Benjamin Franklin famously advised fire-threatened Philadelphians in 1736 that “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” While preventing fires is certainly preferable to battling them, we must consider the broader question: how can we protect ourselves from natural disasters?
Let’s shift our perspective. How does this principle apply to education?
Everyday life presents a common dilemma: how much should we invest to prevent unpleasant outcomes? And if the worst occurs, how much should we spend to address the situation?
Franklin’s saying underscores a crucial point: it is easier to prevent a habit than to change it once it has taken hold. His message is clear: investing a small amount of time and effort early can save us significant trouble later on. Taking simple precautions is far better than facing severe consequences down the line.
This notion aligns with the ideas expressed by Edward Thorndike in 1913, who emphasized the importance of initial input in learning. Similarly, Charlie Munger likened the human mind to a human egg, noting that it has a “shutoff device.” Once we accept a plausible explanation, it shapes our framework for understanding new information, often leading us to distort subsequent knowledge to fit our existing beliefs.
This is why I find it challenging to convince teachers, intervention providers, and researchers of these concepts.
In the upcoming posts, we will explore this topic further.
2 comments:
Thanks Luqman. I appreciate your philosophical approach to how to best approach reading instruction. Do you think that universal screenings will help in prevention?
Thank you very much for your comment and question.
I don't know what universal screening is about.
However, I have asked, several times, all over social media how we can decide, at the beginning of grade 1, the kids who will most probably leave school as illiterates. I am still waiting for someone to answer that question.
That is the screening I am talking about. Children shut down/disengage from learning to read due to confusion when they are taught letter sounds incorrectly.
If schools have started teaching letter sounds correctly (that is without extraneous sounds) then why would kids shut down?
This is where initial input comes in. In addition to what Thorndike said in 1913 and what Charlie Munger said about the human mind being like the human egg, I have also mentioned a quote from much earlier. 'It is what we know already that often prevents us from learning.' (Claude Bernard 1813 - 1878)
Kids will come into grade 1 having learned the sounds of letters wrong from shows such as Charlie and the Alphabet and many other videos available on YouTube.
We can screen and find out how kids pronounce the letter sounds. If they pronounce letter sounds wrong intervention can be provided immediately.
Then, what George Bush said in 2001 about 'No Child Left Behind' will come to pass.
Post a Comment