|
Kritiek van de hoofdinspecteur onderwijs in Engeland op de
ontscholing ("child-centred" teaching methods) van het onderwijs vanaf
ide jaren 1970. De ontscholing ging gepaard met de invoering van
comprehensief onderwijs.
(Passage uit The Telegraph: Ofsted
chief attacks 'mediocrity and failure' in comprehensives Sir Michael Wilshaw,
Ofsted's chief inspector, says the damaging legacy of 70s-style trendy teaching
still exists in too many mixed-abilit
De huidige hoofdinspecteur, Sir Michael, the former head of
Mossbourne Community Academy in Hackney, east London, taught in inner-London
comprehensives from the late 60s when many schools were engaged in an
ideological battle between supporters of traditional and
"child-centred" teaching methods.
He said that in many
schools "intellectual excellence was sacrificed on the altar of social
equality. To strive, to compete, to achieve was considered reactionary".
"To show respect
was craven," he added. "To expect obedience was oppressive. Rules,
competitive sport, professional dress, uniforms were all too often ditched.
"Head teachers
were encouraged to pander to their staff and to their pupils. They were
expected to be a friend not a leader. Some even styled themselves 'convener'
rather than head. 'Call me Pete,' one urged his pupils. "I can assure you none of my students
ever called me 'Mike'."
Sir Michael said the
education system needed to find head teachers who were "prepared to
challenge the orthodoxies that have damaged education over the past 40
years" to enable more state schools in the 21st century to succeed.
He said that large
numbers of comprehensives provide a "demanding intellectual
education" for their pupils but many others "do the opposite". "They still indulge in attitudes and
practices that are far from exceptional and are a throwback to the 60s and
70s," he said. "'Informal' or individualised learning' is a case in
point.
"This
once-fashionable concept was based on the belief that children learn best by
self-discovery; that criticism and adult supervision stifle youthful
creativity.
"Its legacy still lingers in some schools today:
academic rigour is undervalued; basic literacy and numeracy are neglected;
subject specialism is relegated in favour of cross-curricula muddle. Its echoes
are particularly apparent in the continued resistance to exams and any form of
meaningful qualification."
He also attacked
teachers who claim there is more to education than testing, saying that schools
who fail to properly prepare pupils for GCSEs risked saddling them with
"four less useful letters" - NEET (not in employment, education or
training).
Sir Michael also said that head teachers have to confront
parents who refuse to take responsibility for their children, saying too many
comprehensives "ignored this partnership" which
"infantilised" large numbers of mothers and fathers.
In further comments,
Sir Michael insisted that schools "must accept that discipline is not a
dirty word", saying that too many teachers refuse to impose high standards
of behaviour.
"A good
comprehensive school is a well-disciplined school where important rules are
non-negotiable," he said. "Children are happiest in a school that is
calm and well ordered and where they feel safe. Its the only environment in
which learning can flourish. Without it, teaching becomes impossible, learning
dissolves, staff become disillusioned and too often leave."
|
