The debate about 'traditional' v 'progressive' education

Whether or not you are using the Phonics International Programme, feel free to visit this informal 'Chat' forum!
Here you will find all sorts of interesting articles, links to research and developments - and various interesting topics! Do join in!
Post Reply
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

The debate about 'traditional' v 'progressive' education

Post by debbie »

As someone who strongly promotes research-informed reading instruction, I realise that this is associated closely with the label of 'traditional' education as it involves explicit teacher-led instruction of structured, systematic content - and learners practising largely with paper and pencil, sitting-at-desks focused application.

My philosophy on education generally, however, is not about the promotion of 'traditional' practices (in so far as these can be categorised).

I've left a reader's comment on Greg Ashman's posting 'Destroying the Death Star is only the beginning':


https://gregashman.wordpress.com/2015/1 ... beginning/

Greg writes:
...I don’t tend to write much about traditionalism versus progressivism in education. I tend to favour explicit teaching of a body of knowledge but, in some people’s minds, ‘traditionalism’ also means corporal punishment and selection. I don’t argue for these.

However, the education debate on social media does tend to divide into these two broad categories and so they serve a useful distinction. There is nothing intrinsically political about this. Instead of seeing it as conservatives versus liberals, it is much more accurate to portray the discussion as the enlightenment arguing with the romantics. It is clearly the traditionalists who have science on their side and the progressives who are most likely to reject science as a basis for understanding education....
Do read Greg's full post - it is not long! :D

Greg's blog is well worth a visit.
Last edited by debbie on Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Debbie Hepplewhite
User avatar
debbie
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: UK

Post by debbie »

I respond thus:

As an advocate for research-informed reading instruction which is associated, probably, with the ‘traditional’ label, I’d like to speak up for an approach in our schools which is, arguably, the ‘best of both worlds’.
We are in modern times when the internet enables learners to seek out information and ideas for themselves – and learners are indeed ‘individuals’ with the capacity – one hopes – to live their lives with a wide spread of experiences.

I am first and foremost a practical person – and one who cares about the quality of the experiences of young people who have no choice but to attend our school institutions.

It is surely important that children learn that they are very special – each individual – but no more special than anyone else.

Thus, there are times when it is suitable for them to be just one of a whole class listening to the knowledge and experience of the teacher followed by application of that knowledge and practice as individuals in whatever skills are associated with the subject.

And there are times when it is suitable for learners to have opportunities to express their individualism and to explore their own ideas and creativity – be it as individuals or within group situations.

Above all, it is humane for children and people to have changes throughout a working day and working week/month/term/year so that their educational diet is truly rich and varied.

This, in practical terms, means that following a ‘sitting down and concentrating quietly lesson’ we would provide a more active, physical lesson or more free opportunities to develop – regardless of the ‘subject’.

This approach can be expressed simply as ‘ringing the changes’.

In broad terms, for me this means a combination of more ‘traditional’ and ‘progressive’ practices.

The BEST of both worlds.
Debbie Hepplewhite
Post Reply