Education

Education in the general sense is any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character, or physical
ability of an individual. In its technical sense, education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its
accumulated knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to another. Education can also be defined as the process of
becoming an educated person. An educated person refers to a person that has access to optimal states of mind regardless of the
situation they are in. That person is able to perceive accurately, think clearly and act effectively to achieve self-selected
goals and aspirations.
EDUCATION IN ARGENTINA
Education is highly valued in Argentinian society. The Argentine National Council of Education sets a standard
curriculum that is followed by schools throughout the country, because it is believed that a national education system
promotes unity.
Kindergarten is optional for children aged four and five. Mandatory education begins at age six and ends at fourteen.
Public primary schools are free, but there are no public school buses and students must buy their own books and
uniforms. The uniforms look like white laboratory coats and are worn over regular clothes. Private schools are often
sponsored by churches or organizations and charge tuition fees. For children with special needs, there are separate
programs.
Did you know?

The Nobel prizes have been
awarded to five Argentinians: Carlos
Saavedra Lamas (1936) and Adolfo
Prez Esquivel (1980) for peace,
Bernardo Houssay (1947) for
medicine, Luis Federico Leloir
(1970) for chemistry and Csar
Milstein (1984) for biology.

For some students, the school day begins at 8 a.m. and ends at noon. Others attend school between 1 p.m. and 5
p.m. When students arrive, they raise the flag and sing the national anthem. During each session, they get three breaks
of 10 minutes each for recess. In rural areas, some children go to school on horseback. Some large estancias have
their own one-room schoolhouse for children living on the ranch.
Unless students need to work full-time to help their families, they may continue their education at secondary school.
Those who want to go to university must attend secondary school for at least five years and take the bachillerato
(baccalaureat) exam. Commercial and vocational schools are available for those who want careers in commerce,
agriculture, fashion or technical occupations such as automotive mechanics.
Schoolteachers are trained in an escuela normal (teachers' college).
People who leave school to work may return when they are in their twenties to finish their secondary school studies.
Night classes are also available for those who work during the day.
Argentina has about 50 universities. About half are public and tuition is free. The others are Catholic orprivate
universities that charge fees. The University of Buenos Aires is the largest university in South America, with 140,000
students. The oldest university in Argentina is Crdoba, founded by the Spanish in 1613.

The main purpose of education
October 2010
Summary
The main purpose of education is to strengthen your mind so that you can more easily learn to deal with
specific challenges you will face throughout your life. Even though you will forget most of what you learned in
school, the intense effort you spend struggling with difficult academic material tones your mind, just like how
physical conditioning tones your body (even though it serves almost no practical purpose).
Every single child has asked his/her parents the following question regarding what they have to learn in
school: "When am I ever going to use this?" It's a fair questionafter all, kids in the developed world
are forced by law to spend over a decade of their lives listening to lectures, doing homework, and studying for
tests on material that seem mostly irrelevant to their everyday lives. Even worse, everything that they must
learn can simply be found on the Internet, so it's reasonable for them to wonder why they must go through
the motions of learning all these facts in the first place.
I'm not an education expert by any means, but I have a hunch that many parents cannot give their kids a
satisfactory answer to"When am I ever going to use this?" Their responses range from misguided attempts to
find direct applications (e.g., "If you want to become an astronaut, you've gotta first learn to solve systems
of two algebraic equations in case you need to, ummm, do that while you're up in space and your computer
breaks") to cliches like "it doesn't matter what you're studying, you're actually learning how to learn!" Since
I've been disappointed with the answers I've heard so far, I've decided to make my own feeble attempt at
responding to this age-old question.
My response to kids is that the main purpose of education is to strengthen your mind so that you
can perform better in the sport of life.
To reinforce my claim, I'm going to make a cheesy sports analogy. Imagine your favorite sport. For this
example, let's say it's basketball. Your goal is to become the best possible basketball player, within the limits
of your biological capabilities. To do so, you will need to spend many hours each day on two types of
activities: playing basketball and doing physical conditioning. The former is obvious: You can't get good at
basketball without actually playing a lot of basketball. However, the latter is also crucial: Physical
conditioning activities like stretching, running, and weightlifting all strengthen your body so that you can
playbetter basketball. Similarly, to succeed in the sport of life, you need to practice two types of activities:
Learning how to directly deal with life's challenges and doing mental conditioning. The former is obvious: If
you want to do well in your job as, say, a pilot, then you need to spend thousands of hours flying planes.
However, the latter is also crucial: Mental conditioning activities like practicing math, writing analytical
essays, and studying history all strengthen your mind so that you can more easily learn to adapt to future life
challenges.
Do you see the parallel I'm drawing between physical and mental conditioning? Just like how stretching,
running, and weightlifting are forms of physical conditioning, your education is your main form of mental
conditioning. An aspiring basketball player might whine and ask coach, "When am I ever going to use
this?"regarding seemingly-boring conditioning exercises. Why should a basketball player work so hard on
trying to run fast or to liftheavy weights? After all, he/she isn't trying to become a world-champion sprinter or
weightlifter, so why does being fast and strong even matter? They matter because being physically fit will
indirectly improve one's basketball skills, enabling one to be sharper and more stable on the court. So, why
should a student work so hard on math and science homework? After all, he/she isn't trying to become a
Nobel prize-winning scientist, so why bother slogging through all of that homework? Studying in school
matters because being mentally stronger will indirectly improve one's skills in dealing with real-world
professional and personal challenges. For example, math teaches you to reason logically, science teaches you
to think empirically, and the humanities teach you to read critically and analytically. Even if you don't
remember most of the specific facts, your mind will be stronger for having learned them, and it will be harder
for people to deceive you with misleading facts or reasoning.
As a particular example, consider biology class. Although knowing about the parts of a living cell might never
benefit your career, just the fact that you know a cell is comprised of physical components rather than 'being
magic' strengthens your mind by reinforcing the idea that humans can empirically observe and test theories
about the natural world rather than simply inventing myths. Even if you don't work as a biologist, an
understanding of the scientific method will help you to become a more effective problem solver in any
domain. Speaking of myths, learning about mythology in history class also strengthens your mind by
deepening your understanding of individual and group psychology and the origins of human culture. Again,
even though you're probably never going to directly apply your history knowledge, an understanding of
psychology and culture will undoubtedly help you in dealing with interpersonal issues in any professional or
social situation.
So if schooling is actually mental conditioning that supposedly strengthens your mind, then how come so
many kids graduate from high school with their minds still as soft as mush? Well, to get conditioning benefits,
you actually need to make an active, deliberate effort to learn and absorb the subject matter, not
just half-ass your way through classes with minimal effort. Half-assing your way through school is like half-
assing your way through physical conditioning exercises. Even the most out-of-shape fools can still do some
half-ass stretches, run a lap slowly around the track, and lift tiny dumbbells each day, but does anyone expect
those fools to actually strengthen and tone their bodies? They're doing the exact same activities as the serious
athletes (e.g., stretching, running, weightlifting), but they won't ever get physically stronger since they don't
challenge their bodies with intensive training. Similarly, students who don't actively engage with the subject
matter and immerse themselves in it won't have their minds strengthened. They can still get by and graduate,
but their brains won't receive much long-term benefits. Nothing can substitute for active, deliberate practice
and hard work.
Of course, mental conditioning doesn't guarantee professional success or life happiness; it's merely a
foundation. Similarly, physical conditioning doesn't guarantee athletic success; it's merely a foundation. The
strongest and fastest person in the world will still be terrible at basketball unless he/she has trained intensely
on the court. However, nobody can get good at basketball without being physically fit.
In closing, just like how an excellent coach can bring out an athlete's greatest physical potential, an excellent
teacher can boost kids' motivations to strengthen their minds through efficient and focused practice.
Teachers aren't just relaying information about specific topics; they're responsible for building stronger
minds, which can have a lifelong positive impact on kids.
Importance of Education in Society
Education, if looked at beyond its conventional boundaries, forms the very essence of all our actions. What we do is
what we know and have learned, either through instructions or through observation and assimilation. When we are not
making an effort to learn, our mind is always processing new information or trying to analyze the similarities as well as
the tiny nuances within the context which makes the topic stand out or seem different. If that is the case then the mind
definitely holds the potential to learn more, however, it is us who stop ourselves from expanding the horizons of our
knowledge with self-doubt or other social, emotional, or economic constraints.

While most feel that education is a necessity, they tend to use it as a tool for reaching a specific target or personal
mark, after which there is no further need to seek greater education. Nonetheless, the importance of education in
society is indispensable and cohering, which is why society and knowledge cannot be ever separated into two distinct
entities. Let us find out more about the role of education in society and how it affects our lives.
Purpuse of education in Society Education is self empowerment.
Receiving a good education helps empower you, thus making you strong enough to look after yourself in any given
situation. It keeps you aware of your given surrounding as well as the rules and regulations of the society you're living
in. It's only through knowledge that you can be able to question authority for its negligence or discrepancies. It is only
then that you can avail your rights as a citizen and seek improvement in the structural functioning of governance and
economy. It's only when a citizen is aware about the policies of its government can he be able to support or protest the
change. As a whole, people can bring about development only when they know where improvement is necessary for
the greater good of mankind. Education helps you understand yourself better, it helps you realize your potential and
qualities as a human being. It helps you to tap into latent talent, so that you may be able to sharpen your skills.


Financial Stability and Dignity of Life
Another importance of education is that it helps you gain sufficient academic qualification so that you are able to get
suitable employment at a later stage. A decent employment would be combined with hard-earned remuneration or
salary through which you can look after your personal expenses. While you earn for yourself, you gradually begin to
realize the true worth of money and how hard it is to earn it. You realize the significance of saving for a rainy day and
for unforeseeable contingencies. You feel empowered because there is a new sense of worth that develops within you,
and you feel the need to be independent and free from any further financial support. You take pride in the fact that you
are earning for yourself, and are not obligated to anyone.

Growth in Personal Aspiration
There also comes a phase when the amount you are earning presently will seem inadequate because your aspirations
and expectations from yourself would have grown considerably. After this, you will want to change jobs so as to have a
higher profile. However, here is when you need to be prepared. A promotion of this figure can occur in two given
situations, which are, that either you have the necessary higher academic qualification or a college degree which allows
you a safe passage, or that you have amassed enough practical experience which allows you to be a suitable
candidate for the employment you seek.

On the Job Efficiency
This is why college education is very important after high school and must not be taken for granted. When faced with
the option of choosing between a highly qualified candidate and a not so educated candidate, the employers will most
probably go in for the qualified person. The reason being that, a qualified candidate will not require much investment of
the employer's time and money. The organization need not teach him or her the tricks of the trade, or the various ways
of functioning and performing the tasks of the workplace. On the contrary, a novice / amateur applicant would need to
be taught everything from scratch, which many employer's are usually not willing to do. The same applies for people
who seek higher education and get advanced diplomas while working. These people are continuously improving their
profile and their knowledge base so as to go higher up on the competitive ladder.

Helps Plan Ahead
Those who have amassed enough education, steer the path of development and progress for their country. It is these
individuals who go ahead and become teachers, scientists, inventors, welfare activists, soldiers, and politicians who
work together to form the very backbone of the society. Without this pool of intellect, the economic and social
framework would crumple and fall, paving its way for anarchy, degradation, and violence. While this intricate balance of
growth is maintained, there will be a continuous rise in progress in all quarters of life, whether that be personal growth,
or development of the nation as an entity. This progress has a very important role to play for the coming generations,
which will reap the benefits of our hard work, as they develop it further. At the same time, the negative impact of our
actions shall have its collateral damage on the coming generation as well. Which is why we must be exceptionally
prudent about the decisions we make and the actions we take in the present.

Job Seeker vs. Job Provider
There will come a time, when you will no longer feel the need to be working as someone's mere employee. You would
want to take charge and control over your own life and income. This is when you will decide to become a self-employed
individual, who would like to watch his / her own ideas take realistic form. You would prefer being the one offering job
opportunities to others and aid in providing income to them. At this stage of entrepreneurship, you may use your own
expertise as well as that of other trained and skilled associates. As a team, you will find your business or venture
expanding and yielding good results. You may even gain the confidence and insight, which will help you diversify and
spread your expertise into other business arenas, which were previously unknown to you, or you were unsure about.
This ability, comes with experience and knowledge amassed over the years.

An Idle Mind is The Devil's Workshop
Education and studying regularly, gives people of all age groups something substantial and challenging to do. It helps
them think and use their idle hours, doing something productive and worthwhile. Education need not be purely
academic and may include reading for leisure or as a passion for literature, philosophy, art, politics, economics, or
even scientific research. There is no limit, to all that you can teach yourself, only if you take the interest to learn and
grow as an individual. However, those who treat knowledge as trash, eventually find themselves getting absorbed with
thoughts of violence, and jealously against those who are better off than themselves. It is people such as these who
turn towards drug addiction, unnecessary rebellion, crime, and plain inactivity. Such people lack the self-esteem, that a
good education often provides to its followers.

Education plays its continuous role in all spheres of life. The reason being, that if we are aware of the drawbacks of a
decision and we know about the possible contingencies and the collateral damage, our consequent actions would be
wiser, which would help us to keep danger at bay at all times.
By Rohini Mohan
Opt for Online Tutoring to Help Your Child Excel in Studies
Today's era is highly competitive. In order to create an identity, everyone has to win this tough struggle of
competition. When it comes to teaching, Online Tutoring is evolving as a modern yet effortless way of learning.
This revolutionary way of learning has already assisted a huge number of students across the globe in wide range
of subjects. In contrast to physical tutoring, it provides the students with a new way to learn and explore by
seeking individual attention.

We are all aware that talent needs nurturing. The students who are gifted can seek enormous help in studies by
the help of Online Tutors. However, the students who are not able to perform well are the ones who benefit the
most. Tutoring via online learning method offers interactive learning to students. The motivational techniques of
online tutoring can greatly enhance students' ability to learn.

Many a times, students tend to give up when their hard word does not seem to get rewarded despite repeated
efforts. Lack of motivations may also be behind many weak students for not being able to exploit their potential
well. Individualized attention by online learning can help them devote needful attention to obtain better grades.

If you have been worried about not being able to devote time to your dear child forHomework Help, then online
system of tutoring can help solve your problem in an efficient way. The deficiency in certain skills like presentation,
writing, analysis, and numeric problems can be simplified in a resourceful way.


The job of Online Tutors is not just to help students learn the subjects but also to discover the interesting aspects
of the subjects. The long term goal of self-motivation is achieved by developing interest in the subject. The interest
instills the enthusiasm that prevents the boredom from kicking in. The process of online teaching emphasizes on
the fact that learning is much more than just knowing the facts.

If you have been thinking about looking for an Unlimited Online Tutoring solution for your child, it is right time that
you seek one. However it is very important to devote some time looking for the best option. It is important that you
choose atutoring system that offers:

Live tutoring or one-on-one tutoring sessions.
Coaching by experienced and highly qualified teachers.
Flexibility in terms of making choice of teachers.
Help with regular homework assignments.
Criteria for quality check by frequent sessions of barging into the classes by quality team.
Using interactive tools to make learning easy.
Privacy in terms of information provided.

These days many providers offer Free Online Tutoring trials to the students. It is a good way to gauze the efficacy
of the learning classes by the provider. Opting for tutoring via Internet will ensure that your child will save time in
getting ready for tutoring classes, reaching to the class, and related hassles. Web-based tutoring offers new-age
learning and comes packed with variety of benefits. The strategies and techniques used by online tutoring system
can greatly help your child grow intellectually and obtain good grades.

Benefits of Virtual Schooling
Many people are aware of virtual schooling as an educational alternative. However, they might wonder just what
makes it worthy of consideration. As with other forms of education, cyber schooling offers unique benefits. Here
are just a few of them to consider:

Individualized Education

Having educational options means families can make the best choices for their children. Each child has unique
educational strengths, weakness, needs and preferences, and virtual schooling allows families and educators to
address these differences. In many cases, virtual schools allow families and educators to evaluate a student and
provide a customized education geared towards helping the student learn and develop. With education
individualized to meet his or her needs, a student may be more willing to learn and more likely to excel.

Learning Pace

A student's learning pace can prove a concern in any type of learning environment. In traditional classrooms, it is
often important for students to adopt a pace that suits the classroom, so that no one lags behind others and no
one gets too far ahead. Adopting an average pace is often important, in such cases, to keeping the flow of
learning consistent and preventing students from becoming bored and frustrated. In a cyber school, however, this
is typically less of a concern or a non-issue altogether. Because virtual education programs can be adapted to
meet student needs, they often allow students to work towards mastery at the pace that is comfortable for them.


Flexibility

Many students and their families appreciate the flexibility that cyber schooling can provide. Rather than requiring
students to keep to traditional school schedules, many virtual schools allow students to create the learning
schedules that best suit their lifestyles. Here, the point is not to learn at a particular hour but simply to learn.
Scheduling flexibility can prove helpful for students who have other interests to pursue on a regular basis. For
instance, it may help students who are heavily involved in art, music, dance, and athletic activities. It might also
prove beneficial for students who volunteer, work, or participate in internships. Sometimes family dynamics or
travel schedules also make flexible scheduling a plus.

Guidance and Support

Often, families consider virtual schooling because of the support and guidance they can expect versus traditional
homeschooling. For example, with cyber schooling, parents can benefit from the guidance of instructors and the
support of counselors and mentors. Many schools also offer technical support, academic advising and tutoring
help for students on an as-needed basis.

Art Is A Great School Subject
Art is a fantastic subject. It is taught from children being of young age up until secondary school in Year 9 where
they can then either choose to continue it on or drop it. No matter what age you are or level of skill possessed,
anybody can create a piece of artwork. Having a creative mind is a great thing to build in a child as it grows and
expands across various areas of the curriculum.
Children love to be messy so covering a bit of paper in bright coloured paints and using sponges and potatoes to
do so must be a lot of fun, it is also great for their minds too. It is a known fact that children are stimulated by an
array of bright colours so using these to create what is going on in their imagination is amazing for them to be
expressive.
Some children are not naturally gifted at drawing or creating pictures however they will still enjoy using the
different products such as paints, so it is a subject they can all participate in. It is also a great subject for quiet
children who feel they cannot necessarily express themselves, although they may not realise this until a later
age. Drawing and painting can be therapeutic for many as it is an enjoyable hobby. Starting to explore this subject
at a young age will like all the rest taught within a school, can get their minds going and help to keep building their
skills every year up. The younger a child starts a subject the more they will take in. It is known that young
childrens minds are like sponges so teachers want them to soak up as much as they can!
Children of a very young age are much more receptive at being interested in a subject that uses more of their
senses than just listening to a teacher talk. Being able to create something for themselves and feel the different
materials with their hands will get their minds stimulated. Creating craft products is also a lot of fun and beneficial.
These can include making birthday cards, purses, paper hats, a variety of things really. The difficulty of what they
create will obviously develop as the children age, perhaps starting off decorating a hand puppet moving all the
way up to the top end of primary school by creating their own cross stitch pictures. This allows them to explore
further materials and also gain new skills. Encouraging a small amount of sewing will come in handy when they
come to build upon this skill in secondary school. All in all, arts and craft are a wide subject area and there will be
something any child can enjoy.
Writing about childrens educational resources, Zoe Robinson aims to provide readers with informative knowledge
into her experience gained within this area and offer readers the chance to view a website she has experienced
positively. Take a look at a range of arts and crafts for children today.

Poor Teaching for Poor Children in the Name of Reform
By Alfie Kohn
[This is a slightly expanded version of the published article.]
Love them or hate them, the proposals collectively known as school reform are mostly top-down policies: divert public money to
quasi-private charter schools, pit states against one another in a race for federal education dollars, offer rewards when test scores go
up, fire the teachers or close the schools when they dont.
Policy makers and the general public have paid much less attention to what happens inside classrooms -- the particulars of teaching
and learning -- especially in low-income neighborhoods. The news here has been discouraging for quite some time, but, in a
painfully ironic twist, things seem to be getting worse as a direct result of the reform strategies pursued by the Bush
administration, then intensified under President Obama, and cheered by corporate executives and journalists.
In an article published in Phi Delta Kappan back in 1991, Martin Haberman, a professor at the University of Wisconsin, coined the
phrase pedagogy of poverty. Based on his observations in thousands of urban classrooms, Haberman described a tightly controlled
routine in which teachers dispense, and then test students on, factual information; assign seatwork; and punish noncompliance. It is a
regimen, he said, in which learners can succeed without becoming either involved or thoughtful -- and it is noticeably different
from the questioning, discovering, arguing, and collaborating that is more common (though by no means universal) among students
in suburban and private schools.
Now, two decades later, Haberman reports that the overly directive, mind-numbing anti-intellectual acts that pass for teaching in
most urban schools not only remain the coin of the realm but have become the gold standard. Its how youre supposed to teach
kids of color.
Earlier this year, Natalie Hopkinson, an African American writer, put it this way in anarticle called The McEducation of the
Negro: In the name of reform education -- for those "failing" urban kids, anyway -- is about learning the rules and following
directions. Not critical thinking. Not creativity. It's about how to correctly eliminate three out of four bubbles.
Those who demand that we close the achievement gap generally focus only on results, which in practice refers only to test
scores. High-quality instruction is defined as whatever raises those scores. But when teaching strategies are considered, there is
wide agreement (again, among noneducators) about what constitutes appropriate instruction in the inner city.
The curriculum consists of a series of separate skills, with more worksheets than real books, more rote practice than exploration of
ideas, more memorization (sometimes assisted with chanting and clapping) than thinking. In books like The Shame of the
Nation, Jonathan Kozol, another frequent visitor to urban schools, describes a mechanical, precisely paced process for drilling black
and Latino children in obsessively enumerated particles of amputated skill associated with upcoming state exams.
Not only is the teaching scripted, with students required to answer fact-based questions on command, but a system of almost
militaristic behavior control is common, with public humiliation for noncompliance and an array of rewards for obedience that calls
to mind the token economy programs developed in prisons and psychiatric hospitals.
Deborah Meier, the educator and author who has founded extraordinary schools in New York and Boston, points out that the very
idea of school has radically different meanings for middle-class kids, who are expected to have opinions, and poor kids, who are
expected to do what theyre told. Schools for the well-off are about inquiry and choices; schools for the poor are about drills and
compliance. The two types of institutions barely have any connection to each other, she says.
Adds Kozol: The children of the suburbs learn to think and to interrogate reality, while inner-city kids are trained for
nonreflective acquiescence. (Work hard, be nice.) At one of the urban schools he visited, a teacher told him, If there were middle-
class white children here, the parents would rebel at this curriculum and stop it cold.
Among the research that has confirmed the disparity are two studies based on data from the periodic National Assessment of
Educational Progress. One found that black children are much more likely than white children to be taught with workbooks or
worksheets on a daily basis. The other revealed a racial disparity in how computers are used for instruction, with African Americans
mostly getting drill and practice exercises (which, the study also found, are associated with poorer results).
Yet another study, by a researcher at Michigan State University, discovered that students in more affluent neighborhoods were given
more choice in their reading, more opportunities to talk with one another about books, the chance to analyze and write poetry and to
learn skills in the context of real literature.
Well before his brief tenure last year as New Jerseys Commissioner of Education, Bret Schundler expressed considerable
enthusiasm about the sort of teaching that involves constant drill and repetition and doesnt allow children not to answer. This
approach is bringing a lot of value-added for our children, he enthused. Our children? Does that mean he would send his own
kids to that kind of school? Of course not. Those schools are best for certain children, he explained.
The result is that certain children are left farther and farther behind. The rich get richer, while the poor get worksheets.
To be sure, the gap is not entirely due to how kids are taught. As economist Richard Rothstein reminds us, all school-related
variables combined can explain only about one-third of the variation in student achievement. Similarly, if you look closely at those
international test comparisons that supposedly find the U.S. trailing, it turns out that socioeconomic factors are largely
responsible. Our wealthier students do very well compared to other countries; our poorer students do not. And we have more poor
children than do other industrialized nations.
To whatever extent education does matter, though, the pedagogy of poverty traps those who are subject to it. The problem isnt that
their education lacks rigor -- in fact, a single-minded focus on raising the bar has served mostly to push more low-income youths
out of school -- but that it lacks depth and relevance and the capacity to engage students. As Deborah Stipek, dean of Stanfords
School of Education, once commented, drill-and-skill instruction isnt how middle-class children got their edge, so why use a
strategy to help poor kids catch up that didnt help middle class kids in the first place?
Essentially the same point has been made by one educational expert after another, including two prominent African Americans in the
field: Linda Darling-Hammond (who observed that the most counterproductive [teaching] approaches are enforced most rigidly
in the schools serving the most disadvantaged students) and Claude Steele (a skills-focused, remedial educationvirtually
guarantee[s] the persistence of the race gap).
Rather than viewing the pedagogy of poverty as a disgrace, however, many of the charter schools championed by the new reformers
have concentrated on perfecting and intensifying techniques to keep children on task and compel them to follow
directions. (Interestingly, their carrot-and-stick methods mirror those used by policy makers to control educators.) Bunches of
eager, mostly white, college students are invited to drop by for a couple of years to lend their energy to this dubious enterprise.
Is racism to blame here -- or perhaps behaviorism? Or could it be that, at its core, the corporate version of school reform was
never intended to promote thinking -- let alone interest in learning -- but merely to improve test results? That pressure is highest in
the inner cities, where the scores are lowest. And the pedagogy of poverty can sometimes work to raise those scores, which makes
everyone happy and inclined to reward those teachers.
Unfortunately, that result is often at the expense of real learning, the sort that more privileged students enjoy, because the tests
measure what matters least. Thus, its possible for the accountability movement to simultaneously narrow the test-score gap and
widen the learning gap.
Whats to be done? In the short run, Deborah Meier is probably right when she remarks, Only secretly rebellious teachers have
ever done right by our least advantaged kids. To do right by them in the open, we would need structural changes that make the best
kind of teaching available to the kids who need it most.
And we know it can work -- which is to say, the pedagogy of poverty is not whats best for the poor. Theres plenty of precedent. A
three-year study (published by the U.S. Department of Education) of 140 elementary classrooms with high concentrations of poor
children found that students whose teachers emphasized meaning and understanding were far more successful than those who
received basic-skills instruction. The researchers concluded by decisively rejecting schooling for the children of poverty . . . [that]
emphasizes basic skills, sequential curricula, and tight control of instruction by the teacher.
Remarkable results with low-income students of all ages have also been found with theReggio Emilia model of early-childhood
education, the performance assessment high schools in New York, and Big Picture schools around the country. All of these start
with students interests and questions; learning is organized around real-life problems and projects. Exploration is both active and
interactive, reflecting the simple truth that kids learn how to make good decisions by making decisions, not by following
directions. Finally, success is judged by authentic indicators of thinking and motivation, not by multiple-choice tests.
That last point is critical. Standardized exams serve mostly to make dreadful forms of teaching appear successful. As long as they
remain our primary way of evaluating, we may never see real school reform -- only an intensification of traditional practices, with
the very worst reserved for the disadvantaged.
A British educator named David Gribble was once speaking in favor of the kind of education that honors childrens interests and helps them to think deeply about
questions that matter. Of course, he added, that sort of education is appropriate for affluent children. For disadvantaged children, on the other hand, it is . .
. essential.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
Spring 2008

Progressive Education
Why Its Hard to Beat, But Also Hard to Find
By Alfie Kohn
RELATED PUBLICATIONS:
* "What to Look for in a Classroom" (table)
* "A Dozen Basic Guidelines for Educators" (list)
If progressive education doesnt lend itself to a single fixed definition, that seems fitting in light of its reputation for
resisting conformity and standardization. Any two educators who describe themselves as sympathetic to this tradition
may well see it differently, or at least disagree about which features are the most important.
Talk to enough progressive educators, in fact, and youll begin to notice certain paradoxes: Some people focus on the
unique needs of individual students, while others invoke the importance of a community of learners; some describe
learning as a process, more journey than destination, while others believe that tasks should result in authentic products
that can be shared.[1]
What It Is
Despite such variations, there are enough elements on which most of us can agree so that a common core of
progressive education emerges, however hazily. And it really does make sense to call it atradition, as I did a moment
ago. Ironically, what we usually call traditional education, in contrast to the progressive approach, has less claim to that
adjective because of how, and how recently, it has developed. As Jim Nehring at the University of Massachusetts at
Lowell observed, Progressive schools are the legacy of a long and proud tradition of thoughtful school practice
stretching back for centuries including hands-on learning, multiage classrooms, and mentor-apprentice relationships
while what we generally refer to as traditional schooling is largely the result of outdated policy changes that have
calcified into conventions.[2] (Nevertheless, Ill use the conventional nomenclature in this article to avoid confusion.)
Its not all or nothing, to be sure. I dont think Ive ever seen a school even one with scripted instruction, uniforms, and
rows of desks bolted to the floor that has completely escaped the influence of progressive ideas. Nor have I seen a
school thats progressive in every detail. Still, schools can be characterized according to how closely they reflect a
commitment to values such as these:
Attending to the whole child: Progressive educators are concerned with helping children become not only good
learners but also good people. Schooling isnt seen as being about just academics, nor is intellectual growth limited to
verbal and mathematical proficiencies.
Community: Learning isnt something that happens to individual children separate selves at separate desks.
Children learn with and from one another in a caring community, and thats true of moral as well as academic learning.
Interdependence counts at least as much as independence, so it follows that practices that pit students against one
another in some kind of competition, thereby undermining a feeling of community, are deliberately avoided.
Collaboration: Progressive schools are characterized by what I like to call a working with rather than a doing to
model. In place of rewards for complying with the adults expectations, or punitive consequences for failing to do so,
theres more of an emphasis on collaborative problem-solving and, for that matter, less focus on behaviors than on
underlying motives, values, and reasons.
Social justice: A sense of community and responsibility for others isnt confined to the classroom; indeed, students are
helped to locate themselves in widening circles of care that extend beyond self, beyond friends, beyond their own ethnic
group, and beyond their own country. Opportunities are offered not only to learn about, but also to put into action, a
commitment to diversity and to improving the lives of others.
Intrinsic motivation: When considering (or reconsidering) educational policies and practices, the first question that
progressive educators are likely to ask is, Whats the effect on students interest in learning, their desire to continue
reading, thinking, and questioning? This deceptively simple test helps to determine what students will and wont be
asked to do. Thus, conventional practices, including homework, grades, and tests, prove difficult to justify for anyone
who is serious about promoting long-term dispositions rather than just improving short-term skills.
Deep understanding: As the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead declared long ago, A merely well-informed man is the
most useless bore on Gods earth. Facts and skills do matter, but only in a contextand for a purpose. Thats why
progressive education tends to be organized around problems, projects, and questions rather than around lists of
facts, skills, and separate disciplines. The teaching is typically interdisciplinary, the assessment rarely focuses on rote
memorization, and excellence isnt confused with rigor. The point is not merely to challenge students after all, harder
is not necessarily better but to invite them to think deeply about issues that matter and help them understand ideas
from the inside out.
Active learning: In progressive schools, students play a vital role in helping to design the curriculum, formulate the
questions, seek out (and create) answers, think through possibilities, and evaluate how successful they and their
teachers have been. Their active participation in every stage of the process is consistent with the overwhelming
consensus of experts that learning is a matter of constructing ideas rather than passively absorbing information or
practicing skills.
Taking kids seriously: In traditional schooling, as John Dewey once remarked, the center of gravity is outside the
child: he or she is expected to adjust to the schools rules and curriculum. Progressive educators take their cue from
the children and are particularly attentive to differences among them. (Each student is unique, so a single set of
policies, expectations, or assignments would be as counterproductive as it was disrespectful.) The curriculum isnt just
based on interest, but on these childrens interests. Naturally, teachers will have broadly conceived themes and
objectives in mind, but they dont just design a course of study for their students; they design it with them, and they
welcome unexpected detours. One fourth-grade teachers curriculum, therefore, wont be the same as that of theteacher
next door, nor will her curriculum be the same this year as it was for the children she taught last year. Its not enough to
offer elaborate thematic units prefabricated by the adults. And progressive educators realize that the students must help
to formulate not only the course of study but also the outcomes or standards that inform those lessons.
Some of the features that Ive listed here will seem objectionable, or at least unsettling, to educators at more traditional
schools, while others will be surprisingly familiar and may even echo sentiments that they, themselves, have expressed.
But progressive educators dont merely say they endorse ideas like love of learning or a sense of community. Theyre
willing to put these values into practice even if doing so requires them to up-end traditions. They may eliminate
homework altogether if its clear that students view after-school assignments as something to be gotten over with as
soon as possible. They will question things like honors classes and awards assemblies that clearly undermine a sense of
community. Progressive schools, in short, follow their core values bolstered by research and experience wherever
they lead.
What It Isnt
Misconceptions about progressive education generally take two forms. Either it is defined too narrowly so that the
significance of the change it represents is understated, or else an exaggerated, caricatured version is presented in order
to justify dismissing the whole approach. Lets take each of these in turn.
Individualized attention from caring, respectful teachers is terribly important. But it does not a progressive school make.
To assume otherwise not only dilutes progressivism; its unfair to traditional educators, most of whom are not callous
Gradgrinds or ruler-wielding nuns. In fact, its perfectly consistent to view education as the process of filling children up
with bits of knowledge and to use worksheets, lectures, quizzes, homework, grades, and other such methods in
pursuit of that goal while being genuinely concerned about each childs progress. Schools with warm, responsive
teachers who know each student personally can take pride in that fact, but they shouldnt claim on that basis to be
progressive.
Moreover, traditional schools arent always about memorizing dates and definitions; sometimes theyre also committed to
helping students understand ideas. As one science teacher pointed out, For thoughtful traditionalists, thinking is
couched in terms of comprehending, integrating, and applying knowledge. However, the students task in such
classrooms is comprehending how the teacher has integrated or applied the ideas and [then] reconstruct[ing] the
teachers thinking.[3] There are interesting concepts being discussed in some traditional classrooms, in other words, but
what distinguishes progressive education is that students must construct their own understanding of ideas.
Theres another mistake based on too narrow a definition, which took me a while to catch on to: A school that is
culturally progressive is not necessarily educationally progressive. An institution can be steeped in lefty politics and
multi-grain values; it can be committed to diversity, peace, and saving the planet but remain strikingly traditional in its
pedagogy. In fact, one can imagine an old-fashioned pour-in-the-facts approach being used to teach lessons in tolerance
or even radical politics.[4]
Less innocuous, or accidental, is the tendency to paint progressive education as a touchy-feely, loosey-goosey, fluffy,
fuzzy, undemanding exercise in leftover hippie idealism or Rousseauvian Romanticism. In this cartoon version of the
tradition, kids are free to do anything they please, the curriculum can consist of whatever is fun (and nothing that isnt
fun). Learning is thought to happen automatically while the teachers just stand by, observing and beaming. I lack the
space here to offer examples of this sort of misrepresentation or a full account of why its so profoundly wrong but
trust me: People really do sneer at the idea of progressive education based on an image that has little to do with
progressive education.
Why It Makes Sense
For most people, the fundamental reason to choose, or offer, a progressive education is a function of their basic values:
a rock-bottom commitment to democracy, as Joseph Featherstone put it; a belief that meeting childrens needs should
take precedence over preparing future employees; and a desire to nourish curiosity, creativity, compassion, skepticism,
and other virtues.
Fortunately, what may have begun with values (for any of us as individuals, and also for education itself, historically
speaking) has turned out to be supported by solid data. A truly impressive collection of research has demonstrated that
when students are able to spend more time thinking about ideas than memorizing facts and practicing skills and when
they are invited to help direct their own learning they are not only more likely to enjoy what theyre doing but to do it
better. Progressive education isnt just more appealing; its also more productive.
I reviewed decades worth of research in the late 1990s: studies of preschools and high schools; studies of instruction in
reading, writing, math, and science; broad studies of open classrooms, student-centered education, and teaching
consistent with constructivist accounts of learning, but also investigations of specific innovations like democratic
classrooms, multiage instruction, looping, cooperative learning, and authentic assessment (including the abolition of
grades). Across domains, the results overwhelmingly favor progressive education. Regardless of ones values, in other
words, this approach can be recommended purely on the basis of its effectiveness. And if your criteria are more
ambitious long-term retention of whats been taught, the capacity to understand ideas and apply them to new kinds of
problems, a desire to continue learning the relative benefits of progressive education are even greater.[5] This
conclusion is only strengthened by the lack of data to support the value of standardized tests, homework, conventional
discipline (based on rewards or consequences), competition, and other traditional practices.[6]
Since I published that research review, similar findings have continued to accumulate. Several newer studies confirm
that traditional academic instruction for very young children is counterproductive.[7] Students in elementary and middle
school did better in science when their teaching was centered on projects in which they took a high degree of initiative.
Traditional activities, such as completing worksheets and reading primarily from textbooks, seemed to have no positive
effect.[8] Another recent study found that an inquiry-based approach to learning is more beneficial than conventional
methods for low-income and minority students.[9] The results go on and on. In fact, I occasionally stumble upon older
research that Id missed earlier including a classic five-year investigation of almost 11,000 children between the ages
of eight and sixteen, which found that students who attended progressive schools were less likely to cheat than those
who attended conventional schools a result that persisted even after the researchers controlled for age, IQ, and family
background.[10]
Why Its Rare
Despite the fact that all schools can be located on a continuum stretching between the poles of totally progressive and
totally traditional or, actually, on a series of continuums reflecting the various components of those models its
usually possible to visit a school and come away with a pretty clear sense of whether it can be classified as
predominantly progressive. Its also possible to reach a conclusion about how many schools or even individual
classrooms in America merit that label: damned few. The higher the grade level, the rarer such teaching tends to be,
and its not even all that prevalent at the lower grades.[11] (Also, while its probably true that most progressive schools
are independent, most independent schools are not progressive.)
The rarity of this approach, while discouraging to some of us, is also rather significant with respect to the larger debate
about education. If progressive schooling is actually quite uncommon, then its hard to blame our problems (real or
alleged) on this model. Indeed, the facts have the effect of turning the argument on its head: If students arent learning
effectively, it may be because of the persistence oftraditional beliefs and practices in our nations schools.
But were also left with a question: If progressive education is so terrific, why is it still the exception rather than the rule? I
often ask the people who attend my lectures to reflect on this, and the answers that come back are varied and
provocative. For starters, they tell me, progressive education is not only less familiar but also much harder to do, and
especially to do well. It asks a lot more of the students and at first can seem a burden to those who have figured out how
to play the game in traditional classrooms often succeeding by conventional standards without doing much real
thinking. Its also much more demanding of teachers, who have to know their subject matter inside and out if they want
their students to make sense of biology or literature as opposed to simply memoriz[ing] the frogs anatomy or the
sentences structure.[12] But progressive teachers also have to know a lot about pedagogy because no amount of
content knowledge (say, expertise in science or English) can tell you how to facilitate learning. The belief that anyone
who knows enough math can teach it is a corollary of the belief that learning is a process of passive absorption a view
that cognitive science has decisively debunked.
Progressive teachers also have to be comfortable with uncertainty, not only to abandon a predictable march toward the
right answer but to let students play an active role in the quest for meaning that replaces it. That means a willingness to
give up some control and let students take some ownership, which requires guts as well as talent. These characteristics
appear not to be as common as we might like to think. Almost a decade ago, in an interview for this magazine, I recalled
my own experience in high school classrooms with some chagrin: I prided myself on being an entertaining lecturer, very
knowledgeable, funny, charismatic, and so on. It took me years to realize [that my] classroom was all about me, not
about the kids. It was about teaching, not about learning.[13] The more were influenced by the insights of progressive
education, the more were forced to rethink what it means to be a good teacher. That process will unavoidably ruffle
some feathers, including our own.
And speaking of feather-ruffling, Im frequently reminded that progressive education has an uphill journey because of the
larger culture we live in. Its an approach that is in some respects inherently subversive, and people in power do not
always enjoy being subverted. As Vito Perrone has written, The values of progressivism including skepticism,
questioning, challenging, openness, and seeking alternate possibilities have long struggled for acceptance in
American society. That they did not come to dominate the schools is not surprising.[14]
There is pressure to raise standardized test scores, something that progressive education manages to do only
sometimes and by accident not only because that isnt its purpose but also because such tests measure what matters
least. (The recognition of that fact explains why progressive schools would never dream of using standardized tests as
part of their admissions process.) More insidiously, though, we face pressure to standardize our practices in general.
Thinking is messy, and deep thinking is really messy. This reality coexists uneasily with demands for order in schools
where the curriculum is supposed to be carefully coordinated across grade levels and planned well ahead of time, or in
society at large.
And then (as my audiences invariably point out) there are parents who have never been invited to reconsider their
assumptions about education. As a result, they may be impressed by the wrong things, reassured by signs of
traditionalism letter grades, spelling quizzes, heavy textbooks, a teacher in firm control of the classroom and
unnerved by their absence. Even if their children are obviously unhappy, parents may accept that as a fact of life.
Instead of wanting the next generation to get better than we got, its as though their position was: Listen, if it was bad
enough for me, its bad enough for my kids. Perhaps they subscribe to what might be called the Listerine theory of
education, based on a famous ad campaign that sought to sell this particular brand of mouthwash on the theory that if it
tasted vile, it obviously worked well. The converse proposition, of course, is that anything appealing is likely to be
ineffective. If a child is lucky enough to be in a classroom featuring, say, student-designed project-based investigations,
the parent may wonder, But is she really learning anything? Where are the worksheets? And so the teachers feel
pressure to make the instruction worse.
All progressive schools experience a constant undertow, perhaps a request to reintroduce grades of some kind, to give
special enrichments to the children of the gifted parents, to start up a competitive sports program (because American
children evidently dont get enough of winning and losing outside of school), to punish the kid who did that bad thing to
my kid, to administer a standardized test or two (just so we can see how theyre doing), and, above all, to get the kids
ready for what comes next even if this amounts to teaching them badly so theyll be prepared for the bad teaching to
which theyll be subjected later.[15]
This list doesnt exhaust the reasons that progressive education is uncommon. However, the discussion that preceded it, of progressive educations
advantages, was also incomplete, which suggests that working to make it a little more common is a worthy pursuit. We may not be able to transform
a whole school, or even a classroom, along all of these dimensions, at least not by the end of this year. But whatever progress we can make is likely
to benefit our students. And doing whats best for them is the reason all of us got into this line of work in the first place.
Rethinking Homework By Alfie Kohn
After spending most of the day in school, children are typically given additional assignments to be completed at home. This is a
rather curious fact when you stop to think about it, but not as curious as the fact that few people ever stop to think about it.
It becomes even more curious, for that matter, in light of three other facts:
1. The negative effects of homework are well known. They include childrens frustration and exhaustion, lack of time for other
activities, and possible loss of interestin learning. Many parents lament the impact of homework on their relationship with their
children; they may also resent having to play the role of enforcer and worry that they will be criticized either for not being involved
enough with the homework or for becoming too involved.
2. The positive effects of homework are largely mythical. In preparation for a bookon the topic, Ive spent a lot of time sifting
through the research. The results are nothing short of stunning. For starters, there is absolutely no evidence of any academic benefit
from assigning homework in elementary or middle school. For younger students, in fact, there isnt even a correlation between
whether children do homework (or how much they do) and any meaningful measure of achievement. At the high school level, the
correlation is weak and tends to disappear when more sophisticated statistical measures are applied. Meanwhile, no study has ever
substantiated the belief that homework builds character or teaches good study habits.
3. More homework is being piled on children despite the absence of its value. Over the last quarter-century the burden has
increased most for the youngest children, for whom the evidence of positive effects isnt just dubious; its nonexistent.
Its not as though most teachers decide now and then that a certain lesson really ought to continue after school is over because
meaningful learning is so likely to result from such an assignment that it warrants the intrusion on family time. Homework in most
schools isnt limited to those occasions when it seems appropriate and important. Rather, the point of departure seems to
be: Weve decided ahead of time that children will have to do something every night (or several times a week). Later on well
figure out what to make them do.
Ive heard from countless people across the country about the frustration they feel over homework. Parents who watch a torrent of
busywork spill out of their childrens backpacks wish they could help teachers understand how the cons overwhelmingly outweigh
the pros. And teachers who have long harbored doubts about the value of homework feel pressured by those parents who mistakenly
believe that a lack of afterschool assignments reflects an insufficient commitment to academic achievement. Such parents seem to
reason that as long as their kids have lots of stuff to do every night, never mind what it is, then learning must be taking place.
What parents and teachers need is support from administrators who are willing to challenge the conventional wisdom. They need
principals who question the slogans that pass for arguments: that homework creates a link between school and family (as if there
werent more constructive ways to make that connection!), or that it reinforces what students were taught in class ( a word that
denotes the repetition of rote behaviors, not the development of understanding), or that it teaches children self-discipline and
responsibility (a claim for which absolutely no evidence exists).
Above all, principals need to help their faculties see that the most important criterion for judging decisions about homework (or other
policies, for that matter) is the impact theyre likely to have on students attitudes about what theyre doing. Most of what
homework is doing is driving kids away from learning, says education professor Harvey Daniels. Lets face it: Most children dread
homework, or at best see it as something to be gotten through. Thus, even if it did provide other benefits, they would have to be
weighed against its likely effect on kids love of learning.*
So whats a thoughtful principal to do?
1. Educate yourself and share what youve learned with teachers, parents, and central office administrators. Make sure you
know what the research really says that there is no reason to believe that children would be at any disadvantage in terms of their
academic learning or life skills if they had much less homework, or even none at all. Whatever decisions are made should be based
on fact rather than folk wisdom.
2. Rethink standardized homework policies. Requiring teachers to give a certain number of minutes of homework every day,
or to make assignments on the same schedule every week (for example, x minutes of math on Tuesdays and Thursdays) is a frank
admission that homework isnt justified by a given lesson, much less is it a response to what specific kids need at a specific
time. Such policies sacrifice thoughtful instruction in order to achieve predictability, and they manage to do a disservice not only to
students but, when imposed from above, to teachers as well.
3. Reduce the amount but dont stop there. Many parents are understandably upset with how much time their children have to
spend on homework. At a minimum, make sure that teachers arent exceeding district guidelines and that they arent chronically
underestimating how long it takes students to complete the assignments. (As one mother told me, Its cheating to say this is 20
minutes of homework if only your fastest kid can complete it in that time.) Then work on reducing the amount of homework
irrespective of such guidelines and expectations so that families, not schools, decide how they will spend most of their evenings.
Quantity, however, is not the only issue that needs to be addressed. Some assignments, frankly, arent worth even five minutes of a
students time. Too many first graders are forced to clip words from magazines that begin with a given letter of the alphabet. Too
many fifth graders have to color in an endless list of factor pairs on graph paper. Too many eighth graders spend their evenings
inching their way through dull, overstuffed, committee-written textbooks, one chapter at a time. Teachers should be invited to reflect
on whether any given example of homework will help students think deeply about questions that matter. What philosophy of
teaching, what theory of learning, lies behind each assignment? Does it seem to assume that children are meaning makers -- or
empty vessels? Is learning regarded as a process thats mostly active or passive? Is it about wrestling with ideas or mindlessly
following directions?
4. Change the default. Ultimately, its not enough just to have less homework or even better homework. We should change the
fundamental expectation in our schools so that students are asked to take schoolwork home only when a theres a reasonable
likelihood that a particular assignment will be beneficial to most of them. When thats not true, they should be free to spend their
after-school hours as they choose. The bottom line: No homework except on those occasions when its truly necessary. This, of
course, is a reversal of the current default state, which amounts to an endorsement of homework for its own sake, regardless of the
content, a view that simply cant be justified.
5. Ask the kids. Find out what students think of homework and solicit their suggestions perhaps by distributing anonymous
questionnaires. Many adults simply assume that homework is useful for promoting learning without even inquiring into the
experience of the learners themselves! Do students find that homework really is useful? Why or why not? Are certain kinds better
than others? How does homework affect their desire to learn? What are its other effects on their lives, and on their families?
6. Suggest that teachers assign only what they design. In most cases, students should be asked to do only what teachers are
willing to create themselves, as opposed to prefabricated worksheets or generic exercises photocopied from textbooks. Also, it rarely
makes sense to give the same assignment to all students in a class because its unlikely to be beneficial for most of them. Those who
already understand the concept will be wasting their time, and those who dont understand will become increasingly
frustrated. There is no perfect assignment that will stimulate every student because one size simply doesnt fit all. On those days
when homework really seems necessary, teachers should create several assignments fitted to different interests and capabilities. But
its better to give no homework to anyone than the same homework to everyone.
7. Use homework as an opportunity to involve students in decision-making. One way to judge the quality of a classroom is by
the extent to which students participate inmaking choices about their learning. The best teachers know that children learn how to
make good decisions by making decisions, not by following directions. Students should have something to say about what theyre
going to learn and the circumstances under which theyll learn it, as well as how (and when) their learning will be evaluated, how the
room will be set up, how conflicts will be resolved, and a lot more.
What is true of education in general is true of homework in particular. At least two investigators have found that the most
impressive teachers (as defined by various criteria) tend to involve students in decisions about assignments rather than simply telling
them what theyll have to do at home. A reasonable first question for a parent to ask upon seeing a homework assignment is How
much say did the kids have in determining how this had to be done, and on what schedule, and whether it really needed to be
completed at home in the first place?
A discussion about whether homework might be useful (and why) can be valuable in its own right. If opinions are varied, the
question of what to do when everyone doesnt agree take a vote? keep talking until we reach consensus? look for a compromise?
develops social skills as well as intellectual growth. And that growth occurs precisely because the teacher asked rather than
told. Teachers who consult with their students on a regular basis would shake their heads vigorously were you to suggest that kids
will always say no to homework or to anything else that requires effort. Its just not true, theyll tell you. When students are
treated with respect, when the assignments are worth doing, most kids relish a challenge.
If, on the other hand, students groan about, or try to avoid, homework, its generally because they get too much of it, or because its
assigned thoughtlessly and continuously, or simply because they had nothing to say about it. The benefits of even high-quality
assignments are limited if students feel done to instead of worked with.
8. Help teachers move away from grading. Your faculty may need your support, encouragement, and practical suggestions to
help them abandon a model in which assignments are checked off or graded, where the point is to enforce compliance, and toward a
model in which students explain and explore with one another what theyve done -- what they liked and disliked about the book they
read, what theyre struggling with, what new questions they came up with. As the eminent educator Martin Haberman observed,
homework in the best classrooms is not checked it is shared. If students conclude that theres no point in spending time on
assignments that arent going to be collected or somehow recorded, thats not an argument for setting up bribes and threats and a
climate of distrust; its an indictment of the homework itself.
9. Experiment. Ask teachers who are reluctant to rethink their long-standing reliance on traditional homework to see what happens
if, during a given week or curriculum unit, they tried assigning none. Surely anyone who believes that homework is beneficial
should be willing to test that assumption by investigating the consequences of its absence. What are the effects of a moratorium on
students achievement, on their interest in learning, on their moods and the resulting climate of the classroom? Likewise, the school
as a whole can try out a new policy, such as the change in default that Ive proposed, on a tentative basis before committing to it
permanently.
Principals deal with an endless series of crises; theyre called upon to resolve complaints, soothe wounded egos, negotiate solutions,
try to keep everyone happy, and generally make the trains (or, rather, buses) run on time. In such a position there is a strong
temptation to avoid new initiatives that call the status quo into question. Considerable gumption is required to take on an issue like
homework, particularly during an era when phrases like raising the bar and higher standards are used to rationalize practices that
range from foolish to inappropriate to hair-raising. But of course a principals ultimate obligation is to do whats right by the
children, to protect them from harmful mandates and practices that persist not because theyre valuable but merely because theyre
traditional.
For anyone willing to shake things up in order to do what makes sense, beginning a conversation about homework is a very good
place to start.
.