Sir Ken Robinson presents some interesting thoughts on education . . .
[via Zahir Yusuf on G+]
Posted on September 12, 2012 at 6:55 pm in Forum | RSS feed
Reblogged this on betterschools4all and commented:
Great summary of the philosophic and economic roots of the prevailing approach to education. Sir Robinson’s tidy dismissal of the educational challenge encountered by children suffering from ADHD, however, presents logically similar to birthers and climate change sceptics, and detracts from his argument, at least likely so for those of us who study ADHD and treat children who suffer from it. This is the predictable alt-culture, anti-pharma response. Yet, improved treatment and medications, like sustained release stimulants coupled with behavior supports, have produced success rates among the highest of any neuro-pharmacological therapies. Are there misdiagnoses? Of course. Practitioners prematurely resorting to meds? You bet. But his line of reasoning is a little like saying that poverty is a myth – as evidenced by an increase in applications for food stamps. This doesn’t make the case for the benefit of collaborative learning, and there’s a lot out there that does. Still, this is a great summary of the historic, phylosophic link between industrialism and education.
Thank you for dropping by and leaving a comment, betterschools4all.
I do not work in education so cannot judge how valid or widely accepted is the historical summary of the link between industrialism and education presented in this video – but it made intuitive sense to me
I would like next to see him do a companion video to spell out in detail how exactly he envisages an alternative collaborative model of learning would work in practice !
Hopefully, better schools don’t encourage people to use the number 4 in place of the word ‘for’, and teach their pupils that ‘philosophic’ doesn’t have a fucking ‘y’ in it.
Wyrds fail me….4 fuck’s sake.
Are you as welcoming to guests who visit you at home, Nobbly, as you are to people who visit this blog ?
P.S. out of respect for your disdain for smileys, I have not appended one to the above question.
I might have added a ‘winking’ smiley to indicate I was ‘winding you up”.
I might have added a smiley rolling it’s eyes to indicate a certain weariness, a ‘here we go again, Nobbly once more finding more to say about a contributor’s spelling or grammar than about what they have to say’.
I might have added an ‘angry’ smiley to convey – well, no need to spell it out.
Since you hold to the view, though, that smileys do nothing to illuminate how the writer of a comment intends their remark to be interpreted, I take it you will know which of these possible interpretations I intended when I posed the question
I’m sorry. I’ve probably overstepped the line again, but won’t do so in the future.
wot’s up nobs r u ok?
We do have a mad hatter with first hand experience of coping with ADHD.
I wonder how she’s been managing ??
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.
Join 470 other followers