![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2022 and 17 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Gcoconnell19 (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Katelynnels.
This article is on crack!
It seems to me that this article is strongly biased towards Outcomes-Based (or standards-based) education. This undoubtedly needs fixing. The example of Phonics is particularly poor. -- TimNelson 13:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Utterly biased throughout. Just a joke. 82.26.127.248 ( talk) 23:12, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
To call this article biased is a huge understatement. Even to call it one-sided is an understatement. It's fanatically one-sided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.204.134 ( talk) 23:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Most of the statements here need links to their associated Philosophy of Education (both the ones in the Traditional and Alternate columns). I've had a stab at the "Person" row under "Instruction Centre". -- TimNelson 13:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The previous article is completely discussing how traditional education is horrible. I made it more neutral. I added another part stating that in traditional schools that students call teachers by their last names. -- Ladii artiste 17:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Going to:
Topic | Traditional approach | Alternate approaches |
---|---|---|
Person | Teacher centered instruction: | Student centered instruction |
Materials | Book based instruction: What is the nation's capital? | Project based instruction: a student might be asked to build a model of the US Capitol out of 100 toothpicks |
The terms Teacher centered instruction and Student centered instruction are ghost links. Anyone know what they mean so that we can have articles on these?? Georgia guy 16:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I intended originally to just fix the hyphenation failures. And then I thought I'd perhaps adjust some of the stupider examples while I was at it. But this article is really odd, and my edits basically ended up re-writing each section. What the article desperately needs is some history -- about the modern use of the term. "Traditional education" is currently used as a political term, and it needs to be defined as such. After all, the article (as it stands) pretty much defines TE as "what Hollywood thinks public schools were like in the 1950s (if you were white)." If you actually want to have an article about traditional education, then the article needs to cover real history. Whipping a student who forgets an answer is a highly traditional teaching method. Expelling disabled students (unless they were really wealthy) is traditional. Making students profess the dominant religion is traditional. Separating students according to gender, race, and class is traditional. Teaching different subjects to girls and boys is traditional. Beating kids for speaking the 'wrong' language is traditional. These pedagogical techniques were used for centuries -- and used precisely because that's what the teachers themselves experienced as students, not because they work better than other options -- and they can't really be called anything except traditional. But I strongly suspect that proponents of TE don't want these traditional approaches restored. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 05:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Statman41, the reason I took out this essay the first time is not just because the quality of the original writing was low (thank you for improving it before reinserting it), but because it's basically your personal opinion. For example,
Additionally, you mangled the formatting for the next subhead when you were reinserting your essay, and we need a full bibliographic reference, not just a date and a name. (Did you by any chance write this originally for a class?)
The single biggest problem in this article has not been the absence of America-only, persuasive, or flowery language. The biggest problem is getting a decent verifiable definition together. It sounds like you have some resources with which to do that, but we need specific, concrete details, like "Traditional education emphasizes practice and drill, memorization and correction instead of discovery," complete with a footnote that proves we're not making it up.
Also, Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. The "traditional" methods used in America are not the same as the traditional education methods in use among (for example) Canada's First Nations. This article should cover it all, not just Hollywood's version of the 1950s classroom for middle-class, non-disabled, suburban white kids (which is what the politicians mean when they're talking about traditional education).
So: Welcome to Wikipedia. I really do appreciate your help; this article is in horrible shape. Please edit this section to list the parts of your essay you think are neutrally phrased and concretely specific and easily (without even a small stretch) supported by the source that you were reading. From there, we'll see what we can build for this article. Thanks, WhatamIdoing ( talk) 03:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
In France, since the early 90s, we've been told again and again that traditionnal education was all crap, that rote learning was for morons, "old fashionned" respect for teachers (calling them "sir") was retarded, etc... and here are the results : most of 18 years old can'st do exercises that were given to people of the same age 30 years ago, their cultural knowledge is a joke, their orthograph sucks and even basic mathematics (equation, percentage) is a pain in the ass for them...
I think that this article should not be so biased and should also point out the danger of getting traditional education away Mitch1981 ( talk) 13:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Here is the limit of wikipedia. This kind of article can't be written by amateurs. It needs people who actually know the subject (teachers, sciologist, etc.). Mitch1981 ( talk) 12:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
It reminds of what Hannah Arendt wrote about american education in Between Past and Future. Eight Exercises in Political Thought. She said that school was giving kids too much liberty, that teachers were treating them as their equals, what they couldn't possibly be yet, taht they were focusing too much on stimulating their creativity instead of giving the necesary bases to fully develop this creativity much later. Well, I don't really know american culture so I don't know if this description is accurate but I think it's relevant in the case of french education. Mitch1981 ( talk) 19:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
The role or duties of the woman in the family 41.191.105.233 ( talk) 18:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Pinging Seberle. What would make a good SD for this article? Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:02, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 12 April 2024. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
SINGH KHUSHWINDER (
article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by SINGH KHUSHWINDER ( talk) 01:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
f 2C0F:F5C0:600:A6A9:816B:1178:154F:EED7 ( talk) 11:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)