I fear my blog posts could blur with redundancy in the use of concepts like balance, meaningful, thoughtful or purposeful. As I was listening to the debate and then investigating sources, I started to wonder, What if the alphabet on the wall in every (Apologies here: dominant Western culture is showing) classroom was jumbled or random? Why do we learn the alphabet the way we do? What would English language acquisition, reading development and the learning of writing be like if we just completely went to a discovery model? These are probably better questions for the likes of Merriam-Webster, Oxford, Cambridge, Collins, and Longman.
When it comes to the debate statement: Schools should continue to teach skills that can be easily carried out by technology, I AGREE. Does that mean that I think time should not be devoted to modern activities like coding? It does not. One of the roles that schools have is to prepare students for the world outside of school. Integrating instruction related to technological skills is preparing them for the modern work world. It is, however, vital that technology use is purposeful and the usage is planned, not just frivolous and random screen time.
Rote learning is often the target of the old ways. It would be irresponsible to completely banish rote learning from classrooms because of the benefits it can have on “mental training”. Spending hours a day memorizing facts would be a wasteful way to spend precious class time. Boredom aside, students who are just memorizing and regurgitating information are not developing the important skills of critical thinking. This is an area where discovery or innovative learning methods can provide a spark in our students, light the flames of curiosity and creativity.
I know technology, like iPads and Chromebooks, can bring benefits to our classrooms. What I also know is that kids need time away from screens. Why not bring the art back to language arts with some handwriting practice? Taking some time every day in our elementary school classes to build fine motor skills will have benefits well beyond the cursive letters themselves. Handwriting has also been linked to brain development, which links to reading skills in pre-literate children. This might create an argument that cursive can be phased out as students become more competent readers. Finally, our developing writers are supported through handwritten work.
As stated, old school methods still have a place in my classroom and should have a role in many elementary classrooms. However, ‘new school’ methods and activities are just as important in my classroom. This source highlights adaptability as a modern and important skill in the current and future workforce. I might contest that having the “old school” skills makes a student more adaptable. When the power goes out, when the subscription runs out, students need to have some skills to fall back on when the zombie apocalypse ensues.
The big question for me then is, how do we integrate the old teaching with the new teaching to best prepare our students for the world outside the classroom?
