November 13, 2007--Sit Still & Shut Up
There’s a question on an IQ test that is frequently administered to kids in the first grade. It’s one of those tests where the children are shown a series of pictures and asked to use a crayon to make an X over the one that doesn’t belong. This one includes pictures of a car, a train, a bus, and an airplane.
I’ll give you a moment to come up with the right answer. . . .
If you put an X on the airplane you would be right—it’s the only one that doesn’t travel along the ground. But, one smart-alecky kid raises her hand to protest—“The car doesn’t belong,” she claims, “because it’s the only one where you don’t need to buy a ticket.”
“Wrong,” the teacher says, “The right answer is the plane.”
But another smart-ass waves his hand and says, “It's the train because it’s the only one that rides on tracks.”
“Wrong,” the teachers says once more; and seeing a sea of waving hands yells at them, “Sit still and shut up.”
So much of schooling is about getting the right answer and, beyond that, learning to behave oneself. In fact, if students misbehave too much they get labeled disruptive; a discipline problem; or if their parents can afford to get them tested, they get certified as “learning disabled.”
It is generally assumed that if children misbehave in the early grades, pretty soon they will begin to do poorly in reading, math, and other academic subjects. But there are a number of recent studies that call some of this conventional wisdom into question, simultaneously putting more pressure on teachers to tolerate and work with a variety of behaviors and learning styles and on developmental psychologist who until now have had a free hand in interpreting children’s behavior and guiding practice in elementary schools. (See linked NY Times article for a report about these studies.)
One study finds that kindergarten kids who spoke out of turn, resisted instruction, and even got into frequent fights wound up by the fifth grade doing as well in math and reading as well-behaved children of equivalent ability.
An on-going assumption about disruptive students has been that they do not have the innate capacity to do well and thus “act out” in class out of frustration. Or that our media-suffused culture is such that a standard classroom cannot compete with video games for a student’s attention. But these controversial studies imply that a typical classroom may be so dumbed-down or poorly run that a kid with an inquiring or creative mind just can’t sit still.
In schools that serve privileged kids teachers find ways to accommodate and stimulate a wide diversity of students; but in public schools that enroll low-income students, during even a short walk through the building, one hears a lot of yelling and screaming by both children and teachers.
Admittedly teachers have one of the most challenging of jobs and are grossly underpaid and insufficiently acknowledged; but no one forced them to enter this profession, and they need to be expected to do a lot better.
I’ll give you a moment to come up with the right answer. . . .
If you put an X on the airplane you would be right—it’s the only one that doesn’t travel along the ground. But, one smart-alecky kid raises her hand to protest—“The car doesn’t belong,” she claims, “because it’s the only one where you don’t need to buy a ticket.”
“Wrong,” the teacher says, “The right answer is the plane.”
But another smart-ass waves his hand and says, “It's the train because it’s the only one that rides on tracks.”
“Wrong,” the teachers says once more; and seeing a sea of waving hands yells at them, “Sit still and shut up.”
So much of schooling is about getting the right answer and, beyond that, learning to behave oneself. In fact, if students misbehave too much they get labeled disruptive; a discipline problem; or if their parents can afford to get them tested, they get certified as “learning disabled.”
It is generally assumed that if children misbehave in the early grades, pretty soon they will begin to do poorly in reading, math, and other academic subjects. But there are a number of recent studies that call some of this conventional wisdom into question, simultaneously putting more pressure on teachers to tolerate and work with a variety of behaviors and learning styles and on developmental psychologist who until now have had a free hand in interpreting children’s behavior and guiding practice in elementary schools. (See linked NY Times article for a report about these studies.)
One study finds that kindergarten kids who spoke out of turn, resisted instruction, and even got into frequent fights wound up by the fifth grade doing as well in math and reading as well-behaved children of equivalent ability.
An on-going assumption about disruptive students has been that they do not have the innate capacity to do well and thus “act out” in class out of frustration. Or that our media-suffused culture is such that a standard classroom cannot compete with video games for a student’s attention. But these controversial studies imply that a typical classroom may be so dumbed-down or poorly run that a kid with an inquiring or creative mind just can’t sit still.
In schools that serve privileged kids teachers find ways to accommodate and stimulate a wide diversity of students; but in public schools that enroll low-income students, during even a short walk through the building, one hears a lot of yelling and screaming by both children and teachers.
Admittedly teachers have one of the most challenging of jobs and are grossly underpaid and insufficiently acknowledged; but no one forced them to enter this profession, and they need to be expected to do a lot better.
posted by Steven Zwerling at
11:16 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home