The discussion of education and poverty has heralded me back to a paper I wrote last year about how our 1960's style of education is robotic in nature. Poverty and Education are linked, those with better education arguably do better than those who have not. Lack of good education is a complex issue, and as such I could've written an entire book on all the different factors, but I instead focused on the way we teach. This is not a critique of teachers themselves, but the system in general, which I think needs major reform to adapt to the 21st century. This was my experience in my school growing up. Anyway, I'd like to share my paper with you all:
Of
all the academic issues that plague adult learners today, the Robot Effect is one
of the most troubling. What is the Robot Effect? It is simply put the turning
of students into automatons whose only function is to absorb and then output
data precisely as told to. It dehumanizes students, inhibits critical thinking
and does not encourage problematizing. This begins during the formative years
of K-12 and the effects can last a lifetime. The Robot Effect causes problems
that are seen in the workforce today, as well as in higher education, because
it enforces the didactic learning style which stifles creativity and innovation.
A frame of reference is an idea that is discussed by Jack Mezirow, former
university professor and author of the theory of “Transformative learning”
states that; “Frames of reference are the structures of assumptions through
which we understand our experiences” (8). The Robot Effect shapes our frame of
reference negatively towards education and can be a block for those that could
benefit from pursuing a college degree.
When examining the Robot Effect, one must consider the
cause, who it affects, when the effect is felt, and why it is a detriment to
all who are exposed. The Robot Effect should be viewed negatively because it
limits a person’s thinking by forcing students to learn the same way, which
does not address the needs of the individual student, it also does not
encourage real world type problem solving. It creates a generation of people
who are easily replaceable in the workforce. The Robot Effect is caused from an
outdated/overburdened and underfunded education based on a teacher student
narrative of control. The Robot Effect hurts the workforce by creating an
employee base that is unable to critically think and innovate. Innovation is at
the heart of business. Every day new ideas are presented and old ideas are
re-examined to see if we can improve on them. In these two areas people need to
be able to “think out of the box” and innovate in order to come up with new
interesting ideas. This is where the Robot Effect is a huge problem. Many who
have learned this way lack the habits of mind required to think and innovate as
well as be self-directed and independent. The result of this is people who are
unable to cope with the business world of today.
The ability to problematize is also essential today for
new developments and innovations. The Robot Effect, however, is the antithesis
of being able to problematize. Robots don’t innovate, robots don’t
problematize, they only do what they are told exactly how they are told to do
it. The system is flawed by not showing other/more different ways of thinking. This
attitude is prevalent in K-12 education as you are told to answer questions a
certain way and not deviate. There are some questions that have definitive,
known answers: what color is the sky and what is the sum of two plus two? But
not everything is so cut and dry, teachers don’t always tell you the
fundamental ideas behind the color of the sky, or the concepts behind two plus
two. In the Robot Effect, it’s either
right or wrong, 1 or 0, and yes or no.
This
of course does not place the blame on the teacher; it is the system itself that
is at fault. Paulo Freire, a Brazilian born (and later exiled) educator,
references this by saying “Those who use the banking approach, knowingly or
unknowingly (for there are innumerable well-intentioned bank-clerk teachers who
do not realize they are only serving to dehumanize), fail to perceive that the
deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality” (243). In fact there
are many wonderful educators who are dedicated to opening up the minds and
hearts of the student, but a student must also be self-directed to benefit from
them. A good example of this is found in Mike Rose’s essay “Entering the
Conversation” where Rose, a professor of social research methodology at UCLA,
had a series of instructors who changed his frame of reference and taught him
the skills to become a self-directed learner and broadened his abilities as a
student. Teachers like the ones Mike Rose had are what free adult learners from
the Robot Effect, using an idea known as “Transformative Learning” that was
championed by Jack Mezirow. The “problem-posing” method offered by Freire is a
similar approach to “Transformative Learning.” “Problem –posing education bases itself on
creativity and stimulates true reflection and action upon reality; thereby
responding to the vocation of persons as beings who are authentic only when
engaged in inquiry and creative transformation.” (249) In this quote from
“Entering the Conversation” Rose shows that: “They liked books and ideas, and
liked to talk about them in ways that fostered growth rather than established
dominance” (108).Sadly, there are not a lot of students today who are able to
find these types of liberal educators unless they enter higher education. By that time, their frames of reference may
be so jaded when it comes to education that they do not enter into the higher
levels after K-12, or the didactic learning style is so comfortable to the
student that he/she is unable or unwilling to branch out and become a cognitive
self-directed learner. Frames of
reference are an important factor in education, and life in general, they shape
our world and what we expect from it for example, if you have a negative
experience with a math teacher you may end up with a bad attitude towards math
in general, If you have a negative experience in K-12, you may not wish to
continue education after.
A
major issue within the Robot Effect is the idea of control. There are rules
built into today’s education systems that encourage the use of dominance and
control over a student. The teacher has the knowledge, the student has nothing,
the teacher has the voice, the student must stay quiet, and the teacher can
punish you, even take away your property, and give you detention, the
equivalent of serving time in the jail system for minors. The teacher
effectively uses these tools to dominate the class so that the students do what
they are told. Paulo Freire can be tied into this idea of dominance when it
comes to adult education and the workforce. In one of his pieces “The Banking
Concept of Education.”, Freire uses the idea of the banking system as a form of
control, where the instructor controls the classroom, establishes dominance
over the student, and inputs knowledge he or she believes is most important for
the student to have. Not only that, but the instructor also attempts to get all
of the students to see only the frame of reference presented. This is a lot
like a factory, a place where I’ve spent quite a number of years working at,
where being a didactic learner is most useful. The idea that was drilled within
our heads as a machine operator was that the machine does not make mistakes. It
is the operator that is at fault, and so long as you (the operator) follow
instructions to the letter, you will have a perfect part all the time. The
issue here is that actual robots have become a commonplace staple within the
factory, so why would we continue to educate in a way that creates human robots
for manufacturing careers when actual robots can do it better, and more
cheaply?
The
Robot Effect causes harm to the people within it by making them think in an
obsolete kind of way and tailoring them for careers that are being automated,
therefore the worker himself is becoming obsolete. This leads to a disparate
workforce who are unable to work in the field they were best at, and unable to
learn new skills and new ways of thinking to be able to work in other fields
that require the worker to be a critical thinker. In his essay “Transformative
Learning” “Jack Mezirow references the “Key Competencies for workforce
preparation identified by the Australian government, employers, and academics
include analyzing information, communicating ideas, planning and organizing
activities, using mathematical ideas and technology, working in teams, solving
problems and using cultural understandings” (8).” None of these competencies
are really taught by the Robotic style of learning, therefore students going
into these types of workplaces after K-12 are not prepared for them, instead
they require a college education that many cannot, or will not be able to enter
into.
There
is another, more personal issue involved in the Robot Effect, it is the fear of
becoming self-directed, of throwing off the shackles of didactic learning, and
no longer being a receptacle of knowledge as Freire would put it. It is fear
that can stop many adults from entering higher education. They look back into
the experiences of K-12 and think of being told that they were wrong when they
had a different idea, or that they were not smart because they learned
differently than was expected, and therefore developed the frame of reference
that they could never make it college. Mike Rose referenced this fear of
education, “And my fears of science and mathematics prevailed: Pereira hall,
the math and engineering building, seemed and unfriendly mirage, a malevolent
castle floating in the haze of a mescaline dream “(99). To many adults this is
how a college appears. It is not just those who choose not to go to college,
but even those who are in college are affected by the fears from didactic learning.
To
succeed one must become a self-directed learner, but fear of looking stupid in
front of your peers and your instructor comes from the experience of being told
that you’re wrong in K-12 can stop an adult learner from participating much
like the story of Mike Rose and how his frustrations often discouraged him. Also
the lack of communication between student and teacher during K-12 can also hurt
the adult learner because they cannot create a dialogue where the students’
ideas are heard. Consequently in higher education many students do not attempt
to communicate their ideas as they draw upon their frames of reference of what
a classroom is supposed to be, as shown to them in the K-12 environment. The
K-12 environment according to Freire is one of narration. “This relationship involves
a narrating subject (the teacher) and patient listening objects (the students)”
(240). The fear created from this relationship is an inhibiting factor when it
comes to getting the most out of higher education. Mezirow states that in a
successful classroom “The educator functions as a facilitator and provocateur
rather than an authority on subject matter.”(11) That currently is not the case
in K-12 and we have the Robot Effect to blame. Robots do not engage in dialogue
with their programmers, nor do robots even have ideas to communicate. Another
fear that adult learners contend with due to the Robot Effect is the fear of
questioning the teacher, the teacher known for his dominance over the classroom
in K-12 is portrayed as someone who cannot be questioned, and someone who can
punish you for questioning them. It is this fear that rules the classroom. Just
like a robot, a student cannot question its master.
An
important aspect of the Robot Effect is the dehumanization of the student. When
a student is dehumanized the very core of who they are is taken away, objectifying
them. Mezirow states that “A defining
condition of being human is that we have to understand the meaning of our
experience. For some, any uncritically assimilated explanation by an authority
figure will suffice. But in contemporary societies we must learn to make our
own interpretations rather than act on the purposes, beliefs, judgments, and
feelings of others” (5). Freire agrees with this approach in that humanization states
that; “people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in
the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the
world not as a static reality , but as a reality in process, in transformation.”
(248) The Robot Effect opposes that defining condition and serves to dehumanize
by empowering a single authority figure to explain everything you’ll ever need
to know about education. A student who is dehumanized will still have ideas,
thoughts, feelings but they will not be acknowledged and because of that, their
frame of reference changes into one where they know their thoughts and ideas
are not heard and therefore not valued. When in a classroom those who are
dehumanized become disillusioned and angry at the education system and can act
out or choose to no longer pursue an education as an adult. Dehumanization in
K-12 leads to the assumption of being dehumanized in higher education, and in
workforce too.
In
education there are those who forge ahead with learning, who are not content
with being simple receptacles. These people are not overachievers; they are
people who are taking an active role in their education. They are the
self-directed learners. Being a self-directed learner means that you as a
student are the one who is most involved with your success, the burden falls to
you when it comes to being successful. People tend to go the way of least
resistance, and they tend to blame all but themselves when something goes
wrong. Being a self-directed learner puts the work in the students’ hands, as
well as the blame. The fear of doing the work and taking all the blame makes
the didactic style of learning an attractive alternative for many; it’s also
familiar and therefore comfortable since we all grew up with the didactic
learning style. Taking your education into your own hands is risky, it’s much
easier to become a receptacle as Freire puts it, and it’s easier for the
teachers of K-12 who have overloaded classrooms and unruly students. For the
adult learner it’s easy to get set in their ways and be afraid of change and
doing what is ultimately best for them.
The
Robot Effect affects the workplace by creating a workforce that is unable to
innovate, critically think, and problematize. It has the effect of displacing
workers who only know how to take information and follow it exactly with robots
that are more efficient, cost less and usually perform perfectly. The Robot
Effect also creates the problems in adult education by giving students a
negative connotation of education, which is based on a teacher to student
narrative resulting in a classroom where few students participate because of
the fear of being told they are wrong just for seeing things from a different
perspective than the instructor. Finally the Robot Effect creates the fear of
taking education into your own hands due to spending 12 years of school being
told to think a certain way, listen to the teacher, never question anyone in
charge, and that your ideas do not matter. Then there is the fear that taking
your education into your own hands is too big of a risk to take. Compounded by
the fear of failure, as referenced by Rose, is why the Robot Effect is so
dangerous. This is why something must be done to K-12 education so that our
future workers, and adult learners, do not have to struggle to learn to think
for themselves.
Works Cited
Rose, Mike. Lives on the Boundary: The Struggles
and Achievements of America's Underprepared. N.p.: n.p., 1989. 93-108.
Print.
Freire, Paulo. Education for Critical
Consciousness. N.p.: n.p., 1973. 240-51. Print.
Mezirow, Jack. Transformative Learning: Theory to
Practice. N.p.: n.p., 1991. 5-11. Print.