Comments on: The Ability Paradigm http://bengrey.com/blog/2008/11/the-ability-paradigm/ Standing on the verge of a technologically educational revolution. Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:13:22 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Alternative Learning Organization » Education - The Importance of Questioning the System http://bengrey.com/blog/2008/11/the-ability-paradigm/comment-page-1/#comment-99 Alternative Learning Organization » Education - The Importance of Questioning the System Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:04:04 +0000 http://bengrey.com/blog/?p=44#comment-99 [...] Limitations A piece that essentially addresses the insidiousness of NCLB, “The Ability Paradigm,” resonated beginning with the very first [...] [...] Limitations A piece that essentially addresses the insidiousness of NCLB, “The Ability Paradigm,” resonated beginning with the very first [...]

]]> By: Education - The Importance of Questioning the System » Learning Freely Network http://bengrey.com/blog/2008/11/the-ability-paradigm/comment-page-1/#comment-98 Education - The Importance of Questioning the System » Learning Freely Network Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:52:11 +0000 http://bengrey.com/blog/?p=44#comment-98 [...] Limitations A piece that essentially addresses the insidiousness of NCLB, “The Ability Paradigm,” resonated beginning with the very first [...] [...] Limitations A piece that essentially addresses the insidiousness of NCLB, “The Ability Paradigm,” resonated beginning with the very first [...]

]]> By: Education - The Importance of Questioning the System — Open Education http://bengrey.com/blog/2008/11/the-ability-paradigm/comment-page-1/#comment-94 Education - The Importance of Questioning the System — Open Education Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:04:34 +0000 http://bengrey.com/blog/?p=44#comment-94 [...] Limitations A piece that essentially addresses the insidiousness of NCLB, “The Ability Paradigm,” resonated beginning with the very first [...] [...] Limitations A piece that essentially addresses the insidiousness of NCLB, “The Ability Paradigm,” resonated beginning with the very first [...]

]]> By: Ira Socol http://bengrey.com/blog/2008/11/the-ability-paradigm/comment-page-1/#comment-49 Ira Socol Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:41:13 +0000 http://bengrey.com/blog/?p=44#comment-49 This is the problem with our entire structure of education - the very nature of ranking students, of measuring all against a single standard, is a belief system based in Calvinism and Mercantilism (market Capitalism) which has nothing to do with humanity or human potential. No, no one can "grow up to be whatever they want to be." (I usually illustrate this by saying that no matter what I do, I'll never be able to reach the top shelves in the market without some "assistive technology" - like a ladder, a grabber, or climbing on the lower shelves). Humans are not born the same, and they can not follow the same paths even if they are to end up in the same place. School is about two ideas - one is conversion - the changing students from who they are into who we want them to be. The other is industrial processing, the repeated stamping of students to change them into the product we need them to be. In both cases failure is the student's fault - they are insufficiently holy (Calvinism, destined for Hell), or they are flawed raw materials (Industrialism, unsuited for the manufacturing process). The idea that people would find pleasure in their own capabilities, in the way your post concludes, is antithetical to both of these purposes of school. This is the problem with our entire structure of education – the very nature of ranking students, of measuring all against a single standard, is a belief system based in Calvinism and Mercantilism (market Capitalism) which has nothing to do with humanity or human potential. No, no one can “grow up to be whatever they want to be.” (I usually illustrate this by saying that no matter what I do, I’ll never be able to reach the top shelves in the market without some “assistive technology” – like a ladder, a grabber, or climbing on the lower shelves). Humans are not born the same, and they can not follow the same paths even if they are to end up in the same place.

School is about two ideas – one is conversion – the changing students from who they are into who we want them to be. The other is industrial processing, the repeated stamping of students to change them into the product we need them to be. In both cases failure is the student’s fault – they are insufficiently holy (Calvinism, destined for Hell), or they are flawed raw materials (Industrialism, unsuited for the manufacturing process).

The idea that people would find pleasure in their own capabilities, in the way your post concludes, is antithetical to both of these purposes of school.

]]> By: Brendan http://bengrey.com/blog/2008/11/the-ability-paradigm/comment-page-1/#comment-31 Brendan Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:23:28 +0000 http://bengrey.com/blog/?p=44#comment-31 Nice analogy, I sometimes wonder if NCLB is trying to set a bottom standard that 80% of students should cross without thinking and 100% of students can pass with help or if they are setting a true standards. In which case around 20% of students should fail to meet those standards in a given test cycle. Is it a case of T-ball where everyone gets to bat and no one keeps score or is it real competition with winners and losers? Nice analogy,

I sometimes wonder if NCLB is trying to set a bottom standard that 80% of students should cross without thinking and 100% of students can pass with help or if they are setting a true standards. In which case around 20% of students should fail to meet those standards in a given test cycle.
Is it a case of T-ball where everyone gets to bat and no one keeps score or is it real competition with winners and losers?

]]>