Math-Whizz Blog

There has been increasingly intense discussions about how to change the education system to better align American children with foreign counterparts.  These discussions focus on many facets: classroom size, utilizing charter or for-profit schools, education tenure, technology integration, national testing standards and so on.  Unfortunately there are times when discourse is more like cacophony that fuels doubt for rekindling education with any possible solution muffled and distorted underneath a collection of bickering, talking heads.   

Adding to this confusion is the notion of testing as the barometer of success.  Does improving test scores truly serve student preparation in the 21st century?  Will students enhance analytical thinking or will they be given enough todiscern testing objectives and nothing more?  For teachers, parents and even children all of the above is just noise that masks a truly simple question:  how do you engage students to stir a curiosity for learning?

Of course, it would be naïve not to recognize the lack of equality and its resulting disparity in student achievement when mentioning technological integration within the overall school system.  And teacher compensation benchmarked solely to meeting or surpassing test scores fails to consider other criteria such as a school demographics, community financial stability or students’ home environment.  Important as these issues are their scope is macro in nature and overshadows the crucial day-to-day interaction between educators and students.  Though many of us relate to particular teachers that inspired, even down to the finer details of methods or approaches, we soon find ourselves drawn into the broader debate on who or what should change in order to reform a supposed stagnating educational system, forgetting how we were once driven to learn. 

Below is a video of the 1969 Congressional hearing where one person spoke of his devotion to children,  helping them to understand, communicate and control their emotions and inner dialogues.  He was there to demonstrate why federal funding to his programming should not be cut to the extent proposed by then President Nixon.  This brief clip is certainly Capra-esque, not the least bombastic and contains no manipulative score for extra emotional tugs.  It is wonderfully moving and shows a impassioned  man inspiring one other person to look beyond the typical approach.  Engaging one person to strive to inquire, learn – this is the missing focus of the education argument.  May I present, Mr. Rogers.