I know this is unpopular, but rote memorization gets an undeservedly bad rap. knowing stuff by rote is vastly superior to knowing nothing, and my many years working in schools has given me the distinct impression that, in many cases, THOSE are the choices. of course, you're right about the humanities getting fucked over and the whole c…
I know this is unpopular, but rote memorization gets an undeservedly bad rap. knowing stuff by rote is vastly superior to knowing nothing, and my many years working in schools has given me the distinct impression that, in many cases, THOSE are the choices. of course, you're right about the humanities getting fucked over and the whole critical thinking thing is very real, but my point is that (as E.D. Hirsch, who is NOT remotely a right-wing guy, as many accuse him of being, has been telling us--and I LOVE the Core Knowledge curriculum he pioneered) you have to know a little something BEFORE you can think critically about ANYTHING. sorry to sound picky, and I'm certain we're in agreement. but I always LIKED memorizing stuff...I don't think you can deal properly with, say, a lyric poem until you've memorized it and possess it SPACIALLY.
Rote memorization does form the base of knowledge - the "archives" one consults when *thinking critically* about a topic. But rote memorization without being used in critical thinking, without critical thinking being taught, is virtually the same as no education. Because it doesn't involve *thinking*.
That’s where rubber hits the road. Rote learning, as Dave says, is crucial and can be taught in a way that leads seamlessly to critical thinking skills. Rote is the who, what, when…a schema of info. Critical thinking is the how and why.
I spent a lot of hours getting teachers up to speed on this.
yes, exactly.and as to the whole "critical thinking" thing: I noticed that as soon as any school system starts to push something (anything), you can be sure that it's at least mostly because people have been bitching and moaning about it for ten years or so. I was still working when "critical thinking" (which, at least in NYC, seems to have no fixed meaning) became a catch phrase for everything that wasn't being taught, meaning that a lot of people had been bemoaning its absence for a long time. the thing is, of course, that the kind of people who were MY teachers were a very different bunch of people from most of the people who are entering the field now. in those days, two teachers who lived together could manage a pretty decent life in NYC. now, to say "not so much" should come with a laugh track. my point being that, while there are still some really excellent teachers still out there, for the most part, the field doesn't tend to attract the brilliant people who used to enter the field. I remember encountering a lot of, say, Teach for America kids working in schools, but most of THOSE do their two years and go back to graduate school for something else. the ones who stay, many of whom are great, don't stay in the classroom very long, but become administrators as quickly as they can. so, cutting to the proverbial chase, I think that there is almost certainly a dearth of critical thinkers in the teaching pool itself. then, on top of THAT situation, you have all the new "technologies." when I hear the words "new technologies," I (echoing, god help me, Goebbels) I reach for my revolver...that shit gets really crazy. there was one "technology" in which the size and type of rug required for the "reading room" was mandated. yes...the size and type of RUG was MANDATED. and the response to this of ANY person who thought critically about this was a completely non-critical "just do it." I don't think it worked. the rug thing, I mean.
In 12 years of public education, I can remember three teachers - two for being of some use to me, and one for being particularly "in the way." Most of them were intellectual roadblocks of one sort or another. When I went to Colorado State College ("the nation's number two teacher training school in America!") I finally took an Educational Psychology class that was rote memorization of the professor's book and fill-in-the-blanks tests, With that and having seen what they made teachers out of and now how they did it (I did some work in the campus PR office where I saw a survey that four 80% of the student body, the school wasn't in their top three choices to go to - hey, you can always be a teacher if you're too stupid to do anything else), I now understood why I had spent most of those 12 wasted years counting the days till I could get the hell out. HS graduation is still the only graduation ceremony I ever attended, because it was mandatory or you wouldn't get your graduation certificate.
two things: it's funny that you worked in your school's PR office...my father ran the CCNY PR office for 32 years (all my friends worked in that office at one point or other, and loved it), until the "professional featherbedders" (as we both called them) got him disgusted enough to leave. it had been a huge school with a "brain trust" of about six or seven people, tops. in 1970, the top-heavy administration thing took over and my dad left in '77. the other thing, which sounds like a joke, but isn't, is my own HS graduation story. we graduated in Forest Park, much too early in the morning and, as soon as it was over, I was carrying my diploma in its small manila envelope, spotted a girl I knew, and we ran together for a hug. I dropped the diploma and (IMMEDIATELY) a parks dept. guy with one of those long sticks with a nail (for spearing errant pieces of paper) stuck his nail through my diploma. both of us collapsed with laughter. the story of my trying--unsuccessfully, of course...it was 1966--to parlay the thing into a sexual opportunity is one I can easily leave out....
I know this is unpopular, but rote memorization gets an undeservedly bad rap. knowing stuff by rote is vastly superior to knowing nothing, and my many years working in schools has given me the distinct impression that, in many cases, THOSE are the choices. of course, you're right about the humanities getting fucked over and the whole critical thinking thing is very real, but my point is that (as E.D. Hirsch, who is NOT remotely a right-wing guy, as many accuse him of being, has been telling us--and I LOVE the Core Knowledge curriculum he pioneered) you have to know a little something BEFORE you can think critically about ANYTHING. sorry to sound picky, and I'm certain we're in agreement. but I always LIKED memorizing stuff...I don't think you can deal properly with, say, a lyric poem until you've memorized it and possess it SPACIALLY.
Rote memorization does form the base of knowledge - the "archives" one consults when *thinking critically* about a topic. But rote memorization without being used in critical thinking, without critical thinking being taught, is virtually the same as no education. Because it doesn't involve *thinking*.
That’s where rubber hits the road. Rote learning, as Dave says, is crucial and can be taught in a way that leads seamlessly to critical thinking skills. Rote is the who, what, when…a schema of info. Critical thinking is the how and why.
I spent a lot of hours getting teachers up to speed on this.
yes, exactly.and as to the whole "critical thinking" thing: I noticed that as soon as any school system starts to push something (anything), you can be sure that it's at least mostly because people have been bitching and moaning about it for ten years or so. I was still working when "critical thinking" (which, at least in NYC, seems to have no fixed meaning) became a catch phrase for everything that wasn't being taught, meaning that a lot of people had been bemoaning its absence for a long time. the thing is, of course, that the kind of people who were MY teachers were a very different bunch of people from most of the people who are entering the field now. in those days, two teachers who lived together could manage a pretty decent life in NYC. now, to say "not so much" should come with a laugh track. my point being that, while there are still some really excellent teachers still out there, for the most part, the field doesn't tend to attract the brilliant people who used to enter the field. I remember encountering a lot of, say, Teach for America kids working in schools, but most of THOSE do their two years and go back to graduate school for something else. the ones who stay, many of whom are great, don't stay in the classroom very long, but become administrators as quickly as they can. so, cutting to the proverbial chase, I think that there is almost certainly a dearth of critical thinkers in the teaching pool itself. then, on top of THAT situation, you have all the new "technologies." when I hear the words "new technologies," I (echoing, god help me, Goebbels) I reach for my revolver...that shit gets really crazy. there was one "technology" in which the size and type of rug required for the "reading room" was mandated. yes...the size and type of RUG was MANDATED. and the response to this of ANY person who thought critically about this was a completely non-critical "just do it." I don't think it worked. the rug thing, I mean.
In 12 years of public education, I can remember three teachers - two for being of some use to me, and one for being particularly "in the way." Most of them were intellectual roadblocks of one sort or another. When I went to Colorado State College ("the nation's number two teacher training school in America!") I finally took an Educational Psychology class that was rote memorization of the professor's book and fill-in-the-blanks tests, With that and having seen what they made teachers out of and now how they did it (I did some work in the campus PR office where I saw a survey that four 80% of the student body, the school wasn't in their top three choices to go to - hey, you can always be a teacher if you're too stupid to do anything else), I now understood why I had spent most of those 12 wasted years counting the days till I could get the hell out. HS graduation is still the only graduation ceremony I ever attended, because it was mandatory or you wouldn't get your graduation certificate.
two things: it's funny that you worked in your school's PR office...my father ran the CCNY PR office for 32 years (all my friends worked in that office at one point or other, and loved it), until the "professional featherbedders" (as we both called them) got him disgusted enough to leave. it had been a huge school with a "brain trust" of about six or seven people, tops. in 1970, the top-heavy administration thing took over and my dad left in '77. the other thing, which sounds like a joke, but isn't, is my own HS graduation story. we graduated in Forest Park, much too early in the morning and, as soon as it was over, I was carrying my diploma in its small manila envelope, spotted a girl I knew, and we ran together for a hug. I dropped the diploma and (IMMEDIATELY) a parks dept. guy with one of those long sticks with a nail (for spearing errant pieces of paper) stuck his nail through my diploma. both of us collapsed with laughter. the story of my trying--unsuccessfully, of course...it was 1966--to parlay the thing into a sexual opportunity is one I can easily leave out....