Why is is that some people with an awful lot of knowledge thinks it’s okay to devalue same? We are all familiar with Sir Ken Robinson and his cry for ‘soft skills’ like creativity to be as valued as highly as knowledge. If we skip over the argument that the more knowledge you have the more creative you can be, I think there is something a bit amiss here.
What would be the motive of educators with vast stores of knowledge telling kids they don’t really need it as much, that in the 21c employers are looking for creativity, problem-solving, collaboration, entrepreneurship etc? I guess the simple answer is that they see the world changing and they want our students to fit into it. They want students to be fitted with the skills that 21c employers are looking for. Let’s skip over another argument here, shaping students for work is very much like the never tiresome ‘Industrial Model’ of schooling.
This seems like great news for disadvantaged kids. Here are a new set of skills that they can work on with their peers, ( in a student -directed model usually), and their lack of some very basic knowledge won’t hold them back. Except it rarely works like that. In a classroom that values the soft skills highly and tries to teach them, while taking time away from explicit knowledge instruction, the advantaged kids will still learn. I’m not sure if they will learn to be more creative or entrepreneurial, but they can get by on reduced knowledge instruction. They will still have the background foundations behind them, still have perhaps more support at home.
Unfortunately the disadvantaged souls will fall further behind, denied the opportunities that others take for granted. They will desperately miss some of the explicit instruction that has to make way for those 21c skills. (As a personal example, I once had a trainee teacher with me who let kids run their own 30 minute vocabulary lesson. She praised their collaboration and creativity in exploring a new word. She was stunned when I told her to save 25 minutes and explicitly teach the word and how to use it.) I think those calling for less knowledge because we can ‘Google it’ , or we need to build skills for jobs that haven’t been invented yet, or the general notion that knowing something just isn’t as important in the 21c, are becoming the ‘Knowledge Gatekeepers’. They are making knowledge acquisition harder, and perhaps entrenching the status quo.
I have yet to be convinced that those students who are lagging in basic literacy and numeracy foundations, including a much reduced vocabulary, and haven’t been exposed to a broad range of knowledge, are not going to suffer from less explicit knowledge instruction. (I’m skipping the argument about which knowledge). Educators make all sorts of value judgements about teaching. What’s best for whom and when. One judgment I’m happy to make is that those educators with knowledge should value it highly, for themselves and their students.