The “qualities” of the learners, that’s what it’s all about.
The passage just below is taken from the Considerations on Representative Government by John Stuart Mill. I found it in Peter Berkowitz’s Introduction to his book, Virtue and the Making of Modern Liberalism.
“If we ask ourselves on what causes and conditions good government in all its senses, from the humblest to the most exalted, depends, we find that the principal of them, the one which transcends all others, is the qualities of the human beings composing the society over which the government is exercised.”
We might make a few changes to Mill’s words and write our version as follows:
“If we ask ourselves on what causes and conditions education in all its forms, from the humblest vocational classroom to the most accelerated advanced placement English or Molecular Biology lesson, depends, we find that the principal cause or condition, the one which transcends all the others, are the qualities of the learners comprising the student body on whom the education would take effect.”
When we talk about improving our public schools, when we talk about school reform as we seem to do endlessly, we should always begin with the students, the particular students of the particular school community intended to be the object of our reforms. But we don’t do this.
Instead, and much too often, we talk about all sorts of other things, the teachers, teaching certificates, teacher preparation, professional development and such. We talk about the curriculum, the schedule, the length of the classes and the school day. We talk about the physical condition of the school itself, about the peeling paint, the poor lighting, and we talk about the families and the neighborhoods where the students live when they are not in school.
Education to take effect has to begin, not with any of these things, but with the object of all our efforts, with the learner, in particular with Mill’s “qualities,” with the interests and talents of the learner. And since these are not evenly distributed among the learners the learners or students will differ widely, in respect to them, among themselves.
But the root cause of most of our school problems doesn’t stem from the differences among our students, but from the fact that our schools and classrooms are not structured to take into account these differences. The teacher is reaching only a few of her students, at best, at any one time —the different levels of understanding among the students confronting her means that she loses the attention of most them most of the time.
Dropping out of school is a healthy response of a good number of those who are no longer listening. Remaining in school, but not paying attention, is more common.
Read any one of tens of thousands of school mission statements to see just how far our vision for the schools is removed from the reality of the students. Here is a typical statement from New Rochelle, NY:
“The mission of the New Rochelle School System is to produce responsible, self-sufficient citizens who possess the self-esteem, initiative, skills, and wisdom to continue individual growth, pursue knowledge, develop aesthetic sensibilities, and value cultural diversity by providing intellectually challenging educational programs that celebrate change but affirm tradition and promote excellence through an active partnership with the community, a comprehensive and responsive curriculum, and a dedicated and knowledgeable staff.”
It should be clear that the school mission statement is rarely, if ever, what the school, any school is all about. Yet we go on making these statements, and the students, too many of them in too many schools go on simply not listening to us, not paying attention to what the school leaders would have us believe is the school’s mission.
And there’s only one solution, and that’s to begin with the “qualities” of the “human beings,” with the talents and interests of the students, with the learners themselves.
