatory language, to
guide one’s focus. In fact, despite its social and communicative
benefits some have argued that the original evolutionary advantage of
human language might have been to enhance memory, attention span and
selective attention faculties – in other words as a luck-of-the-draw
mutation providing a broad categorical/organizational access in an
extraordinarily large, noisy brain. (Vallotin & Ayoub 2011).
Another means of sifting is called the feed-forward or “gating”
response. It entails having an expectation or bias that provides for
pre-recognition of what does and does not coincide with relevant input.
In some ways this is nothing more than a neural version of Piaget’s
notion of the scheme ; although his concept pertained to previously
learned ideas rather than a mechanical pre-set and noise-reducing
mechanism.
From Brain to Classroom
The gradual development of the human brain has implications for
education theory ; one of which is that in elementary grades the
old-style, categorical method is more brain-friendly, more likely to
lead to automaticity and down the road, to age-appropriate conceptual
thinking. Translating that process into a curriculum theory would no
doubt over-turn apple carts and invite criticism. On the other hand,
since the modern curriculum methods don’t seem to be working very well,
perhaps it is time for new ideas, particularly those grounded in old
ideas that seemed to work better. In a more practical context, a return
to a retro-educational approach might entail the following revisions.
1. That the elementary school curriculum be rigorously categorical
from grades 1-5, then gradually conceptualized in grades 6 and 7.
2. That the actual name of subjects should have a tight and
categorical association with the material to be taught. Labels and
categories like Geography and History are more categorical and brain
friendly and have greater feed forward value than ambiguous terms such
as Social Studies or Language Arts. Breaking up language classes into
categorical, discreet units such as grammar, spelling, reading, writing
etc. would be more learnable at the elementary level. In that context,
the teacher would explain to the class exactly what they would be
learning from the outset in an information-friendly theme/variations
format where the subject’s title correlates directly with the material
to be learned. Undoubtedly many modern educators, and certainly the
theoreticians who espouse the modern methods might be rendered
uncomfortable with such a regressive approach. On the other hand the
student might find it very comforting. More to the point, they might
learn more, memorize more, develop more solid degrees of automaticity in
all skill areas and conceivably make less necessary the interventions
provided in special education and RTI formats.
3. A return to a more categorical format would enable teachers to
truly understand levels of student achievement in building blocks
fashion and perhaps they would see fewer students with double and triple
ceilings in their academic performance.
4. Returning to a categorical method would likely umbrella more
students along the normal curve and set the stage for a higher rate of
functional skills within the population – as opposed to establishing
ever-higher standards and peeling off even students with potentially
average intellectual abilities.
5. Use of a categorical (old-school…pardon the pun) teaching method
would enable teachers to use time-tested memory-friendly/drill
exercises such as rhythm, music, word-spelling formulas such as… i after
e except after c. While some teachers are creative enough to
incorporate such mechanics into the modern, conceptual method it is more
difficult to employ that kind of associative approach in a conceptual
teaching format. In some ways this is simple as saying narrow pathway
teaching methods such as repetition, rhyme and recitation are more
likely to lead to memory consolidation than the smorgasbord methods
currently used in many current elementary classrooms.
6. When all is said and done, much of what plagues public education
might boil down to a curriculum-driven inability among so many to
retain what they have ostensibly been taught. The argument here is that
some parts of this problem can be addressed via a simple strategy that
merely requires teaching in ways that maximize a student’s capacity to
memorize the material. In this opinion, the old methods did that, the
new ones do not.
REFERENCES
Chechlik, G. Mellijson, I. Ruppino, E. (1999) Neuronal Regulation :
A Mechanism for Synaptic Pruning During Brain Maturation. Neuronal
Computation 11 (8) 2061-2080
(Educational Study Reference). Report by Harvard University Program on Educational Policy and Governance. 2012
Kohlberg, L. (1981) Essays on Moral Development. Vol 1. The Philosophy of Moral Development. San Francisco. Harper & Row.
Lashley, KS. (1950) In Search of the Engram. In Symposium of the
Society for Experimental Biology No IV Cambridge University Press.
Piaget, J (1932) The Moral Judgment of the Child. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.
Vallotin, C. & Ayoub, C (2011) Use Your Words : The Role of
Language in the Development of Toddler’s Self-Regulation. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly 26 (2) : 169-181
Robert DePaolo, MS Clinical Psychology. Practitioner, Licensed
Clinical and School Psychology, Former Professor of Psychology, NH
University System, Author of five books and many articles.
Author Profile For robertde
Date Joined : 30th Dec 2006
Total Published Articles : 16
Total Article Views : 96298
Author Bio : Robert DePaolo. MS Licensed in Clinical and
Educational Psychology. Currently employed in Northwood, NH School
District. Author of five books and many articles. president of film co.
Media Milestones
No comments:
Post a Comment