rethinking education
The Atlantic, apparently, first used the term "neurodiversity", in the late 1990's. What if education needs to destroy the idea that people are "the same" and adopt a neurodiversity platform? What would that look like?
First off, it seems like the whole design of schools and education rests on the belief that people are "the same" or the same enough to be grouped by age; that what everyone needs to know is "the same"; how everyone learns what everyone needs to know is relatively the same; and how we evaluate what everyone needs to know and if they've got it is the same.
What would it take to destroy the notion of "sameness" (generalizability, ?
What would the neurodiversity school look like? Would it even be called a school?
We know that education requires economies of scale--we can't provide education to millions on a one-to-one basis, but we have lots of different options . . .
Would there be some way to start each year with a "test" that would determine where a kid was in many different dimensions and for that year the kid would follow a trajectory that met those dimensions (we do all that testing throughout the year anyway, let's just do it at the beginning). Not a written test or not only a written test and much of it could be web based (physical testing would have to have a central place or maybe not--maybe people could wear some kind of hardware to measure their physical accomplishments . . .
Design a variety of pods around a community that provide a variety of learning opportunities and allow people to shift from pod to pod (no tracking).
What are the skills that most people need? Is there such a list? should there be?
Respect for others
Tolerance
Be able to read
be able to communicate in some way to many people
some basic math
some basic health and cleanliness
some basic constitutional rights
importance of trying
Now, what are the ways that these ideas and skills can be communicated to a neurodiverse population?
some through internet
some through hands on
some through social interaction
Pods would value these inherent skills within them while building on them with a variety of diverse directions. Pods could be learning hands on skills, learning computers, higher math/physics, biology, ecology, business etc. But all would include the basic skills in every program.
Would shifting how we think of education also allow us to create value for a neurodiverse population instead of the seeming value we now place on a certain type of individual who is socially adept, bright, friendly, etc.?
What would teachers look like? Teachers would need to recognize when an approach was working for a kid or when it was failing. They would need to be able to provide a certain level of intervention if redirection was necessary.
On Failing: But student failing would also be okay. We learn through failing. When a student failed, we would use that as an opportunity to learn from that failure. Students would not be punished for failing or held back. Failure provides lots of information. We would need to run with that information.
There could be some communal learning environments that are like classrooms although that model just doesn't seem very successful. Would it be more successful if the only people in there were those that thrive on that environment? Do people? Many modules could be computer based with mentors helping, while other models could be small group based. Older students could lead modules for younger students . . .
First off, it seems like the whole design of schools and education rests on the belief that people are "the same" or the same enough to be grouped by age; that what everyone needs to know is "the same"; how everyone learns what everyone needs to know is relatively the same; and how we evaluate what everyone needs to know and if they've got it is the same.
What would it take to destroy the notion of "sameness" (generalizability, ?
What would the neurodiversity school look like? Would it even be called a school?
We know that education requires economies of scale--we can't provide education to millions on a one-to-one basis, but we have lots of different options . . .
Would there be some way to start each year with a "test" that would determine where a kid was in many different dimensions and for that year the kid would follow a trajectory that met those dimensions (we do all that testing throughout the year anyway, let's just do it at the beginning). Not a written test or not only a written test and much of it could be web based (physical testing would have to have a central place or maybe not--maybe people could wear some kind of hardware to measure their physical accomplishments . . .
Design a variety of pods around a community that provide a variety of learning opportunities and allow people to shift from pod to pod (no tracking).
What are the skills that most people need? Is there such a list? should there be?
Respect for others
Tolerance
Be able to read
be able to communicate in some way to many people
some basic math
some basic health and cleanliness
some basic constitutional rights
importance of trying
Now, what are the ways that these ideas and skills can be communicated to a neurodiverse population?
some through internet
some through hands on
some through social interaction
Pods would value these inherent skills within them while building on them with a variety of diverse directions. Pods could be learning hands on skills, learning computers, higher math/physics, biology, ecology, business etc. But all would include the basic skills in every program.
Would shifting how we think of education also allow us to create value for a neurodiverse population instead of the seeming value we now place on a certain type of individual who is socially adept, bright, friendly, etc.?
What would teachers look like? Teachers would need to recognize when an approach was working for a kid or when it was failing. They would need to be able to provide a certain level of intervention if redirection was necessary.
On Failing: But student failing would also be okay. We learn through failing. When a student failed, we would use that as an opportunity to learn from that failure. Students would not be punished for failing or held back. Failure provides lots of information. We would need to run with that information.
There could be some communal learning environments that are like classrooms although that model just doesn't seem very successful. Would it be more successful if the only people in there were those that thrive on that environment? Do people? Many modules could be computer based with mentors helping, while other models could be small group based. Older students could lead modules for younger students . . .
Comments
Post a Comment