This week I was supposed to talk about how my experience of school shaped me as a learner, and as an adult. Then, I had to think of ways my school expeience could have been improved, and the priorities for schools today.
I may have
touched on the issue of how my school experience shaped me for what I am today
in an earlier post. This is evident by the fact that I look back on those days
and seem to only find rich and meaningful experiences that have helped me to be
who I am.
The other day
during one of my postgrad lectures on ELT (the subject was on grammar,
prepositions and linking elements to be more exact) a student teacher asked me
if I had always had this funny and engaging way of seeing things. While I stopped
in my tracks for half a minute to answer, my mind catapulted back to secondary
school days. It was as if I was unconsciously attributing that time of my life
to person I have become – socially, culturally and intellectually, if I am to
use Bourdieu’s theoretical proposition for the role of school in shaping students.
My past experiences as school prefect, scout troop leader and class rep enhanced
my social skills; my musical, dance and theatrical endeavors brought cultural
appreciation and the competitive academic environment that we were made to
thrive in from year one could only bring intellectual gain.
Quite honestly,
I find it hard to come up with a sufficiently unbiased view of my schooling to
be able to say what could have been improved. Thinking back on it stirs up
immense pride and gratitude for the fruits it has borne me and continue to do
so even today. It leads me to think of some of the points raised in the videos with
Dr. Jane Perryman and the assigned readings about what makes a good school. As
a start, Perryman’s contention that a good school is the one that enables
students to be more than they can ever imagine being summarizes the priority of
any school or educational institution. For me, ranking a school based on exam
data or on inspectional reports diverts attention from the really significant
issues of whether students are learning critically and reflectively. It also
creates a test or result-oriented culture in which schools are concerned with
attaining the government or international standards, which do not necessarily
take into consideration the socio-economic background of a given school
(something which Perryman says plays a pivotal role in the final result). Schools
then train students to get the scores - “learning” starts becoming mechanized instead
of being socially and culturally relevant.
The hurdle of
our schools today is not whether education has
to reflect in microcosm the inequalities of the society surrounding it, or
whether it is possible to challenge such inequalities. What stands in their way
is the obsession with rankings, international standards and inspection service reports.
It is a waste of time and effort no to try to reflect these differences, not to
mention hypocritical. They will continue to exist when the student sets foot
out of the school boundaries, and the fact that the school doesn’t prepare them
to deal with their realities is what most probably frustrates our learners and
takes away any chance of wanting to be part of that school. Typing students,
like that outlined in Hargreaves, Hestor and Mellor´s study is natural. The problem
is when we fail to see students beyond the pre-conceived or idealized type. Schools
have to want to be wrong about pre-determinism in education.
No comments:
Post a Comment