A subtractive education

If you are not a member of Phi Delta Kappa, you should join for no other reason to get the always delightful Phi Delta Kappan professional journal.

Herb Childress's article, "A Subtractive Education" alone make the whole issue worth obtaining. He writes:

My dream is that I will live to see the day that the modern high school will be considered the counterpart of the mission, the orphanage, and the poor farm - an institution that was taken for granted and considered beneficial in its time but has since been judged to be inhumane and unthinkable.

He lists the ideal outcome measures for high school:

• Graduates of  my ideal high school should love to read.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should enjoy numbers.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should enjoy physical exertion and activity.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should have some well-developed outlet for their creative desires.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should know how to work in groups, and they should know how to teach a skill to someone else.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should be brave and take risks.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should understand and take an interest in their community.
• Graduates of my ideal high school should be compassionate and care about people they don't know.

Not a bad list. Wish I'd written it. 

I've long been cynical about what society/business says it wants in terms of skill sets and attitudes from workers and what it really wants. Karl Fisch at the Fischbowl blog writes, "Everything I've read indicates that they want what we are trying to help our students become: creative and critical thinkers, problems solvers, producers of information, innovators, knowledgeable of and participants in a global community, expert navigators of 21st century technologies." You seem to be reading the same stuff I am, Karl.

But on the flip side, take a look at Kathy Sierra  "Knocking the exuberance out of employees" on her Creating Passionate Users blog who suggests employers are looking for robots, not "bold, creative, smart, passionate, independent" workers. She lists the advantages of hiring "robots."

Why Robots Are the Best Employees

1. They don't challenge the status quo
2. They don't ask those uncomfortable questions
3. They're 100% obedient
4. They don't need "personal" days.
5. ... because they don't have a personal life
6. They never make the boss look bad (e.g. stupid, incompetent, clueless, etc.)
7. They dress and talk the way you want them to
8. They have no strongly-held opinions
9. They have no passion, so they have nothing to "fight" for
10. They are always willing to do whatever it takes (insane hours, etc.)
11. They are the ultimate team players
12. They don't complain when you micromanage (tip: micromanaging is in fact one of the best ways to create a robot)
13. They don't care what their workspace is like, and don't complain if they don't have the equipment they need
14. They'll never threaten your job
15. They make perfect scapegoats
16. They get on well with zombies

My sense is most teachers prefer robot students as well.  Hey, as a supervisor I have to admit that there are days I'd trade some of my folks in for a few robots! And my sense is that NCLB is a lot more about creating robots than it is about creating 21st century learners. Standardized tests on very basic skills? Yup, robot manufacturing.

I'm guessing most of us would be happiest knowing that any independent thinkers we create would eventually come around to thinking exactly like we do. True independence and creativity is really pretty frightening.

 Does society really want creative, divergent thinkers?

Comments

[Karl Fisch]

I agree, robots are easier to teach. But I think Kathy says that middle management wants robots, but that CEO's - and possibly upper management if such a thing exists - want creative problem solvers. Hopefully CEO's and upper management got there because they were smart and successful (a big assumption I know) and they have a better idea of what they need. I also think that if a company listens to those middle managers here just after the dawn of the 21st century, that company may not be around very much longer.

Regardless, my loyalty is to my students. I think that even if middle management wants robots, if we help our students become "bold, creative, smart, passionate, independent" people (not just "workers") - we will help them be successful - and happy - in the long run. Anything else would be "inhumane and unthinkable". And maybe they will become the CEO's instead of middle management.

[Doug Johnson]

Hi Karl,

I'd not thought of this from the angle of CEO vs. middle manager. Makes great sense.

And yes, I certainly agree about students needing to be bold, passionate, creative, etc!

Thanks,

Doug

[John Thompson]

Hey, Doug! I agree with your assessment of the journal. Of course, I'm a bit biased as the journal has been kind enough to include Web Watch columns written by my grad students for the past four years. See the latest column in the current (October) issue - inside back cover.

John

[Brent Loken]

Doug, this is a great post. I especially liked the list of Why Robots Make the Best Employees. I've been reading about issues like this for some time now and am really questioning, like Herb and many others, the role that education plays. We really need to begin an open and honest dialouge about the purpose of our schools. Mission statements abound that say the purpose the HS is to produce 21st century citizens. However, most schools could not be farther from the truth. I've written about this issue myself and would enjoy your thoughts.
brentloken@edublogs.org

[Herb Childress]

Herb Childress here. Thanks for the kind words about "Subtractive Education." And I also love the list of why employers want robots. At the college I'm currently in, we do a good job of creating solid employees. I think we do less well at helping our graduates become social and civic leaders. But that's part of my job, and I think we have a shot at it.