On one of my first business trips to the United States 25 years ago, I visited a Texas university. Convinced that local students loved all-nighters as much as Moscow students did, I was interested to learn whether strict attendance records were kept at lectures. "They don't keep track at all," I was told. "These are our studies that we are paying for."
My son is now enrolled at an American elementary school, and I know that attendance is monitored almost as strictly as academic progress. But in my opinion the key point is what the students are being taught, which is a sense of responsibility for themselves and their studies.
One often hears that American schools are wild places, that students do what they want and no one stands in their way. That is a misconception. There is order there, and it is sufficiently strict. However, it is structured in such a way that it is not discipline which is relied on, but self-discipline.
Incidentally, where Americans consider it necessary, discipline can be harsher than in Russia. For example, students are not allowed to disrupt others from studying, and more particularly, to offend anyone. Reporting someone is not just devoid of shame but almost laudable. A similar attitude prevails where cheating is concerned.
In the interest of security, it is forbidden to bring to school not only real and toy weapons but also food that may cause allergic reactions, such as nuts. There is a complete ban on children touching one another. There can be no talk of a teacher raising a hand against a child, or even yelling.
So that older children do not offend younger ones, elementary schools are separate from middle schools. The problem of children being bullied by peers (it still happens, of course) is addressed not only by parents and teachers, but also by the authorities. Recently there was a national conference at the White House on this issue, with President Barack Obama participating.
Yet despite all of this, schools are not overly rigid. Students are not made to wear uniforms, they interact with teachers and even principals fairly freely; in lessons they can sit at their desks or on the floor (naturally, all of this happens with the teacher's consent), they do not have grade books, they do not study penmanship or learn math by rote.
For instance, learning to solve math problems using an established template is not simply absent but is fundamentally rejected. The direct opposite is the norm: "one right answer" almost never happens in learning, or for that matter in real life.
That is just one of the important local lessons. Children are taught that they must have tolerance for the opinions of others, that "different does not mean bad." By the way, all of the quotes are drawn from my conversations with American and Russian principals and school teachers, child psychologists and parents.
I am not attempting to compare the educational methods accepted in Russia and the U.S. But in terms of form and method, a fundamentally different "ideology" is evident to me. We have a well-known principle: "If you can't, we will teach you. If you don't want to, we will make you."
They have a choice: no one is going to make you study, although you can count on getting help. And you will be ready to bear responsibility for the choices you make.
Many in fact do not study, as a result of immaturity, difficult life circumstances or for other reasons. And it is not only they who pay the price but the whole country, as Obama himself does not tire of reminding people. The U.S. does not hold a high position in international education ratings.
Freedom has an even more dramatic downside. Tragedies like the Columbine High School shooting in 1999 by two teenagers have left an indelible mark on the public consciousness in the United States. And yet I am sure, from my overall perspective based on independence, conscience and freedom of choice, including the right to make mistakes, that Americans will not pull back. It is not in their DNA. And in schools, children are taught that making mistakes is normal.
A different matter is that not everyone agrees with this approach. Recently, America enthusiastically read and discussed a book written by a self-proclaimed "tiger mom" about raising children. Chinese-American Amy Chua argued that in her experience, children need to be unmercifully drilled, not allowed to make mistakes or be lazy or to behave with impunity. She said that the children themselves will one day say thank you.
Earlier, a Korean mother in the school courtyard related something similar to me. She also contrasted the "domineering" style, in her view a "typical Asian" style, with the standard American way. But to her, these "tiger" variations on the theme of "we do not teach them, we just make them" are not to her liking.
Nor to mine. In my opinion, constantly controlling a child means he is being trained to be irresponsible. He himself is not answering for his behavior, studies, and eventually his entire life, but others, adults, are.
This cripples him inwardly. Dependence, distrust of his strengths, and a habit of relying on outside "guidelines" is ingrained. It can give rise to insincerity and lying and a servile attitude, under which a person obeys outwardly, but at the slightest opportunity attempts to deceive, work carelessly, and slack off in his studies, in the military, or at his job. A protest arises.
I want to emphasize two more things about school classes and life in the United States. The first is the genuine sincerity and honesty, born of a happy lack of understanding of why it would be necessary to feign or pretend. This also takes root in childhood.
Of course, Americans can also lie, go along or remain silent when it is convenient, or even just out of politeness. (They are, as a whole, well-mannered, including the children.) And many among them listen to government propaganda and believe that America is always right in everything.
But whether they believe it or not, they talk. They do not "sing with a different voice" just to "be like everyone else," especially if it would involve self-deception and self-censorship. Therefore, their convictions, knowledge and experience are, as a rule, their own and not borrowed.
Incidentally, several authors in the U.S. see in this an important difference in their country from China, as if it is not flustering everyone now with all of its academic successes. According to them, the Chinese are chasing after university degrees and a number of scientific publications, but they are erring on the side of conformity, copying and direct plagiarism. They are making few original breakthroughs, and they continue to lag behind the U.S. in terms of innovation.
And there is one more thing: However strange, Americans are dedicated collectivists. They do not know this word in its essence, and would be very surprised to be called that. But in business, even with all their notorious individualism, they place a high value on mutual trust, generosity, patience and tolerance. (If you do not believe me, look closely at an American line when you get a chance.)
There is an ability to unite and act together for the general good. Children are taught this at a very young age. In essence, it is these very "grassroots" which, when woven together, make a canvas of the entire American way of life.
В одну из первых своих служебных командировок в США четверть века назад я ездил в Техасский университет.
Убедившись, что тамошние студенты не меньше московских любят полуночные загулы, я поинтересовался, строго ли у них следят за посещаемостью на лекциях. "Совсем не следят, - ответили мне. - Это же наша учеба, за которую мы сами платим".
Теперь мой сын учится в американской начальной школе, и я знаю, что там за посещаемостью следят чуть ли не строже, чем за успеваемостью. Но, по-моему, главное, чему там учат, это как раз чувство ответственности за себя и свою учебу.
Часто приходится слышать, будто в американских школах царит дикая вольница, дети делают, что хотят, и никто им в этом не препятствует. Это заблуждение. Порядок там есть, и достаточно строгий. Просто он сознательно устроен так, чтобы опираться не на контроль, а на самоконтроль.
Впрочем, и контроль бывает куда жестче российского - там, где американцы считают это нужным. Например, они не позволяют детям мешать другим учиться и тем более обижать других. Наябедничать на обидчика не только не зазорно, но и почти почетно. Кстати, схожее отношение и к списыванию.
Для физической безопасности запрещено приносить в школу не только оружие - настоящее и игрушечное, но и съестное, способное вызвать аллергическую реакцию, например, орехи. Действует полный запрет на прикосновения детей друг к другу. О том, чтобы на ребенка поднял руку или просто накричал учитель, не может быть и речи.
Чтобы старшие ребята не обижали маленьких, начальная школа отделена от средней. Проблемой травли детей сверстниками (а она, конечно, все же существует) занимаются не только родители и учителя, но и власти. Недавно в Белом доме прошла общенациональная конференция на эту тему с участием президента страны Барака Обамы.
При всем том внешне гайки в школах здесь закручены не туго. Учащихся не заставляют носить форму, они достаточно вольно разговаривают с учителями и даже директором, на уроках могут сидеть за партами, а могут и на полу (естественно, все же с согласия учителя), не имеют дневников с отметками, не занимаются чистописанием и подсчетами типа "две клеточки вниз, три клеточки вбок" и т.п.
Требование решать, например, математическую задачу по установленному шаблону не просто отсутствует, а принципиально отвергается. Установка прямо противоположная: "единственно верных" решений практически не бывает ни в учебе, ни тем более в жизни.
Это как раз один из главных местных уроков. Детям внушают, что необходима терпимость к чужому мнению, что "иной не значит плохой". Кстати, все цитаты почерпнуты из моих бесед с американскими и российскими директорами и преподавателями школ, детскими психологами, родителями.
Сравнивать методики обучения, принятые в России и США, я не берусь. Но за формами и методами мне видится принципиально разная "идеология". У нас известный принцип: "не можешь - научим, не хочешь - заставим". У них - выбор: учись сам, заставлять никто не будет, хотя на помощь можешь рассчитывать. И будь готов нести ответственность за то, что предпочтешь.
Многие, кстати, не учатся - в силу детского легкомыслия, тяжелых жизненных обстоятельств или иных причин. Расплачиваться за это приходится не только им самим, но и всей стране, о чем не устает напоминать тот же Обама. В профильных международных рейтингах США занимают невысокие места.
Есть у свободы и еще более драматичная оборотная сторона. Трагедии наподобие массовой бойни, устроенной в 1999 г. двумя подростками в средней школе "Колумбайн", оставляют неизгладимый след в общественном сознании США.
И все же я уверен, что от своего общего подхода, основанного на самостоятельности, сознательности и свободе выбора, означающего помимо всего прочего и право на ошибку, американцы не отступят. Это у них в крови. И в школах детей учат, что ошибаться тоже нормально.
Другое дело, что с этим согласны не все. Недавно Америка с увлечением читала и обсуждала книжку самозваной "матери-тигрицы" о воспитании детей. Местная китаянка Эми Чуа на своем опыте доказывала, что их надо нещадно муштровать, не прощая ошибок и лени и не считаясь с обидами. Дескать, потом сами спасибо скажут.
Еще раньше нечто подобное рассказывала мне знакомая по школьному двору мама-кореянка. Она тоже противопоставляла "командный" стиль - на ее взгляд, "типично азиатский" - стандартному американскому. Но ей как раз "тигриные" вариации на тему "не научим, так заставим" не по душе.
Мне тоже. По-моему, постоянно контролировать ребенка значит приучать его к безответственности. К тому, что за его поведение, учебу, в конечном счете за всю его жизнь отвечает не он сам, а другие, взрослые.
Это духовно калечит. Прививает несамостоятельность, неверие в собственные силы, привычку полагаться на чужие "руководящие указания". Может порождать неискренность и лживость, холопскую психологию, при которой человек слушается напоказ, но при малейшей возможности норовит обмануть, схалтурить, "закосить" - от учебы, от армии, от работы. Вызывает протест.
Среди уроков школы и жизни в США я хочу выделить еще буквально две вещи. Прежде всего вот эту самую искренность, правдивость, рожденную счастливым непониманием того, зачем вообще притворяться и лицемерить. Это тоже прививается с детства.
Нет, конечно, американцы могут в известных обстоятельствах сказать неправду, поддакнуть или осмотрительно промолчать из соображений собственной выгоды или даже просто из вежливости (они в массе своей хорошо воспитаны, включая и детей). Конечно, и среди них многие оболванены госпропагандой и верят в то, что Америка всегда и во всем права.
Но именно верят, а если не верят, то так и говорят. "Петь с чужого голоса" просто ради того, чтобы "быть как все", они не станут. Тем более если для этого необходимо заниматься самообманом, самовнушением, самоцензурой.
Поэтому и убеждения, и знания, и навыки у них, как правило, свои, незаемные. И, между прочим, некоторые авторы в США видят в этом важное отличие их страны от того же Китая, как бы тот ни нервировал сейчас всех своими академическими успехами. По их словам, китайцы "гонят вал" по университетским дипломам и количеству научных публикаций, но при этом грешат конформизмом, вторичностью, а то и прямым плагиатом, дают мало оригинальных прорывных решений, продолжают отставать от США в сфере инноваций.
И еще одно напоследок: как ни странно, американцы - убежденные коллективисты.
Слова этого они по сути не знают и очень удивились бы, что их можно так назвать. Но на деле они при всем своем пресловутом индивидуализме очень высоко ценят взаимное доверие, щедрость, терпимость и терпеливость (кто не верит - присмотритесь при случае к американской очереди). Умение объединяться по интересам, действовать сообща на общее благо. Этому же с младых ногтей учат детей. По сути это те самые "корни травы", которые, переплетаясь, образуют канву всего американского образа жизни.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The madness lies in asserting something ... contrary to all evidence and intelligence. The method is doing it again and again, relentlessly, at full volume ... This is how Trump became president twice.
The economic liberalism that the world took for granted has given way to the White House’s attempt to gain sectarian control over institutions, as well as government intervention into private companies,
I found this fascinating and wonder which school your children attended! I’m an American who worked in public schools in Houston, Texas, for twelve years–primarily with minority students–and what you describe is certainly not my experience. Yes, American schools do discourage rote learning, but, unfortunately, we have discouraged it to the extent that most of our students never acquire the foundational skills and knowledge required for a sound education. Far too many children function two to three years below their expected reading level, are still counting on their fingers when they are past the age of ten, and have little or no knowledge of proper grammar or spelling of the English language. Teachers are pressured into teaching the material on the state test rather than a full curriculum. In order to get high percentages of students passing, the curriculum is dumbed down and teachers are forced to focus on the lowest achievers, while our brightest students are allowed to stagnate or assigned ill-conceived computer programs for “enrichment.” Inappropriate and uncivil behavior is tolerated or often goes unpunished by many principals and teachers, either because they are wary of antagonizing students they depend on to earn bonuses for good test scores, or because they fear angry and uncivil parents. Rather than instilling respect and love for knowledge in and of itself, administrators and teachers bribe children to learn with prizes and trinkets or empty promises that getting an education will ensure the students will get “good” jobs when they are adults. Empty because the students not only lack the knowledge and skills necessary for the college education that might lead to a decent job, but also because our methods have not helped them acquire the work ethic that would allow them to overcome the shortcomings of their early education.
I’m not questioning or casting doubt on your experience, but I would caution you on assuming it is the norm. However, from talking to other teachers across the country (particularly those who teach in inner-city schools), I find many who are dealing with the same problems I did. And, given the rank American schools currently hold internationally, I think there is statistical evidence that suggests my experience, alas, might be more reflective of the average American school than your own.
I found this fascinating and wonder which school your children attended! I’m an American who worked in public schools in Houston, Texas, for twelve years–primarily with minority students–and what you describe is certainly not my experience. Yes, American schools do discourage rote learning, but, unfortunately, we have discouraged it to the extent that most of our students never acquire the foundational skills and knowledge required for a sound education. Far too many children function two to three years below their expected reading level, are still counting on their fingers when they are past the age of ten, and have little or no knowledge of proper grammar or spelling of the English language. Teachers are pressured into teaching the material on the state test rather than a full curriculum. In order to get high percentages of students passing, the curriculum is dumbed down and teachers are forced to focus on the lowest achievers, while our brightest students are allowed to stagnate or assigned ill-conceived computer programs for “enrichment.” Inappropriate and uncivil behavior is tolerated or often goes unpunished by many principals and teachers, either because they are wary of antagonizing students they depend on to earn bonuses for good test scores, or because they fear angry and uncivil parents. Rather than instilling respect and love for knowledge in and of itself, administrators and teachers bribe children to learn with prizes and trinkets or empty promises that getting an education will ensure the students will get “good” jobs when they are adults. Empty because the students not only lack the knowledge and skills necessary for the college education that might lead to a decent job, but also because our methods have not helped them acquire the work ethic that would allow them to overcome the shortcomings of their early education.
I’m not questioning or casting doubt on your experience, but I would caution you on assuming it is the norm. However, from talking to other teachers across the country (particularly those who teach in inner-city schools), I find many who are dealing with the same problems I did. And, given the rank American schools currently hold internationally, I think there is statistical evidence that suggests my experience, alas, might be more reflective of the average American school than your own.