Your thoughts reminded me of Nietzsche in "In Human, All Too Human." He writes (paraphrasing) that we speak of genius as though it were a miracle, but what distinguishes the great individual is sustained labor and a certain “economy of means” developed over time.
King made a related observation in his Three Dimensions sermon, that whatever our lot in life, we owe it to ourselves to aspire to be the best at it.
Finally, recall when Cassius tells Brutus: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.”
There are many inspiring examples in our history and culture. If we chose to follow them.
I read this while I was holding my sleeping toddler. Every day I see how hard he tries to learn and do new things (to the point his dad and I sometimes struggle to divert him from things he doesn't realize are impossible because he doesn't know the laws of physics yet). Obviously, personalities carry a lot, but most babies and toddlers are constantly trying very, very hard because that's how they learn. I realize you are talking about a different part of the education continuum, but if trying hard is something that falls away for a lot of kids as they move through their schooling, we should probably consider (in addition to all your recommendations) what is happening developmentally and what is being taught that causes many kids to lose their early affinity for effort (which I suspect is different for different kids/contexts) and work to address that. My understanding of the Montessori model is that it too some extent seeks to do this and that is likely part of why it appeals to many families
I largely agree with this piece but I find it unfortunate that Success Academy is your primary positive example. Requiring effort does not have to mean implementing an excessively punitive culture. There is productive stress, and then there is creating such a high-anxiety environment that students regularly wet themselves. Success's practices are harmful to teachers and students alike, and there is ample reporting on how the school uses tactics to pressure underperforming students to withdraw, inflating their own statistics. Colleagues of mine that have worked at Success have genuine horror stories -- that should not be the example of what we strive for.
I agree with everything that you're saying, and I appreciate such a thoughtful, well-written discussion. Thank you! But I think there's an important point that you need to address.
When we make school more demanding, and require more student effort, many students will rise to the challenge. But a non-trivial proportion of students won't; that's just the reality of the world. What will you do with those students? If you are really serious about raising standards, then it's unavoidable that you have to penalize these students. Of course that doesn't mean that you beat them or humiliate them, but it does mean that there have to be negative consequences for non-performance, and that includes failing the student and/or denying them a diploma. Are you prepared to do that? Everybody wants high standards, but nobody seems to acknowledge that enforcing those standards is unpleasant, and that some students will suffer.
Here's a simple thought experiment. Suppose you are the principal of a high-school that has an 85% graduation rate, and you decide to raise expectations and demand more from students. But then when this is implemented the graduation rate drops to 50%. Sure, the kids who survived the newly rigorous standards now are better educated than before, but at the cost of a 50% attrition rate. Are you willing to accept that trade-off? If not, what is the biggest drop in the graduation rate that you would be willing to accept in exchange for your proposals?
Agree except for "perfect attendance" awards - which we do NOT want to encourage. If you're sick, you should stay home. We can award "high or great attendance" instead.
Everybody knows that to play in the NBA or in Carnegie Hall takes practice. In our high school and college Student Success programs with about 1 million teens and young adults, we found that most came to us thinking that homework is extra credit and grades reflect their IQ. Using approaches that fit under the umbrella of learn by doing--whether term papers or algebra--and persevering to competence, with access to help as needed, over 80% completed their regular courses with certifiable competence. Nothing succeeds like success. Failure is sometimes motivating, but usually discouraging. What works is more learning lab and less lecture/discussion.
Your thoughts reminded me of Nietzsche in "In Human, All Too Human." He writes (paraphrasing) that we speak of genius as though it were a miracle, but what distinguishes the great individual is sustained labor and a certain “economy of means” developed over time.
King made a related observation in his Three Dimensions sermon, that whatever our lot in life, we owe it to ourselves to aspire to be the best at it.
Finally, recall when Cassius tells Brutus: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.”
There are many inspiring examples in our history and culture. If we chose to follow them.
I read this while I was holding my sleeping toddler. Every day I see how hard he tries to learn and do new things (to the point his dad and I sometimes struggle to divert him from things he doesn't realize are impossible because he doesn't know the laws of physics yet). Obviously, personalities carry a lot, but most babies and toddlers are constantly trying very, very hard because that's how they learn. I realize you are talking about a different part of the education continuum, but if trying hard is something that falls away for a lot of kids as they move through their schooling, we should probably consider (in addition to all your recommendations) what is happening developmentally and what is being taught that causes many kids to lose their early affinity for effort (which I suspect is different for different kids/contexts) and work to address that. My understanding of the Montessori model is that it too some extent seeks to do this and that is likely part of why it appeals to many families
I largely agree with this piece but I find it unfortunate that Success Academy is your primary positive example. Requiring effort does not have to mean implementing an excessively punitive culture. There is productive stress, and then there is creating such a high-anxiety environment that students regularly wet themselves. Success's practices are harmful to teachers and students alike, and there is ample reporting on how the school uses tactics to pressure underperforming students to withdraw, inflating their own statistics. Colleagues of mine that have worked at Success have genuine horror stories -- that should not be the example of what we strive for.
So much overlap between this article and the teen gambling article. Removing friction is having a big impact on students in multiple ways.
I agree with everything that you're saying, and I appreciate such a thoughtful, well-written discussion. Thank you! But I think there's an important point that you need to address.
When we make school more demanding, and require more student effort, many students will rise to the challenge. But a non-trivial proportion of students won't; that's just the reality of the world. What will you do with those students? If you are really serious about raising standards, then it's unavoidable that you have to penalize these students. Of course that doesn't mean that you beat them or humiliate them, but it does mean that there have to be negative consequences for non-performance, and that includes failing the student and/or denying them a diploma. Are you prepared to do that? Everybody wants high standards, but nobody seems to acknowledge that enforcing those standards is unpleasant, and that some students will suffer.
Here's a simple thought experiment. Suppose you are the principal of a high-school that has an 85% graduation rate, and you decide to raise expectations and demand more from students. But then when this is implemented the graduation rate drops to 50%. Sure, the kids who survived the newly rigorous standards now are better educated than before, but at the cost of a 50% attrition rate. Are you willing to accept that trade-off? If not, what is the biggest drop in the graduation rate that you would be willing to accept in exchange for your proposals?
Agree except for "perfect attendance" awards - which we do NOT want to encourage. If you're sick, you should stay home. We can award "high or great attendance" instead.
Everybody knows that to play in the NBA or in Carnegie Hall takes practice. In our high school and college Student Success programs with about 1 million teens and young adults, we found that most came to us thinking that homework is extra credit and grades reflect their IQ. Using approaches that fit under the umbrella of learn by doing--whether term papers or algebra--and persevering to competence, with access to help as needed, over 80% completed their regular courses with certifiable competence. Nothing succeeds like success. Failure is sometimes motivating, but usually discouraging. What works is more learning lab and less lecture/discussion.