Loosey-Goosey

So I was talking to another local Mom about choosing schools for our kids.  Part of the conversation went like this:

OtherMom: "I've never heard anything good about Natural Friends."

(Then she remembered that my younger daughter attends Natural Friends, and stopped, looking embarrassed.)

Me:  "Really? What do you hear about Natural Friends?  I want to know!"

OtherMom: "People say it's loosey-goosey, and the kids just do what they want."

There's a part of me that responds "I wish!", and another part that writes a blog post about it. 

On the one hand,  Natural Friends is loosey-goosey enough to hang in there with my sometimes difficult younger daughter, and that's a good thing for us. 

On the other hand, they apparently haven't gotten Alfie Kohn's memo on the subject of homework, which they start assigning nightly in the FIRST flippin' GRADE. 

On the third hand, the academics at Natural Friends can be pitiful, especially math.  Just today I started working Younger Daughter through Singapore Math 1B, and if she stays at Natural Friends I know I will have to do a great deal more.  So far she likes the Singapore Math workbook (knock wood.)

My dream school would be loosey-goosey and laissez-faire in re compliance issues (the classic triumvirate of "sit down, shut up and do what you're told"), but crystal-clear in re academic issues like content knowledge and procedural fluency. 

Is there such a school?  Probably not.  I think the reason is human psychology.  The kind of teacher who wants to provide nurturing and tolerance to children tends to be the kind of teacher who isn't very academic.  The kind of teacher who cares about academics is often also the kind of teacher who wants to see compliant, on-task kids.

It is a source of constant amazement to me how often schools get these issues exactly wrong; that is, they require unquestioning obedience and endless hours of work (from kids and parents both!) without actually delivering content knowledge.   That is the worst possible bargain.

What is Student Engagement?

(from Trailblazers Math, grade 2.)

Many educators feel that if kids are actively doing something, that means they are engaged with learning; conversely, if kids are just sitting quietly, they are not engaged.  I've heard this expressed both by those on the far right (e.g., Whole Brain Teaching) and those on the far left (e.g., constructivist math.)  Whole Brain-ers think that the kids' constant gestures and talking means they're engaged; constructivists think that if kids are measuring and graphing, they're engaged.

Unfortunately, life is not that simple.   It is possible to be mentally engaged while sitting quite still (e.g., while watching a movie), and it is also possible to be mentally absent while moving around (e.g., daydreaming while folding laundry.)  You can make kids move around, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're interested in what they're doing, or that they're learning anything in particular.   A bad project is less engaging than a good lecture.

I Have Measured Out My Life with Coffee Spoons

For I have known them all already, known them all:—
Have known the evenings, mornings, afternoons,
I have measured out my life with coffee spoons;
I know the voices dying with a dying fall
Beneath the music from a farther room.

(from The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, by T. S. Eliot.)

We find that in doing measurement activities, children learn about number. It’s a two-way street.  Our approach is not, “Well, we’ll teach the kids about number, and once they understand number, then we can teach them about measurement, because measurement is based on number.” We find it works the other way, too: by doing various measurement activities, which are very engaging for the students, they’re building their number ideas.

(from Math Trailblazers, quoting one of the developers.)

I think the program is pretty good with measurement. Kids like to measure things, and the program builds on that; it builds on their interests. 

(from Math Trailblazers, quoting a 3d grade teacher.)

From Trailblazers Math, Grade 2

"Kids like to measure things?"  Really?  I've never noticed my kids show any particular interest in measuring.  I have noticed, however, that Trailblazers spends an unbelievable amount of time and effort on measurement, from the Bouncing Ball lab to the above worksheet, part of an entire section that has the kids measuring random objects in hands and cubits (forearm lengths).  Why?  In order to demonstrate what a bad idea it is to use non-standard units!

Parent-Teacher Conferences in China

(from Country Driving, by Peter Hessler.)

During the first six weeks of school, Wei Jia distinguished himself by an early interest in English, an unruffled demeanor, and a complete refusal to sit still. In a Chinese classroom, the group is the foundation for every endeavor, and each child always knows his place within that organization ... Peer discipline is crucial — children who misbehave are often asked to stand before the class, where other students help the teacher criticize the guilty party. At the beginning none of this seemed to faze Wei Jia. Having missed kindergarten, he had no concept of school routines; he talked out of turn and he played with pencils at his desk. He lost school assignments and he forgot homework. He wandered the classroom during lessons ...

These infractions, along with a host of others, were described at the first parent-teacher conference. In Chinese schools, such meetings are communal: all of the parents attend at once, and all of them listen as the teacher summarizes each child's performance. The good students are praised, the bad students are criticized, and the listening parents are socialized in much the same way as the children: by the power of the group. There is no greater loss of face than hearing in public that your child does poorly at school. And the bad ones always receive the most attention ... And Wei Jia — he was the fidgeter, the classroom-wanderer, the kid who played with pebbles in the principal's presence.

northTOMom on Constructivist Math

(From the comments to The Birds, the Bees and Constructivist Math.)

... for me the key issue is not whether a math program promotes the retention of mathematical facts or concepts, but rather whether or not it stimulates or enables further learning. I think constructivist math programs, by continually frustrating kids, and by denying them basic competence, make it difficult for students to know whether or not they like math or have any real interest in it.

... there are some constructivists who believe that the end—as well as the beginning—of math instruction must always be real world applications. I disagree with this, since to me math is a language, and any pleasure I once derived from it came from this aspect of it.

The Birds and the Bees and Constructivist Math

Years ago, parents could buy little picture books to read to their kids when the tykes asked "Where do babies come from?". Designed for thoroughly embarrassed parents (isn't that all of us?), the books went through the conceptual habits of most of the animal kingdom (insects, fish, birds ...) before arriving at humans. This way, blushing Dad had time to work up to the really difficult stuff, and if he was lucky, the kid might have fallen asleep!

My college biology teacher told us that some genius did a follow-up study. It was very simple: he went around to kids whose parents had dutifully read them the book, and asked the kids "where do babies come from?" He discovered that the kids, understandably, had gotten the different species all mixed up. A typical answer:
"Daddy holds the babies in his mouth until it's time to go to the hospital."

Constructivist math takes a similar approach, with similar consequences. When the kid asks "how can I multiply two big numbers together?", constructivist math behaves like the blushing Dad, loosening his shirt collar with one finger while replying: "Here's an ancient lattice method, and over here is a partial products method, and oh, look! let's measure our armspan!" while never getting around to the method that everyone actually uses.

Since the kids don't really understand any of the methods, they tend to combine them, using steps 1 and 2 of one method, followed by 4 and 5 of another method, and coming up with the wrong answer after a great deal of effort and frustration. I say, cut to the chase! Just teach them the standard algorithm.

Nel Noddings re: Homework

From Critical Lessons: What our Schools Should Teach, by Nel Noddings:

Students need to believe that they should reflect, evaluate, and make authentic decisions. That means perhaps rejecting some of what the adult community advises them to do. It means questioning some practices that seem unhelpful or even damaging. Must there be homework every night? Why? What are students learning from this practice? Is the assigned homework necessary for meaningful understanding of the subject matter? Or is the object to teach docility and obedience to authority?

... If we educators are thoughtful, many of us will admit that much homework is meaningless, even absurd.