Critical thinking, not endless testing
About thinking … it's being said that students who leave college should be proficient in critical thinking, logical reasoning, a second language, insight into various cultures, computation, speaking and writing.
How long does it take all students to be competent in this critical thinking and reasoning? When should it start?
Before retirement, I was fortunate to be principal for a K-5 school with four classrooms of early childhood education for children "at risk."
On one occasion, as children and teachers were waiting for family members or bus to take the children home, one of the 3-year-old boys responded to whatever my antics were. He asked me, "Why are you acting so silly Mr. Price?" I said," I guess it's the little boy in me." The child quickly said, "Mr. Price, you can't be pregnant."
Let's name him Bob. At three, Bob didn't understand my metaphor. But did his thinking reflect "using information and ideas together to come up with a new good statement (synthesize)"? Or did Bob "infer unknown information from known information (extrapolated)"? Or was he "able to estimate and calculate in advance (forecast)"?
His thinking was logical and correct from his base of information as well as giving all the adults present a good laugh. This was a child of 3 from a family with few resources. His teacher and developmental program prompted him to use this thinking talent to further enable him in his learning.
Congress is in a process to refine the "No Child Left Behind" law aka "No child Left Untested."
Will it consider giving some emphasis to the thinking needed for the information age? It's here, you know. Some believe present attempts at reform in education via accountability and testing is dumbing-down the student population. The drop-out rate is also increasing.
From where will come the fuel needed to effectively study the basics, ratio, proportion, logic and technical reading reduced? If emphasized, shouldn't thinking ability stimulate and raise U.S. education to the needed level for students to compete in the global economy?
Good individual teachers have employed these skills for years. All were the efforts of bright groups of teachers and university projects in an effort of educational reform spanning 15 years before the "accountability stuff."
Was NCLB an example of not gathering enough information to synthesize a good new statement for education by political leadership at the state and federal levels?
Or was it inefficient forecasting of need by manufacturing lobbyists who embraced the product testing and accountability route for education?
Or did the educational community drop the ball by failing to assume leadership in stepping up strong enough for real reform of what needs to be learned and how to teach it?
Shouldn't these skills be in the content for all students in this country?
Is it logical that being competent in upper-level thinking begins with 3-year-old Bob and takes a good number of years of student training before mastery is expected? I'm talking about all students.
Think about it.
Herb Price
Huntley