Many of our elected officials have virtually handed the keys to our schools over to corporate interests. Presidential commissions on education are commonly chaired by the executives of large companies.
Back to Basics is back! Those famous words from the past have returned, even after all the corporate school reforms. So, what do education reformers mean when they refer to Back to Basics in 2024? What will this mean for students who usually like consistency?
New York Governor Kathy Hochul wants students to go Back to Basics! Republican presidential candidate and former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley wants students to return to the basics. Her basics sound different from Hochul’s Back to Basics, although she says, This is not a Republican or Democrat issue. Every parent, regardless of their education, regardless of where they’re from, knows what’s best for their child.
Education author Alfie Kohn spoke about Back to Basics in 1999 in The Schools Our Children Deserve: Moving Beyond Traditional Classrooms and “Tougher Standards.”
He stated:
Those who sermonize about the need to raise standards often proceed, in the next breath, to call for a return to the “basics.” Indeed, this term holds a certain appeal for most people. But the question isn’t whether we’re for or against the basics; it’s how we define them. If traditionalists mean that a lot more time should be spent on reading, writing, and arithmetic than on other subjects, plenty of people might object to neglecting art, science, social studies, and so on. If, however, they mean that more attention should be paid to the foundations of each subject, then the question becomes: What constitutes the foundations?
Traditionalists often use “the basics” to refer to little more than the mechanics of the “three R’s,” and they assume these are what kids primarily need and lack (p.49).
Back to Basics now appears to be about reading and marketing lots of programs, many online, and most with little to show they’ll work. Some are new, but others have been in classrooms for years and have evaded scrutiny during the so-called Science of Reading movement.
Or will the new Back to Basics movement be different? Here’s an idea. Why not end the condemnation of America’s democratic public schools, kick A Nation at Risk out the door, and do what makes schools thrive?
Let there be:
- no more high-stakes standardized assessments.
- a return to developmental appropriateness for kindergarten and beyond.
- an end to Common Core State Standards.
- support for smaller class sizes.
- more accountability for charter and private schools.
- an end to the misuse of tax dollars for Education Savings Accounts to buy frivolous items.
- a reduction of the nonprofits with faux educators.
- better and more affordable childcare for working parents.
- an insistence that all teachers obtain quality university preparation and student teaching.
- an end to hunger for children by helping fund school breakfasts and lunches.
- quality healthcare for all children.
- less online instruction and better data privacy controls.
- better instructional options for students with disabilities.
- nurses and counselors and quality support staff.
- well-resourced school libraries and qualified school librarians.
- a return of the arts, providing students with art, music, drama, and dance.
- more social studies, history, civics, and classes besides reading and math.
- no more punishing third-grade retention.
- an end to the ridiculousness of grading schools.
- several recess breaks each day, so children have unstructured play.
- less corporate and non-profit interference focusing on profits.
- a requirement that teachers gain control of what they teach.
- a demand for school administrators to have longtime experience teaching.
How many years will it take to have a new Back to Basics and by then will technology have replaced all teachers? Is this the real plan?
References
Kohn, A. (1999). The schools our children deserve : moving beyond traditional classrooms and “tougher standards.” Houghton Mifflin Co.
As an artist and art teacher I often find myself asking, “What can be more basic than art?” The earliest artifacts of humankind from the caves at Lascaux to the structures at Gobekli Tepe all demonstrate the importance of visual expression as a means for inquiry and understanding. Leonardo da Vinci’s drawings of his dissections of the the human body and the countless landscapes around the world all give us a greater understanding of the world in visual and scientific context. Our basic understanding of geometry and engineering are both related to understanding the concept of linear perspective. I learned the profound value of observation as an intellectual pursuit as a young artist and later as an art teacher I impressed the importance of observation not just for creative expression, but sentient understanding. What “back to the basics” means to me is that expansive knowledge should be reserved for a chosen few. That the purpose for most of us is to develop a utilitarian skill that allows us to produce for elites who simply believe this is better for us. The current assault on the liberal arts and humanities are another example of this minimalist enterprise. There is nothing more core to human experience than creative expression. This is what gives us the reason to read, write, and learn the quadratic equation.
Removing the arts from poor schools was a particularly rotten thing to do. I often wonder how many children could have learned how to be artists that never got the chance. Thanks for being so eloquent, Paul.
I concur with Paul. After teaching to the most at risk youth, here’s what I know:
ART SAVES LIVES. Many of my students (now in their 30s closing in on 40) see me again and say thank you. The way you taught through art saved me. We need a true Renaissance where the arts were first and foremost that taught many to use their minds and beyond! Ars Gratia Artis!
Great point, Rick. Students might stay in school for the arts, and there are jobs in the arts. Thank you!
The arts have represented a growth industry for decades.
I had a similar experience Rick. My art room was a sanctuary for many.
I loved how art brought out the natural inquiry of students. From those who said, “I can’t draw; this is not for me” to me helping them navigating the world via art. As you said, many of my students came to school only for the art class. And silly me, I remember being discouraged because I wasn’t creating “artists” but when I reflected on what was actually was going on, art was the catalyst for reading, science, history, government, writing. and critical thinking. The kids loved being able to create their own works, but I remember the rich conversations that led to me finding books, articles, paintings to expand their knowledge about the world around them. So many of my students would have never picked up a book until they found the connection and yearned to learn more. I am thankful for instructors like you. As I told them, “Art is life.”
Our education system is given the best years of our children’s lives.
If you can’t do the math for 15 x 4 in your head you’re not well educated.
This is what we mean by the need to go “back to basics.”
You all had 12 years of the lives of each of these people.
I’m sorry, Brian, but I don’t usually put other links on the site unless I know where they’re coming from. “You all” is also such a generalized statement. Back to Basics has been used for years. Note Alfie Kohn’s book reference.
I find this post to be very interesting as many of the bulleted point list stated at the end are all things talked through in teacher prep programs as best practices. On example is “support smaller class sizes” there is numerous studies and research done that small class sizes are more beneficial to students. Smaller class sizes support one on one attention for each student as well as they allow the teacher to better know the individual needs of each student and provide support in those areas. It also allows teachers to teach to the levels of there student not just the middle of the class. Teachers also are showing to be more satisfied with their job when there class size is smaller, for example one study states “Results of the study indicated that higher levels of teacher satisfaction were associated with fewer children assigned to a class. Specifically, statistically significant correlations were found for the relationship between small class sizes and the use of enriched activities in the classroom, ability to reconfigure classrooms for learning, and increased ability to respond to student needs, all factors enhanced through smaller class sizes and related to teacher job satisfaction.” (Price 2008). Another bulleted point I would like to touch on is the need for more movement breaks. Children need to be able to move in order to increase their focus in the classroom. The also brought me to a thought about children who are on 504 or IEP plans, a common accommodation that is written is “allow for frequency movement breaks”. This shows that special education teachers are being forced to accommodate for how general education classrooms are being run.
I believe it is important to go back to the basis of best practices of teaching and how to best support students. Back to the basis teaching is not a political issue as best practices of teaching does not have to do with government but with what is best for the students. Teaching should be routed in best practices and research of how to support students.
Price , W., & Terry, E. (2008). Can Small Class Sizes Help Retain Teachers to the Profession?∗.
Hi Piper. I think you may have misread the post. It says at the top
Let there be…
support for smaller class sizes.
several recess breaks each day, so children have unstructured play.