Or by critical thinking does he mean that students should learn proper “attitudes” that render them unable to make meaningful distinctions between, for example, “good” ideas and “bad” ideas; or, “good” behavior and “bad” behavior? Does he mean that they learn that “patriotism” is childish so that they acquire a preference not for their nation but for the “global community”? And does he mean students who think “critically” become cynical of religious belief?
The most telling buzz word the author uses, though, is “creativity” and by using it he reveals his philosophical heritage, namely the educational philosophy of John Dewey.
Dewey is the air that the faculty and students at colleges of education breathe, whether they know it or not. Dewey was all about “creativity” (as well as “critical thinking”). In Dewey’s candid moments, however, he admitted, like the German philosopher Nietzsche, that creators must be destroyers. In Dewey’s case, he was quite eager to destroy anything that smacked of traditional religion or a traditional canon of learning.
Dewey’s critical thinking--which is the antecedent of most critical thinking programs today--means that students must “think for themselves” unrestrained by the quaint notions once imposed upon them by their parents and Sunday school teachers. Dewey called his critical thinking “intelligence” but it had little to do with the tools that are really needed for tough thinking. It had, as is the case today, everything to do with political correct attitudes.
As bad as all that sounds, it is most telling to note what was not cited in the Dean’s guest editorial as the strengths of our schools.
There was no mention made of a canon of literature that runs from elementary school through high school graduation including, e.g., the best that American, European and African authors have to offer. There was no bragging about the systematic and lively study of American history, Greek and Roman civilization, European history—not to mention Ancient History or the history of Asia.
There was nothing said about the serious study of at least one foreign language so that students might actually be able to converse in Spanish, French, Italian—or Chinese.
There was vague mention of “problem solving,” but nothing specific was said about no-nonsense instruction in Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry, Calculus, Biology, Chemistry or Physics. These subjects are nowhere to be found in the editorial. And there was certainly no mention of American students out-scoring their Chinese counterparts in science and math—since they don’t. Not even close.
Teachers are the real heroes and heroines of education. But for decades now, they’ve been fighting their own bureaucracies and colleges of education. It’s not clear who will win the war. Meanwhile the collateral damage as too American students graduate with degrees in Mediocrity.