10 minutes, a clarity that does not come from reading it or only hearing it. This was a much better clip than I expected. These are arguments most of us have heard, but now also are put into pictures that feed several of our senses simultaneously. It is astounding how much more one connects with and remembers a speaker's talking points if it is accompanied by moving pictures. At least, I found it engrossing, and watched several of the other (similarly animated) clips by the same company (out of the U.K.).

Posted by: Millie at October 17, 2011 11:53 PM

I loved the concreteness of the way the drawings on the whiteboard is made. Quite enjoyable. Quite entertaining. That's about it.

He declares that common (mis)perceptions are true and argues from there without justification. But if you buy this entertainment as good policy or true, you've been snookered.

He argues that the promise of education was the promise to get a job. He is wrong. The history of education was not to get a job but to find truths -- to be educated. So much of what is now considered math and science was the core of philosophy! This history has been handed down to us in an ever so obvious way. A PhD is Doctor of Philosophy, and it doesn't matter if one earned this terminal degree in Chemistry, Math, English, engineering.

Education was meant for the elite, until the turn of the 20th Century. Being educated meant not having dirt under your fingernails; the burdens of living were to be carried out by servants and skilled artisans.

It is SIR Ken Robinson, so I take as given his lack of knowledge of the American perspective on education. A few quotations of Thomas Jefferson might enlighten those who would otherwise be persuaded by this video:

1786 August 13. (to George Wythe) "I think by far the most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised, for the preservation of freedom and happiness...Preach, my dear Sir, a crusade against ignorance; establish & improve the law for educating the common people. Let our countrymen know that the people alone can protect us against these evils [tyranny, oppression, etc.] and that the tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance."

Or

1816 January 6. (to Charles Yancey) "If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be."

Or, most thoroughly

1818 August 4. "The objects of this primary eduction [university education] determine its character and limits. These objects are To give to every citizen the information he needs for the transaction of his own business; To enable him to calculate for himself, and to express and preserve his ideas, his contracts and accounts, in writing; To improve by reading, his morals and faculties; To understand his duties to his neighbors and country, and to discharge with competence the functions confided to him by either; To know his rights; to exercise with order and justice those he retains; to choose with discretion the fiduciary of those he delegates; and to notice their conduct with diligence, with candor and judgement; And, in general, to observe with intelligence and faithfulness all the social relations under which he shall be placed. To instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests and duties, as men and citizens, being then the objects of education in the primary schools, whether privet or public, in them should be taught reading, writing and numerical arithmetic, the elements of mensuration...and the outlines of geography and history."

Ken Robinson's presentation works to persuade the un(der)educated. Too bad. His technique is good but for a bad purpose.

Those telling truths and teaching truths using his style of presentation can learn something seeing this video. It would seem to be quite effective; I would hope Salman Kahn of Kahn Academy would model Robinson's technique for his videos, as this style of presentation would substantially improve the Kahn videos, for example.

Anyway, Robinson's diatribes on education generally, and ADHD, information overload, industrial revolution, factory education models, divergent and convergent thinking are quite pathetic and wrong.

Posted by: Larry Winkler at October 18, 2011 2:59 PM

"The history of education was not to get a job but to find truths -- to be educated."

Actually, the historical point of (widespread, public) education in the United States was not originally to find truths, but, indeed, to get a job. The whole point of public education (not older, elite education) was to educate people just enough to get them to be good employees. That is the basis of his whole premise of the "factory of education".
One reason the industrialists had so much power at the turn of the 20th century was this presumption to educate the masses just enough to make them good employees, but not enough for them to realize they were being taken advantage of. I do appreciate the quotations you shared. They are telling in their portrayal of the speakers, but maybe not so much in their portrayal of actual education at the time (no such thing as free, public education available to the masses in the time of George Washington - if you couldn't help pay for the teacher's wages, you didn't get to go to school).

Maybe in the longer view, education was as noble as you first purport, but since the 20th century at least, it has indeed been "get a job". Now, it cannot even do that well. His other points are arguable, certainly - I never claim anyone should accept whole what someone else puts forth as opinion - but I doubt that any one of us could correctly label them fundamentally wrong. They are opinions, and not presented as fact with citations and the like.
Another modern problem of the Internet. Young people who do not know what it was like to look something up before Google often assume that if it is on the Internet, it is presented as fact, and, therefore, must be true. Blogs, much of Wikipedia, etc. are not typically full of citations for "facts".

Posted by: Millie at November 1, 2011 3:45 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:

Remember personal info?
YesNo
Comments: