We
are all born unique with differing gifts to present to the world, although we
may develop and present these gifts at differing points in our lives. It is a complex and challenging task for
educational systems to asses children’s abilities and create standards of
achievement by which to evaluate the individual’s performance. Standardized testing has long been the ‘go
to’ format for such assessment and evaluation.
While I do believe there is some benefit from this type of information
gathering, I also believe that it does not present the picture of the whole
child necessary to determine competence, creativity, intelligence or future
success in the world. For a more
comprehensive view, we must learn to consider the whole child and how all his/her
unique abilities may contribute to success and accomplishment.
“Leading
developmentalists are among those who believe that humans have multiple
intelligences, not just one. Howard
Gardner originally described seven intelligences: linguistic, logical-mathematical,
musical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic (movement), interpersonal (social
understanding), and intrapersonal (self-understanding), each one associated
with a particular brain region (Gardner, 1983).
He subsequently added an eighth intelligence (naturalistic:
understanding nature, as in biology, zoology, or farming) and a ninth
(existential: thinking about life and death) (Gardner, 1999, 2006; Gardner &
Morgan, 2006) (Berger, 2012, p. 335-336).
Taking
Gardner’s research into account, educational systems that are willing to
consider the whole child by identifying strengths and weaknesses in the nine
areas of intelligence have a much better chance of instilling a positive
self-concept into their students, creating life-long internal motivations for
learning, fostering tolerance and acceptance, and have a greater chance of
higher achievement by their student populations both individually and
collectively. Many educational
philosophies such as Montessori, Waldorf, Constructivist and Reggio-Emilia either
directly or indirectly follow such types of assessments by education practices
that engage the whole child through their head, hands, and heart. In these educational settings, children are
provided with many different educational materials and experiences for them to
explore and conquer at their own pace.
Teachers in these settings are viewed more as guides following the
natural tendencies of the child to best foster their interest in a particular
subject when the child seems ready for that lesson. This process involves keen observational
skills to create insights into the child’s strengths and weaknesses and to
adjust the learning environment to best fit the specific needs and individual
learning styles of each child. There is
also a great deal of emphasis placed on the learning community to which every
student makes a contribution creating a community of learners of varying ages
and abilities which in turn brings a more social/emotional connection to the entire
school experience.
In
this type of atmosphere there is little pressure on students to achieve certain
benchmarks at a specific time, as is the case with standardized testing. Instead, it allows for each child to grow, develop, and learn at
their own pace. Teachers who no longer
fear losing their jobs over test scores have much more time and energy to
devote to each child and their family thereby creating a cohesive plan between
home and school to strengthen areas of concern.
By creating individualized plans, teachers are able to differentiate
their instruction to help concrete concepts through the child’s specific area
of intelligence. For example, a child
with musical intelligence as a strength can be more easily taught to read with
the use of music; children who are kinesthetic learners may best learn to read
when movement is incorporated into the lesson.
Schools that embrace the whole child have more leeway to be creative
with instruction, which in turn keeps all children more engaged. Ultimately this leads to higher rates of success
and overall satisfaction for students and teachers, alike.
However, not everyone in the world agrees with
this philosophy. In Japan, for example, “the teacher's main concern is to
cover the prescribed material thoroughly. Instruction in most subjects is
teacher-centered and takes place in a straightforward manner, usually through
lectures and use of the chalkboard. Students are frequently called on for
answers and recitation. They stand to respond” (U.S. Dept. of Education Study, (2000)).
While this isn’t far from the style of teaching used by many public
schools in the U.S., major differences are apparent. The biggest difference is their lack of
acknowledgment of special needs/varying abilities in students. The Japanese believe that,
“…all children have equal potential. Differences in student achievement are thought to result largely from the level of effort, perseverance, and self-discipline, not from differences in individual ability. Hence, students in elementary schools are not grouped according to ability. Promotion to the next grade is not based on academic achievement, but is automatic. Neither is classroom instruction individualized according to ability differences” (U.S. Dept. of Education Study, (2000)).
This philosophy make things extremely difficult for slow learners
who are thought to not be exerting enough effort into their studies, and who
are not assessed for learning disabilities or assigned remedial assistance. As they automatically advance each year, the
pressure to succeed becomes an increasing burden as they fall further behind. “Inevitably,
the number increases with grade level, accompanied by attendant disaffection
from school” (U.S. Dept. of
Education Study, (2000)). Having lived and taught in Japan myself, I
can attest to the burden these students face.
When a child fails a test in Japan, they not only feel that they have
let themselves down, but their teacher, classmates, school, family and country
as well. The pressure to succeed is
tremendous and can cause a significant strain on students’ self-esteem. “The
uniquely intense stress due to the Examination Hell (shiken jigoku) not only
generates a basic drive for Japan's economic success but also contributes to a
high rate of young people's suicide” (Iga, M (2011)). This fact breaks my heart! A child’s life
could be saved, simply by attending a different type of school—one that
embraces the whole child.
In my opinion, it’s time to stop
testing for intelligence and instead work from the assumption that all children
are intelligent in their own unique way.
It is our job as teachers, guides, parents and childhood professionals
to help them identify and foster their talents as well as strengthen their
weaknesses in order to create happy, well-adjusted, conscientious, creative and
tolerant children that grow into adults with these same characteristics. Isn’t the one who’s a whiz at math and able
to do our taxes for us as valuable and important as the one who understands the
basic principles of engineering and comes to fix our plumbing? The world needs all kinds of people, and when
we strive to educate the ‘whole’ child, we, in turn, educate and create a ‘whole’
society.
References:
Berger, K.S. (2012). The
developing person through childhood (6th Ed.). New
York, NY:Worth Publishers
|
Hi Angie,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post very much. I completely agree with you about providing different opportunities for students that better align with their individual interests and abilities. I believe that many child care program in early childhood education do exactly that. They observe the children's skill level and likes and dislikes then they provide experiences to promote their development. Why do we stop doing that once the child is school-aged? Our public education system needs a reform in my opinion. If everyone graduates with the same knowledge and skills then we will not necessarily have a society that can meet all of it's needs. We need to provide opportunities in our schools for children to choose the path that will lead them to personal success. Thank you for sharing your personal insight on the topic. -Mary
Angie,
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to tell you thank you for sharing your knowledge in the field of early childhood! You always have wonderful experiences to share that allow me to make a connection from the text book to real life situations. I hope that we will be able to continue this exciting journey together!
Siera
Hi Angie,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your personal experiences throughout this course on your blog and in your discussion posts. I truly value your opinions and insights in the field of early childhood. I wish you the best of luck in your future courses. Thank you for all your hard work; it inspired me to be more willing to share personal information that could also contribute to the class. -Mary