Conversations of Learning Theory.

(After reviewing following Blogs, I posted...)

http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html

Education was put in place to help our citizens become productive members of society.  To be able to work, have a family, and provide a benefit to the town (Which in turn is a benefit to one's family again).  However, we now must question what the previous statement means in today's and the future's environment.  

Today's public schools still base performance on very basic skills that they compare to everyone in the state and or nation.  We are steadily falling behind the world in academic skills, but what does this mean.  Whatever the answer is, what we are doing and how we are measuring it, is flawed.  We need to take a good look at what we are doing. (And even better focus on who "We" will be).  I agree with Bill Kerr and that "...we need big change."

I think we need to focus on helping our students become productive members of society, but during this process, respect how students learn.  Once the students are able to learn the new information they will be capable of greater things, and we leave the burden of job skill preparation (for at least a 9-5 job) to the employer.  As educators we were taken out of the loop once mainstreaming occurred.  Because all students were meant to be in the mainstreamed, specialization (whether advanced or modified) was lost.  We were basically told to ignore that students are individuals and learn in different ways and are capable of different things.  This does not mean that these students do not need basic skills, or that we shouldthrow out anything they do not like or enjoy.  We just need to use our education as educators and emphasize what is necessary, and if it is not, minimize our time and effort towards the topic or skill, or maybe even eliminate it.  

However, as I mentioned before, "We," is the main question.  Educators are taken out of the mix and we are at the mercy of state and federal guidelines.  I feel that these guidelines are based on minimal or basic level skills and because of the penalties that come with these guidelines we have to meet them whether we agree with them or not.

As mentioned before, I do not know what the answer is but "...we need big change."  I think at a minimum we need to trust and respect our qualified educators who are in the front lines of education and give them latitude they need to get their students to learn.  We need to understand that our school, our classroom, our students, our personel, are all unique.  Even from year to year.

As a person of science, I agree that we should use the scientific method to solve any problem.  After identifying the problem, we must produce a hypothesis (which will become a theory with collaborative data, even if never a law).  Bill Kerr's blog goes on to discuss that there are postitive and negative critisims of most if not all theories, but we should not abandon or accept and particular theory.  I agree, I feel that we need to stay abreast of all the idea, and "evolve."

Karl Kapp's blog is listed to show an example of a different style of a lesson and how to construct it rather that simple teaching and testing of knowledge.

FOR THE CONVERSATION:  What is the best theory? Why?  What were your experiences as educators having the knowledge of these theories when teaching a lesson?