Humanist Theory: My Take

Aspects of Humanist Theory seemed to be designed out of fear of a transition to “fluffy” Progressivism. This is not said in spite of the Humanists. I actually believe that it’s crucial to have such a strong dichotomy between the two traditions so that both sides are kept in check. I also believe there is a lot of merit in the arguments presented by Finn and Hirsch, with emphasis on the latter. Finn’s article provides good recommendations on what to do about the ill state of our education system, but they all seem quite self-evident and aren’t much of a source of controversy. Who wouldn’t want these prescriptions to happen? With that said, there were parts of the prescriptions that really resonated with me.

I can personally relate to Finn’s thoughts on social promotion because of my summer experience teaching in China. Please take note of the picture on the top left corner of the blog. That girl’s English name is Chanel. It was through my experience teaching her that I came to realize that social promotion can create a very negative viral effect in a classroom. Chanel couldn’t understand any spoken English but was placed in my pre-intermediate classroom because of her age and the status of her father. I honestly didn’t mind that her being in the classroom made my job more difficult; what bothered me was how little she took away from the classroom. The unique quality of second language education is that this trend of falling behind becomes very apparent immediately. It’s quite easy for educators to see that students aren’t receiving any benefit being in a class taught at a level above their ability. Yet, why do parents and educators let this become less salient with other subjects? I agree with Finn. Social promotion is disastrous, and it places unnecessary burden on the teacher while driving students into a position from which they cannot recover. Additionally, I strongly agree with Finn’s call for more homework (if the homework is purposeful). I believe we must instill the idea of education as an investment in our children. We must teach our children that sometimes it is necessary to delay immediate gratification in the pursuit of more valued rewards.

Although Finn’s prescriptions seem hard to argue, Hirsch’s article is quite a bit more inflammatory. This is expected of an article that seeks to discredit expected norms. In short, I support Hirsch yet believe his theory is too exclusive. It is appealing to us all to believe that the findings of the Coleman Report are not inherent and inevitable. Like I mentioned in my “personal snapshot,” I believe in the power of the transformative teacher. Charismatic teachers like John Keating (from Dead Poets Society) are the key to bridging the gap between a strict focus on a common literate culture and making material meaningful to each student. Doesn’t the idea of a common literate culture rest on the presumption that teachers can succeed at making each student understand the core knowledge being thrown their way? This takes a degree of child-centered teaching. Good teachers can achieve this, and this is why I feel Hirsch falls short in being fearful of Progressivism.