HW 45

Between Hirsch and Sizer, the debate seems to stress what the content of classes should truly be about. "Students should be able to read and know basic number facts by the end of the first grade." Hirsch argues that students should be prepared with common knowledge early, and that they should stress the student's ability to retain and recite necessary information. Hirsch maintains that this kind of number-crunching and basic understanding of literacy will be adequate preparation for the concrete, regimented workforce.

Sizer would argue that this basic information is necessary up until high school, where Sizer says "Students should leave school as well-informed skeptics, able to ask good questions as a matter of habit." Sizer's entire point is that students should not only know things but be able to understand them and question what makes them tick. Sizer's main argument with Hirsch is that his form of education is to focused on simple knowledge, with not enough focus on understanding and questioning.

1. Do these theories contradict each other? Intellectually, emotionally, practically? In what ways do they? Could they be adapted to work together?

I think that in a practical way of thinking, Hirsch's method of schooling benefits the student greater when they are trying to join the workforce and when they work jobs that require less broad thinking and more repetition and recalling fact. I also think that this method is more emotionally draining, as the students are just forced to crunch information and recite and repeat as they are told. There is little room in this method for dreaming and growing intellectually. Sizer's method of thinking of things as developmental and curious benefits the student's natural wonder for things, and urges the students to push deeper and really marinate in their thoughts, always rethinking and re-imagining why they are taught what they are, and how it can ultimately benefit them.

2. Which of the two theories do you find more resonant in your own experience? Has your education at one of Sizer's schools (he not only inspired SOF, he also came and visited) taught you to use your mind well, to be intellectually alert, to be able to think about important aspects of your life and society? Have you had any teachers that seemed inspired, now that you know about it, by Hirsch? For instance, would you say that the chemistry class's focus on molarity and ions and the periodic table of elements create an emphasis on knowledge?

I can clearly see the general Sizer method that we have in place at SOF. We are told to think, to question, to seek insight and meaning in our work. I feel that this is mostly prevalent in our history and english classes. We have a lot of work that involves reflecting on our own work, and even much of that is pushed to be creative in terms of how we present it. Even our exhibitions are Sizeresque. We employ the habits of mind to draw as much meaning from source material as possible. Point of view is one of the biggest concepts we learn to use in papers and presentations, and is useful information to carry with us into real life outside of school.

I used to go to a catholic school, and now that I know these methods, I can see clearly how my old school was a Hirsch dream school. We had everything regimented. The seating order, the material, and the pace at which we moved in our lessons allowed little forgiveness for kids who needed extra help or kids who were ahead of the curve. Hirsch's narrow focus on basic information only really appeals to students in the middle 50 percentile, whereas the top and bottom 25%s get left out.

3. What additional points does reading these theorists make you think of, about your own education and philosophy?

I think that if I had been offered the choice between the two methods of teaching when I was young, I ould certainly have picked Sixer's approach. Sizer seeks genuine learning and understanding of topics, and allows for thought in the classroom. I feel the Hirsch does the opposite. Of course, I am naturally inclined to think so because I go to a Sizer school, and there are many people who would disagree with me, but I feel personally it is more beneficial for me to be allowed to dream and rationalize my own thoughts in my own way.