David Hill: Schools trying hard to lead kids into the 21st century

Opinion

There are certain absolutes in life: It always rains on Labour Day weekend; rugby referees let opposition teams get away with things they ping the All Blacks for; and children these days are not taught as well as we were.

Along with dentists' fees and police speed traps, that last one makes a great bonding topic at dinner parties. And it's true.

It's true within limits, anyway. Kids these days aren't taught spelling, grammar, mental arithmetic or historical dates as thoroughly as my generation was.

But then my parents went in for similar head-shakings over what I wasn't taught. My mother tut-tutted at my irregular handwriting. My father lamented that I wasn't learning miles of poetry by heart. They both regretted Latin being dropped from my high school curriculum.

From the start of the 21st century, their concerns look pretty irrelevant. The lack of correctly sloping letters, rote knowledge of Longfellow, and third declension verbs did leave gaps in my education, but I was taught new things: New Zealand regional geography, literary criticism, elementary keyboarding. My knowledge reached areas that my parents had not.

I believe that's still happening in schools today.

Can we put aside the silly claims of syllabuses driven by political correctness. (Ours were politically correct - British imperialism ruled.) Can we accept that, yes, kids are not taught some things we were taught - and that is often a pity - but there are not the time nor resources to teach them those things plus new knowledge. And can we accept that children in today's schools often know more than we do.

Computers and information technology are obvious examples of this new knowledge. Most kids are so computer-literate they don't even think about it. Many of my generation are not. Yet we chuckle at the fact that in this vital field we are illiterate. I suggest kids are more tolerant of our illiteracy than we are of theirs.

Other areas in which children are taught skills and knowledge that we never learned: video and film techniques and analysis; astronomy; microwave cooking; te reo; theatre and fashion design; photography; quantum theory. They are being introduced to the significant innovations and directions of this decade.

Kids in today's schools also learn new attitudes. Primary and secondary pupils are increasingly confident of their ability to produce poetry, prose and drama. Teacher friends tell me their students are better at speaking, acting and presenting material to audiences. (Sorry, education now believes that children should be seen and heard.)

We would complain if kids weren't being taught 21st-century skills. We have the right to voice doubt if some of the skills seem trivial or frivolous. Education is vulnerable to fads and foolishness, so its gurus need watching.

But while we grumble about what children at school are missing out on, we could try to comprehend what they're getting in its place.

Education in 2005 is broader than it ever has been. In achieving that breadth, it has become shallower in some areas.

I repeat - that's often a pity. Measures to remedy it in and outside school should be welcomed and considered. But any such measures must not mean a trek away from new skills and knowledge.

The word "education" derives from a Latin root (ha, my parents were right) meaning to lead, to bring out. I think New Zealand schools are trying very hard to lead children into the 21st-century world, and to bring out the skills that will help them to live profitably in it.

We could approve of that a bit more, and lament the decline in our 20th-century priorities a bit less.

Then all we would have to do is achieve a similar balance in those rugby referees.