Entries Tagged 'Manuscripts & Presentations' ↓

MWERA Keynote Address

Thursday, October 13, 2011, St. Louis, Missouri

Midwest Educational Research Association Annual Conference

Conference Theme: What does it mean to be educated?

 

First I want to thank everyone who attended last night’s Fireside Chat.  We had an interesting conversation.  I left with important things to think about.  I also want to thank Ellen Sigler for inviting my presentation and for all her hard work on the program.

I am going to talk to you about something you already know, but have probably never thought about.  An example of this is that you already know American life is driven by the buying and selling of goods and services, but you probably never thought about it that way.

You know this because you don’t ask why newspapers and magazines are full of advertisements.  You know they provide the revenue that makes expensive publications affordable to subscribers.

Neither do you ask why the internet has become a huge commercial market place.  It used to be a forum for the exchange of text messages among scientists and professors; but now it entices you with multimedia messages at almost every click of the mouse.  You don’t ask why because you know why.

You also don’t ask why football coaches receive higher salaries than professors.  Or, if you ask, you feel silly for asking because you know winning football teams bring in donations, raise a university’s visibility, and contribute to its “brand.”  Even America’s institutions of higher education are driven by the buying and selling of goods and services.

Similarly, you already know that understanding, imagination, strong character, courage, humility and generosity are the six virtues of the educated person.   You know this because, if you are a leader, you want these virtues in your followers.  And if you are a follower, you want these virtues in your leaders.  You know it because you want these virtues in your companions.

Before explaining the significance of this definition, I want to look at how we usually define educated–in terms of college degrees.  A person with a doctorate has a lot of understanding about one topic.  If that person lacks imagination, strong character, courage, humility and generosity; though, do we want to spend time with that person?  I don’t; and I don’t think you do, either.  According to the six-virtue definition, a person with a doctorate is “schooled.”  More information is needed to determine if he/she is “educated.”

In an email exchange with Alfie Kohn, I learned that definitions of educated are neither true nor false, neither right nor wrong.  He said what it means to be educated is not an empirical question; but, he added, some definitions are more useful than others.

I appreciate this insight, so I pose two questions:  Is the six-virtue definition useful?  Is the definition that drives today’s public schools useful?

Today’s schools are driven by a definition that says educated people are those who score high on standardized tests.  This definition can be used to hold teachers accountable.  That is why it is universally accepted in today’s public schools.  The politics of public education says it is of the utmost importance to hold teachers accountable for higher test scores.  If  “educated” is equated with high test scores, it is a matter of course that teachers should be held accountable for higher scores.  Everything depends on the definition of “educated.”

In a different way, however, this definition is not useful.  It misses the mark when it comes to why college students decide to become teachers.  For example, never once has one of my undergraduate students said, “I want to become a teacher to raise students’ test scores”–never once, in twenty years.

Because of this experience, I have added to Kohn’s “usefulness” premise — some definitions are also more inspiring than others.  We can now see that our current definition of “educated” (achieving higher test scores) is useful, but not inspiring, which is why my students never said they wanted to become teachers to improve test scores.

Before examining the six-virtue definition for its usefulness and inspiration, I want to address what you are probably thinking right now.  I know what you are thinking because I think the same thing, whenever I visit a virtue website.  I always ask myself, “Why these virtues and not others?”  When authors don’t answer that question, their point is that people should develop their arbitrary list of virtues.  This, of course, is not useful because we already know we should develop virtues.  It is in the meaning of the word “virtue.”

The significance of any virtue list is in the answer to: “Why these virtues and not others?”  If I cannot answer that question, the six-virtue definition is just another arbitrary list of virtues.

First, this is a useful definition because the six virtues combine to form all other virtues.  They are like the ingredients of a cake.  You can have milk, salt, eggs, and flour without having a cake, but you cannot have a cake without milk, salt, eggs, and flour.  Similarly, for example, you can have understanding, imagination, strong character, courage, humility and generosity without respect; but you cannot have virtuous respect without these virtues.

Another example is perseverance.  You can have understanding, imagination, and strong character without perseverance, but you cannot have virtuous perseverance without understanding, imagination, and strong character.

A third example is patience.  You can have understanding, imagination, strong character, humility and generosity without patience, but you cannot have virtuous patience without understanding, imagination, strong character, humility and generosity.

I keep searching for a virtue that is not a combination of these six ingredients, but I can’t find one.   By developing these six, we develop the ingredients for all virtues; and failing to develop these six prevents us from developing others.  This is important because developing six virtues is simple, but developing hundreds is complicated.  Developing virtue is already difficult, we shouldn’t make it complicated, too.

The six-virtue definition is useful for a second reason.  It tells us how to improve every learning situation.  In situations fraught with ignorance, teachers should model and teach understanding.  In situations fraught with intellectual incompetence, teachers should model and teach imagination.  In situations fraught with weak character, teachers should model and teach strength.  In situations fraught with fear of truth, teachers should model and teach courage.  In situations fraught with pride, teachers should model and teach humility.  And in situations fraught with selfishness, teachers should model and teach generosity.

If teachers operated with this definition (the best teachers already do), we would not be engaged in fruitless debates over educational methods.  The answers for how to teach would always be right in front of us–model and teach the virtues that are absent from the learning situation.  What is more useful than that?

Finally, the six-virtue definition is inspiring.  People often say something is “just human nature” in order to make the point that humans are flawed and imperfect.  While that may be true, the six virtue definition suggests a  different, more inspirational truth.  Although our uneducated nature may be vicious, we have the potential to develop a virtuous, educated nature.  We are born ignorant, intellectually incompetent, weak, fearful of truth, proud and selfish; but we can become understanding, imaginative, strong, courageous, humble and generous.  Nothing is more inspiring than being with educated people.  Isn’t that why we became educators?

Although you have never thought of “educated” this way; you know the six virtues of the educated person are understanding, imagination, strength, courage, humility and generosity.  And this definition is useful and inspiring for the reasons just mentioned.  So, why isn’t this definition the basis for improving K-16 schools?

My graduate students say I need to “connect the dots” for them.  They want me to explain how they can use the six-virtue definition to improve their schools.  The following eight ideas from the book’s Introduction form the outline for understanding both our current situation and what we can do to improve it.  (Some have already been mentioned.)

(1)               A five-element model captures the operation of American public education.

The desirability of democratic governance is the core belief that drives everything (Element #1).  Therefore, we govern democratically (Element #2).  Democratically elected officials identify the purposes of public education (Element #3).  They create a bureaucratic structure to hold teachers and principals accountable for the use of public funds (Element #4).  And they direct teachers to improve schools through the social science improvement paradigm (Element #5).

(2)               Our human nature is of two kinds:

We come into the world ignorant, intellectually incompetent, weak, fearful of truth, proud and selfish. Our educated nature develops as we overcome these vices and develop the six virtues.

(3)        The 12 virtues and vices can be separated for discussion, but they are integrated and interrelated in all behavior and situations.

(4)        Public schools model and teach three virtues (understanding, strong character, and generosity); and they model and teach three vices (intellectual incompetence, fear of truth and pride).

(5)        Our uneducated nature is ugly; our educated nature is beautiful.

(6)        Democratic governance is ugly because it models and promotes the vices of our uneducated nature.

(7)        Virtue-based education purposes are more useful than knowledge and skill purposes.

(8)        Although we can’t agree on knowledge and skill purposes, we can agree on virtue purposes.  It is built into the meaning of the word “virtue.”

In conclusion, earlier I said, “Everything depends on the definition of ‘educated.’”  That is why our conference theme is so important.  The politics of education has focused public schools on improving standardized test scores.  When test scores improve, which has happened in many places, what does that mean?  Does it mean young people are becoming better educated, or better “schooled?”  It all depends on your definition of educated.

NASSP Doesn’t Know the 6 Virtues (With an update)

The May issue of Principal Leadership published by NASSP (the National Association of Secondary School Principals) describes the award winners of the “MetLife Foundation — NASSP Breakthrough School Project.”  Ten schools were honored for meeting “academic requirements despite high poverty and other challenges” (Umphrey, p. 4).

None of the school turnaround stories mentioned either the word “virtue,” or any of the six virtues of the educated person.  As I read the accounts, however, it was clear that, in every case the adults and students in those schools brought to bear understanding, imagination, strong character, courage, humility and generosity.

Continue reading →

“Learning for Democracy” Article

In a recent Learning for Democracy essay I argued that the following American public education experiments have failed:

(1) providing equal educational opportunity via democratically elected governors at the local and state levels,
(2) improving education via the social science improvement paradigm.

We have invested 160 years in the first experiment and 60 years in the second; but politicians, scholars, citizens, and education writers continue to call for the reform of public education. My essay describes the failures of these experiments and argues that educational governance must replace democratic governance and an aesthetic improvement paradigm must replace the social scientific one.

Read it at: (Registration is free.)

https://ojcs.siue.edu/ojs/index.php/lfd/article/viewFile/1939/483

I ask for counter-arguments in the article. Post comments below.

Articles and Blogging

My ASCD, PDK and NASSP memberships expired. I am not renewing.  Education will not improve until we define what it means to be educated, and these organizations are not interested in defining it.  That is because they are devoted to the democratic governance of public education, which means they are devoted to a never-ending debate about the purposes of American public education, a debate about which random knowledge and skills should be taught in schools.  For the last 60 years this debate has been framed by the social science improvement paradigm, even though what it means to be educated is a philosophical question and teaching is an art.

These organizations’ journals don’t publish my articles.  That is fine.  I publish them here.  When I get Education Week newsletters, they have links to both commentaries and blogs. Links to the newspaper commentaries are inactive because I am not a paid-up subscriber.  But the blog links work. Blogs are available to everybody online, free of charge. It will soon be the case (if not already), that educators will read more online blogs than Education Week articles.

Blogging is like a return to the old days of the internet — when people of good will shared worthwhile content free of charge. Imagine that — an internet site devoted to the free sharing of valuable ideas, instead of a thinly veiled plea to purchase something of little value. I like that my blogs are available to anybody with a computer and an internet connection. And I like that people can comment and reply here, too.

If you want to discuss what it means to be educated, which is the foundation for improving education, this is the place. That is my “beat,” and nobody else has it. Simply log in and type in the comment box.

Effectiveness and Appreciation #2

Effectiveness and Appreciation, Part 2

The main job of teachers is to start the cycle of appreciation.  They begin by communicating appreciation for their subject matter, the art of teaching and their students.  They will know this has been adequately communicated, when students reciprocate with appreciation for their teachers and  lessons.

This is not a new idea. Elliot Eisner has written about educational connoisseurship for a long time.

This idea is incomprehensible, though, to those who believe teaching is an applied social science. They can’t put “appreciation” first, until research provides evidence that it belongs there. That is how paradigms work — they make some ideas comprehensible and others incomprehensible.

Have believers in the social science paradigm ever been teachers, themselves? If they were, did they apply theory to their practice?  What did that look like?

Or did they create learning environments and activities that emerged from their unique teaching styles?  Did they imagine new ways to connect with students? If so, why do they ask teachers to pay attention to the ideas of researchers who have never been in their classrooms? Why do they have so little appreciation for the art of teaching?

Continue reading →

Effectiveness and Appreciation #1

Now that my submission to Educational Leadership has been rejected, I can re-post the two blogs that discuss TSVOTEP’s chapter 8. Enjoy.

Effectiveness and appreciation are discussed in chapter 8 of TSVOTEP.

On page 119 I wrote:

“If the social science paradigm is based on the false assumption that it informs practitioners about effectiveness . . . maybe the reason schools do not improve is that our improvement paradigm is the wrong one.”

Yes — we use the wrong paradigm, but I should have said it differently. I should have explained that research findings do inform practitioners about “effectiveness.” Then I should have explained that social scientific “effectiveness” has a narrower meaning than what we commonly give to something we call “effective.”

In common usage, “effective” means several things at the same time. It means successful, meaningful, useful, efficient, desired, or combinations of these. But social scientific “effectiveness” means none of these. It points only to the explicit definition it was given in the study — nothing more, nothing less. Social scientific effectiveness is a good thing, but it never has the luster associated with something that is “effective.” Continue reading →

A Letter from Teachers and Principals

The following letter from reform-minded teachers and principals is adapted from chapter 6 of The Six Virtues of the Educated Person.

It was rejected by Phi Delta Kappan because, according to the editor, “It is not compelling.” Let me know what you think. Is this, or is this not, more interesting than what you read in PDK?

Dear School Board Members and State Legislators:

You have good intentions as you work to improve education. Because we work daily with students, we see both the good and the bad accomplished by your policies. We are sure you want to hear from us, if public education is going in the wrong direction.

That is the first purpose of this letter—to tell you we are going in the wrong direction. Our second purpose is to explain how we can go in the right direction.
Continue reading →

Does Effectiveness or Appreciation Improve Education?

This blog starts the “Manuscripts” category.

The following piece was submitted to Educational Leadership for “The Effective Educator” issue (December– January, 2011). Let me know what you think. Any thoughts on why it was rejected? Is it, or is it not, more interesting than what you typically read in Educational Leadership? You be the judge.

The call for manuscripts asked, “. . . what does effective teaching look like?” This is an important question, but it is a peripheral one. Research has found so many effective materials, methods, and tools that “effectiveness” can’t fit at the center of teaching. In other words, it can’t be the focal point of the profession, simply because there are too many ways to be “effective.”

This creates a problem for what Cochran-Smith (2002) calls the social science metaphor. (I call it the social science paradigm for improving education.)

It is assumed first that there is a body of knowledge based on cutting edge empirical research in various academic disciplines that is relevant to teaching, learning, and schooling, and second, that when teachers know and act on this knowledge, schooling is more effective (p. 284).

The problem is that effectiveness is the central idea in the social science paradigm, but it can’t be the central focus of teachers. There are an infinite number of ways to be effective, which renders effectiveness an empty concept in teaching, just as it is in the arts. Why have we adopted a teaching improvement paradigm that does not guide teaching?
Continue reading →