As Darwin discovered when he jumped off the Beagle and onto the pristine shores of the Galapagos; in nature the strongest survive. Those who are best equipped are most likely to find a mate and propagate, strengthening the species. This may be true for the Galapagos finches and tortoises, but the process of evolution stops in my community.
No other species on the planet actively works against evolution like we do. We support those who can not support themselves. When they propagate, we support them further and the cycle often continues.
As a teacher, what concerns me is that despite valiant attempts to differentiate curriculum the trend in many classrooms is teach to the lower end or, at best, lower middle. Students are coming into secondary school at age 13 with a reading ability of a 6 year old. This might make them the best reader in their home for some. These students can not do the class work at their year level, so the answer is for the teacher to provide work at a level that they can work to. In any given class there might be 10 distinct ability levels. How does the teacher cater to this?
But this is exactly what teachers attempt to do. Heaven forbid a student might find out that they are lacking in some area. We cater to their deficiencies, tell them they can achieve anything and never let them get a scent of failure. At least, that is, until they leave the safety of the school yard and face the real world.
If only someone had got to the Galapagos before Darwin and bent all the shrubbery down for the poor short neck turtles to eat, they wouldn't have had to bother with evolving longer necks. Unfortunately if the shrub bender let them fend for themselves after turtle adolescence they would have starved to death as Galapagos amphibians have a far poorer social security system than in my community.
I have no answer to our anti-evolutionary pathway. Of course we should support the less able, I just wonder about the sustainability of going against a natural process that seems to have done quite well for quite some time.
No other species on the planet actively works against evolution like we do. We support those who can not support themselves. When they propagate, we support them further and the cycle often continues.
As a teacher, what concerns me is that despite valiant attempts to differentiate curriculum the trend in many classrooms is teach to the lower end or, at best, lower middle. Students are coming into secondary school at age 13 with a reading ability of a 6 year old. This might make them the best reader in their home for some. These students can not do the class work at their year level, so the answer is for the teacher to provide work at a level that they can work to. In any given class there might be 10 distinct ability levels. How does the teacher cater to this?
But this is exactly what teachers attempt to do. Heaven forbid a student might find out that they are lacking in some area. We cater to their deficiencies, tell them they can achieve anything and never let them get a scent of failure. At least, that is, until they leave the safety of the school yard and face the real world.
If only someone had got to the Galapagos before Darwin and bent all the shrubbery down for the poor short neck turtles to eat, they wouldn't have had to bother with evolving longer necks. Unfortunately if the shrub bender let them fend for themselves after turtle adolescence they would have starved to death as Galapagos amphibians have a far poorer social security system than in my community.
I have no answer to our anti-evolutionary pathway. Of course we should support the less able, I just wonder about the sustainability of going against a natural process that seems to have done quite well for quite some time.
No comments:
Post a Comment