Another Brick in the Wall (Part 1)

In 1979, rock band Pink Floyd came out with a song called “Another Brick in the Wall” which speaks out against rigid, traditional schooling. The lyrics go:

We don’t need no education.
We don’t need no thought control.
No dark sarcasm in the classroom,
Teacher leave them kids alone.

Hey, teachers, leave them kids alone!
All in all it’s just another brick in the wall.
All in all you’re just another brick in the wall.

Amidst the recent drama involving radio broadcaster Raffy Tulfo and the public school teacher he lambasted for allegedly humiliating a student, this song seems an appropriate background theme. I am not here to elaborate on that case, however. Many other people have made their own commentaries and I think enough has been said for one to go through, read, and make their own judgment.

What I want to focus on, is the system, the culture, of education that the song is protesting. The lyrics make the teachers to be the villains, but in reality, teachers are as much the victims of the system as the students. We have been programmed to think of schools as factories, as tools for shaping society, for providing human resource needs — very much like “another brick in the wall” of humanity that we are building. And teachers are victims because they think their job is to produce bricks, not humans.

The math teach thinks everybody needs to learn long division. The English teacher thinks everyone needs to properly differentiate between an adverb and an adjective. The Filipino teacher thinks everyone needs to read Noli Me Tangere and the History teacher is surprised if a teenager does not know who Andres Bonifacio was.

Think about that for a second, and notice your own reaction to it. Now let me ask, why would it be surprising for a teenager not to know who Andres Bonifacio was? Does Bonifacio matter in their daily life? Does it help them cross the road? Do they get money for knowing him? Why should it matter? If you still insist that it does, then let me ask you then, does it matter in your life that you know Andres Bonifacio? How does that knowledge impact your everyday life? Is it useful in your work? Does it give your life meaning?

Now, let this sink in. No one NEEDS to know who Andres Bonifacio was, nor long division, nor adverbs and adjectives, nor Noli Me Tangere. Am I saying these are unimportant? No. That is not my point.

But this is what I’m driving at. The system has fooled us into thinking that to be an “educated”person, an “educated” Filipino, we need to have all these little bits of knowledge within us. We need to be bricks with the right ingredients.

If we can satisfactorily spit out to the teacher what he/she wants to hear, we get that congratulatory handshake and that little piece of printed paper certifying that we are “educated.”

But is that what education really means?

More next week.

Email me at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

The Right Questions

When confronted with a problem, most of us are trained to look for answers and solutions. Very few take the time to look at the problem itself.

For example, if I were to present the problem: Pedro has 8 oranges in one hand and 10 oranges in the other, what does he have?

Most people would straightaway answer 18 oranges. One clever student however, answered, “Pedro has very large hands.”

Or how about this: Julie has a pile of 100 chocolate bars and 200 candies. She eats 52 chocolate bars and 112 candies. What does Julie now have?

Again, most of you would start computing and say, Julie now has 48 chocolate bars and 88 candies.

But then this smart aleck answers, “Diabetes. Julie now has diabetes.”

In school we are trained to ask, is that the right answer? But in real life, in business, and in many other areas, I more often than not been forced to ask, is that the right question? How you frame the question is more crucial than finding the answer. The right question puts you in a state of mind that is open and creative while the wrong question can make the situation seem very limiting and constrictive.

These days, educators are asking all the wrong questions — How do we raise test scores? How do we increase our school’s college passing rate? How do we get kids interested in our lessons? How do we get them to sit still and listen and take notes? What are effective teaching strategies? What topics need to be added to the curriculum?

What we ought to be asking, instead, are the following: How do children learn? And how can we best support their interests? How do we continually make ourselves relevant to them? What can we learn from them? How do we help prepare them for a future we may not see? How do we help them make difficult decisions?

What do you think?

Email me at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

Still Doing It Wrong (Part 2)

Last week, I discussed the first of a 3-point agenda of DepEd called Digital Rise, about how wrong it was to expect everyone to learn the same skills and information as everybody else via a fixed curriculum.

This time, I want to tackle the 2nd and 3rd points — which is to preload material on teachers laptops, mapped to the curriculum, as well as to provide each learner with their own device to access e-Learning resources.

While I understand the idea that pre-loading material on laptops makes such information accessible to far flung areas that do not have internet access, I also see the danger in the wording that makes DepEd think it has the power to decide what sort of materials to preload. I’m sure there will be a lot of materials on mathematics and science, but what if the child’s interest doesn’t lean towards any of those?

What if a child is interested in learning and mastering card magic, or playing billiards, or singing? Will those be part of their e-Learning resources? DepEd might shake its mighty head and say those aren’t important but who are they to say what is or what is not important to a child? Accomplished magicians in places like Las Vegas can earn more in a year than our public school teachers earn in their lifetime.

Who are we to curate, censor and filter a child’s interest?

In fact, probably the only point I can get behind is providing learners with their own devices, but I fear that even then, they will try to lock the devices to access only materials they think are “educational.”

The best would be just to provide kids with a basic and inexpensive Android device, a place where they can access wifi, and leave them be.

There is a saying, often misattributed to Einstein, that goes “Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing it is stupid.” That, in a nutshell is what DepEd does with its focus on curriculum, on standardized testing, and adding this or that subject because they think that’s what the child needs — never mind what the children themselves think.

It is tragically funny how DepEd uses the word “learner-centered” in their documents when what they do is anything but that. To be truly learner-centered means respecting and supporting the interest of the child, not to create a curriculum and then try to have the child fit in there.

To be truly learner-centered, one must learn not how to control, but how to set free.

Email me at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

How Schools Promote Bullying (Part 4)

A problem that is systemic in nature cannot be solved by good intentions, high ideals or hard work. A teacher who sees the problem and tries to remedy the situation might get away with small changes here and there, but those don’t really do much. Sooner or later, she is going to come up against a principal who will tell her to not rock the boat too much, to follow the system, or else.

A principal radical enough to allow teachers certain freedoms will sooner or later come up against a district supervisor, or the government’s Department of Education (DepEd) telling him to stand down, or else. The system is more likely to swallow individuals than have individuals change it. Those in their comfortable seats of power rarely want to do anything that might jeopardize their position, and of course people with new and interesting ideas would more often be seen as a threat and a potential rival, rather than as a welcome guest.

This is what Dan Greenberg saw when he decided to start Sudbury Valley School. This is what Ken Danford and Joshua Hornick realized when he decided to start the North Star Center for Self-Directed Learning. This is what Tomis Parker and Arthur Brock realized when they started Agile Learning Centers. Change cannot come from within the system. It is too huge, too political, too entrenched for any individual to really do anything about them.

Let me share a couple of anecdotes. My eldest daughter homeschooled her senior high year. Last year, we went to DepEd asking about their placement test for homeschoolers. This test was supposed to be a diagnostic exam that would determine the equivalent grade level of the student on the K-12 system. Guess what we found out — there was no such test in place for grade 12. This was in 2018, seven years after K-12 was first implemented. I wonder what DepEd has been doing all these years.

Here’s another encounter that I had. Since we had plans to open a school, we went to DepEd early this year to get a list of the requirements. The first thing we were told was that we had to submit everything by August 2019 and the earliest we could open was by 2021. I mean, really? It takes them 2 years to approve? And included in the list of requirements is the school building, facilities, and even a full roster of faculty — all of which will supposedly sit and twiddle their thumbs for 2 years waiting for approval.

I mean, really, this is the agency that’s going to accredit my school and determine if it is up to standard? No thanks. And if you want to understand bullying on a large-scale systemic level, you need look no further than this.

Email me at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

To Homework or Not To Homework


That is the question. Or is it?

Two bills have been filed in congress seeking to ban homework as a requirement for schools. One seeks to ban homework in general and the other only seeks to ban it during the weekends. It has been interesting following the debate on this issue.

The proponents of the bills, as well as those who are pushing for these, say that it promotes more quality time for the children and parents and enhances well-being by eliminating a stress factor. Besides, they say, a lot of parents or tutors end up doing the homework anyway.

Those against the measure say that by doing this, we are producing wimps. Pile on the homework. Life is more difficult so we should prepare them for it instead of running away from it.

If you have been reading my previous articles, you could say that I favor throwing out the homework. But focusing on homework alone, however, is missing the point. I say throw out the homework, and the entire curriculum as well.

You see, the problem is not whether or not to give homework, because if a child is inclined to learn a certain topic, you can pile all the homework you want and he will do it. But if a child is not interested, no amount of homework will make him learn. Oh, he will perhaps learn just enough to pass the quiz, then the exam, and then forget all about it.

So it is important to study motivation and purpose — not the adults’, not the parents’ nor the teachers’ nor the principal’s motivation and purpose, but the child’s. 

There is a popular saying that goes, “the two most important days of your life are the day you were born, and the day you find out why.” 

What education ought to be doing is helping children discover their why’s, but what is happening with education now is that it is obsessed with telling children what they should be concerned with, what they should deem as important, what they should do with their time, what they should be studying, and even what they should be wearing and how their hairstyles ought to be.

This is not what education is all about. It is not about molding or shaping the children — because that implies that we are bending them for the purpose of the molder or shaper.

Each child has a unique gift, talent and purpose. The educator’s job is to get out of the way and let them discover the joy of finding it, then support and nurture that joy.

In the words of John Taylor Gatto, “Whatever an education is, it should make you a unique individual, not a conformist; it should furnish you with an original spirit with which to tackle the big challenges. It should allow you to find values which will be your roadmap through life; it should make you spiritually rich, a person who loves whatever you are doing, wherever you are, whomever you are with; it should teach you what is important, how to live and how to die.”

Email me at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

Originally published in Sunstar Davao.