PEI's Education Crisis - The Well Curve perspective

The OECD ranked PEI last in Canada in educational attainment. The premier announced that he will form a task force to find out what is going on.

This is a plea to look beneath the surface.

Broadly in Canada, about 30-40% of kids fail to make it through school at all and a smaller fraction go on to post secondary. In any system with this much 'wastage' there has to be a systemic problem not solvable by tweaking or accusing teachers of not trying hard enough. Nor can we blame the kids as we tend to.

I think that the systemic issue is one of engagement.

Sitting quietly and receiving the "word" from the teacher as a passive process does not work any more in a world where kids are exposed to so many distractions. TV and fast food have a huge part to play in disconnecting kids from passive process. The roots of these influences are in the home. What we can control is what happens at school.

What happens at school is that we have system works for an ever smaller group of the whole. Over time, kids progressively get labeled as poor learners. This weeding process accelerates as the children pass up the system so that by grade 10 only a small group fit. We have a system that purports to serve all kids but in reality discards most by grade 10.

This image, devised by Daniel Pink of Free Agency fame has a clue for me as to where to look. It is called a Well Curve and is the value opposite of the Bell Curve.

The idea of the Well Curve is that the worst place to be in any system is in the middle. In a business context there is a market for cheap and cheerful and for luxury, but the middle ground is a nightmare. Follow the link for Daniel's excellent explanation. Snip:

The implications are huge: insurers, marketers, and policy-makers may be basing decisions on faulty premises about what is normal. They're assuming a vibrant center - Middle America, middlebrow tastes - when the action has migrated to the edges. The 180 from bell curve to well curve has turned their logic on its head.
Our school system is firmly rooted in the middle ground. What does this mean? It means that in the middle are only a few kids. Most of the kids are on the wings.

So if you are part of the large group of inquisitive kids on the left side of the curve - like my son James who left school aged 14 as a result - you feel oppressed by the boring droning and the forced silence of the pedagogy. You are penalized as trouble maker for asking questions or worse by questioning the authority of the teacher. Result - You act out or shut down.

If you are part of the other large group that is not at ease with symbolic thinking you inhabit the right hand side of the surve. Being a concrete and experienced based learner, you are turned off by the abstract and meaningless reliance on ideas that make no sense in the context of an active world. You too act out or shut down.

The result is that most of the kids and nearly all of the boys act out or shut down. What about the girls?

Generalization follows. Why are girls doing better than boys? Do you doubt that they are? Over 70% of freshman at UPEI this year are women! I think that an answer is to found in the differing world view of young men and young women. Girls are doing better than boys because they fit the system as we offer it better. Why? I think that it is because women have a powerful urge to fit in socially when they are young. Boys on the other hand have to find themselves as individuals more. They have to break away. Consequently they have a deep need to be physically active, to question and to feel relevance. This need does not fit the highly socially compliant culture of our school system. With no physical outlet to use up a lot of their energy boys cannot focus in such a passive system.

Boys need for engagement is evidenced by the powerful appeal of gaming. Gaming has overtaken action movies for boys. Why - because they have an innate desire to be involved actively and to be challenged. For boys, interactivity wins out over passivity. Challenge wins over ease. Anyone whose son skateboards or games knows the huge investment that their boy will put on his own volition into learning about something that he is engaged with.

Our fault is not our children it is how we "see" the process of learning at school.

Please I beg of you stop thinking about the tests and think about engagement.

"We can't do that" you say, "there are too many risks" The facts are clear - what we do now does not work. Doing what we do now harder will fail for sure.

On the other hand there is lots of evidence that when kids follow what they want to learn that they do well. I have one anecdotal story of my own. I am sure that you have similar stories your self. James gave up the formal school system and focused only on art. Is he now illiterate. No he is exceptionally literate. Does he have no math skills - no his are of a post grad level. Is he socially inept - no he is very attuned to how he affects the world. he got to this place by finding his bliss - for him it was art, and then adding in the other parts so that he could excels in his chosen field. Is he poor and dependent on his parents and the system? No he has been economically viable since he was 18.

Can we try an experiment? Can we set up one school on PEI where the kids can choose what they want to do and then we pile in and help them get there. It would be likely that such as school, would have a string bias towards the arts of all types. This does not have to be big at first. See it as a living experiment. Do we have a precedent? yes we do. PEI has a great music program. Question for Superintendent - how well do the music kids do compared to any other group? I bet you dinner Sandy at the place of your choice that they do better than most. I bet that we have more than anecdotal evidence that kids who are engaged somewhere will do well generally. We can build on a solid foundation of proven achievment in our own system

Simply working the system that does not work harder or tweaking it is a guarantee that we will not reverse the tide of misery and failure that our current system produces for so many.

Comments

[Cyn]

PEI has another precedent, other than the music program. There is one school on PEI attempting to offer an alternative, Full Circle Co-operative School:
http://users.eastlink.ca/%7efullcirclecoop/index1.html

I know some the kids who have come out of this school, and they are vibrant, smart, engaging young people. Full Circle is small, but it's a start.

[Nils]

One of the inherent problems in moving towards any kind of monumental change - and I think it's clear to anyone that we're not talking about "tweaks" here - is that the people who would be expected to implement the change have built their careers through the system as it exists today.

In all likelihood, the result will be a "circle the wagons" mentality and a "don't throw out the baby with the bathwater" approach. In other words, defensive administrators acting as sea anchors to brake any momentum in a direction that they feel threatens their careers. Nobody wants to be "old school" when "new school" gets promoted to Deputy Minister.

I'm not saying that what you're recommending is wrong - in fact, quite the opposite. It seems to me the very model of what needs to happen. Nor am I saying it shouldn't be pushed forward and pursued. But consider:

To establish such a school, you'd need substantial support - both economic and philosophical - from the Provincial Government. Problem one: Many older people - with their gauzy memories of the good old days - won't see why their taxpayer dollars should go to fund one of those "crazy new-type schools, when what they really need is to bring back the strap and theach the damn 3 Rs!.

Problem two: the government would, of course, put this new school in the purview of the Department of Education, which is staffed at all levels by what I'll call SQAs - Status Quo Administrators, who built careers based on the old model. First one in the meeting to say "What we need to do is keep what works while ..." wins a prize.

Problem three: if there's no financial commitment from the Province, the school becomes an elitist enclave for parents who can afford to send little Jimmy or Joanie to private school. Those parents are likely to expect their adorable genius children to go onward to University. All well and good, but (problem four) the University hasn't shown us that it has elastic requirements for entrance (although the standards seem to have a little give).

Maybe I'm wrong, but I can see a University registrar holding out a set of marks at arm's length with a "What's that smell?" expression when confronted with a curriculum that includes "Grand Theft Auto 301" or "Death Metal Studies 302".

(Incidently, I'm not being facetious - I think study of computer games is legitimate, and I bet somewhere in some school of music there IS a course about Death Metal. But would a registrar accept those courses as admissable? Since the registrar is, in all likelyhood, an SQA - probably not.)

Rob, I'm absolutely with you when you make the points about engaging students. How much easier it would be on students, teachers, parents ... everyone, if kids woke up in the morning bursting with joy that today is NOT a snow day and they get to go to school. And I think, given the right kind of school, that could happen.

Am I optimistic that such a school could exist in a world ruled by SQAs? Not so much.

[Jeremy]

Great post, Rob. How does this vision differ from what you've seen and heard from Chris Corrigan with their homeschooling community and resource center? More structure, more support?

[Alan]

Is it not possible you are answering another question. PEI came last in a national (and international) test of schooling. If, for example, Alberta or Finland came first, why come up with the made-in-PEI-solution when all you really need to accept that someone else is doing it better already, being the jurisdictions ahead of you. Go copy that program or the bits you can take on. Forget invention. Plagerize!

Even better, if the PEI Department of Education can't or doesn't get it, outsource the management of the Department to the Province of Alberta or Ontario. Maybe the problem is a tiny community trying to compete with larger systems without the resources to do. If you can't beat them, join them.

[Harold Jarche]

I agree with Nils' comment on SQA's but I'm not sure about university registrars' rejecting atypical graduates. I came across a comment recently (I'll look for the link) that universities in the US were more open to accepting home schooled applicants than those from the public system. Not sure what the case is in Canada. Any registrars out there?

[Robert Paterson]

Do we accept that we cannot move forward?
Alan - Alberta is only a bit better and the problem is all over North America and in the UK where the top down behave pedagogy has control.

I agree with Nils that reform inside an established organization is all but impossible

So guys - what do we do other than complain and regret that we can do nothing?

I

[Robert Paterson]

Here is how the US sees the problem - they are worried too
http://www.expansionmanagement.com/smo/newsviewer/default.asp?cmd=articledetail&articleid=16228&st=3%

[Cyn]

To say that we can do nothing, is omitting what others have already done, ie: Full Circle School.
Build on what's already good.
And I disagree, reform within an existing system IS possible. To say that change can only occur from the top down is over generalizing. Yes, those in power are stuck back in some other time zone, but those who are empower-able are the foot soldiers. The ones who actually do the work. If we can start at the bottom and work up who's to say the result wouldn't be as desireable.

[Harold Jarche]

Yes, Cynthia, you can reform existing systems, but having worked within these, it's a lot of bashing your head against brick walls.

Rob said a while back that "I am beginning to think that this may be the great work - to build the alternatives rather than to try and reform the existing system." I would take that as supporting Full Circle and other alternatives, to show to the world how well they work.

My pragmatic self would then ask - Do these schools need volunteers to augment the curriculum? Do they need money? Do they need in-kind donations?

[Robert Paterson]

Funny you should say that H - later on Cyn called Full Circle and they are now talking about a role for Cyn

[Nils]

I've been reading the work of Thom Hartmann - he's come up with a new way to look at ADD, and it feels germaine to this thread.

Traditionally, ADD has been looked at as a ... well, deficit. As something "wrong" with the person who has it. Hartmann postulates - and it makes utter sense to me - that ADD is in fact, vestigal inherited traits that remain from the earliest time of man. He identifies people with ADD as "Hunters" and those without it as "Farmers".

You can see how such traits as alertness, curiosity, energy, the ability to take in and process all the information around you, and the ability to shift focus instantly can be useful to a hunter. It is only when the hunter is put in a setting designed for farmers that the hunter runs into problems.

Schools, says Hartmann, are invariably run to meet the needs of "Farmers" - kids whose inherited genetic makeup is more suited to a placid, static learning environment. These children focus resolutely on tasks, finish one task before moving on to the next, and are less easily distracted than the "Hunters" (kids with ADD).

I won't delve into the details of Hartmann's "Hunter" theory (check out www.thomhartmann.com if you're interested), except to say that a) it's an eye-opener for people like me who have been plagued their whole lives by boredom in setting like schools and business environments. It also means that b) I can shake some of the lifetime of criticism directed at me, because this view of people with ADD is far less judgemental and negative - in fact, it celebrates some of the characteristics that have been so troublesome over the years.

So, why is this germaine to this thread? Because a school has been established in New Hampshire called The Hunter School which addresses the very issues you so elequently outline. Check it out: http://www.hunterschool.org/

You may (or may not) acknowledge that it's possible James had undiagnosed ADD. (I actually recoil at the term "undiagnosed" because it once again implies "pathology" where in fact, it's nothing more than "difference"). He sounds like a Hunter to me - creative, energetic, multi-talented, wide variety of interests, energy in hue bursts ... all those attributes which make convention schools a deathtrap but which, if harnessed, make Hunters the leaders of the world.

[Nils]

And here's a more useful link to Thom Hartmann's work in the field of ADD: http://thomhartmann.com/home-add.shtml

[Robert Paterson]

What a gold mine Nils - you are so generous - thanks

I wonder, if there is going to be this task force, could we ask to speak?

I am more than nervous that few deeep questions will be asked. If we cannot speak formally - could we consider holding a press conference as an alternative. I am reluctant simply to bleat on my blog and not do something.

Any ideas as to what might work best?

[Nils]

My first thought is - where do they draw the task force from? Presenting to a task force is not nearly as effective as working within it ...

I'm not so concerned about having to answer deep questions. I don't think anyone has presented him or herself as a source of definitive knowledge. We're covering new ground, and if the task force doesn't realize that, then the questions they ask won't matter much anyway.

Let's make some calls ...

As for bleating on your blog ... leading an informed, empassioned discussion hardly constitutes "bleating" ...

[Harold Jarche]

very interesting point on ADD. A good friend of mine has ADD and is one of the best military helicopter pilots arounds. Flying a military helicopter involves constant multi-tasking - with three to four radios to monitor, infrared systems, missile warning systems, various flying instruments, both hands and most of your fingers controlling specific levers, as well as your feet on the pedals. It's like chewing gum and juggling while balancing on a ball.

I guess it's all about perspective, and I think that we are advancing whenever we move away from a "one size fits all" system.

Good luck with task force!

[Stephen Harlow]

Thank you Robert, your blog is a well of inspiration. If you are not already aware, you might be interested in the ideas of William Draves and Julie Coates. Coincidently they have just blogged about schools' tendency to teach to the mean. They maintain a website for their book, Nine Shift, and a blog. I've written about the connections between your ideas, as I see them, on my blog. Your comments would be most welcome.

Regards
Stephen

[NineShift]

Great post Robert. We have discovered why boys get worse grades than girls, and thus why only 35% of college graduates today are boys/men.

You list many of the reasons. We know that turning in homework late is a major cause in the gap in grades (girls turn it in on time; boys are apt to not turn it in on time). And we're exploring a) the hard wiring (neurology, biology, etc.) why this is so; and b) Really looking for data on what happens when there is no penalty for late homework. Do grades equalize between boys and girls? More later. Keep up the great blog.

[Robert Paterson]

I am so bucked up as I discover how extensive the thinking is about where we can go. As you can see by the comments here, I think that we have enough energy here to begin to act

Good luck and best wishes to you as well
Rob

[Bob DeRoche]

I visited PEI to see my grandparents birthplace and where they spent their early years. In reading the comments on PEI education, I wonder if there is a difference in achievement of students who are of French ancestry vs those who are not? Perhaps this is not an issue or maybe the Frech population is not large enough to make a difference. Does anyone know?