I think far too often politicians, school leaders and society at large focus on the what and how of schools and education. What should be taught and how it should be taught.
Too little attention is given to why.
European didactics is the why what and how of pedagogy - and I think it is vital we take on board all of these questions. I ask the same questions when it comes to play too - why this play, what is happening in the play, what can children do in their play, what role does the adult have on their play etc and how are children playing, how are they allowed to play, how does their play respond to the environment, materials and lessons we provide? Of course there are many more questions to ask - about play, learning, teaching and understanding - in order to create both play and learning flow.
But the why is so important from a collective point of view. How can we find a why that we can all stand behind, and not only stand behind but also motivates teachers, learners and all those involved in the care/welfare of children?
I keep thinking of the old saying that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. This is the same with education. We can lead children to an educational experience but we can’t make them learn - many try through force and fear tactics - but this is not deep or meaningful learning - and maybe the real learning that is happening is not the subject content but how to survive the situation. Yes, the child might retain the information short term, but there is a risk it will not become long term knowledge.
By having a great why - children will also be motivated to learn. I look back on my youngest’s education and the question he asked the most was “why do I have to do this?” and the answer he most often received from school was - so you can get grades, which can then help you get the next stage of life. Until the next stage of life was literally upon him, this made zero sense to him, and was unable to motivate him as to why he needed to do things he considered uninteresting. His brain was not telling him to learn what the school was leading him to.
Yesterday I shard how the Swedish school system intends to make the preschool class for six year olds into the new first grade in 2028. Thus thrusting young children into a formalised education one year earlier. The why of the preschool class is being ignored - a bridge between preschool and school, a hope that it could inspire schools to be more playful.
But that was doomed to fail when the early years, play, and young children are not valued in the same way as school, teaching and older children. So instead of infusing schools with a more holistic approach to education, a schoolification of the early years happened instead. Pushing down ever younger. This, of course is not just a Swedish dilemma, but a worldwide dilemma.
I know many places in the world have looked to Sweden to show that earlier is not better - and in the last few years when I have shared that Sweden intends to go in the opposite direction of what educators and researchers in the rest of the world are pushing for - the information is always met with shock. Why would Sweden take play and autonomy away from children when the rest of the world is fighting to give it to their children?
And why would Sweden take play and autonomy away from children when they have made the UN Children’s Rights law - surely this would then be breaking the law?
While on the topic of the UN Rights of Children - there is a part that I have always been frustrated with - the fact that Sweden has translated article 28 to mean that school is obligatory for children to attend rather than it being obligatory for countries/states to provide free primary education for all children. Sweden is not alone in making school obligatory. The problem is that is the why of the school is neither motivating or inclusive it becomes a place where not all children can acquire an education. This means for children who refuse to go to school because they are unable to for the sake of their own mental health, or some other valid reason - are labelled the problem rather than the school system that fails to be a place where all children can both thrive and learn.
I think, this too, is a worldwide phenomena. The why of school is no longer relevant or meaningful for teachers and learners to be fully motivated. If we look into history school like education has been something for the privileged - prior to that there were lots of apprenticeships where learning was more hands on, and embedded with work. Early schools for the working class was more about preparing them for factory work than it was to prepare them for a life where they could freely choose.
I recently read a book on the history of children in Stockholm - and sadly its not so different from other western industrial countries - the rich didn’t like the poor children hanging out on streets when their parents were forced to work long hours in order to afford to barely live. So instead of increasing the wages and standard of living of their parents (heaven forbid profits should be interfered with) they designed charities and other options that could round up the children and make them useful - the precursor to wrap around care in Stockholm were a form of workhouse where children would train in some sort of profession suitable to their standing in life, and get a meal (girls got less food because apparently females needed less food than boys).
Schools did not arise out of the why to educate children so that they could become anything - the arose to ensure children learned what was needed to maintain the status quo.
The question is - is this the why we still want? Has this why actually been rooted out - or is it still there as the foundation of school just with different buildings on top? And can a school be safe if the foundations are wrong?
Schools have become slaves to grades - ways to prove to the world that children are learning. But of course a holistic education has many elements that are not measurable. So they get squeezed out in favour of those that can be measured. This means teaching is not about children learning for life, but is about passing the test. This is about information not knowledge.
Then there is PISA - this means the school systems in each country around the world are being graded. And instead of focusing on how children can learn and thrive - countries are focussed on their ranking. Grades that do not, can not measure, creativity, inventiveness, resourcefulness, curiosity, social competence etc - all skills current workplaces are asking for… and what research is saying are the skills needed for an unknown future.
It is short term thinking about education. And it’s not just a Swedish thing.
Education is always political. Politics decided the curriculum, school start, when testing starts, accessibility, inclusion, how many teachers can be afforded, what resources can be afforded - what books are allowed etc etc. But whether left or right or in the middle - they all seem to be failing children - and therefore our collective future.
please add comments, links, questions