Progressive versus Traditional

Many progressive schools place value in the experience of learning itself much like the teachers at Phoenix Park, believing that learning in groups, creative projects and discussion of concepts are intrinsically good. Traditional schools are the mostly unintended consequence of decades of politically driven school reforms that are often misguided. The debate over progressive versus traditional education pedagogies is not a new one. The principles of progressivism were spelled out in books like John Dewey’s Democracy and Education and Traditional view were spelled out as early as Franklin Bobbitt’s Scientific method in curriculum-making. I believe education should be about achieving a balance or hybrid based on the needs of students in different disciplines. Of course we need to prepare students for adulthood, but focusing only on the future does not make sense either.

With crt scores, public exam results, and mpts leaving our education system in state of unrest. We see high schools accuse intermediate schools who accuse elementary schools for not preparing students, and universities with record high remediation needs (Bridging programs, foundation courses) for entering students in English or Mathematics, and often they need remediation in both English and Math. This is causing stress for teachers, students, and parents. How does this stress affect the love of teaching, the love of learning, and a child centered curriculum? These testing requirements align very well with Bobbitt’s theories.

Bobbitt would appreciate all of the assessment and testing we are going though. Our education system sets us up to fill the students with facts and test them over and over, rather than teaching them where to find the information, or how to love learning, or how to think critically. Historically we have adopted different curriculums at different times depending on the political climate of the time.

References:

Dewey, J. (1916). My Pedagogic Creed in Flinders, D.J., & Thornton, S.J (Eds.). (2009). The Curriclum Studies Reader (pp.34-41). New York:Routledge.

Bobbit, F. (2009). Scientific method in curriculum-making. In Flinders & Thornton (3^rd Ed.), The curriculum studies reader (pp. 15-21). New York: Routledge.