Ivan Snook: Dark times for classroom enthusiasm and creativity

Opinion

Recently, Massey University conferred an honorary doctorate on an 80-year-old man, Elwyn Richardson. He was honoured for his creative approach to teaching, for which he became renowned in New Zealand and overseas.

Central to his work was his profound respect for the emerging abilities of his students; he drew out the best in them and developed their latent talents.

Nearly 20 years ago, the Government transformed the whole structure of education, as well as much else beside.

The result was not just a change in structures, funding and administrative procedures. What changed was the nature of teaching, the nature of learning and, arguably, the very nature of the students. As a result:

* Bookkeeping has replaced pastoral care.

* Testing has squeezed out teaching.

* Skills training has replaced education.

* Competition has driven out co-operation, and compliance has pushed out creativity.

* Teachers face increased surveillance by means of standardised curriculums, frequent appraisals, and supervision by the Education Review Office.

* Teachers are less and less permitted to think for themselves: they are seen not as professionals but as skilled technicians.

* Where they used to help design the curriculum, now they merely "deliver" it.

* And the school's role in promoting social justice has been minimised. To raise it is to be deemed "politically correct", a term of abuse that discourages any concern for fairness.

The task of educators is to develop the minds and hearts of young people by introducing them into the traditions of human thought and feeling painfully gained over the centuries and preserved in the sciences, humanities and arts.

Yet, under the new regime, teachers are asked simply to prepare young people to be workers: their future as informed and thoughtful citizens is neglected.

Not only that. It seems that we now face a new breed of students: "children of the market". Much of the evidence for this is anecdotal, but it is starting to show up in more formal studies.

An Otago University study noted the recent emergence of a new group of young people. They exhibit high levels of materialism and consumption, have few political interests, lack any concern for a healthy diet, do not place any value on family life and focus on individual activities such as TV and video games.

These findings reinforce the growing international literature on "kiddyculture". Led by business interests, young people are seduced by video games, text messaging, music, food chains and movies to see their main function in life as consumers. And they not only consume physical things: they see education, not as the gentle nurturing of the human spirit but as a commodity to be bought, used and discarded. This makes teachers' job difficult.

In contrasting the idealism of Elwyn Richardson with the profound changes of the past few years, I am drawing attention to teachers' difficult position. They are caught between the personal and the political. Wanting to get on with the exciting task of educating students, they are subjected at every turn to distracting political demands.

And this is never-ending. If you scan the educational policies of political parties as we approach a general election, you will see that there is more to come. They just cannot leave education alone.

Education is now a major site of struggle: for political parties, for business interests, and, indeed, for every group that wants to capture the hearts of the young.

At all levels of the system, I find staff engaged in "joyless compliance", carrying out meaningless tasks to comply with some managerial dogma. The next step is cynicism. There is nothing sadder than a cynical teacher: cynicism dries up the energy needed to confront energetic young people day after day.

A better response is the nurturing of critical faculties. Critical thought cuts through the nonsense that passes for educational wisdom and motivates us to find better answers. Critical thinking will not only help teachers to resolve their tensions: it is an attitude that will rub off on students who, themselves, may be led to resist the kiddyculture in which they are immersed.

To this end I suggest that teachers:

* Keep up professional reading so they can recognise nonsense even when it comes from principals or the Education Review Office.

* Continue to think. Take nothing for granted, especially when it comes from those bent on subverting the educational ideal.

* Work collegially with those teachers who still retain their enthusiasm despite the constant attacks on teachers.

* Form coalitions with parents, for they really care about their children. Parents and teachers are natural allies, though powerful forces work to drive them apart.

* Conform where you have to and resist where you can. In the long run, the forces of light may be more powerful than the forces of darkness.

The ability of people to participate in society depends on the quality of the education they receive. And this depends not on large bureaucracies, glossy brochures, curriculum documents or flowery mission statements but on the personal qualities of teachers.

* This is an extract of a graduation address delivered last month by Ivan Snook, emeritus professor of education at Massey University.