Schools kill creativity: A liberal education should prioritise it
17 November 2011 6 Comments
What is the current Lib Dem education policy and how does it differ from the other parties? Is it so distinctive that people would vote for it or is it only slightly different in the eyes of the public that they probably won’t know the difference? There is a saying – the difference that makes no difference, is no difference – which equally applies to politics but in politics it is not whether it makes a difference or not, it is whether people think it will make a difference. So what people think of the Lib Dem policy is important. So what is the message we can give people to show it will make a difference?
No doubt that you have heard the Lib Dems say the Tories and Labour are the same and that we are different but now we are in Coalition, it is even more important to show that we are different as no doubt that you have heard people complaining that the 3 main parties are all the same. There are some fairly simple things the Lib Dems could do which would show what a difference we could make in education which I have written about here and here. But there is another more fundamental one.
For anyone interested in the Lib Dem education policy, you may or may not have come across the most watched talk on TEDtalks which is Ken Robinson, an Englishman, talking about education. It is well worth watching as he is very engaging but his point is simple and effective. Schools kill creativity. A fairly common belief and one which has been often repeated but it is such an important point that it needs changing. We have a system which suits some people and tries to push people in more or less the same direction. This results in a children growing up believing that they are not clever, useful or good enough. This is not a liberal education system.
An excellent lecture, but what does this mean for Lib Dem education policy? Although this post promotes change and difference, what change does it have in mind to change the education system for the better?
I think that the most promising educational policy in the political sphere at present is to release schools from local authority control, loosen zoning regulations, and enable the donaitions of private patrons to schools. It won’t achieve uniform difference, but it would create a dynamic educational sector capable of catering to a broad spectrum of need at a local level.
Jillian Lynne was very lucky to be near a dance school. Out here in Peterborough, a small midland city with a history of railways and engineering, her mother would have been hard pressed to find such a place without having to move to London. Under the free school proposals organised by the Tories, it would be possible to find buildings, hire teachers, and aquire funding for a new specialist school which would benefit more people than just Miss Lynne: a whole school full of people like her, who need to move to think, who would otherwise have never gone to a school full of people like her.
I think us Lib Dems are missing a trick by not backing this legislation more strongly, usually due to rather sad excuses like small-c conservativism, or worse, the preservation of the power of local councils many of our members sit on. A liberal education policy ought to have creativity at its heart, yes: but not just for students, when teachers have so much potential to innovait and nurture when freed from the tyranny of teaching-by-numbers.
Hi Toby and thanks for the comments. I totally agree that teachers should be free to teach and I wish we would just let them. I guess my problem with any school system we keep setting up and changing, including the new free schools, is that they will still take the same tests and exams and be subject to the same competition as the other schools. Changing the system will only create the same system in the end if the culture doesn’t change. I think putting creativity at the heart of education is about changing the culture of education. Not just in terms of arts, but even in science and maths. The best scientists and mathematicians talk about their work being like art rather than how science it taught. We have a sausage machine of an education system. I can’t see how any new system is going to change that unless the culture changes, which means a different standard being set by government. But that means we then have to face what schools are really for – education or something more convenient for adults?
I concur, children are over-tested. Especially primary school children, who are presently drilled by rote in English, Maths and Science. Move SATS from the end of Year 6 to the begining of Year 7, thereby reducing the entrenchment of educational privilage, reducing the incentive for junior schools to drill pupils, while still holding primary schools accountable for any diffiencies in literacy or numeracy.
In senior schools, I think too many GCSEs have been instituted with a mind to allow employers to tick check-boxes instead of getting to know their candidate.
Free schools, with their ability to alter the curriculum and shop around for different qualifications, could decide to bypass GCSEs altogether in favour of broader programmes of study like the IB. It wouldn’t solve the issues of our present education system, but it’d be a fine start.
I think that a major problem is that classes are too controlled and directed. They normally have a strict structure where students have to do things at the teacher’s pace rather than their own. Not only does it mean that the lesson is less likely to meet individual needs, I also think it stifles a student’s independence.
More than anything else in school, students are trained to “behave well”, i.e. follow the structure and follow the teacher’s instructions.
I think a more liberal approach would be to give students a curriculum plan, and then give them freedom and flexibility on how they want to achieve it. Once they are working towards a target on their own terms I think they would be genuinely learning rather than just paying lip service to teachers instructions. I think this form of learning would be more engaging so would reduce the restlessness that leads to disruptive behaviour. It would also lead to students develloping skills and habits in organisation and taking responsibility for themselves.
In a University library I once came across a book called “Freedom in Schools” or something, and mentioned an American elementary school teacher who did an experiment with a troublesome class of 6th graders. She permitted them to do whatever they liked so long as they were quiet enough not to disturb the rest of the class. Those who wanted to learn would see her at the beginning of the day to set a “learning contract”, where they would work out a target for them to work towards. Apparently there was chaos for the first 3-4 months, but as the students got used to taking responsibility for themselves the difference was amazing. Some of them started making major breakthroughs that had previously eluded them.
I’d love to see us partner with an organisation that promotes this approach to education and provided them with some “free schools” to pilot such ideas. If such schools were successful then we’d be able to extend the practice to mainstream ones.
Pingback: The robot and the muse | Music for Deckchairs
Pingback: Top of the Blogs: The Lib Dem Golden Dozen #248