The Demise of Consequence

Many parents today are dismayed by what they see their school age children bringing home as the result of their public education.   Further, they are astounded by the intellectual positions that their kids may have adopted due to the indoctrination in schools. (I'm speaking of genetics here, but further than that I will not go.  That's a topic for another post).  And those parents who may be inherently curious about what's being taught may be further astounded and, dare I say enraged, by what they may find just by doing a little research into what paradigms currently define the secondary scholastic education procedure. 

One such paradigm being used as a base for Common Core is Constructivism, and is defined as encouraging students to use active techniques (experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. The teacher makes sure she understands the students' preexisting conceptions, and guides the activity to address them and then build on them. That's their definition verbatim.  Is this a valid teaching methodology?  What will be the result of this method twenty, thirty years out?  The evidence so far would seem to conclusively point to the demise of individualism, and squarely to group think.

What happens when one denies the result of cause and effect in teaching methods?  What happens when a teacher removes the concept of consequence of actions from the teaching equation?  The answer is that students are free to discuss the relevancy their own preexisting experience and discuss others' notions, as well.  There's no wrong answer, but no right answer, either.  Peachy.  I'm warm and fuzzy all over just writing about it.

The problem with Constructivism is that it doesn't take into consideration the affect of causality.  It denies consequence.  Let's discuss why the tomato plant didn't bear fruit.  We'll fall back on our previous experiences we may have had when other plants died.  We'll formulate a consensus that plants that don't bear fruit are still alive.  We'll determine if - somewhere in the past - we've had an experience of barren fruit bearing plants.  Stroking our chins, we'll revel in the fact that we're being very scientific and learned in our views.  But we ignore the root rot the tomato plant has developed due to over watering, perhaps.  Or the grub that's gnawing away on the root structure that we inadvertently imported in the soil. But we studiously deny a consequence to an observed truth.

If the effort were to promote and nurture critical thinking in our children's developing minds, this system fails.  If the effort is to indoctrinate our kids into a non-individual group think, this system is a marvel.

Put another way, let's say we have a pet - a mature dog - who we love and adore.  We have him in the house at night, although he prefers it outside where he can excel as guard dog of the family estate.  And every night he urinates inside the house, on the wall, on a couch, on other select areas he's chosen.  Every night he does this, even though he's given the opportunity to go outside to pee before being brought into the house.  What do we do?  Do we merely contemplate his motivation?  Do we accept it as an inevitable result of pet ownership?  Or do we take action to apply a consequence to an unwanted action?  What if in this scenario the dog were a 10-year old child who had no control over her continence?  Would we allow that behavior, or would we merely arrive at a communal consensus that, well, she doesn't really mean to do it, so we'll look the other way?  And we hope she doesn't pee herself in public and embarrass the family name.  But insanely, in either case, we withhold the application of consequence to that action or behavior.

So the educational system now in use has determined that, in its drive to withhold judgement of right or wrong, of good or bad, that a mutually arrived at group consensus is a superior method of problem solving than the traditional direct observation.  Of cause and effect.  Of consequence of action.  And what is the result? We get corrupt and evil politicians like Hillary Clinton, who with the well known revelations of her corruption, sedition and insanity, avoid the consequences of actions and literally get away with murder.  And we get an entire generation of intellectual snowflakes who can't think critically, and who seek refuge in "safe spaces" lest their tender sensibilities be assaulted.

And we get dogs that still pee in the house.