No, I didn't forget to capitalize the c in catholic in the title, and that's because I'm not referring to Catholic (as in the religion), but rather catholicism as the concept of being universal. Feel free to substitute katholikos if it makes it easier for you to separate them.
This post is thanks to Lance from Pious Posers, who posted a couple comments on education today and inspired me to write about something that's been on my mind for a while.
It's no secret education is a bit of an ideological battleground, and that makes it troublesome for those of us who practice it.
It's troublesome for a new teacher who has been indoctrinated into the idea that a teacher shouldn't be a 'sage on the stage' but rather a 'guide on the side' (Freireism and constructivism) but struggles to figure out exactly how to get kids to learn enough material, fast enough to cover curriculum, and how to asses that kind of work.
It's troublesome when education is discussed in public and the focus seems to centre around education existing for the purpose of our economic growth and preparing students for the workforce (Neo-Liberalism).
It's troublesome when an administrator has to deal with the fact that every child has a right to be in a regular classroom all the time, but they may not have the resources to take proper care of that child's learning needs (inclusivism)
It's troublesome when parents or grandparents reminisce about the good old days, and how drills and memorization worked just fine for them and today's kids aren't learning because we don't do enough rote practice (Taylorism), or that kids just need more consequences (like 0's) and that punishing negative behaviours more strictly will fix the problems with today's generation (Skinnerism or behaviourism).
It's troublesome when an education professor teachers their students that the only meaningful way to learn is in the natural context the knowledge is a part of (ecopedagogism... seriously, that's the name for that!).
It's troublesome when we have various pieces of conflicting evidence from functional MRIs indicating how children 'really learn'. (Cognitive developmentism)
I could go on.
The problem with this battleground of 'isms' is that none of them addresses every need. Inclusivism addresses the dignity of the individual over the finite resources of a modern school. Constructivism looks at the natural curiosity of a student over the life experience and knowledge of a teacher, or the standardized curriculum they teach in. Behaviourism focuses in on simple cause and effect relationships, where the effects may not actually exist that way.
My proposal here is that we adopt a more catholic approach to the way we educate. The reality of education is that it is heavily dependent on context. Who are the students? Who is the teacher? What system are they in? What actually works? I have some students I can threaten with 0s and they will perform, others respond to real world connections, others still to story telling and direct teaching. If we get caught up too much in an ideology we lose sight of the fact that students are truly universal. To use a bit of Vulcan philosophy (sorry) education must deal with the IDIC (infinite diversity in infinite combination) on a daily basis, and so in light of that, the only 'ism' that can really be effective in teaching is catholicism, because it's the only approach that can draw on the tools of every way of educating as they are needed. As the old adage goes, if the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem starts to look like a nail.
So directly for you Lance, don't kill off your 'sage on the stage', he's a wise person with a lot to offer his students, and you'll figure out when being the guide is effective as you gain experience!
Thoughts on matters of faith, education, and whatever else sparks my interest.
