Nations should not require that all students study the same national curriculum. If every child were presented with the same material, it would assume that all children learn the same and that all teachers are capable of teaching the same material in the same way. In addition to neglecting differences in learning and teaching styles, it would also stifle creativity and create a generation of drones. The uniformity would also lend itself to governmental meddling in curriculum that could result in the destruction of democracy. If every teacher is forced to teach a certain text, the government need only change that text to misinform an entire generation. Lastly, a standardized curriculum would also adversely affect students who come from lower Having a national curriculum implies that there is a set group of things worth learning for every person. Maybe this is true, but for students, it sets up a world where there is a finite amount of knowledge to be acquired for the purpose of regurgitating it on a test. Teaching a standard curriculum doesn’t encourage inquiries; it doesn’t make students ask questions like, “Why?” and “How? School’s real purpose is teaching people to learn, not just teaching them a set group of facts. By teaching them to learn, students can continue doing so, they can extend skills from one area of knowledge to another. This type of learning fosters creativity that can be used not only in math or science or English, but in art or music or creative writing. Teaching a brain to go beyond being a file cabinet for facts is the best way to teach creativity. Creativity is too often assumed to be something only for the arts. It is creativity that results in innovation and it is innovation that has resulted in the greatest achievements of humanity in the sciences and humanities
Doing that involves an increasing mastery of skills, knowledge, and ideas." (Robinson, p. 119) The mentioned idea can be used to motivate students to participate in the learning process. The same way young children learn playing with others, the older child can do it experimenting and prove their theories. As a teacher is easy to noticed the difference between a lesson that is pure theory, and the lesson that incorporates creative factors. Students present a better behavior during the lesson, participate, interact, formulate questions and get the answers working together without
The American system of education is considered to be one of the most progressive in the world. One of the surveys on attitudes toward teaching around the world found that the United States is unique in its strong emphasis on "good teaching." My experience at State College has helped me to understand better how this system works, and what methods and techniques American teachers use to motivate their students for creative and active learning. However, I can also see that this system doesn’t work perfectly in every classroom. Reading Ernest Boyer’s article “Creativity in the Classroom” helped me with my understanding of the main problem that nowadays exists with the American college education system. According to the author, the problem is that teachers and students don’t see each other as one team doing the same business; therefore, in most classrooms the process of learning becomes a boring procedure instead of being mind-blowing. Moreover, reading this article, I could analyze the reasons of this problem that the author identifies through my own experiences at State College.
(Common Core State Standards Initiative) Many find flaws in the system such as Valerie Strauss of the Washington Post. Strauss points out in her article Eight Problems With Common Core Standards that the standards set by the Common Core should not be limited to school subjects, but should step outside the box and tie in real world scenarios. (Strauss) Strauss also says the lack of diversity in the curriculum puts students at a disadvantage because of the changing world around teachers should not be limited to teaching information provided by an initiative that makes students from all over the nation learn the same material. (Strauss) Strauss is especially skeptical of the Common Core’s preparation for standardized test as she says, “The Common Core Standards are a set-up for national standardized tests, tests that can’t evaluate complex thought, can’t avoid cultural bias, can’t measure non-verbal learning, can’t predict anything of consequence.” (Strauss) Strauss explains how the Common Core destroys any form of originality by stating; “The word “standards” gets an approving nod from the public (and from most educators) because it means “performance that meets a standard.” However, the word also means “like everybody else,” and standardizing minds is what the Standards
● The children who were receiving a high quality education before the national curriculum is being used to work out the bends in this new system. If we were going to have national standards, there should have been some effort to design a baseline curriculum to be used in the first design of textbooks and testing materials. But I would guess a mix of things, but mostly political pressure and the threat that standardized testing would use common core as its guide and those tests could affect educational funding.
Why would one hypothesize a change is needed? First, international comparisons show the decline in education. Tests show American high school students rank much lower than other nations on standardized math and science tests (United States 66). On a test given in twenty-one nations, American pupils only outperformed Cyprus and South African students. These results seem more devastating when one sees Asian nations, usually ranking high in competitions, did not participate (McNamara 73). Examinations also reveal pupils' performances decline as students climb up the educational ladder toward college. "We seem to be the only country in the world whose children fall farther behind the longer they stay in school" ("Nation" 1). Yet, just comparing our students to international standards does not divulge the whole story.
Students spend the majority of their time preparing for standardized tests, instead of spending their time learning. In addition, standardized tests give students anxiety, and could lead them to want to drop out of high school due to all of the stress. I believe that standardized tests should not carry so much weight in the education system. They should serve as checks of the educational system rather than as a determinant of the future of
Free thinking is what encourages our creatively but it seems that school systems find it irrelevant. According to Tony Wagner in forbes.com, “[h]e identified five ways in which America’s education system is stunting innovation: individual achievement is the focus, specialization is celebrated and rewarded, risk aversion is the norm, learning is profoundly passive, and extrinsic incentives drive learning" (par. 9-14). Each point he made was to show what schools are currently focused on and how it affects the children’s thinking. In all of the points made, students are taught two things; how to the reiterate the information given to them and to not fail the class by any means. With this current system students are taught to follow directions, ultimately leading them to not think for themselves or how they can get to the solution. In Doomed to Fail, Zoch did researched about Jamesian’s psychology, basically stating a student chooses what interest their minds and learn those lessons. He reiterated James central idea: “That is for James the essence of education: to help students develop their minds in order that they may solve whatever problems life presents” (10). Later on in life, students will rely on people to find a solution to their problem instead of figuring out themselves. If school systems were able to stress the importance of the arts and have it as a daily class or create more real life situations in the class; students would be able to stimulate their minds and offer their opinions to
Standardized testing is a down fall to many students but also an opportunity for many others. Standardized testing has its pros and its cons. It can be the make it or break it factor into getting into colleges you are hoping to attend or the scholarships you want to earn. Some people may have their opinions about the test, whether they hate it or not but the fact is that it’s here to stay.
What is a Creative Curriculum? In few simple words it is to promote a student's social, emotional and intellectual development. Though the course work varies with each school, this strategy often uses unconventional means that lean toward project-based learning environments. (www.ehow.com)
But not through impossible math problems or writing impossible papers on dead people no one really cares about. Students should be taught creative and critical thinking in a way that is specific to each individual child. We grow up being told we are unique, so why do we all have to learn the same way? Today, schools force the students to learn the same way. They are forcing us to conform instead of giving us the chance to be creative and allow us to find our identity. If we are given the chance, we can blow your minds and make a difference in this world. Maybe the difference that the world needs. But if we are forced to conform, forced to learn about things we do not care about, then the odds of making a difference
In this notable Ted Talk video "Do schools kill creativity?", Sir Ken Robinson discusses how public education systems demolish creativity because they believe it is essential to the academic growth and success of students. Robinson created a broad arrange of arguments to persuade the viewers to take action on this highly ignored issue, and he primarily focuses on how important creativity is. There are classes within schools that help utilize creativity, but they are not taken seriously by adults in society. Therefore, the value of creative knowledge decreases. Robinson uses an unusual combination of pathos and ethos to make an enjoyable dispute for implementing an education system that nurtures rather than eats away at creativity.
In the TED talk “How School’s Killing Creativity” Ken Robinson makes some very good points, he says that as we grow we are taught to be more practical than we are creative. He starts out with a very humorous approach to his topic; by starting out with several jokes the mood becomes lighter and he grasps the audience’s attention. As a college professor he knows a lot about education and what is being taught in schools today. As he begins to speak his main point is that all children are born creative, but through years of schooling we are taught from ‘the waist up’ and only taught how to use our brains at school. That in most schools the most important subjects around the world are math and
With a standardized curriculum comes standardized testing. A standardized curriculum limits what students learn. Students master content areas (Cole, Hulley, & Quarles, 2013). Students are not encouraged to go in depth of content knowledge. According to Adler (2013), objectives of the school should be the same for the whole school. To obtain these objectives teachers use lecturing, textbooks, coaching, and supervised practices. Students are not exploring the content beyond what is expected. Teachers are teaching to the test because that is what is expected of them. Students are not growing and exploring with knowledge. Content is watered down and vague for students (Noddings, 2013).
According to Google, creativity is defined as “the use of the imagination or original ideas, especially in the production of an artistic work.” In his TED Talk, which is one of “the most popular talks of all time”, Sir Ken Robinson discusses how public education systems degrade creativity as an essential component within the academic growth of all students. Robinson is a creativity expert and an author who writes books about creativity in school systems. His expertise in the field of school systems and creativity justifies his opinion on the subject. Robinson concentrates on the significance of creativity by creating a variety of strong arguments. His main contention is that “creativity now is as important in education as literacy” (Robinson).
School are responsible for the graduation of creative students capable of development in all aspects of life. Mathematics is the best subject can help students to evolve creative thinking. Therefore, educators believe there are a strong relationship between studying mathematics and increasing creative thinking. Mathematics teachers, however, are required to give the students the opportunity to think creativity in classroom. The teachers are able to provide an effective environment for thinking in classroom. Classroom environment such as order of students in classroom, type of questions, clarity of the purpose of the lesson, and feedback effect on the relationship between teacher and student, and might develop the communication, and facilitate the exchange of information between teacher and student. Bharti mentioned several points will help teachers to promote the creative thinking. Classroom environment has a crucial role to improve students’ creativity. Teacher can employee classroom environment to send the massage to students that the classroom is the best place can precise creative thinking. Teachers can do that by create discussion in the classroom and give the opportunity to all students to share their ideas, make time for informal class and listen to the students ideas, and memorize all students name and call them by their name and the teacher should be sure that every students knows everyone’s name. Using different