Stages of Life Coaches

April 30, 2008

Materials to Use in an Early Childhood Education Program

7620691_2 Increasingly we're seeing early childhood education programs veering toward formal academic learning.  This is a distressing trend, inasmuch as it makes young children do things (formal reading and math, computer instruction) that they are not developmentally ready for, and that take precious time away from letting children be children.  There are no critical periods in early childhood during which a child must have exposure to formal reading and math, or computers, or they will never develop these capacities later in life.  However, there are only these few precious years of life when the child's brain is buzzing away at twice the metabolic level of an adult, and when the young child is open to a wide range of perceptions, senses, feelings, and other experiences.  If you fill the young child's time with academic activities and other preparations for elementary school, then you take away something that can never again be reclaimed:  the magical years of play.  Every early childhood education program should have free play as its central focus.  Anything less than this is developmentally inappropriate, threatens to deprive the child of a solid multi-sensory experiential foundation for all future learning, and causes deterioration in brain connections that are related to art, music, nature, intuition, social interaction, physical expression, and a range of other culturally-valued domains.  Here is just a sampling of the kinds of materials that should be in any early childhood education program.

Linguistic:  children’s books of all kinds, magazines for cut out, alphabet letters of different sizes and shapes, storytelling area, drawing implements and paper to practice emergent literacy; alphabet stamps, dolls that speak in different languages, word blocks, magnetic letters;

Logical-mathematical:  things to count, sort and classify (e.g. buttons, coins, rocks, color swatches), number blocks of different sizes and shapes, scale to weigh things, measuring tape, measuring cups, calendars, clocks, and other time-related materials, cash register, play computer, magnets, lacing, beads, pattern puzzles, pattern blocks, abacus;

Spatial:  pictures of all kinds, drawing, painting, and collage  (paint, colored chalk, pens, collage materials, paste, play dough etc.); easels, puzzles, pegboards, parquetry sets, telescope, microscope, different colored materials to look through, maps, geometric shapes, cameras;

Musical:  percussion instruments, electronic keyboard, drums, auto harp and other stringed instruments, music to listen to, containers with “mystery sounds”; stage for karaoke, everyday materials to create their own musical instruments (e.g. cardboard tubes, oatmeal box etc.), stethoscope to listen to things with;

Bodily-kinesthetic -  hands-on manipulatives;  dry sandbox with age appropriate toys (including bulldozers, small shovels, and other sand processers);  wet sandbox; building materials (e.g. large legos, large wooden blocks, stacking blocks etc.), water table with cups, pans, cans, (to play “sink or float” etc.), gymnastic equipment,  housekeeping toys (e.g. broom, dust pan etc.), balance beam, jump rope, tricycles and other transportation vehicles, ballgames, clay and mud areas, carpentry equipment and work bench, space to run, jump, and climb on ropes, ladders, nets, trees; building materials to create forts and other play spaces, containers with mystery tactile experiences, little doctor’s kit, space to dance, bean bags;

Interpersonal -  household furniture, dress-up clothes for make-believe, doll house, dolls and stuffed animals of all kinds, miniature figures for play, puppets and puppet theater, stage for impromptu drama, board games, materials for creating playing at store, farm, village, or other social institutions;  parachute, huge ball, tunnels, miniature vehicles, action figures, walkie-talkies;

Intrapersonal:  private spaces to be alone, recorder to record voice, mirrors, sand play with miniature people, objects, houses to create worlds;

Naturalist:  aquarium, terrarium, class pet, outside garden, indoor plants, materials for measuring weather (e.g. weather vane, rain gauge etc.), binoculars for bird watching, gardening equipment, miniature farms, and farm animals;

Tasting and Smelling:  cooking and baking opportunities with an adult,  containers with mystery smells; child-sized kitchen play area.

For more information about developmentally appropriate practices for early childhood education, go to the website of the Association for Childhood Education International

February 11, 2008

Great Quotations on Childhood

1748890I just finished reading a cute book of quotations from Penguin Books called Child: Quotations About the Delight, Wonder, and Mystery of Being a Child, edited by Helen Handley and Andra Samelson.  Here are ten of my favorite quotes from the book:

"Babies are such a nice way to start people."

                            - Don Herold

"In a secular age, children have become the last sacred objects."

                           - Joseph Epstein

"One laugh of a child will make the holiest day more sacred still."

                          - R.G. Ingersoll

"Ah! What would the world be to us

   If the children were no more?

We should dread the desert behind us

  Worse than the dark before."

                        - Henry  Wadsworth Longfellow

"If a child is to keep alive his inborn sense of wonder, he needs the companionship of at least one adult who can share it, rediscovering with him the joy, excitement and mystery of the world we live in."   

                       - Rachel Carson

"My music is best understood by children and animals."

                      - Igor Stravinsky

"When I was younger, I could remember anything, whether it had happened or not."

                     - Mark Twain

"The lost child cries, but still he catches fireflies."

                    - Ryusui Yoshida

"Diogenes struck the father when the son swore."

                   - Robert Burton

"If there is anything we wish to change in the child, we should first examine it and see whether it is not something that could be better changed in ourselves."

                  - C.G. Jung

January 02, 2008

Book Review: The Power of Play

The_power_of_play I've just finished reading a new book by developmental psychologist David Elkind called The Power of Play, and I would recommend it to parents, educators, psychotherapists, and anyone else who has an interest in play and children.  David Elkind was a disciple of Jean Piaget, the great French structuralist thinker who changed people's conceptions of how children think.  In this book he explains how play changes as a child moves through different cognitive stages.  In infancy, play is sensori-motor, a matter of wiggling limbs and exploring the world through the baby's senses. Toddlers like to repeat play experiences over and over again as they experience a sense of mastery over their environment.  Preschoolers enjoy dressing up in cast-off clothes and pretending to be kings, princesses, and ogres.  Once children have reached Piaget's stage of concrete operations (Elkind calls this "the age of reason"), they enjoy playing games that have rules to them, and may spend as much time arguing about the rules, and determining what is "fair," as in following them.  Older elementary school children enjoy creating their own forts and spaces where they can cooperative, compete, or just get away from others and experience some well-deserved privacy. 

The problem with today's society, according to The Power of Play, is that these natural play experiences are too often disrupted by high-tech products that are being pushed on children at younger and younger ages as manufacturers seek new markets to expand their profits.  Elkind derides, for example, Baby Einstein videos and software for children two and under as virtually worthless, and devoid of any research supporting their supposed benefits.  He points out that babies do not possess critical thinking capacities.  Thus, frequent claims by software designers that these programs will expand a baby's thinking capabilities are simply wrong.  He also criticizes the formal teaching of reading and math in preschool, suggesting that children do not reach Piaget's stage of concrete operations until five to seven years of age, and that children can't really  understand that a number or letter is both a part of the number or alphabet system, but also that it's value changes depending upon where it is in relationship to other numbers or letters (e.g. an "e" is both a letter of the alphabet, but also a sound value that changes depending upon where it is in a word, as in "fine" "fen" "feign" etc.). 

Elkind criticizes parenting and schooling approaches that utilize any of three "theories" of learning.  The "watch me" theory:  that somehow by looking at what the parent or teacher is doing the child will figure out how to do the skill.  The "little sponge" theory:  that children can just soak up any kind of learning that we throw at them no matter who they are, or what age they are.  And the "look harder" theory:  the idea that if we just tell kids to "look!" they will "get it."  This is like yelling at a blind person.  Children move through different stages of growth at different rates, and they need parents and teachers who will watch them learn, and listen to them, and help them move from where they are in their understanding of a skill or subject, to the next step of whatever they are learning. 

All in all, The Power of Play is an excellent read.  I hadn't enjoyed an education book so much since reading John Holt, George Dennison, Herb Kohl, and Jonathan Kozol's books on open education when I was in my twenties back in the early 1970's.  I recommend that people read this book, and use its recommendations (it includes suggestions for creating rich early childhood education environments based on play) to refute the encroaching high-tech world of toys and software that leave so little to the imagination and that leave our children getting ever more obese.

December 27, 2007

Hypertension in Children and Adolescents on the Rise

Blood_pressure_gaugeA study that appeared in the August 22/29, 2007 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), reports that pediatric hypertension is increasing as a result of the obesity epidemic in the United States, and that in most cases, high blood pressure in children goes undiagnosed.  The study observed over time 14,000 children aged 3 to 18 at outpatient clinics in a large academic urban medical care system in Ohio.  Of these, over 500 had hypertension (3.6%). Almost three-quarters of these cases had been up to that point undiagnosed.  One of the problems is that doctors do not routinely take children's blood pressure, assuming that hypertension is an adult problem. If one extrapolates from these findings, then nationwide, roughly 2 million children have high blood pressure, and 1.5 million of those cases are undiagnosed. Left untreated, high blood pressure can lead to a variety of health problems including heart disease, stroke, artery damage, and kidney disease, which are problems that often take years to develop after the first onset of hypertension.  There is concern that this increase in undiagnosed hypertension in children and adolescents could be a warning sign that the nation's obesity epidemic is predisposing many youngster to developing serious health problems later on in life.  (see April 2, 2007 post in The Human Odyssey blog:  "TV Food Ads Contribute to Child Obesity." 

December 07, 2007

Basil & Spice Features Interview with Thomas Armstrong, Author of The Human Odyssey

Basilheaderorange3

Kelly Jad'on, whose blog "Basil & Spice" focuses on "Author & Books Views on a Healthy Life," conducted an interview with me that appeared in her blog yesterday, December 6, 2007 (it has also been syndicated and appears in BlogCritics Magazine).  See her blog for reviews of books and interviews with authors on a host of wellness topics including diet, self-healing, spirituality, nutrition, fitness, and aging.  The full interview appears below:

Interview With Thomas Armstrong, Ph.D.--Author of The Human Odyssey

Posted on Dec 7, 2007 by Kelly Jad'on.
The author of 13 books, Thomas Armstrong, Ph.D., has spent his life writing and speaking about human development, with a particular focus on children. He has appeared on The Today Show, CBS This Morning, CNN, and has presented more than 800 keynotes, workshops, and seminars in 42 states and 16 countries.

Dr. Armstrong, until the publication of The Human Odyssey, most of your writing seemed to focus on children and issues which affect their education. True? If so, why the departure?

In the early 1980s I began teaching courses in both adult and child development, and received a doctorate degree in East-West psychology from the California Institute of Integral Studies in 1987, where I began working on the idea of creating a psycho-spiritual book on human development. Then I was sidelined by my writings in education. About ten years ago, I came up with the focus of this book, and have been working on it pretty steadily since then.

My writing in education has been motivated by the fact that there is so little understanding among parents and educators about what children really need in order to learn. The No Child Left Behind Act and the general climate of education these days are pretty dismal. Childhood is disappearing as we push adult responsibilities earlier and earlier. For example, play and recess are being taken away, and corporate models of thinking are being institutionalized in classrooms. Kindergarten has become a worksheet wasteland in order to get kids ready for college. Childhood is being bulldozed by what I've called in one of my books (The Best Schools) "the academic achievement discourse."

Is there any stopping it? That is, the disappearance of childhood?

I don’t know. Childhood is a manifestation of the spirit. Spirit is being hacked away in other arenas of society too, through political and military influences, for example.

Yes, I do have hope, I’m an optimist. But I also have a realistic understanding that massive forces are being unleashed against the spiritual side of life these days.

Frances Wickes, a Jungian analyst from the 1940s, illuminates this dynamic in her book The Inner World of Choice. She shared a dream (it may have been her own as a young child) about a fragile flower facing a massive behemoth. The flower prevails and is able to survive against this catastrophic image. I believe that this is the situation we have today. Fragile truth will ultimately win out.

My blog addresses the image of the behemoth in posts such as the recent high rates of suicide in girls, boys beginning to develop eating disorders , infants being terribly abused — these are the warning signs of a disintegrating culture. But it also addresses the strength of the fragile flower by highlighting proactive organizations, programs, and resources that are available to help individuals at each of the twelve stages of life (prebirth, birth, infancy, early childhood, middle childhood, late childhood, adolescence, early adulthood, midlife, mature adulthood, late adulthood, and death and dying).

Back up a moment. What were you like as a child?

I was playful and serious at the same time. My father was a physician, but because he had a nervous breakdown and lay around the house for seventeen years, I became an anxious child. He would blow up suddenly without warning. It was like being in a minefield, and I had to be vigilant all the time. Avoiding my father's rage took a lot of work on the reptilian level. Our house was destroyed by an F5 tornado around same time my father had the breakdown, so there were a lot of terrifying moments. But growing up in Fargo, North Dakota, an uncomplicated place to live, was otherwise rather normal for me. I played baseball, had a coin collection, liked to ride my bike, had good friends. I was not a particularly spiritual child, but can remember things like being able to leave my body in a floating state while going to sleep, and producing eidetic imagery (inner images that were as clear as outer perceptions). And, I was always wondering about the ultimate questions of life. My mom even told me not to think about these things so much.

What aspects of your childhood carried through into your field of research today?

I had an aunt who went into education. She became director of the Amsterdam International School, and helped to transform it into a building based on Waldorf (Rudolf Steiner) architecture. I think I was was inspired by her unconsciously. I also had good teachers who recognized my own individuality and reached out to me. That made a difference. I had a voracious love of learning, and enjoyed regular art and music periods. I’m just now rediscovering my art side — painting and doing collages. I drew a lot as a child, then switched and became very verbal. I think my hidden art life is one reason I got so passionate in my writing (e.g., In Their Own Way, The Myth of the A.D.D. Child) about kids labeled learning disabled (LD) or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who are very artistic but are not having their creative side acknowledged or developed.

Do you have children?

No. I'm working on a novel right now to address the irony of spending so much of my professional life focused on children, yet not having children myself. It's called Childless. My wife is a psychotherapist who works with children and adults in sandplay therapy. So we're both working with kids -- just not having them ourselves. This may sound like rationalizing, but I think there's a certain detachment that people have who don't have children, that they can use in helping to better the lives of all kids. I think of my own teachers in elementary school, many of whom didn't have kids, and yet who helped me (and others) quite a bit.

In The Human Odyssey, you discuss "Adapters" and "Rememberers," using the industrialist Leland Stanford and the poet Emily Dickinson as examples. How are the "Adapter" and the "Rememberer" keys to living life?

"Adapters" are concerned with fitting into the world that is, with all of its demands for conformity, ambition, and street smarts. "Rememberers" are always thinking of what is possible -- they're concerned with what it means to exist, to realize one's potential, to explore the depths of one's being. The fact is, we need to have both of these qualities in order to live a full life. A parent has an obligation to help her children "adapt" to the world's demands, but she must also help her child "remember" who she really is (her gifts, her essence). Some parents focus all the attention on the adapting, and their kids lose their souls. Other parents go the other way, and try to protect their child from the real world, and this also creates an unbalanced personality. In The Human Odyssey, I talk a lot about Odysseus in Homer's epic poem, and how he had both the "adapter "and the "rememberer" in him. That's part of what made him such an archetypal personality.

You're critical of much early childhood education these days. What's the biggest problem?

During early childhood kids shouldn’t have formal lessons in reading, math, or any other subject. This is a time of life when brains are plastic and being dynamically wired to the world; if they are exposed to abstract letters and one-dimensional computer screens, that's what the brain will be wired to. What they need is to be exposed to rich multi-sensory environments.

What should children be doing?

They need to play. During early childhood, play is what nature designed kids to do. Some researchers think that the neocortex actually evolved from play. Materials for play should be simple — puppets, blocks, simple toys, dress up clothes. And they should span the multiple intelligences — artistic, musical, nature-oriented, science exploration, physical play, etc. Books are okay to have in a play environment, but let the children decide what to do with them. It’s their choice. Other good examples involve manipulatives — sink and float, sandboxes, or just allowing them to mess around. These should be open-ended experiences. That’s the essence. They also need the time — not being shuttled from place to place, and they need a safe space in which to play.

Dr. Armstrong, which stage of life are you in? Are you comfortable with it?

At 57 years old, I’m in what I've called in The Human Odyssey, "mature adulthood" (forgive me if that sounds a little self-serving!). Mature adulthood roughly spans ages 50 to 80. For many it is a whole new stage of life because advancements in modern medicine have extended the life span by two or three decades. Some people at this age may feel as if they’re winding it up (based on messages they received from previous generations) but then realize they’ve got 20 or 30 more years to fill. This stage can be a wonderful second childhood, an opportunity to experience the energy and vitality of a child, and the knowledge and experience of an adult. By this age, most of us are no longer looking for a mate, or raising a child, or beginning a career (ages 20-50). I was a latebloomer and didn't find my marriage partner or career until my late thirties. So now that these are going along pretty well, I can focus on more on developing other potentialities that didn't get a chance to develop during my early adulthood, like my art and novel-writing. The ages from 50-80 can be a time to explore oneself (more "remembering" and less "adapting") and be generative by mentoring, grandparenting, teaching, and/or volunteering. One has greater life experience at this stage and greater opportunity to give back to the community.  For those with poverty or health issues, mature adulthood may be a time of more suffering. It is also a time of life when the body begins to break down. It’s not a completely rosy picture. I’m noticing that my friends and I are beginning to talk about health issues just like our elders did.

Our culture says about aging: “Look young physically,” whereas it should be emphasizing “Be young spiritually.” I question people wanting to mess around with their faces and bodies surgically doing face lifts and tummy tucks. It seems to me that they're almost saying: “I want you to think that I’m young, but I’m really not. I’m a liar.” For men it’s more of a virility issue. One of the messages of my book is: "Let's face it. You’re going to get old. Get used to it. Live a balanced life. Nurture your body, mind, and soul." The irony is that during youth people abuse their bodies because there’s no immediate feedback, but they’re laying the seeds for physical problems in their 50s, 60s and 70s. If my book helps even one person in young adulthood take better care of him or herself so that they have a better second half of life than they would have otherwise, then I will be very happy indeed.

The Human Odyssey adds a substantial amount of new information about the Twelve Stages of Life.

In The Human Odyssey, I’ve extended the conversation about human development to include prebirth, birth, death, and the afterlife. It seemed necessary to me that I discuss what many cultures around the world have thought about the stages of life. That's why I added an extra chapter (beyond the twelve stages of life) on the afterlife. Mentioning the afterlife shouldn’t be seen as something flaky or New Age, but rather as something "cross-cultural." Going back to earliest recorded history, cultures have always had maps of the afterlife (for example, the Egyptians built much of their culture around their image of the afterlife). We ought not leave these out of a book on human development. The life cycle is a huge thing to try to get one’s arms around. The more perspectives we can provide, the better we’ll be able to understand this incredible adventure.

I'm very excited about the filmography I've created at the end of the book — 130 movie listings with annotations organized by stage of life. I’ve always been profoundly moved by certain movies. I’ve noticed that the best of them usually deal with the human life span in some way (for example, Orson Welles' Citizen Kane takes us from his childhood to his death in old age). Many of the great films focus on a specific stage of life, like adolescence. Some examples include: Romeo and Juliet , Rebel without A Cause, and Westside Story (which totally blew me away as an eleven year old). I'd like to see people read a chapter from The Human Odyssey, watch a movie on that stage, and then talk about it among friends and/or family.

How should I relate to The Human Odyssey?

I wrote The Human Odyssey because I wanted people to see the big picture of our journey through life, and I wanted them to begin to care about the stages of life in a proactive way. Each person has all twelve stages of life within them -- some of them have been wounded by negative past experiences and need healing. We all know people who are in the different stages of life -- they also need care and support from us -- the infant son that needs human touch, the nephew who is having trouble learning at school, the friend at midlife who just got downsized at work. Our community is represented by all twelve stages -- and we need to care for the individuals in it who are at each stage -- our abused elders, our adolescents at risk, our toddlers who need to be protected from dangerous toys. I hope that people will read the book and then be moved to take positive actions that can transform human lives at each stage of development.

November 16, 2007

ADHD as a Developmental Issue (Not a Medical One)

The_myth_of_the_add_childI was very glad to see the research report this week (November 16, 2007) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), concluding that children labeled ADHD have normal brains that simply develop later than their peers.  This study compared brain scans over a period of years between a group of  223 children diagnosed as having ADHD and a group of 223 children in a control group. Typically, brain growth in the cerebral cortex goes through a developmental process of thickening for the first few years of life, then a peak, after which there is a "thinning down" or "pruning" of cortical tissue as the brain becomes more efficient in its adaptation to the surrounding environment (e.g. connections that are not required for adaptation are eliminated).  The study revealed that the average age for this peaking of cortical development was 7.5 years old in "normal kids", but that in children labeled ADHD it was 10.5 years old, three years later. This research strongly suggests that kids identified as having ADHD are really latebloomers after all.

I've argued this case in my books The Myth of the A.D.D. Child, and  ADD/ADHD Alternatives in the Classroom.  In my own work with kids with this label, I noticed that they acted younger than their peers.  I remember one seventh grade student in my special education class who would see something that interested him on the other side of the classroom, and simply get up and walk toward it, like a toddler would do.  Some people might call this "immaturity," but there is a much better word to use that captures the vitality and freshness of these kids:  neoteny.  Neoteny is a Latin word meaning "holding youth."  In an April 8, 2007 post in this blog, I wrote a piece called "Neoteny: The Lost Fountain of Youth Rediscovered," where I explained that neoteny is essentially the retaining of childlike characteristics into adulthood.  There appears to be a tendency, as species evolve, for more of "the child" to be retained into adulthood.  This has obvious survival value, inasmuch as retaining the "plasticity" of the child's brain later on in development, gives the human species more flexibility in adapting to changing circumstances.  It's curious in this regard to note that many of the most advanced creators and thinkers in civilization have had more than a little of the child in them.  Einstein said "I never grew up."  Newton compared what he did to child's play on the beach.  Picasso said it took him his whole life to learn how to paint like a child. In my book Awakening Genius in the Classroom, I've argued that it's these neotenous characteristics of childhood--playfulness, creativity, imagination, vitality, curiosity, flexibility--that need to be retained into adulthood if our society is going to continue to transform and evolve.  It appears from this week's study in PNAS, that kids labeled ADHD are slower to grow up, and as a result, they have more of their childhood available to them than the average person as they move into adulthood.  This is why they're constantly moving, imagining, making associations, and playing around when they're supposed to be "serious."  We should admire these qualities in them.  We need to stop using negative terms to describe these kids.  Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, after all, has three negative words in it:  deficit, hyperactive, and disorder.  If by retaining more of their youth into later development these kids are the vanguard, so to speak, in the evolution of our species, then I think it would be more appropriate to give them positive labels:  "evolutionarily gifted," comes to mind.  And yet the scientific community continues to use the disease-based "medical model" term that doesn't at all speak to the true nature of these kids. 

Some will argue, "but these kids are troubled and troublesome to themselves and to others.  Research shows it."  Yes, this is true.  If you're evolutionarily advanced, and you have to function in an environment of Neanderthals, then, yes, this is a problem.  And that's what it is like for so many of these kids, who come into school in kindergarten brimming with enthusiasm, vitality, creativity, and spark, and have to sit for hours every day doing meaningless tasks in boring workbooks overseen by teachers who care far more about following rules than exploring exciting ideas.  Now we're even seeing a new development that can only make things worse:  the societal tendency to push developmental timetables backwards (again, toward the prehistoric).  We're increasingly expecting kindergarteners to do the work that second graders used to do and creating even less opportunity for the "child" in these kids to express itself (see my January 4, 2007 post "Preschoolers Need Play, Not Academics!"). 

So, here you have the situation:  evolutionarily advanced human beings bringing more of the child into later development, on the one hand, and evolutionarily regressive societal forces pushing more of the adult back into early development, on the other.  Is it any wonder that kids labeled ADHD have problems?  Their so-called "symptoms" (again, to use the medical model), are really the mismatch, the incredible disjunction, between the way in which evolution has fashioned them (as the cutting edge of the species), and the way in which an ignorant society has tried to push them back into the Stone Age.  It's this incapacity (this "deficit deficiency") of the ADHD community of researchers, psychiatrists, psychologists, special education teachers, parents, and others to understand these gifts (and to create environments where these gifts are allowed to flourish), that gives rise to most of the "problems" and "symptoms" you see among kids labeled ADHD:  poor self-esteem, negative social relationships, distractibility (which is just a "divergent mind" operating in a boring environment), and impulsivity (which is called "spontaneity" when that environment is open to new discoveries).  I hope that this new study in the prestigeous Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, will prompt people who work with children labeled ADHD, to be open to a few new discoveries of their own, and to start thinking of this matter as a developmental (and evolutionary) issue, and not a medical one.

November 12, 2007

15 Reasons Why Standardized Tests Are Worthless

Test_happyIt seems that everybody is talking about test results these days.  The No Child Left Behind Law (NCLB) requires schools to make "adequate yearly progress" on standardized tests in reading and math (next year in science as well).  Local newspapers regularly post the standardized test scores of area schools.  Property values are sometimes tied to these test results.  Parents are doubtful of any innovations in schooling that do not in some way boost test scores.  But folks, the truth of the matter is that standardized tests are worthless, utterly worthless!   Here are 15 reasons why:

1. Because students know that test scores may affect their future lives, they do whatever they can to pass them, including cheating and taking performance drugs (e.g. psychostimulants like Ritalin "borrowed" from their friends).

2. Because teachers know that test scores may affect their salaries and job security, they also cheat (see the best-seller Freakonomics for some interesting statistics on this).

3. Standardized tests don't provide any feedback on how to perform better.  The results aren't even given back to the teachers and students until months later, and there are no instructions provided  by test companies on how to improve these test scores.

4. Standardized tests don't value creativity.  A student who writes a more creative answer in the margins of such a test, doesn't realize that a human being won't even see this creative response; that machines grade these tests, and a creative response that doesn't follow the format is a wrong response.

5. Standardized tests don't value diversity.  There are a wide range of differences in the people who take standardized tests:  they have different cultural backgrounds, different levels of proficiency in the English language, different learning and thinking styles, different family backgrounds, different past experiences.  And yet the standardized test treats them as if they were all identical; identical to the group that took the test several years ago, and to which the test has been "normed" (e.g. this original group is the "norm group" against which any future test-takers are to be compared). 

6. Standardized tests favor those who have socio-economic advantages.  Test companies (a multi-billion dollar a year industry) not only manufacture the tests, they also manufacture the courses and programs that can be taken to "prepare for the test."  If you have the money, you can even get special tutors that will help you do well on a test.  If you don't have the money, and your school is in a low socio-economic area that gets less funding than rich suburban schools, then you're not getting the same preparation for the test as those at the higher socio-economic levels do.

7. Because so much emphasis is placed on standardized test results these days, teachers are spending more and more time "teaching to the test."  If there is something that is interesting, compelling, useful, or otherwise favorable to the development of a student's understanding of the world, but it is not going to be on the standardized test, then there really isn't any incentive to cover this material.  Instead, most of classroom time consists of either taking the tests or preparing for the tests, and this shuts out the possibility of learning anything new or important.  For example, because the No Child Left Behind Law (NCLB) only tests reading and math (and next year science), that means that art, social studies, physical education, history, and other subjects are given far less attention than used to be the case.

8.  Standardized tests occur in an artificial learning environment:  they're timed, you can't talk to a fellow student, you can't ask questions, you can't use references or learning devices, you can't get up and move around.  How often does the real world look like this?  Prisons come to mind.  And yet, even the most hard-headed conservative will say that education must prepare students for "the real world." Clearly standardized testing doesn't do this.

9.  Standardized tests create stress.  Some kids do well with a certain level of stress.  Other students fold.  So, again, there isn't a level playing field.  Brain research suggests that too much stress is psychologically and physically harmful.  And when stress becomes overwhelming, the brain shifts into a "fight or flight" response, where it is impossible to engage in the higher-order thinking processes that are necessary to respond correctly to the standardized test questions.

10.  Standardized tests reduce the richness of human experience and human learning to a number or set of numbers.  This is dehumanizing.  A student may have a deep knowledge of a particular subject, but receive no acknowledgement for it because his or her test score may have been low.  If the student were able to draw a picture, lead a group discussion, or create a hands-on project, he/she could show that knowledge.  But not in a standardized testing room.  Tough luck.

11. Standardized tests weren't developed by geniuses. They were developed by mediocre minds.  One of the pioneers of standardized testing in this country, Lewis Terman, was a racist (the book to read is The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould).  Another pioneer, Edward Thorndike, was a specialist in rats and mazes.  Just the kind of mind you want your kid to have, right?  Albert Einstein never created a standardized test (although he failed a number of them), and neither did any of the great thinkers of our age or any age.  Standardized tests are usually developed by pedantic researchers with Ph.Ds in educational testing or educational psychology.  If that's the kind of mind you want your child to have, then go for it!

12. Standardized tests provide parents and teachers with a false sense of security.  If a student scores well on a test, then it is assumed that they know the material.  However, this may not be true at all.  The student may have simply memorized the fact or formula or trick necessary to do well on the test (some students are naturally gifted in taking standardized tests, others are not).  A group of Harvard graduates were asked why it is colder in the winter and warmer in the summer.  Most of them got the question wrong.  They were good test-takers but didn't understand fundamental principles that required a deeper comprehension (the book to read is The Disciplined Mind: Beyond Facts and Standardized Tests; the K-12 Education that Every Child Deserves by Harvard psychologist Howard Gardner, named in a recent poll one of the 100 greatest intellectuals in the world).

13. Standardized tests exist for administrative, political, and financial purposes, not for educational ones.  Test companies make billions.  Politicians get elected by promising better test results.  Administrators get funding and avoid harsh penalties by boosting test scores.  Everyone benefits except the children.  For them, standardized testing is worthless and worse.

14. Standardized testing creates "winners" and losers."  The losers are those who get labeled as "my low students" "my learning disabled kids," "my reluctant learners."  Even the winners are trapped by being caught up on a tread mill of achievement that they must stay on at all costs through at least sixteen years of schooling, and more often twenty years.  The losers suffer loss of self-esteem, and the damage of "low expectations" (which research shows actually negatively influences performance - the book to read is Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils' Intellectual Development by Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson).  The winners suffer loss of soul, since most of them are performing penguins for fast-track parents and may reach midlife on a pinnacle of power and achievement, yet lack any connection to their deeper selves, to ethical principles, to aesthetic feelings, to spiritual aspirations, to compassion, creativity, and/or commitment to life.

15.  Finally, my most important reason that standardized tests are worthless:  During the time that a child is taking a test, he/she could be doing something far more valuable:  actually learning something new and interesting!

So, folks, the next time you have that conversation about testing at your child's school, or pick up the newspaper to read where your district ranks on the latest state-wide tests, or plan your child's future around a program that has the highest test results, think on these things.

Also posted at:  Free Agent U  and The Karl Frank Jr. Communicator 

Continue reading "15 Reasons Why Standardized Tests Are Worthless" »

October 15, 2007

World Congress in Monterrey, Mexico Highlights the Importance of Early Childhood Development

Img_0862I just got back from the 1st World Congress/7th International Early and Preschool Education Conference in Monterrey, Mexico.  In addition to participating in a colloquium with educators and politicians (see photo above), I also gave a keynote talk on "Awakening the Natural Genius in Every Child" to 4000 early childhood educators.  The Congress was part of the Universal Forum of Cultures, a three-month extravaganza of cultural events involving 1.5 million people in Monterrey (the third largest city in Mexico). I was impressed with all the work being done, particularly in Latin America, to further the lives of young children.  I visited a site in Monterrey created by CENDI (Centros de Desarrollo Infantil - Center for Early Childhood Development) that provides low income parents in Monterrey with child care, medical care, parent training, pre-natal instruction, and many other services (see photo on left).  Cendi_intake_monterrey_mexico I couldn't help but think that while I was visiting this full-spectrum developmental center, our president, George Bush, was busy vetoing a bill to provide medical care to more children in the United States.  Accompanying us on our tour to the CENDI site was Dr. James Heckman, the 2000 Nobel Prize winner in Economics, who has been focusing his energies on research demonstrating the positive economic impact of providing for the health, emotional, and educational needs of young children, as opposed to neglecting those needs and having to pay billions of dollars in costs as a result of mental illness, violence, illiteracy, and other societal ills.  His book Inequality in America, sheds important light on the importance of nations' investing in their young children.  Another important individual I met during the conference was Dr. Franklin Martinez Mendoza (below left), Img_0863who was a key architect in the development of the early childhood development program in Cuba, a country with a literacy rate of 99.8% (higher than the United States). Also impressive was a presentation given by Dr. Osmar Terra, the Secretary of Health for the state of Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil, who laid out in most brilliant fashion the latest work in neuroscience chronicling the negative impact of trauma on the brain in infancy and early childhood.  There were in all over 100 presenters at the conference, and I count myself lucky to have met so many wonderful people who are working to make the lives of young children around the world better.

May 23, 2007

The Curriculum Superhighway

Ed_leadership_ed_for_whole_childI have an article in this month's (May, 2007) issue of Educational Leadership (a publication of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development or ASCD), criticizing the educational establishment for trying to hook-up or, as they say, "align", the curriculum all the way from pre-kindergarten to the fourth year of college.  In educationese this is called "PreK-16," that is, going all the way from pre-kindergarten to grade 16 or the fourth year of college (see, for example, the PreK-16 Educational Collaboration in Texas).  This aligning of the curriculum from PreK to grade 16 is considered by most educators to be a very wonderful thing.  But I regard it with much alarm.  I know that the purpose of this new initiative is not so that all the good stuff from preschool (fingerpainting, dress-up, nap time) can be brought up into the higher grades, but rather the reverse:  so that all the educational practices of the fourth year of college (lectures, exams, pressure), can be sent down to the preschool level.  This is the last thing that young kids need (see my blog post "Preschoolers Need Play, not Academics").  In fact, the real purpose of the PreK-16 initiative is so that the rigorous academics of the university can be threaded all the way through the curriculum, regardless of what the specific developmental needs of kids happen to be in high school, middle school, elementary school, kindergarten, or preschool.  In my book The Best Schools:  How Human Development Research Should Inform Educational Practice (also published by ASCD), I make the case that kids at different grade levels have distinct developmental needs, which this current No Child Left Behind law, and the preK-16 initiative completely ignore.  Preschoolers need play.  Elementary schoolers need to learn about the real world through rich interactive experiences.  Middle schoolers need to learn through social, emotional, and metacognitive strategies.  High schoolers need to learn how to live independently in the real world, since they will shortly begin doing so.  The PreK-16 "Superhighway" just blasts a concrete path right through these sensitive developmental ecologies with their textbooks, standardized testing, and overemphasis on reading and math.   To read my article "The Curriculum Superhighway," click here.  To see the entire May, 2007 issue of Educational Leadership, which has at its theme "Educating the Whole Child," click here.  To read excerpts from my book The Best Schools, click here.  To listen to an interview about my book The Best Schools, click here.

May 08, 2007

Dead Iraqi Children: Who Talks About Them in the Iraq Debate?

3457189285I just read that a U.S. helicopter attack against suspected insurgents in Bagdad today has killed a number of children at a primary school.  Also, another report today that a suicide car bomber killed many people, including children, at a holy Shia shrine in Kufa.  These reprehensible actions come on the same day that a report by Save the Children surveying 60 countries ranked Iraq as the worst country for saving the lives of children under 5.  According to their State of the World's Mothers Report, Iraq's child mortality rate has soared 150% since 1990.  Some 120,000 Iraqi children died in 2005 before reaching their fifth birthday.  Since the beginning of the Gulf War in 1990, children in Iraq have been subjected to war, terrorism, and a lack of medical services, food, and other necessary goods as a result of the sanctions placed on Iraq by the United Nations during Saddam's regime.  While politicians are talking about the best "exit strategies" for the war in Iraq, or how to "win" this terrible conflict, or how we're going to "support the troops," meanwhile, these poor children are being slaughtered right and left, and hardly any of this makes it onto the 6 o'clock news.  What would happen if, along with the photos of the U.S. soldiers who have been killed in Iraq, news organizations like PBS would also put up photos of dead Iraqi children and their grieving parents?  Perhaps the parents on all sides of this conflict (U.S., Shia, Sunni, Al Quaida etc.), would feel some sense of empthy for these families.  For once, I would like to see compassion for children overcome all the ideologies (Democracy, Christianity, Islam etc.) that have put us in this senseless mess.

April 27, 2007

Introducing Curious Kids to an Amazing World: How Difficult Can This Be?

100_3042About education:  here's what I don't understand.  On the one hand, you have the child - this incredibly wonderful organism that has had millions of years to evolve a beautifully complex brain that is designed to be naturally curious, playful, vital, creative, and joyful.  On the other hand, you have this amazing world:  exquisite life forms, unbelievable cultural achievements (Beethoven, Picasso, Einstein), new ideas coming forth all the time.  Education should be about introducing this curious child to this amazing world.  How difficult can this be?  It should be the simplest and most natural thing in the world.  Yet, somehow we manage to muck it up.  Why?  First, because educators generally don't regard the child as incredible.  Instead, they place limits on his or her potential with labels like "learning disabilities,"  "developmental delay", "unmotivated", and "average ability."  Second, because educators don't regard the world as amazing, at least when they're teaching about it in school.  Instead, the world is broken down into little skills and tasks that are so small and insignificant that the wonder of the world is lost. Third, because all sorts of garbage is interposed between the curious child and the amazing world to make it nearly impossible for the two to meet: bureaucratic timetables, mandates, standards, legislation, rubrics, standardized tests, and other bits of idiocy.  I would like to suggest a meditation for all those interested in education.  Visualize the way education should be: introducing incredibly curious and creative children to an amazingly rich world.  How difficult can this be?

April 13, 2007

The Best Schools Are Not Test Factories but Places for Developing Whole Human Beings

The_best_schoolsI've written a new book for educators called The Best Schools:  How Human Development Research Should Inform Educational Practice (publisher:  The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, December, 2006).  In this book I suggest that our educational climate has become totally overwhelmed by what I call an "academic achievement discourse."  This discourse concentrates on accountability, rubrics, benchmarks, "closing the achievement gap', a "rigorous curriculum," "tougher standards," and standardized testing.  The epitome of this discourse is the No Child Left Behind Act, which demands that schools make yearly progress on test scores or face tough sanctions.  What is missing from this conversation is any real discussion of human beings.  In my book I suggest that we need to start speaking (again, because we used to talk this way) "human development discourse."  That is, we need to focus on helping children develop their cognitive, social, emotional, creative, and spiritual potentials.  We need to measure student progress, not through "normative" evaluation (comparing a child to an ideal group), but through "ipsative" measures (comparing a child to his or her own past performance).  We need to stop spending so much time focusing on basic reading and science and math skills, and provide more time in the curriculum for social stud