Cui bono?

It's been a long time since I studied Latin. It's been almost as long since I was in graduate school. There are, however, a few phrases that I remember as having raised my consciousness in unexpected ways. I am reminded tonight of one phrase that has contributed, for better or worse, to who I am today.

The phrase is cui bono. The English translation of this Latin phrase is roughly, "in whose interest" or more literally, "who benefits." When listening to arguments that make the hairs on your neck stand up, that fail the smell test, or seem needlessly opaque, the idea of who benefits is a good one to consider. I promise to return to this thought, but first the foil.

I shared with you earlier this week a link to a video produced by RSA Animate and narrated by Sir Ken Robinson. The title was "Changing Education Paradigms." In an eleven minute forty second journey tracing the beginnings of formal education in classical times to the relatively new system of public education emerging a hundred and fifty years ago, Sir Ken pulls no punches.

Education has a DNA, says Sir Ken. It is a culture and propagates a culture. Unfortunately, continues the narrator, the historic DNA of public education has become maladaptive. The school bell schedule, separate classrooms, subject matter disciplines, and age-alike grouping are born of the intellectual culture of the Enlightenment and the economic circumstances of the Industrial Age.

Education, says Sir Ken, is modeled on the interests of industrialism and in the image of it. About the age-alike grouping we persist in propagating, it is as if the date of manufacture was the most important thing about the child. The narrator argues that we drive out creativity in our schools and their inhabitants by insisting on conformity and standardization, getting convergent answers at the expense of divergent thinking, and by failing to encourage collaboration.

I seriously doubt that every indictment of public education cited by Sir Ken is as prevalent in the Triangle as it may be in less fortunate places. And some standardization, when it leads to desired outcomes for example, is okay. And not every answer is acceptable when factual information is sought.

To the extent, however, that the current paradigm of public education fails to prepare students for a global economy or for being not only a citizen of a country but of a world, it is worth asking the question: Cui bono?

In whose interest might it be to advance conformity and standardization over uniqueness and divergent thinking? In whose interest is it to measure the impact of one teacher at a time when my teaching and principal experience says teachers rarely act alone in their contribution to student learning? Who benefits from advancing an industrial model of education that every other nation on earth is trying to reform--and some already have?

Unlike some full-mooners I know, I doubt that there is a conspiracy afoot to destroy public education. I think, however, that because the culture of school as we have always known it is so strong, we sometimes need to ask difficult questions to shake things up.

I have faith that we will reform before it's too late. I just don't want the body count to be too high in the trying.