Changing Education Paradigms Questions

1. We thought that the video was really interesting. We agreed that his comment on the ADHD epidemic being fictitious was one of his more accurate points. People use ADHD as a fall back to control students who do not fit into the conventional conveyor belt system of education. We also liked his comment on the factory like model of education, and felt that this tied into his point about ADHD and the arts. We are attempting to mass produce kids and standardize what they know; this idea is archaic, as we know that each child is different and has a unique perspective to contribute.

2. We agree that the education system was made for a group of people that does not make up the majority anymore. This being said, the system is outdated and needs to change. For Jenifer, the idea of putting kids in their age group was a problem because it made you feel slow if you could not keep up. I feel that I was able to function in the archaic system of education, I found it easy, but really boring. I loved when teachers would break the mold of education and let us do art or hands on science, rather than memorizing facts in a Vulcan like style. We also agree that the education system has a tendency to crush ingenuity. As kids travel through the system they lose the ability to think creatively because they must conform to the system. 

3. We wanted to ask him what his ideal model of education would be. He talks about how education in standardized, but does not offer a solution. How would you suggest addressing the ADHD epidemic. What can be done?

4. We think it did. We think that we should really find ways to use his advice in the classroom, maybe by moving outside of the standards and thinking outside the box. Jennifer thinks that as a teacher you should break the conventional methods that have been taught to teachers, by finding creative solutions to problems rather than conventional answers. I think that we should take into consideration that our students are not factory made products, but rather individuals with unique talents and ideas.

5.Yeah we should. If you move outside the idea of standardization and conventional intelligence you tap into a new source of creative problem solvers. By limiting who is considered bright and intelligent you lose out on some of the more creative and insightful individuals that humanity has as a resource. Once we loose these people to the idea that they are average or below average we crush their ingenuity and fit them into a mold that they could far exceed.