Well this will tie in nicely with the “Nanny State” which Tunya wrote about earlier this year which has invaded Scottish schools

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/418974/Parents-fight-SNP-s-plan-for-state-guardians

Those involved with the British education system will hardly be surprised at some of these revelations.  As Malkin has already summarized, it’s been going on for some time.  On the flip side, I am somewhat encouraged to read that the current Education Minister is trying to stem the tide of poor math skills by flying in Shanghai math teachers and having them demonstrate some of their winning techniques to help stop flagging math skills.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2578693/Chinese-teachers-improve-pupils-maths-Sixty-fly-Shanghai-promote-methods-bid-halt-slide-standards.html

This is a small, but significant step.  Perhaps more of an outcry will be produced after more people read books like these, and international tests show the true story of the dismal state behind the UK education system.

To say that “progressive practice” has permeated education is like saying that someone is a little bit pregnant.

Unfortunately the progressive ideology has managed to take control of the language we use to speak about education. It has set the terminology and reference points, so since we filter everything through language is acts as thought police. Remember 1984’s new-speak?

Let’s take a look at some
* “rote learning” - This automatically implies that any learning that requires any sort of repetition or review is Baaaad. As a consequence any learning that does not require learning must be Gooood and “creative”.
Also assumes that any repetition implies not understanding what you are doing.

The truth that human biology requires us to repeat in order learn no longer matters.

* “active participants in their own learning” - Essentially, this means kids know better. If somebody else, such as a competent, experienced adult who knows the subject and knows what competence in the subject looks like directs the learning then automatically the students are no longer “active”.

I can’t even begin to comment on the immense irresponsability and stupidity of this.

Sure, if we take at random 100 ten year olds and throw them in deep water and let them self-direct learning how to swim, about 50 will drown, about 30 will barely survive and about 20 - who have already been taught the basics of swimming at home - will do well and may even develop a love for it.

Any similarities with the results and root causes of the EQAO test results are purely coincidental.

Well said Europe, you are absolutely spot on.  I just heard from a friend this morning who said many Education profs now want to use “qualitative” research over “quantitative” research in pursuing education research.  Hmmmmm….what is the purpose of meaningful research if we don’t want to recognize meaningful ways of gathering the research?  Scary stuff indeed.  I keep waiting for the bottom to fall out from all of this stupidity so we can go back to learning the proper way.

Disintegration Of Progressive Education House Of Cards Finally Happening

Compare and contrast the specialized fields of education and medicine. 

Ask the simple question:  Would the medical field allow an epidemic to start, take hold, spread, and NOT be challenged?  No. That would not be, and has never been, allowed to happen.  Everything in the structure of medicine screams against negligence of duty.

On the other hand, what is our experience in the field of education?  Well, it’s been at least 50 years of a steady spread of dumbing-down of vast populations due to the virus of “progressivism”.  Many signals have appeared that pointed to danger.  The field is littered with reports and complaints but there has been little relief for long-suffering clients of this system.

Two conditions account for this unchecked education epidemic.  Firstly: Ideological activists — well-fueled with articulate platforms and well-placed in zones of influence — have had a relatively free rein in advancing their progressive cause.  Secondly: Those in oversight have blindly (and compromisingly) allowed a one-size-fits-all mentality to embed itself into services that should be primarily guided by “best practice” and client consensual choice. 

Radicalism and laxity are related.  Progressivism, under many guises, propagates and harms mass populations while a blind eye prevails on the part of school boards and government ministries.

Well, there is good news regarding this raging epidemic hitherto allowed to flourish. While radicalism is growing fiercer, faster and more presuming at least we are seeing some influential resistance gearing up.

1   While each new expose seems to promise reform, finally, this book — Progressively Worse — is likely to encourage the opening of a lot of floodgates. Not only releasing pent-up-demand for reform, but actually helping focus on root causes. The 50 year chronology of UK progressivism’s growth is equally applicable to Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand and other nations. http://www.learningspy.co.uk/featured/progressively-worse-review/

The UK Education Minister, Michael Gove, has just announced an independent Review into ITT (Initial Teacher Training).

2   Australia has two Reviews going into “root” issues: Review of the National Curriculum and Review of Teacher Training. 

3   Alberta (the “tall poppy” that had to be cut down) has just released a report of the Task Force For Teaching Excellence http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmonton/Task+force+report+politcally+driven+assault+teachers/9808600/story.html

4   The curriculum wars have been ongoing for many decades, to the point where two main camps now predominate — traditionalists vs progressives. The traditionalist camp believes in tolerance, live and let live, consent and choice, whereas the progressive camp believes in one-size-fits-all, paternalistic “we know best” and stealth incrementalism.  One side is for freedom, the other for totalitarianism.  My reading of the balance at the moment is that progressives, because of methods used and lack of oversight, have “captured” the field by a ratio of 9 to 1.  A good article to start understanding the two camps and current “Common Core” debates in the US is here http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/171441

Of course, the more parents and public get involved, the greater likelihood that lax and gutless political entities will have to respond — with genuine and accountable programs.

Part 1 of 2

I took the longer route of following the reviews and it turned out to be quite the adventure from Robert Peal’s articles to the reviews of the book to Cartesianism to Spinozo’s philosophy to Constructivism pedagogy and back to the present. I was following the convoluted arguments of the British educators, that positions progressive pedagogy as the only authority over education of children. “Young/Peal/Christodoulou all claim that the ‘problem’ with education is child-centred progressive ideology. What exactly is wrong with making education child centred? This is not the same, as I keep saying as ‘child led’. To place a child at the centre of education is to surely meet its needs? To prioritise the child’s needs over, say, the market? To have authority is not anti-progressive – but to have authority without legitimacy is. What might that legitimacy be? That your authority rests on acting in the best interests of the child, and not of the league tables/Ofsted grading/lastest government whim? That you might be answerable to parents and children in order to have your authority legitimised? In many ways, this is what Demos proposed in their report on the problems with Ofsted. Is that really not better than having your authority legitimised by people called Michael?”  http://debrakidd.wordpress.com/2014/04/28/progressively-predictable/

We should be hearing from Debra Kidd, as she did in August, 2013 in the SQE post about the 7 Myths of Education - /index.php/blog/seven-myths-about-education  I be disappointed if I did not hear from her on another chance of crossing swords with an educator who is thoroughly pickled in the progressive education philosophies and pedagogy that asserts there is no need for a solid foundation and footing of the 3 Rs, to educate a child.

Robert Peal - “Since the 1970s, the principles of progressive education have endured, and are now woven into the fabric of state education. Teacher training, local authorities and schools inspectors all signed up to this idealistic, but damaging, belief. Relevance, freedom, active learning, skills and self-esteem have become the unquestionable pillars of this education orthodoxy. Rigour, hard work, knowledge, discipline and competition are deemed pejorative terms.” http://civitas.org.uk/education/PW.php

“The people running Islington schools believe that personal achievement, especially in exams, is ‘middle-class’ and therefore suspect, and that failure of individual children should not be recognised because it is ‘discriminatory’.”  http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/5519/full

“It is well known that Britain has one of the highest levels of social inequality amongst developed nations. However, there is no proven correlation between educational failure and social inequality. South Korea, China, Singapore and Hong Kong all have much higher levels of social inequality than Britain, but comprehensively beat us in the OECD rankings. These international comparisons bear out that if pupils are taught well in orderly schools, disadvantage need not be destiny.”  http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/debate/columnists/robert-peal-the-return-of-school-discipline-with-no-excuses-1-6587540

The anti-Peal gang - 1. http://www.learningspy.co.uk/featured/progressively-worse-review/
And here - http://debrakidd.wordpress.com/2014/04/28/progressively-predictable/

Debra Kidd ends with - “So I think, so what? What can I do? Well, I can carry on teaching in the way I know works for my students and myself. I can carry on reading a range of cognitive and neuroscience and draw my own conclusions. I can make sure I find out who publishes and funds the latest ‘must read’ and figure out if there has been a responsible and critical editorial eye. I can make sure I don’t get bullied into denying who I am and what I believe. And I can write counter narratives. Like this one.”

What Debra Kidd and her ilk won’t discuss nor acknowledge is that progressive pedagogy is rooted in the 17th century. When a progressive educationalist speaks of cognitive and neuroscience in the 21st century, it will not be the same cognitive and neuroscience where low phonemic awareness can be corrected by directly teaching the children the sounds of the English language that have over seventy plus sounds. Instead, of directly teaching the sounds to the students, because that would be against the progressive child-centered ideologies, the educator will correct by immersing the child in enriched text environments and some magical process of osmosis, the child will learned to read without learning the sounds. Us parents who have gone through the hard knock school, called the process - our children learned to read by memorizing the words.

Part 2 of 2

So I followed Kidd’s convoluted arguments in her defense of progressive pedagogy from Cartesianism to Spinoza, where I learned that Spinoza philosophy, an offshoot or some would say, all part and parcel of progressive pedagogy that has now gone beyond the K to 12 education walls to the external world. “In his novel application of Spinoza’s philosophy to sustainability, systems design, development, and transdisciplinary pedagogy that is introduced in this paper, Daniel also integrates topics like the history and philosophy of science, globalization, the convergence of worldviews, ethics and action; food and water security and justice; carbon management, alternative fuels, biopesticides, and the management of climate-change related risk and disaster.”  http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/content/unpacking-spinoza-sustainability-education-outside-the-cartesian-box_2012_03/

From the Philosophy of Spinoza - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_Spinoza
To Vygotsky: Philosophy and Education - http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1118368770.html
To Constructivism (philosophy of education) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(philosophy_of_education)

To my final two papers of great interest. The first one, one will learn why in 2014, the horrible math curriculum of fuzziness and confusion. It is called, Childhood & Philosophy: A journal of the international council of philosophical inquiry with children
Philosophical Methodology and the Mathematization of Pedagogy: Freeing Children’s Imagination through Philosophy - http://www.filoeduc.org/childphilo/n4/JohnRoemischer.htm

The second one - Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEwQFjAD&url=http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ854992.pdf&ei=qbNnU4b3FpCpyATXsYLYDA&usg=AFQjCNHSi4Zh_NFkYr9yb39WMaoXWOFFYQ&sig2=kJCDRBZhXo5v3qA-EFfcmg&bvm=bv.65788261,d.aWw

It is all about this - “The fact that constructivists, of whatever ilk, consensually hold that knowledge is not
mechanically acquired, but actively constructed within the constraints and offerings of the learning environment, was commonly regarded as a shift in paradigm in educational psychology. The mechanistic positivist accounts of learners as recipients of hard-wired knowledge were supplanted by accounts of learners as situated, active knowledge constructors. We note that with this shift, human subjectivity, which was excluded by behaviourist and information-processing accounts, has through constructivism returned to the discussion. But what is of great interest is the relation expressed by popular constructivist accounts between the objective and subjective
aspects, between the world and mind. “

To which leads me back to the present and the subject at hand, Robert Peal’s book - “Progressive education has been in the ascendency for nearly half a century, and has directly coincided with a prolonged crisis of poor behaviour and academic underachievement in British schools. It is high time we held it accountable for the effect is has had, and freed our schools from this burden of bad ideas.”  Back in the 17th and 18th century, the philosophers was not at all concerned with the outcomes of their ideologies, especially if the negative outcomes were concentrated in the lower social-income regions. Given that the philosophers all came from the upper crust of society of the 17th to the 19th century, the ideologies, dogma, beliefs and values were written to advanced the best interests of the upper crust where knowledge and skills are kept from the lower classes. So began the progressive pedagogues with built-in systemic vehicles of progressive education philosophizes outlining why in 2014, with all the advances made in science and society,, the kids are being educated according to the Gospel of Descartes, Spinoza, Vygotsky, Paiget, Dewey and the list of the other 20th and 21st century progressive educationalists that has build upon the work of the 17th century philosophers, on the construction of knowledge. Thus constructivism was born that works and always has worked for the best interest of the K to 12 education establishment, to educate according to social-income status of the students.

The reason the UK and for that matter the USA are far behind other OECD nations is 100% due to the high levels of inequality permitted within those societies. As opposed to say Finland, Scandinavia in general or the Benelux countries.

Doug, never checks the facts when it comes to OECD numbers. In his link - http://finance.yahoo.com/news/most-educated-countries-world-102232490.html

And OECD - http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/book/factbook-2013-en

Now at the OECD page - under Household Income and Wealth - check Income Equality

“Income is defined as household disposable income in a particular year. It consists of earnings, self-employment and capital income and public cash transfers; income taxes and social security contributions paid by households are deducted.”

“Inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient is lowest in Slovenia, Denmark and Norway and highest in Chile, Mexico and Turkey. It is above-average in Israel, Portugal and the United States, and below-average in the remaining Nordic and many Continental European countries. The Gini coefficient for the most unequal country (Chile) is double the value of the most equal country (Slovenia). Overall, the different measures of income inequalities provide similar ranking across countries.
From the mid-1980s to the late-2000s, inequality rose
in 15 out of 19 countries for which longer-run data are
available. The increase was strongest in Finland,
New Zealand and Sweden. Declines occurred in
France, Greece, and Turkey.”

So is the UK and the USA far behind due to high levels of inequality?  You be the judge, since the OECD numbers are dated, and income inequality from the latest numbers on the economist pages - income inequality is fastest in the Western countries, where countries like Finland with strong social programs, income inequality have the highest increases.

In one of my links - “. However, there is no proven correlation between educational failure and social inequality. South Korea, China, Singapore and Hong Kong all have much higher levels of social inequality than Britain, but comprehensively beat us in the OECD rankings. These international comparisons bear out that if pupils are taught well in orderly schools, disadvantage need not be destiny.”  http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/debate/columnists/robert-peal-the-return-of-school-discipline-with-no-excuses-1-6587540

From the few studies that has been done, there is no correlation between high levels of social inequality to high levels of education achievement.

The OECD lists the reasons the USA is behind as poverty compounded by concentrations of poverty. For example, a nation that is 10% poor will have worse education results if that 10% is concentrated in a few schools rather than spread across many schools.

Doug is fudging the numbers, as is the rest of the poverty gang are as well. “This showed the UK as a middle-ranking country, with Asian school systems, such as in Singapore, South Korea and Shanghai and Hong Kong in China, as the highest performers.
But Mr Schleicher’s latest analysis compares the performance of the most deprived 10% of pupils.
This reveals how the poorest in many countries overlap with the results of the wealthy in other countries.
The poorest 10% of pupils in Shanghai are as good as the most privileged 20% of teenagers taking the test in the UK and the United States.
In Europe, the Netherlands has the highest-performing pupils from the poorest families.
Poor pupils in the Netherlands are as good at maths as much better-off teenagers in France.
The poorest 10% of pupils in Hong Kong scored at a higher level than the wealthiest in Sweden and Norway.
The very lowest performers among this group were in the Slovak Republic.
Mr Schleicher says it shows how academic differences attributed to social background should not be unquestioningly tolerated.
“We tend to overestimate the impact of poverty,” he says .”
http://www.bbc.com/news/education-26015532

And here - http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100248732/oecd-education-report-child-poverty-cant-be-blamed-for-the-failings-of-british-schools/

Note: Shanghai - students in China who take the PISA tests are students in the top 40 % of the social-income ladder. Chinese students whose parents are general labourers or part of the domestic migrant work force that is composed of 60 % of the labour force operate under a private school system, and labour mobility is based on a permit system, where the domestic migrant work force must seek permission to moved to places like Shanghai, and as such, it is only a small percentage of low-income Chinese students that actually attends public high school in places like Shanghai.

In my Google search, I check Canada…..rather odd but to be expected, the education crowd does not want to discuss the latest PISA results regarding poverty to achievement to the latest data streams - It is time to look at the schools. First area to look at, are the progressive pedagogues and teacher training. I somehow doubt a teacher being an expert on social justice and equity theories are going to aid in higher achievement for the low-income students.

1) The people that are in those Asian nations are not poor they are richer than the UK students. Believe me I deal with them every day. Shanghai is the richest city in China. There is a reason China will only allow Shanghai, HK and Macau to be tested to date.

2) Nancy is nor arguing with Doug about American poverty, she is arguing with OECD. It amazing that reformers dema nd standardized testing and when that worldwide testing proves that poverty is the overarching reason for failure they go into denial mode.

Talk about being hoisted on your own petard.

http://m.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/12/american-schools-vs-the-world-expensive-unequal-bad-at-math/281983/

Why does America do badly in PISA? ANSWERS found in SES.

Denial not just a river in Egypt.

Doug is downplaying and not being altogether truthful.

The Chinese students being tested in Shanghai are the students who attend the public schools as opposed to the private schools in the slums of Shanghai. Low-income or the domestic migrant workers or the low-skilled parents, are not allowed to attend public schools that are fully funded by the Chinese government with all the bells and whistles. The public schools only the middle-class and above are allowed to attend public schools. Furthermore the middle-class and above are full fledged citizens who do not need to have travel permits and permits to live in the cities of China. Just the low-income people that comprised of approximately 60 % of the population.

Now the Shanghai public high schools do admit low-income students providing they meet the criteria based on who you know in the Chinese government, if the parents work as servants as gardeners or maids for the wealthy Chinese or some low waged job in government. Probably, and there is no doubt in my mind, approximately 10 percent to 20 percent of students are low-income in the public high schools. All of some top achievers bordering on genius level or higher. Of course they would do well with the PISA tests, because the hand-picked low-income Chinese students are slated for the government jobs of China.

Doug is really talking about the wealthy Chinese that can afford to drop $28,000 in Doug’s private school, and than dropped another half a million on a Canadian home or condo without batting an eyelash. What Doug’s school doesn’t see, is the Chinese middle-class student. These are the Chinese students are are sent to NA when the parents have scrimped and saved for many years to send their children to a Canadian or American university education.

I am not at all arguing with OECD, but I am taking abridge to Doug’s take that fudges on the numbers and misinterpreted the numbers, to make the numbers fit the poverty theories of the progressivists. The global data streams are clearly showing that factors of poverty are not a barrier for achievement for children of low-income. 

Bears repeating - ” However, there is no proven correlation between educational failure and social inequality. South Korea, China, Singapore and Hong Kong all have much higher levels of social inequality than Britain, but comprehensively beat us in the OECD rankings. These international comparisons bear out that if pupils are taught well in orderly schools, disadvantage need not be destiny.”  http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/debate/columnists/robert-peal-the-return-of-school-discipline-with-no-excuses-1-6587540

In places like South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong. approximately 60 % of the students are low-income, accustomed to living in sardine cans in cement towers, but that has not stopped the two countries and one city state in ensuring that all low-income students can achieved despite being low-income and the problems associated with being low-income. 

Doug also focuses on United States while ignoring the declining drops in the PISA rankings, that is following the same pathway as the United States. It all shows up in the OECD rankings for literacy and numeracy levels of adults in Canada. For low literacy it is 49 % and it is 55 % for low numeracy levels.  No wonder the educrats are not jumping up and down, boasting about the Canadian education system.  The progressive practices of educators plays a starring role, to set the stage that some would say is weakening the legs of the Canadian democracy for politicians to take advantage of and as well as the K to 12 education establishment.

Doug should start reading the newspapers and the comments. My my, people at the bottom are an unhappy lot and some of the venom is being directed at the K to 12 establishment. Doug really should do his reading across the social media span, he might even learn the people at the bottom really do expect government and schools to do their jobs without giving the people the gears and more spin.

We are constantly listed as the best educated nation on Earth.

OECD says America’s problem is SES. Deal with it.

“OECD says America’s problem is SES. Deal with it.”

Outside of the nauseatingly smug and arrogant “Deal with it”, Doug’s rants demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the dynamics of ‘child-centered’ education.  When schools expect children to direct their own learning, the results are dire.  This was recognized by the psychologist Jerome Bruner as far back as 1966, who remarked that discovery learning was “the most inefficient possible for regaining what has been gathered over a long period of time”.  Waiting for children to ‘discover’ how to count to ten is absurd—never mind waiting for them to discover the Pythagorean theorem.

Of course, even the most progressive schools still teach—otherwise, they would turn out little savages so ignorant that the fraud of progressive education would be discredited even in the eyes of people like Doug Little.  But in most UK and USA schools, what a child learns at home is one of the major determinant of educational outcomes.  Traditional schools such as Mossbourne Academy in Hackney have demonstrated that traditional education can transform the educational performance of the most disadvantaged pupils.

Another point which Doug misses completely is that the performance gap he is banging on about is between middle-class kids and disadvantaged kids—not between the super-rich bankers and capitalists and the rest, which is what the current debate is about. 

In any case, Robert Peal has done an excellent job of exposing the appalling social effects of progressive education, and he knows whereof he speaks.  He is fresh from a high school in Birmingham, England—a city with a strong egalitarian tradition dating back to the 1832 Reform Act, and some of England’s worst schools.  Its schools used to be relatively good until arch-progressive Sir Tim Brighouse took over as Chief Education Officer in the 1980s, and now they are among England’s worst.

In any case, I will be having coffee with Robert Peal on Wednesday morning, and I am sure he will be heartened to see the support he has received from most SQE correspondents.

The UK has got it wrong. They had a self-appraisal sheet on reading schemes, that publishers could fill in for teachers, but now such self-appraisals are vetted, and only those conforming to government are listed. And government has got it wrong, 1 in 4 failing so the only hope is to do the opposite of what government and teacher training says!
The British Dyslexia Association has, since     it began 40 years ago, has LIMITED its work to helping strugglers, i.e. is against any idea of getting it right first time!  .

Part 1 of 3

Mona, had given me new sets of comparison. I never thought to compared the UK to Canada and other Commonwealth countries to United States, regarding the dyslexia/LD/Autism/ADHD organizations to the respective K to 12 education systems. Why indeed does the British Dyslexia Association fails to advocate for preventative and corrective reading programs for UK K to 12 schools at the UK political levels of government and the K to 12 education establishment? The only country that does and have consistently are the American organizations. Their intensive lobbying at all levels, paved the way for innovation and research funding of big dollars on the science of learning, reading and along the way, have disproved many of the progressive practices found in schools as being ineffective and in some cases bordering on education malpractice.

Yet the UK and the Commonwealth countries are determined to maintain progressive education practices and policies to educate the children. In the 2013 report ot the British Dyslexia Association, one can see - “The Charity’s Objects are:
“to advance the education of dyslexic people of all ages in relation to all aspects of dyslexia
and related conditions, and to conduct research for the public benefit into the problems of
dyslexia and related conditions and to disseminate the results of such research.”
http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/files/2012-13-accounts.pdf

They sure have a strange way of disseminating knowledge in behind pay walls and memberships.
http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/
Parents will not find out that dyslexia is a reading problem that can be corrected. In the end, the parents will not learned the reading science. Much of the BDA knowledge sets are directed at the K to 12 education establishment, in a working collaboration model, based on progressive practices and philosophies. http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/about-dyslexia/schools-colleges-and-universities.html

Now what does music have to do with dyslexia?  When my child was in elementary school, she wanted to learned how to play the recorder properly just like the children on a YouTube video. I never thought much of the music education being received at the local school, but music was the least of my worries, since I was fighting tooth and nail for reading remediation and accommodations for my child’s dyslexia. After listening to my child, I told my child to come to me the following day, and I will teach you the ABCs of reading music. Within 30 minutes, she was reading notes better than she was reading words. Teaching the scales of music by teaching the rules is not part of the progressive education practice. Somehow, children are supposed to discover the rules of music, and through some type of magical osmosis, the child will become an accomplished reader of music. I dare say my methods were a bit old-fashioned, and a direct copy of what I had in the grade 3 to grade 5 classes. I don’t play an instrument but I can read music.  http://datadragon.com/education/reading/

Suffice to say that it was the music teacher that noted within a week, she was playing the recorder and reading music fluently. There is nothing magical about the process. Children must be taught directly and explicitly . Last week a meme was and still is circulating in social media, that there is two things for learning to occur - 1. Repetition 2. Prior knowledge.  Both practices are eschewed by the progressive education crowd, and as such are doing a great disservice to all students and their academic and emotional well-being.

From the National Institute for Direct Instruction, which is another organization that is eschewed and disdain by the K to 12 education establishment. “Underlying principles from research:
Fluency in lower order processes is necessary for success in higher order processes (e.g., decoding for comprehension, spelling for writing, tables for problem solving).
Practice is the key to fluency. e.g., knitting, topspin backhand, reading, spelling, writing.
Using skill is fun; acquiring skill (learning) may not be fun!.”  http://www.nifdi.org/news-latest-2/blog-hempenstall/390-feel-like-a-spell

Part 2 of 3

From a British educator, who fails to acknowledge the role of the education practices, the training of teachers and the progressive pedagogies. Insists that developmental dyslexia diagnoses disempowers both teachers and students, but than seriously questions if dyslexia exists by cherry picking the evidence that fits his hypothesis that direct instruction is best for students with reading difficulties. But than goes on to conclude, “But wrong or not, the best approached to dyslexia that I’ve come up with is not indulge sufferers in the belief that they are doomed, cursed or otherwise blighted by a condition over which they have no control. We all have ‘specific learning difficulties’ of one form or another and they’re never an excuse for not trying. We should always encourage students to overcome their difficulties and provide them with the tools to cope the curve balls their brains throw at them. For some having a label may be helpful, for others it’s most definitely not. My own experience suggests that patience, compassion and high expectations are the very best that a teacher can offer any student. And this seems to work, more often than not.”  A progressive solution where the underlying assumption the teachers have the knowledge bases and skills such as teaching the rules of grammar and spelling to their students with lower reading skills. http://www.learningspy.co.uk/featured/does-dyslexia-exist/

Please do read the above link, and the comments. It clearly shows the disconnection between the K to 12 education establishment and the 21st century research. In one comment - “Whether dyslexia exists is not the question – the way the label has been used, interpreted, misinterpreted and manipulated by others is the issue…”  Progressive educators, trained in progressive pedagogy are likely to believe that dyslexia does not exist, intelligence is fixed and there should be no effort and expense to correct the reading, writing and numeracy deficits for students with learning difficulties. I also noted a new excuse by cherry picking the cognitive science in areas of experiential and instructional deficit research. in response to “Reading and writing are not just cognitive activities – feelings run through them.’ (Barton 1994 p. 48)  & ‘Her reading problem was mostly the fear that she really couldn’t learn to read and the shame she would feel if this proved to be so.’ (Holt 1982 p. 37) & ‘While I was at school I was educated to feel shame and worthlessness, to feel doubt in my own abilities and self-hatred. I was educated to feel small and worthless.’ (Miles & Varma 1995 p. 65) & ‘It is their intelligent response to a perceived problem that appears to prevent them from developing normal reading behaviours.’” http://hugokerr.info/book.pdf

In the progressive school of discovery learning in he 21st century, instead of addressing the reading deficits of students by using prevention and corrective remediation practices, the educators teaches good mental health practices and strategies to improved learning for students. As I noted, on the UK side of the pond, they like the Canadian education establishment seems to think that reading struggles and other learning struggles are a result of emotional deficits and poor parenting skills. This is why the progressive K to 12 education establishment throughout the Commonwealth nations have serious reservations about the science on dyslexia, as they do with other invisible disabilities that impacts academic learning in the classroom.

As such, the K to 12 education establishment across the Commonwealth, Europe and United States continues to eschew all models of preventative practices that effectively prevents academic failure in the 3 Rs. The only reason why the British Dyslexia Association Association exists 40 years later, is because the K to 12 education establishment has allowed it to exist providing they do not stray from their goals, and do not do any effective political lobbying at the government levels, that would change teacher training and practices of the schools.  http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/101003/chapters/Who-Is-Really-Learning-Disabled¢.aspx

Part 3 of 3

Now consider this,  that the 21st century progressive K to 12 establishment have the political and social capital influence and power,  to ensure only innovations, practices and education theories must adapt to the progressive, discovery and child-centered that are based on philosophical beliefs that is rooted in the political theorems and thoughts of the political philosophies dating back to the caves of Plato. Progressive education methods and practices are all about student-directed learning, emphasis on skills, as opposed to knowledge, avoidance of strict discipline/morality teaching, and using the socio-economic background of students to dictate the academic results. The political philosophies are not only the stories of political systems and the subsets of various political topics that makes a government legitimate in the eyes of the citizens, but also has the how-tos to maintain authority and power over the people, that includes in ensuring that at least 50 % of the population are educated to lower literacy/numeracy skills and knowledge gaps. What better way to accomplish it, by using the progressive K to 12 education system to ensure 50 % if not more have lower literacy/numeracy skills and knowledge gaps. 

““Progressive education has been in the ascendency for nearly half a century, and has directly coincided with a prolonged crisis of poor behaviour and academic underachievement in British schools. It is high time we held it accountable for the effect it has had, and freed our schools from this burden of bad ideas.” The only way to break the progressive education ascendency, is to deep-sixed the education acts rooted in the political philosophies of legitimacy that are not based on any science, but rather on ideologies and beliefs that may or may not be based on the science of the day, and start from scratched based on the sciences in the learning, cognitive, neuroscience and child development fields. To do that, the political powers must be willing to stopped using the education model as their means for maintaining control and authority over its people. As for the educators, the teacher faculties must train teachers according to the science, and not some political premise such as, only 50 % of a given population are capable of acquiring academic skills, according to the social-income ranking of the individuals. Who are the 50 % capable of acquiring academic skills?  The higher social-income groups.

And yes Doug, I finally determined where the statement made by the lawyers for the school board, concerning the Moore ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada – that 50 % of all students will never reach average reading levels, came from. All thanks to the progressive pedagogy educationalists, who provided the historical material connecting the progressive pedagogy to the political philosophies. All to justified the ongoing practices of progressive pedagogy in the 21st century schools. In Canada, the K to 12 education establishment truly do believe that only 50 % of students in a given primary classroom, are capable of achieving average to above reading levels.

The people that are in those Asian nations are not poor they are richer than the UK students. Believe me I deal with them every day. Shanghai is the richest city in China. There is a reason China will only allow Shanghai, HK and Macau to be tested to date.

Nowra - about 16 million are wealthy enough to send their children to schools in NA. About 20 % out of the 1.4 billion population in China, are wealthy enough to send their children to NA schools. This is not counting the Chinese who are in the high income bracket, but still middle-class, if they saved their pennies - they too can send their children to NA schools.

Shanghai may be the richest city in China, but according to Forbes and others - has only 14.5 % of millionaires and place third for Chinese cities.

As for the rest of the Chinese, approximately 60 % are of the working class and below. The middle-class and above consists approximately 40 % and out of the 40 %, approximately half of the 40 %  are in the millionaire club and above income class. As for the 60 % working class, few students are able to go to high school, and instead start working in and around the age of 15.

One night while on a swimming meet I met up with a couple of Chinese fish buyers acting for a Chinese fish company. I had a very interesting chat with them. They were quite frank and open what was happening in China in areas of education and the economy. I than asked them why they were slumming in a motel where the price was right, but it be the last time I will ever go to. They laughed, the Chinese company pays for their accommodation and only the cheapest accommodation will do. The conversation after that, drifted into Newfoundland, fish and Canada. Quite friendly fellows, who offered to hold my umbrella as I retrieved the luggage in the pouring rain.