Next please!

More that a fair share of innocent young bodies have passed through these doors to be institutionalised. Daunting entrances like these welcome the vulnerable, subtle mind with the hush of a sliding automatic door, a whisp of cool, purified air and a not so faint smell of disinfectant. Once caught in the artificial light beyond, the true nature of what awaits will be revealed to the unsuspecting. Education!


Surely, if we are going to be tortured and brainwashed they could paint the place in a nice pastel shade and put up a few pictures.

"we don't need no education...."
Or do we? Since education is one of the immediate victims of continuous budget cuts in most countries, I am actually happy to see there are still schools albeit a bit sterile, as long as they are functional. But back to your pictures.

In the first one I see the entrance to an institution or a public building which could be school or an administration office or the like. The utilitarian nature of the building and the announcement boards hanging inside support this impression. What is interesting to notice is the heavy metal shutters and the security fences in front of the windows. It is as if the building needs protection against intruders/thieves. This makes me wonder where the building is located at, is it a hostile/criminal environment?

The photo is composed very formally, reminiscent of a documentary shot instead of an artistic approach. But then, the very same composition imposes upon the viewer the serious nature of this building, it is not something to be messed with. As in, leave all creativity and imagination behind when you enter here. And that is consistent with Tom's message in his introduction, as is the style of the picture which is consistent with other work from Tom I have seen before.

The second picture complements the first one nicely. The hallway of the school is very similar to the other schools I have seen around Europe. Utilitarian ceilings, white-washed brick walls, top windows for letting the light into the long corridors and fluorescent lighting. These buildings are built as a utility, not as a place to inspire people.

Thanks for sharing these Tom. Next set please?

Cem_Usakligil said:

"we don't need no education...."
Or do we? Since education is one of the immediate victims of continuous budget cuts in most countries, I am actually happy to see there are still schools albeit a bit sterile, as long as they are functional.

These buildings are built as a utility, not as a place to inspire people.

Thanks for sharing these Tom. Next set please?

Click to expand...

Hi Cem. You sound like an interesting bloke. Tell me more about your schools and the budget cuts. I detect some underlying current of anarchy there. Or hopelessness. What do you mean by 'functional'? Are they hives of creativity or places of rote learning? And should they be just functional? Wouldn't it be nice to have a pleasantly decorated room with lots of stimulus material, games to play and interesting people to talk to instead of the cubicled version we have at the moment. Even the teachers all look alike.
Forget the photos; share some thoughts.

Sounding like an interesting bloke is my specialty Tom, as long as I can get you to buy me a beer when/if we are in the same vicinity.

The Ministry of Education is the main budget cut victim in all the yearly budgets of the Dutch government since the beginning of this century. There is less money available to keep schools open and running, therefore they must merge into monolithic, soulless institutions. There is less money to pay teachers so the classes become overcrowded and the experienced teacher look for other jobs. There is less money available for the higher education so that the R&D and innovation are on a decline. The quality of education in general is becoming worse and worse. Is that enough of an underlying anarchy/hopelessness for you? I know that this is not only the case in the Netherlands but in many countries around the world.

That brings me back to the comment "functional". To me "functional" is when there is a school with teachers in it for students so that the government approved curriculum can be executed. I am in no way referring to the quality or the effectiveness of the curriculum. Of course they usually lack certain aspects such as being a hive of creativity. Only specialist schools such as the Montessori School my wife teaches at spend some effort in creating and kindling the creativity in children. For the rest, it is more like various shades of grey.

The reason why I am happy with having a "functional" education system is because many countries lack even that. The children are being robbed of their rights for getting a proper education, let alone health services, food or a safe living environment.

Having spent my fair share of time in educational institutions for a variety of reasons including those of a student, educator and advisor, I, too, fear for the education of our youth., but not necessarily for the same reasons. I agree that governments undervalue education when they cut the budget and increase their own salaries or buy the latest in defense toys. That's nothing new and doesn't look like changing in the foreseeable future here in Australia.
What does concern me a bit is the idea that education is a right and should be provided to all. My experience is that there are considerable numbers out there, both parents and students, who do sweet **** all in taking full advantage of the educational opportunities that are presented to them. These parents seem to think that they can just lay back and let it all happen, passively accepting what is presented and then throw a tantrum when their child is not succeeding. The students are of a similar ilk. Results are shite, blame the teacher.
This is a small percentage, mind you, but its the percentage that gets up my nose, and its a bloody big nose to get up.
'What are you doing to help my child get better results?' Is the standard sort of comment I have heard for such parents.
'Giving your child a swift kick up the arse will be a good starting point' I might think of replying, followed by 'and getting you involved would be a good follow through'.
I have been in too many homes where there is absolutely no reading material, not even a news paper, more than one TV, at least two cars, no place for a kid to sit quietly with his school work, and no incentive to do so, with parents who don't ask, encourage or participate, then lay shite on the 'system' that won't educate their kids.
And it's getting worse here.
No wonder teachers get disheartened and go elsewhere.
As each child passes through those doors there is no miracle on the other side that will make them into good learners. That must come from the home.
The sooner we accept education as a privilege the more we will value it when we get it.

What you describe Tom is a trend which is predominantly present in the so-called "developed" countries where the welfare is above the world average. Coming from a then "developing" country myself, I have never seen this kind of behavior when I was a student. It was more like, when a student complained about a teacher back at home, the parents would likely discipline him/her for not respecting the teacher. The education was indeed a privilege to us. I am sure that this still is the case in the "developing" parts of the world. Please note my personal disdain about the adjectives developed/developing".

Cem_Usakligil said:

What you describe Tom is a trend which is predominantly present in the so-called "developed" countries where the welfare is above the world average. Coming from a then "developing" country myself, I have never seen this kind of behavior when I was a student. It was more like, when a student complained about a teacher back at home, the parents would likely discipline him/her for not respecting the teacher. The education was indeed a privilege to us. I am sure that this still is the case in the "developing" parts of the world. Please note my personal disdain about the adjectives developed/developing".

Click to expand...

Distain noted and agreed apon.

Tom dinning said:

I have been in too many homes where there is absolutely no reading material, not even a news paper, more than one TV, at least two cars, no place for a kid to sit quietly with his school work, and no incentive to do so, with parents who don't ask, encourage or participate, then lay shite on the 'system' that won't educate their kids.

Click to expand...

Tom,

You've hit the nail on the head! When kids already have the basics in life, but no family organization directed around the need to value study, (and reinforce the teacher's daily attempts to imbibe skills, they end up with a failed child, who can only hope for the crumbs of society.

Asher

I'm not an educator, but thought this TED talk on the subject had some interesting ideas: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Tom Robbins said:

I'm not an educator, but thought this TED talk on the subject had some interesting ideas: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Click to expand...

Hi Tom,

Ken Robinson is one of my favorite contributors to TED talks, not only for his entertaining presentations (there are a few other presentations by him !), but also for the message.

Cheers,
Bart

Tom Robbins said:

I'm not an educator, but thought this TED talk on the subject had some interesting ideas: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Click to expand...

I've always thought that "the disciplined" in rows of desks are losing out. I was moving about, interrupting, drawing or staring out the window. I was happiest with teachers I loved. Then, the quest for "know-how of everything" took over!

Art, however, has always been my private passport.

Asher

There may be a misconception developed here that such things as maths, english and the like are not food for creative people. I won't tell you how strongly I disagree with that and I'm sure Ken had no intentions of projecting that perspective at his audience.
I do remember my maths teacher telling me how creative my calculations were. Look where it got me.
If we look at the value we place on creativity in our society we find only small and poorly financed pockets of it scattered loosley in the fringes. The average earnings for a full time artist of any sort in Australia is about $35000/annum. Thats less than the basic wage and would put a family below the poverty line.
Schools are changing slowly here. There are signs within the curricula that crerativity can coexist with all learning. It doesn't need to be dance or painting or the traditional forms of art. It can include IT, maths, science, writing, whatever. Its still frowned apon by some and its dumbed down a bit in schools, thinking that those that cant succeed academically might succeed at the so called creative subjects.
I'm not suggesting my surgeon be creative with his incisions or the mechanic be creative with my fuel injection but I would like to think that both have the ability to experiment with ideas without fear of rejection as long as the scar doesn't show and my car still runs smoothly.

Asher Kelman said:

When kids already have the basics in life, but no family organization directed around the need to value study, (and reinforce the teacher's daily attempts to imbibe skills, they end up with a failed child, who can only hope for the crumbs of society.

Click to expand...

But then, when kids have a family organization directed around the need to value study, they don't really need a public education system, do they? If the schools are not doing their job, or are not available, the motivated parents will find ways to compensate.

Tom dinning said:

There may be a misconception developed here that such things as maths, english and the like are not food for creative people.

Click to expand...

I like to believe that technical people are creative as well. Someone had to invent the fuel injection system of your car. Someone had to find the right cut that other surgeons continue to use.

The most creative people, IMO, are mathematicians. It is just that their creativity is poorly understood by the layperson. But if you consider the history of science, all progress in our knowledge of the world was predated by the invention of new mathematic tools.

Jerome Marot said:

But then, when kids have a family organization directed around the need to value study, they don't really need a public education system, do they? If the schools are not doing their job, or are not available, the motivated parents will find ways to compensate.

Click to expand...

Schools aren't just for study, Jerome. Ask any teenager why they go to school. To meet with their mates. All jokes aside, school environments are great places for kids to learn to be kids. Its about socialising, cooperation, tolerance, acceptance and conforming as well as finding their own place. Many of these things cant be taught effectively in the home. There needs to be a balance between home and school that develops all aspects of the child. They are currently treated as two separate identities but over the past few years I have seen some significant changes where the school environment is more like the society the child will need to deal with as they get older.
Whether this is a public or private institution matters not. Teachers are now expected to include families in decision making, teaching strategies, support and resources. Unfortunately it isnt compulsory for parents to return the favour. Teachers are expected to be more broardly and intensely qualified to teach all sorts of people and to maintain those qualifications throughout their teaching career. PArents don't have any such requirement except to send their kids to school until a certain age. Schools are governed to the nth degree for safety, efficiency, financial management, adherence to the curriculum, ethics and standards. No such rigor is applied to parents. The first attempt at governing a family by the stae would be considered dictatorial, yet schools undergo this process daily.
I'm not suggesting we start putting families underthe microscope. I'm suggesting we migh look carefully at who and what is to blame for our education if their is anything wrong with it. Suggesting our education system doesn't prepare our children for the future might well be missing a very important point you have made. Do we need such a system if parents are doing all they can to provide it?

Tom,

All good points on the rigor of school and the almost happenstance of parenting and competing with texting, video games and TV. In addition to the socializing aspect of school, there's another function it serves for our society. It's the antidote to having crowds of teens roaming the streets all day unsupervised and scaring the locals. So for many, as long as their businesses and homes are not being broken into and they can safely go on a city bus, they feel that education is working and wont spend another penny on it!

Library, school nurse, music program? dance, theater, art who needs them?

Asher

What I meant, Tom, is that we don't quite agree on the objective of a public education system. You are arguing, and quite rightly so, that schools find it difficult to motivate children when the family does not help. What I am arguing is that a public school system is primarily there for these children with unhelpful families, since motivated families will find a way for their children education (be it home schooling or private schools or a combination of both).

Jerome Marot said:

What I meant, Tom, is that we don't quite agree on the objective of a public education system. You are arguing, and quite rightly so, that schools find it difficult to motivate children when the family does not help. What I am arguing is that a public school system is primarily there for these children with unhelpful families, since motivated families will find a way for their children education (be it home schooling or private schools or a combination of both).

Click to expand...

I don't agree with you there, Jerome, certainly not in the schools I have worked in. Highly motivated students succeed. That motivation comes from within the student and is fostered by good teachers and good parents among others. Success is, of course, subjective. Academic success is highly regarded in most schools. The trend is to regard all success as highly valued. The other highly valued commodity is striving.
I'm curious that you continue to talk of public schools and not schools in general, Jerome. Did you have a bad experience as a child?
I like the idea that we have a choice. I do think some people are misguided when making their choice due to generalizations. I also think some parents have misconceptions about the function of education and the part they should play in educating their children.
Creativity is just a part of the story and to assume schools are failing because some may not emphasise it as much as others is a crazy idea.
We are all products of these terrible systems. I think I did alright. I see the results of the current systems and they do OK as well. When I talk to ex students most seemed to have been pretty happy and, besides a bit of tidying up, the education they received seems to be working for them.

Tom dinning said:

I don't agree with you there, Jerome, certainly not in the schools I have worked in. Highly motivated students succeed. That motivation comes from within the student and is fostered by good teachers and good parents among others. Success is, of course, subjective. Academic success is highly regarded in most schools. The trend is to regard all success as highly valued. The other highly valued commodity is striving.
I'm curious that you continue to talk of public schools and not schools in general, Jerome. Did you have a bad experience as a child?

Click to expand...

On the contrary, but maybe there is a misunderstanding, as "public school" really means a "private school" in England and "state financed school" anywhere else in the world. I was talking about "state financed schools".

Generally speaking, I am very satisfied about the French system of state financed schools for myself and for my children, but I am good at abstraction (and I realize that the French system is extremely bad at fostering creativity). People with difficulties with abstraction will be very dissatisfied in this system, so I understand your comments.

We were however talking about children with unhelpful parents. I have also heard the teachers in the classes of my children raising the same criticism against parents unable to motivate their children. But the difference is that, in France, there are public discussion about this problem and a consensus that a "state financed school" is actually there to help the children of the less advantaged families to have a chance to get a decent education.

In other words: take a reasonably gifted student from a motivated family. If the state financed schools are poor, his or her family will find a way, pay him a private school, have books at home, etc... Now, if you take a reasonably gifted child but from a family believing that education is a waste of time, that child can only count on the state financed schools to help him or her (it is quite often "her"). The family won't pay for a better school and there are no books at home. Who is going to help them?

This, BTW, is not to be confused with the case of the extremely gifted or extremely motivated students, who will succeed under almost every possible set of conditions. It is for the vast number of normally gifted children with unhelpful families that a state financed school system is really needed.

Jerome and Tom,

I support both of you that well-motivated aware families will overcome most schools' deficits in programs. I offer another perspective to the function of school in our society. We claim they are for providing opportunity for kids, but that's only part of the story and doesn't account for us essentially warehousing the child population in buildings most of the day!

The first real public need of a school system is one of order and safety: to keep the kids off the streets and running wild while parents are at work. Then comes education to provide for the job skills for that society. A school that allows neighbors to have a peaceful life is highly valued. To achieve this community benefit, the school must be attractive enough to get the kids to turn up. Attractions are sports and kids to socialize with and finally certificates! The latter are becoming increasingly worthless as computers take over jobs. Previously a law degree meant a good job. Now computers handle the research of 50 young lawyers in the law library. Consequently, many graduates are unemployed a year after graduation!

The damage schools do by making everyone still for most of the day must be enormous. The discipline in obeying teachers' instructions prepares students well for taking orders in the workplace. That's practical! But it also tends to obliterate independent spirit needed for creativity. Still, great teachers and great parents allow a meaningful fraction of kids to maintain and enhance their creativity and thus far, it has been sufficient for our progress.

From now on, however, we need much more creativity to deal with the outcomes of increased growth of populations and waste products with ever declining resources. So there's more need for magnet schools where attention is given to creative expression over discipline.

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

The first real public need of a school system is one of order and safety: to keep the kids off the streets and running wild while parents are at work.

Click to expand...

Amusing, and indeed true today, but you fail to take into account the history: it is because a school system was developed a century ago that we take for granted that both parents can work and that grand parents can retire in another part of the country. And, of course, before that school system was developed, children were put to work relatively early, so that they had no time to wander on the streets.