[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: TO

MB ... I do not doubt that you have done a good job with many things in your Connections curriculum. At the same time, I find your reasoning about standards and tests hopelessly and laughably schematized. Common Core standards and their predecessors didn't fragment and reduce learning to items on multiple-choice tests. Crappy and unimaginative teaching does that. And integrated curriculum is only a partial cure for that and could be defeated by teachers poorly prepared to work with it or looking for easy ways out in working with it.

My advice is to get off your soapbox about ignoring the enlightened thinkers of the past in favor of a 19th C industrial model of education and quit the phony arguments against standards and testing and stay with the curriculum and the skills and training teachers need to work with it effectively. All you're doing now is giving educators an easy way out by making standards and tests scapegoats for other problems in the profession.


-----Original Message-----
From: Marion Brady <mbrady22@cfl.rr.com>
To: arn-l <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Sun, Jan 29, 2012 5:59 am
Subject: Re: [arn-l] TO

>...Let me know when the crowds show up for your revival meeting.

How about you letting ME know when you're willing to move beyond sarcasm
to substance?

CONNECTIONS: INVESTIGATING REALITY is a product of decades of classroom
experimentation with students from 4th grade through adulthood. Most of the
hands-on activities in it were piloted nationwide by dozens of teachers in
all kinds of schools, with the considerable tab picked up by Prentice-Hall.
What ties the activities together--General Systems Theory--needs no defense
from me.

Internationally known scholars have been saying for hundreds of years
that sense can't be made of reality by fragmenting it and examining the
fragments, as the Common Core State Standards require.

Three publishers -- SUNY Press, Books For Educators, and Information Age
Publishing, have published books in which I've laid out the superiority of
organizing knowledge using the
approach we begin developing at birth and bring to school fully formed, over
the 19th Century approach that now shapes instruction. I've had articles
about it in more journals than I've bothered to count.

In a pre-publication review of my SUNY book, Dr. Philip L. Smith, (Ohio
State University) editor of SUNY's Philosophy of Education Series, wrote
editors that my argument was "a well-thought out, beautifully presented
defense of humanistic general education...an important manuscript both for
what it aspires to and how it accomplishes its goals."

Because I don't think (given their narrow, discipline-based training)
that most teachers can translate theory into a comprehensive, articulated,
extended instructional program, I'm offering, FREE, a course of study that
not only logically integrates all knowledge, but does it in a way that any
adolescent can understand and immediately put to work.

Here's a link. Attack the program, not those of us who think there's room
for improving American education.


Substance, Art, SUBSTANCE! Change my mind about you.


Unsubscribe ARN-L: