I enjoy collecting quotes and sharing them with my students. In my desk at work, I have two envelopes. Right now, one is overflowing with scraps of paper that have written or printed thoughts from other people. And almost every day of the school year, I'll search through that envelope for one to write on my whiteboard, an insight to share with my students and any adults who visit my classroom. The second envelope is empty, but it will get fuller and fuller as I transfer the scraps of paper from the first envelope to it--my effort not to repeat a quote during the two years I have my students. In the past, they've noticed repetitions, and on several occasions, students have given me either their own quotes, or ones they've found, to share.
Recently, I came across the following idea: "To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society." This is credited to Theodore Roosevelt, but, according to the Theodore Roosevelt Center at Dickinson University, there is no known source written by Roosevelt to which this idea can be attributed.
Regardless of the source's accuracy, I find the thought intriguing. I agree with the opinion suggested that a person who lacks morals is a menace to society. A moral, in the sense of this quote, is a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do. And because this quote is typically assigned to Theodore Roosevelt, a former president of the United States, it might be assumed that the morals aren't Roosevelt's personal convictions, but the commonly agreed upon set of morals around which the United States society is oriented. A person who is unaware of or who doesn't subscribe to this set of morals could be a potential threat to harm the greater community.
But what challenges me as a teacher is the suggestion that educating the mind and educating the morals can be exclusive. Can a person develop a well-educated mind without also developing morals? Is it possible to be a critical thinker without considering the set of beliefs by which one will conduct him or herself? And is this quote questioning my practice?
A quick perusal of local school districts' statements of vision/mission/purposes yields the following ideas: "...with engaged and enthusiastic learners...is committed to developing well-rounded individuals...cultivates curiosity and collaboration...encourages responsible citizenship...engage students' minds, hearts, and voices so that they become educated, caring, and responsible adults...inspires self-driven excellence...where all students will learn, grow, and become contributing members of our society...prepare students to become life-long learners and contributing members of society..." It's evident that on paper, or websites in this case, public school educators are committed to educating both the minds and the morals of students. But can this be translated easily into action?
Morals seem to depend on our judgment. In argument writing, an argument of judgment explores what may be right or wrong, good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, fitting or not fitting, etc. But is it easy to make sound judgments? Good judgment, it appears, depends on the honing of other critical thinking skills. Making inferences, categorizing, identifying characteristics, determining similarities and differences, recognizing causes and effects, and making reasonable predictions are all skills upon which judgments rest. For example, an unfortunate problem in schools is bullying. Students report witnessing bullying, and the moral issue they then face is whether or not to intervene. In order for a student to decide to step in when he or she witnesses bullying, a number of other thought processes need to occur. The student must know what constitutes bullying, be able to tell when a situation is bullying, and when it isn't, be aware of the different ways to interrupt a bullying situation, and have a picture of the dynamics that typically result in bullying and the immediate and long-term effects of bullying on the parties involved.
As I've illustrated, it takes time and effort to make good judgments. Also, each of the aforementioned thinking skills require clear instruction and much practice. Ideally, students would tackle judgments based upon our society's morals after some experience making sound judgments around concrete topics, such as which mascot is the best choice for a school to adopt or which person best qualifies to receive a particular award or why a game or toy may or may not be suited for a particular child. But that would mean passing up many opportunities to address basic values of our nation.
So, it appears that public school educators, in theory, are committed to educating both the mind and the morals; the path to educating about the morals is through and dependent on educating the mind; and that path is long, complex, and arduous. But am I getting my students to the point where they can grapple with our society's values and asking them to reason out how they think about core morals?
When I reflect on my teaching recently, I must admit I don't sufficiently attend to educating my students in morals. I give a lot of focus to critical thinking skills. And I allot time, occasionally, to discussion or writing about morals students encounter in the literature we read. But, for the most part, I depend on my modeling to educate students in morals. I leave it to the students to glean from my actions what they should adopt as morals of our society.
However, every day in my local newspapers, I see evidence of people in our country violating what I perceive as morals of our society. A woman allegedly shoots four people in response to having a child removed from her custody. Two people are arrested for intending to sell drugs to addicts. Dozens of students at an Ivy League school are caught cheating in a Sports, Ethics & Religion class.
Yet, at the same time, I can also always point to instances in the paper of people upholding the morals of our society. Recently, in the local paper, there have been articles about a man who earned both a Purple Heart and Bronze Star during his service in World War II, a group of volunteers who plan to record the life stories of people with Alzheimer's disease, and a retail company's plan to eliminate stereotyping in their promotion of toys.
Lorin Anderson, in "What Every Teacher Should Know: Reflections on 'Educating the Developing Mind,'" and Daniel J. Levitin, in The Organized Mind: Thinking Straight in the Age of Information Overload, both clearly state what they believe should be a primary goal of educators. They think we should emphasize teaching students how to make good judgments about the quality of the sources and the information they find while doing research. And this is an important skill. Without reliable information, students will be misguided in their thinking. But being able to discern which sources are and aren't dependable and what information in sources is valid seems to be just a part of a greater process and not the ultimate goal.
The eventual target, it appears, should be to educate students in morals. And I believe I've been remiss in my approach. It seems incumbent upon me to address, explicitly, morals with my students. For, in the end, I want them to be good people--generous, honest, accepting, courteous, gallant, just, and gentle. My hope is to do my part to help my students become protectors of our society.
No comments:
Post a Comment