Read Andy's blog called Or and And, in which he takes on The System, represented by a science teacher that Andy was kind enough not to name. Andy's story reminded me of my first experience teaching Honors English. At that time, there was a traditional class during the day where all the "honors" students were together for an English class. (Believe me, the way we do it now is MUCH LESS WORK!) Everyone in that class was like Andy: too smart for their own good. I don't say that in a negative way, but it is sometimes the case that being right is a less helpful quality than being tactful. This is especially true in large systems and bureaucracies where lots of people must conform to one mode of action in order to accomplish anything.
Anyway, DJ was a student who was so naturally brilliant that he seldom had to study for most of his classes. But because he was in the English class with the 34 brightest students in the school, there was a great deal of competition, and a lot more work than he was accustomed to. DJ and I had many discussions like the one Andy describes, i.e., DJ wanted to prove that his answer was in some way correct. He invested much more time arguing his case after the fact than he did studying for tests beforehand. On multiple-choice tests I used to include special instructions for DJ: "Select the correct response, not the one you can argue about the longest." I've heard thousands of excuses in my teaching career, and it always saddens me a little to see people working harder to subvert The System than they do trying to learn something. It's not just students, either. Many folks seem to believe that it is easier to start a crusade against Accelerated Reader than it is to read a book. I don't get it.
No doubt the question Andy describes in his blog is somewhat unclear. Most of the questions on the end-of-level exams are the same way. The problem that "honors" students have is that they overthink everything. Andy got all tied up in the vocabulary of the question, but he missed its intent, which would have been clear to people who are not as detail oriented (i.e., most of the studentbody...and some science teachers). So, while Andy's point is well taken, I still wonder if it was worth the battle.
As long as you are in a formal system (of education or any other kind), you have to go along to get along. That's hard for most teenagers (and me) to hear, but unless you are really willing to lay it all on the line for your principles, that's the way it usually turns out. We all jump through lots of silly hoops to get to the outcome we desire. (Or we allow a teacher to tell us to sit down and stop arguing even though we are 100% certain that we are correct.) The important thing is to know what you desire. Don't get so bogged down in minutia that you forget why you're here. Any system that plods on long enough will forget its original purpose sooner or later because no one person will have to accept responsibility for anything. Individuals are different, and we should fight to stay that way. But sometimes fighting the system is a waste of time.
I encourage all of you to stand up for your principles (like Andy did), but also recognize when the fight is beneath you or when you are wasting your time arguing something that drives you away from your ultimate goal. Some things are worth fighting for. Fight for them. Others things are not. Know the difference.
We're going to read a book later in the year about the importance of individuality in conformist systems. Until then, just realize that I'm not arguing for you all just to fall in line because The System says so. Blind faith in any system can be dangerous. Question everything! But also be aware that you don't want to live your entire life fighting for causes that aren't worth the effort.
Andy's story illustrates the point nicely. Like he said, it was only one point on the whole test. How much effort is it worth to fight for that one point? I think Andy made the right choice in this case, and by sharing the story with us, he allows us all to consider such issues and how we will respond to them in our own lives.
*<%^)
Anyway, DJ was a student who was so naturally brilliant that he seldom had to study for most of his classes. But because he was in the English class with the 34 brightest students in the school, there was a great deal of competition, and a lot more work than he was accustomed to. DJ and I had many discussions like the one Andy describes, i.e., DJ wanted to prove that his answer was in some way correct. He invested much more time arguing his case after the fact than he did studying for tests beforehand. On multiple-choice tests I used to include special instructions for DJ: "Select the correct response, not the one you can argue about the longest." I've heard thousands of excuses in my teaching career, and it always saddens me a little to see people working harder to subvert The System than they do trying to learn something. It's not just students, either. Many folks seem to believe that it is easier to start a crusade against Accelerated Reader than it is to read a book. I don't get it.
No doubt the question Andy describes in his blog is somewhat unclear. Most of the questions on the end-of-level exams are the same way. The problem that "honors" students have is that they overthink everything. Andy got all tied up in the vocabulary of the question, but he missed its intent, which would have been clear to people who are not as detail oriented (i.e., most of the studentbody...and some science teachers). So, while Andy's point is well taken, I still wonder if it was worth the battle.
As long as you are in a formal system (of education or any other kind), you have to go along to get along. That's hard for most teenagers (and me) to hear, but unless you are really willing to lay it all on the line for your principles, that's the way it usually turns out. We all jump through lots of silly hoops to get to the outcome we desire. (Or we allow a teacher to tell us to sit down and stop arguing even though we are 100% certain that we are correct.) The important thing is to know what you desire. Don't get so bogged down in minutia that you forget why you're here. Any system that plods on long enough will forget its original purpose sooner or later because no one person will have to accept responsibility for anything. Individuals are different, and we should fight to stay that way. But sometimes fighting the system is a waste of time.
I encourage all of you to stand up for your principles (like Andy did), but also recognize when the fight is beneath you or when you are wasting your time arguing something that drives you away from your ultimate goal. Some things are worth fighting for. Fight for them. Others things are not. Know the difference.
We're going to read a book later in the year about the importance of individuality in conformist systems. Until then, just realize that I'm not arguing for you all just to fall in line because The System says so. Blind faith in any system can be dangerous. Question everything! But also be aware that you don't want to live your entire life fighting for causes that aren't worth the effort.
Andy's story illustrates the point nicely. Like he said, it was only one point on the whole test. How much effort is it worth to fight for that one point? I think Andy made the right choice in this case, and by sharing the story with us, he allows us all to consider such issues and how we will respond to them in our own lives.
*<%^)
posted by MRT at 7:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home