WORLD OF LEARNING: BALANCE

"Willingham: Why We Have to Teach Children 'Content' Too" Early Ed Watch Blog 2/8/10
"Willingham: On Susan Engel and 'Playing to Learn'" Washington Post/The Answer Sheet Blog 2/5/10
"Playing to Learn" The New York Times 2/1/2010
"KIPP: Learning a Lesson from Big Business" BusinessWeek 2/4/10

The three opinion pieces starting with Susan Engel's "Playing to Learn" Op/Ed piece in The New York Times resonated with me because I just finished reviewing Nancie Atwell's The Reading Zone where I was concerned about balancing educational approaches, too. In this content vs. concept discussion (I use that word instead of debate since Daniel Willingham was refreshingly non-combative in his Washington Post response to Engel's thesis), we should remember two principles: that one size doesn't fit all, one way isn't the way, and that depth is more important than breadth.

Superficial learning and teaching can be a by-product of "progressive curricula" or traditional methodology. On the one hand, you get empty touchy-feely schooling, on the other, mindless rote work. Engel is right to push for "a curriculum designed to raise children, rather than test scores...free of the laundry list of goals currently harnessing our teachers and students ...devoted instead to just a few narrowly defined and deeply focused goals." Willingham is right to insist that such a curriculum be disciplined and rigorous, so that progressive methods do not "turn in to fluff, into kids horsing around a greenhouse."