| Current
Articles, Interviews and Commentary
from
USA Today , September 24, 2002
Remodel Public Schools
into Knowledge Factories
By John Merrow
Politicians
sometimes characterize public schools as factories, grim places
where students are mere objects moving along an assembly line as
teachers attempt to pour knowledge into them. This metaphor assumes
that factories are the antithesis of quality. In fact, the opposite
often is true.
Public schools would do well to emulate today's most modern factories:
efficient, clean, productive and accountable. In contrast to many
schools:
Industries know workers are more productive in clean,
safe, modern facilities.
The average public school is 42 years old. A National Education
Association study in 2000 estimated it would cost $268.2 billion
to repair our schools.
Factories stress accuracy.
Schools have trouble measuring student progress accurately and have
a long history of promoting students based on their age and "seat
time" instead of their academic accomplishments.
Modern factories emphasize teamwork.
Employees often need training in team building; however, because
cooperation isn't taught in school, when students "cooperate," it's
called cheating. Teachers also rarely cooperate. They work alone,
and their work - teaching - is hidden from their peers.
Today's factory workers are held accountable.
By contrast, teachers and administrators are rarely held accountable.
In a practice known cynically as "passing the trash," some teachers
pass failing students, making them some other teacher's problem
next year.
Factories - old and new - actually make things.
Many schools can't make that claim. Instead, they're more like old-fashioned
egg-grading plants: places that exist to sort, classify and reject
-but do not take responsibility for the rejects.
Our old-style schools look and act that way by design. They were
set up to sort children into "winners" and "losers" at a time when
an industrial-age economy needed an efficient way of differentiating
between those who would dig ditches or work the fields and those
who would sit behind desks and give orders. This sorting continues,
with standardized tests intended to make the decisions appear to
be "objective."
Our information-age economy cannot afford such "winners" and "losers."
It needs an ever-increasing number of workers who can access and
process information, work in teams, communicate easily and learn
new skills. Unfortunately, the ongoing national effort to raise
educational standards focuses largely on test scores, not these
necessary skills. That's why the shortest route to better public
schools would be to emulate the modern factory - with two crucial
differences.
Factories
use the same materials and the same processes to produce identical,
interchangeable parts, because the aim is uniformity. Of course,
that is not what we want for our children. Schools should emulate
the modern factory's reliance on clear standards and its low tolerance
for failure - but not its concern for uniformity.
The second
key difference involves what's being produced. In my "school as
factory" metaphor, students are the workers, and knowledge the
product. Students learn and constantly evaluate their work with
the help and supervision of teachers, the "factory foremen" whose
job is to maximize output - learning - and see that all workers
achieve to the best of their abilities.
Like factories,
schools should be held responsible for outcomes, which requires
clear goals and standards. If a chip-production plant fails to achieve
its goals, the management doesn't blame the chips or make the employees
work longer hours, the way some push for more schooling. Instead,
the managers examine the factory's procedures and make necessary
corrections.
Our economy can no longer afford schools that pick winners and losers.
What we need is to produce highly educated, well-rounded students
based on the standards and approaches used by our most modern and
effective factories.
|