Modern methods and critical objectivity

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 11, Issue 528, 22 March 1994, Page 4

Modern methods and critical objectivity

• Education, as pertaining to the primary school system has, at various stages, been the brunt of criticism. Too often the critics are people who were either involved in teaching years ago or have not availed themselves of the opportunity to study objectively current trends in primary school education. Further, an essential activity for a critic to comment on educational matters is to read widely and undertake research in the specific area or areas under comment. Scientific methodology requires a critic to provide empirical evidence to support his or her argument or position. The recent spate of emotive letters from June Bates suggests knee-jerk reactions penned in oblique language rather than in a systematic presentation of facts or logical argument. Opinions, by their very nature, are self-generated, emotive, openended and essentially non-productive. It would be helpful to readers if she provided supportive data and gave pros and cons to support statements. For example, vertical grouping (multilevel class structure) was raised in a critical way without substantiating her comments. Where is the documentary evidence supporting the claim 'that where such a system exists that is claimed to be an inspiration to the rest of the world' . We then come to the emotiveness of the letter which claims 'that there are sceptical parents'. I am left at a loss as to what is meant here and even go so far as to suggest an error of syntax. The classical Greek and root meaning of the word sceptic is, one who seeks to know the truth through reasoned argument with an open mind in order to arrive at an informed, unbiased position! Vertical-grouping (multi-level classes) is by no means new. Such a system has operated for centuries world-wide, even in New Zealand too since European education was introduced last century! Sole-charge schools are a classic example to illustrate the point made. To infer that, and I quote, 'few teachers are trained for such a teaching situation' again is an opinion. Would the author provide evidence to support such a statement? May I suggest she researches supportive evidence and publish this. The various Colleges of Education would be excellent

places to start. If, in fact for the last four years your grandchildren' s books have been reflecting glaring mistakes - one regrets this. 1am certain that as an exteacher equiped with professional diplomacy those matters are able to be amicably resolved. I found June Bates letter raised more questions than the opinions made. When was the last time that the author taught at length in a primary school? What academic research has been undertaken in order to acquire an objective understanding of the current trends in primary education? I look forward to viewing future letters by June Bates which reflect informed and scientific research, thus contributing to the on-going quest for excellence in primary education and creating a climate in the community for rational debate, discussion and cohesiveness. Subjective opinion on the other hand tends towards partisanship and polarization. If I have taken June Bates letter too seriously, missing the point that it was written in a lighthearted vein, forgive me.

Terry

Cowland PhD.