Hello Ian, here’s what I promised to you at the WW meeting this past weekend!
Pardon if I have a certain ‘skeptical’ attitude throughout – because I do know that having gone through lots and lots of professional development experiences, I’ve got a natural wariness about possibly supporting ‘snake oil in education’. Things I’ve put a lot of effort and hope into have to be better than the likes of (what Qld educator Margaret Kitson will thankfully elaborate more upon at a conference in the future) sodding Brain Gym!
Since the beginning of my teaching career in 1997, I’ve gone through an extraordinary amount of retraining, due to the pre and post-compulsory changes to the Western Australian education system. The only thing I’ll say about that is if you search for the terms ‘outcomes based education’ or ‘standards based education’, you’ll find yourself faced with near-manical glee from particular groups about the history of implementation and crashing downfall of an entire educational reform project. It’s in the past now, but does reflect an enormous amount of training and retraining for changes which are now on their way out and will probably (opinions differ) change again if plans for a national curriculum comes to fruition.
So although I think this is one of the best strategies I’ve ever known about – I don’t like making promises about ‘this will guarantee to work easily’ or ‘this is the answer to
getting critical thinking into schools’. I can’t make that promise with my experience alone and naturally look askance at those who haven’t experienced it first-hand or have no relevant qualifications. I know more work is being done and I certainly think more work is needed – I hope to be involved in such an endeavour in one way or another!
Overall, it depends if you think what I have to say here gives strategies which are a better use of your time and more realistic than trying to reinvent a wheel – or perhaps just involve ‘building a better wooden horse’. Getting people thinking, yay!
Firstly, I’d like to plan to address some of the assumptions out there about skeptics – what makes one, why would someone want to be labeled as one and does anyone really need to be labeled as one? I’ve seen one very poorly done survey that made some gross assumptions about gender ratio with a horrifically limited sample size, so perhaps we should start looking more seriously at aspects like age, profession, parents, nationality, online presence, community activities, conference-going, blog views / writing, forum board participation, message-board activity, subscriptions to magazines, et al.
It interested me that a pre-WW cited Australian Skeptic survey in 1996 with ‘subscribers’ self-descriptions found the most represented group was Education = 20% - what does that really mean? Primary, secondary, tertiary sector? I’m reminded of a joke by Drew Barrymore when she points out to Will Ferrell pretending to be John Edward that a ‘fishing teacher’ means educator too!
New and Old Media – do people return to contribute, read and reflect and why? This would also have a trickle-effect on how to gain and retain members of skeptical meetings and perhaps (perhaps!) encourage young educators. If we really want to make a difference, we have to adapt with the times. And not be afraid to be critical, even of ourselves.
The main part of my presentation was fairly straight-forward analogy, I guess: could skeptics (or any group) contribute in some fashion to get critical thinking into schools beyond discrete classes or mere awards or competitions? As I’ve said before – critical thinking is not the same as skepticism and to promote one in the belief that it will automatically lead to the other… well, that may be a post for another time and there’s certainly ongoing research on that!
My answer in regards to CT, particularly in the example of Philosophy in Schools for primary and / or secondary schools was to point at the example of Loretta Marron who turned to assessing a range of evidence, considered the popular cultures tendency towards pseudoscience and thus allied herself with professionals who are better armed with research, reputation and funding and know how to navigate the inner-workings of the health system.
I mentioned the efforts of FAPSA and the group I’m with, APIS, who unite educators and researchers towards the goal of training teachers, networking and encouraging more research into Philosophy for Children (or P4C) – an upcoming special TANK Vodcast episode will outline their history and what has taken place in Western Australia.
Unfortunately, some elements were completely overlooked by one tiny non-education based skeptic group who spoke about their opinions on the topic. As I’ve said before at TAM5, those who want to become effective stakeholders have to know what we’re up against beyond merely just ‘being heard’.
Dr Mark Henn: “It’s not enough to be noticed; it’s not enough to simply have an audience. Paris Hilton has an audience. What we as skeptics need is empirical data showing the effectiveness of what we are doing. We don’t want to make a big splash; we want to make a big difference.”
The number of primary and secondary teachers nationwide and internationally entering the profession is dropping and so are positive opinions about becoming a teacher . Union issues and lack of training, more pressing research involving basic literacy and numeracy for indigenous students, young people choosing other careers that pay better than teaching (how’s that for critical thinking? Pretty smart!) and more recently, a gang attack on a school - all these should lead you to ask why would anyone want to become a teacher in the first place with all of those things going on? Sheesh!
Let alone those familiar with curriculum, as demonstrated by Michael McRae, pointing at what is already in the system and saying ‘we’ve already got critical thinking, science competitions, science education initiatives, critical literacy, science education and thinking skills in schools, thanks’.
These are only a few that come immediately to mind over merely selecting items from just the last week of news reports – I find it grimly amusing that any notion of an ‘answer’ is deemed achievable without acknowledging factors in education and education funding, the need for broader and Australian-relevant research or involvement of several educational systems or the importance of getting multi-leveled professional support across the sectors.
This is clearly far beyond the scope claimed could be achieved from a few politicians writing bland acknowledgments to skeptics writing spam-like mass emails and a few ‘Hyde Park Corner’ websites where any buffoon, including pseudoscientists, can get their opinions posted. We disappear into the onslaught of other pressure-groups because we are not ‘unique little snowflakes’, no matter how we flatter ourselves!
Let’s not forget too, what skeptical groups need to primarily focus their energies on:
…Likewise, there are those who would prefer to subsume skepticism under the heading of secular humanism, or strongly link skepticism to atheism. I’m both an atheist and a secular humanist, but it is clear to me that atheism is an albatross for the skeptical movement. It divides us, it distracts us, and it marginalizes us. Frankly, we can’t afford that. We need all the help we can get.
Even more to the point, skepticism is not humanism, nor atheism, nor libertarianism. Individual skeptics may or may not agree about any given belief or portfolio of beliefs, about religion or politics or ethics or anything else — that’s all neither here nor there. What unifies us is a commitment to a way of finding out, not a set of conclusions. We’re here to promote methodological doubt and the other tools of scientific inquiry.
Daniel Loxton, Skepticality #63, 16th October 2007
http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/WhereDoWeGoFromHere.pdf
In short, getting critical thinking into schools is a long journey involving a range of strategies and change… has never come easily. To assume it will is the ultimate in anti-skepticism. It’s more akin to the attitude shown by likes of Brain Gym:
A few research papers from another country and one school is not enough – more needs to be done and can be done by supporting a range of strategies. Hedging one’s bets, if a horse-analogy could be continued!
As the far more impressive example of Loretta Marron demonstrates, working within and with the system has influenced change – a $1.7 million research boost. Thus I urge aligning with and getting support of the medical profession should match aligning with the education profession. Talking to them about the factors that outsiders do not see – such as funding, teacher training, differences across states, differences within states such as between inner-city and rural, what currently exists and does it work, what factors influence research that has been produced in the past and now.
Which brings me to the links that I promised to you, Ian Bryce. Hope these are of use and I know that the TANK Vodcast show will be out at the end of the week or near enough.
Finally – if you are keen on Philosophy for Children? If you genuinely think that the Community of Inquiry is something you support: get training in it. Actually go to a meeting that uses it. Go to a school that practices it. See it for yourself. Level one courses exist in every state and I’ve helped present two myself and used it in classes.
It’s something that quite a few adults – especially those who claimed at the WW meeting that they care about reducing conflict – should think about! Let me know if you want anything more and thanks Ian!
FAPSA – Federation for Australian Philosophy in Schools Australasia.
IAPC (Institute for Advancement of Philosophy with Children) Montclair State University – home of Matthew Lipman and Margaret Sharp (who helped run the Level 2 class I attended).
APIS – we have two sites (WordPress and official) and now have a Meetup Group! Last night our Philosophy Cafe ran in Fremantle. The next will be in Perth and we may have a new restaurant site on the cards!
New Zealand Philosophy for Children site A great P4C site which includes lesson plans.
p4c.net Philosophy for Children on the World Wide Web
ACER (Australian Council for Educational Research) has Philosophy resources for sale. Search through their site to find these.
SAPERE is intended as a guide to Philosophy for Children in the UK.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Interesting; they do brain gym at our school – I always thought it was a load of baloney but didn’t really have the expertise or the energy to argue against it. Something about it “calming them down” before class, and it seemed harmless enough.
I think we need to use the ‘get ‘em while they’re young’ approach – if a school offers scripture classes, they should be required to offer simultaneously a ‘secular ethics’ class, talking about what it is to be a good human. Not sending your kid to scripture at the moment is a ‘non choice’, an exclusion, so they trot along dutifully….
Hello!!
One thing I’d like to do more is explore questions from people in my comments. I’ve got a post on DORE, just waiting in the wings, for example.
In regards to Brain Gym, you might like this recent post: http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=285
Do public or non-government schools make scripture classes compulsory?
You must log in to post a comment.