Why Public Schools are Failing

One the fundamental presuppositions of our current educational system is that key to educating a heterogeneous population is to 'improve' (modify) the curriculum and/or teaching methods to presumably include as many children as possible.

IMHO, this is a false presumption and our current 'institutional' model of educating our children is outdated and obsolete. It is based on a one-size-fits-all, assembly line technology that was developed to enable factories to mass-produce cars, dishwashers and hamburgers in a cost-effective manner.

The first problem with this model is that Children are not one-size-fits-all. And as we place more and more academic demands on our children presumably to compete effectively in a post-industrial economy, the more children fail to succeed in this on-size-fits-all institutional model.

The second problem with the model is that the teaching model is no longer cost effective. The time, energy and money required to remediate, accommodate and otherwise ameliorate the ever-increasing academic struggles and failings of our current student population (not to mention the social cost of these failing students) is growing at a staggering rate (more that 24% of K-12 students are experiencing significant struggles in one or more areas.

If we are to move forward and deliver to our children the education that they need to succeed in the 21st century, post-industrial age, we must get the focus off the institution, and back on to the children--not as members of a group , but as unique individuals. We must acknowledge or at least consider that unless each individual child is taught to learn effectively using his or her unique combination of skills and abilities, he (or she) will never live up to his (or her) potential. Any future success will subsequently be limited.


Therefore, unless we are willing to consider a radical change and a fundamental shift in our presuppositions about what education and learning is, our educational system will, according to the current trend, continue to fail even more and more children.

What can be done? IMHO, it is not the teachers who need more skills to teach. It is the children who need the skills to learn. If the answer is so easy and obvious, then why aren't we doing this already?

I think one answer is simply that the nature of any organization or institution is to survive and grow. In our culture, that means more clients, bigger budgets and lower costs. In our institution of public education, that means more students, larger classrooms and problems that only licensed (unionized) teachers can solve.

Consider, what would happen to our schools if students could receive the same or better education by first 'learning to learn' using their natural gifts, and second, receiving individualized instruction at home and via the internet?

There is already a great deal of evidence to suggest that many students will assimilate the same information in one-half to one-quarter of the time given the skills to learn and an individualized, self-paced online curriculum.

If this model were to grow, these huge institutions called schools would no longer be needed. The teachers and administrators who 'run the factory' would be no more needed than an auto worker in Flint, Michigan (a nod to Roger More). All the publishers of the ever-changing text books would also no longer be needed.

I'm not suggesting that every parent pull their child from public school. But I am suggesting that armed with a set of 'Essential Learning Skills', virtually any child can succeed in any school, with any teacher and any curriculum.

At the NLC, we offer parents and children the opportunity to acquire those 16 Essential Learning Skills in as little as 14 days. Visit us at http://www.swish4fish.com and download our free booklet on Understanding Learning styles and Strategies.