19 79
No. 9
Vol. 1
TEACHERS WHO DON'T TEACH
Wth
the new school year opened, many parents sending their children off to school for the first time m ay have tears in their eyes as their child takes that first step into the world of public educatio n. Man}" would shed more than just a sentim ental tear if they knew how th eir child 's education will be detri· mentall y affected by a Swiss non· agenarian biologist-psycholog ist that they probably have never heard of. The works of J ean Piaget have become the found atio n for early ch ild· hood training courses fo r teachers at o ur college and univers ities. One can page through almost an y college text· book dealing with psychology or teaching methods for the very young and find Piaget's ideas treated extensively.
Paraphrasing o ne of Piaget's conclu· sio ns demonstrates his basic philosophy toward teach ing children: "Children do not receive ideas from others; ideas or co ncepts are constructs of the child's own m ind and must be fashioned by the child himsel f." Piaget's statement that "children do not receive ideas from orhers" h~s had a
devastating effect o n educat ion. When te.a chers should be giving t heir pupils the basic skills in reading and writing and math as directly and efficient ly as possible, the child is left to fend fo r himself. Author Morris Kline in Why john11y Can't Add decries the let-the-childdiscover-fo r-himself method which is an integral part of t he New Math program. He po inted out that science of mathema tics has been developi ng steadily for centuries and it cannot be expected that the young ch ild wi ll suddenly "discover" for himself during his primary grade schooling what has taken the combined and cumulative effort of som e of the greatest minds of history to do. An example of th e psycho logical disadvantage that th e teacher is put under by this technique can be seen from the fo llowing quotation taken from a first grade teacher's guide: " If a teacher red marks the children's errors, he or she assumes a responsibility that rightfully belongs to the children." The influence of Mr. Piaget is not restricted to reading and math. It in-
vades all su bject matters with th e same insidiousness. In art, for example, Ms. Robinson's Exploring Teaching in Early Childhood Education states: "A teacher's knowledge of art is not t o be d irect· ; ly comm unicated to child ren." Fu rther, authors J oseph J. and Maril yn C. Sparling of the Education Department of th e University of North Caroli na in t heir book Learning for Little Kids have written, "Comments and questions (abo ut scribbling, for example) to be appropriate and effective,' must be open and help to enlighten the sensitivity of each ~hild to what he ·is doirig or has done. There· fore, adults should avoid questions such as, 'What are you d rawing' o r ' Is this a house?' or 'What's this?' These ty pes of questions puts the child o n the spot, leaving no room fo r varied interpreta· tions and often closing the door o n creativity and fu rth er explanatio n." From this fl uid, foundatio n-less educational system will come the nation's future doctors, scientists, arch itects, mechanics, government af)d religious leaders who, without the basics, will go along "discovering." Let's hope the country can su rvive it.
American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property (TFP)