But experience shows that with the advent of gadgets, children’s desire to draw on desks has decreased many times.

But experience shows that with the advent of gadgets, children’s desire to draw on desks has decreased many times.

So create normal conditions for children to happily run to the dining room and eat there, and not run away from the smells and comfort of the model of the 60s of the USSR. So who is to blame? Right! One who cannot make school canteens attractive to children.

Educational pollution

This is when garbage arises after all sorts of lessons personal narrative writing ideas of work – drawing. Here everything is simple. If, for example, children cut something – glue, it is easy to predict that there will be garbage. So, let’s assume this. Just before classes we agree with the children on the algorithm of waste disposal. A roll of garbage bags and ten minutes of instruction solve all the problems.

Contamination of the board

In principle, it is not so difficult to erase what is written. Unless, of course, you pay attention to the fact that writing in chalk is something like listening to a gramophone. Well, there is no chalk in modern schools, and there can be none.

Consequences of entertainment

This is the only form of littering that requires the involvement of a child. The algorithm is simple. Harmed – clean up after yourself. But, as a rule, it is very local littering at the level of a pair of discarded papers.

Contamination of desks

Here’s the question. If the pollution is due to poor organization of the process – it’s one thing. If this is a special damage – it’s different. But experience shows that with the advent of gadgets, children’s desire to draw on desks has decreased many times.

And now we look. In fact, most forms of classroom pollution are the result of poor organization. Are the children to blame? Children, of course, are far from angels. But adults are not angels. This requires people who can organize the process so as to minimize the process of pollution. Difficult? Of course. It’s easier to just get the kids to clean up. And spit on the law.

The original

blogsAlexander Miroshnichenko

01/31/2018

Calls not to buy flowers, but to donate money to charity – a beautiful and pathetic nonsense

A. Miroshnichenko: flowers are a sign of attention to the teacher

Author: Alexander Miroshnichenko, actor, director, playwright.

Floral

Here, maybe, I will cause dissatisfaction.

Maybe, of course, this is a somewhat outdated tradition. But one of the few normal school traditions. I’m talking about flowers on the first of September.

It’s beautiful. This is a sign of attention to the teacher. There is nothing wrong with that. Of course, if everything is within reason. A symbol, not a competition, who will buy a more expensive bouquet. Beautiful symbol.

But all these calls not to buy flowers, but instead to give money for something like charity – a beautiful and pathetic delusion.

Do you want to give money to charity? Come on. What does this have to do with colors?

Just do not need to raise something there in children. Such a replacement does not bring up anything. After all, parents pay for everything. And the child, in principle, does not care where mom and dad will let the money – for flowers or charity. This is not money earned by the child personally.

Therefore, in my opinion, it is better to give flowers. Let the simplest. Not in the price right. Let it be at least a bouquet of wildflowers, which the child and his parents collected.

And let charity remain. If possible and at will. Without all sorts of « whether flowers – or charity. » Different things. The purpose is different. And the choice between these things is inappropriate.

The original

blogsAlexander Miroshnichenko

31.08.2017

Our programs are a slap in the face to people who understand literature and a mockery of children

Alexander Miroshnichenko: about literature

Author: Alexander Miroshnichenko, actor, director, playwright.

About literature…

I love Lesya Ukrainka. I love her poem « Ancient Spring ». The problem is that I can’t stand the moron who inserted this poem into the fourth grade school curriculum.

Let’s be honest. It’s not just about this verse. Simply – a super-bright example of a complete misunderstanding of child psychology.

Only here it is not necessary to poke to me pedagogical diplomas. And it is not necessary to divorce about « instilling in children a taste for high literature. » Because if a person thinks that this poem can be interesting to a person at the age of ten – he himself has no taste for literature.

Because taste is appropriate. And a poem describing Lesia Ukrainka’s reflections on the arrival of spring is completely inappropriate in the fourth grade.

Perhaps it would not be so sharp about this verse. After all, who cares about trying to get a child to memorize a poem by heart on the third day? And he can’t study not because he doesn’t want to. And because there is a complete misunderstanding by the authors of the program of child psychology. Do you want Lesya Ukrainka in the fourth grade? Take at least « Robert Bruce, King of Scots » or « Ra-Meneis ». It would be more interesting at this age.

And this is not just a problem of a specific situation with this poem. This is 90 percent of the literature program. Complete distaste, complete misunderstanding of what works may interest a child.

And what is the result? What do we achieve? Disgust with literature?

Only again I say – no need for their undergraduate diplomas! If you think that the program is normal – your undergraduate diplomas are fake.

I can’t think about a math or physics program. I have no rights and knowledge. But literature is one of my professions. Including children’s literature. And the existing programs are actually a slap in the face to people who understand the literature and bullying children.

Do I write too sharply? Tired. Just tired. New school, you say? Fine. Then let’s see how many teachers will honestly support the need for a radical change in the program? Just let’s not use Soviet-style stamps and lies in the style: « And my students like this poem by Lesya Ukrainka. » Can’t like it! This is not normal!

It’s not about Lesya Ukrainka. In the desire for change and in the courage to tell the truth. Would you say a generalization? Of course, I generalize. Because the program is GENERAL.

The original

blogstraining programsAlexander Miroshnichenko

01/23/2018

From the speakers will again sound a mix of Soviet pop and Ukrainian nonsense

A. Miroshnichenko: what do we have in the repertoire on September 1?

Author: Alexander Miroshnichenko, actor, director, playwright.

MusicalWhat do we have in the repertoire for the line on September 1? I’m talking about music, not speeches.

So what about music? Which of the speakers will sound there? Invariable dominant in the style of Zibrov, Bilozir, Shportko, Poplavsky. Plus children’s songs by little-known authors, which captivate with the depth of the rhyme of the texts: « LEARN – BE PROUD », « REJOICE – CHILDREN », « FATHERLAND – CHILD ». And three chords at the base. Such a mix of Soviet pop and Ukrainian nonsense.

« And we like it! » – the indignant shout of teachers and principals is heard. Of course, there is a long conversation about musical tastes. And about the lack of musical taste – the conversation is even longer. But why bother?

The music menu for the line has long been recorded on a flash drive. Which was rewritten from a disk, which was rewritten from a cassette, which was rewritten from a reel. Back in the distant 60-70’s. And why change something?

Do you want rap or hip-hop? Do the children want? And traditions? And the stingy tear of the grandmother of the first-grader who under these songs went to the first class. Cross it all out? For what? Who is there about compliance with children’s tastes? Who is interested in the tastes of children here?

Put – listen. Point.

The original

blogsAlexander Miroshnichenko

30.08.2017

If you see in children monkeys, not people – pedagogy becomes training, not personality development

A. Miroshnichenko: schoolchildren and physical labor at school

Author: Alexander Miroshnichenko, actor, director, playwright.

About training

There is a lot of discussion about forcing students to do all kinds of physical work at school. Well, all the dragging and digging there is cleaning.

And everyone seems to understand that this is outside the law. Nevertheless, there are lawyers.

And this is where the main and seemingly one hundred percent convincing argument « FOR » such work arises. Moreover, this argument is insistently repeated and repeated from comment to comment. And it sounds like this: « And what is this? Working with a monkey made a man. » Read for yourself. This is the most popular argument.

And the problem here is not so much that people do not see anything wrong with breaking the law. The problem is that they really think of children as monkeys who need to be turned into humans through stupid physical labor.

But this is an alarm bell. Because if we see in children stupid monkeys, not people, – pedagogy becomes training, not personal development.

Think for yourself. How often training is reduced to training. The main thing is to develop a certain reflex. And the same thing happens from the first to the last class.

Why? Let’s go back to the beginning. If the teacher considers the child a monkey that needs to be transformed into a person by means of labor, if the parents support such a position, then pedagogy acquires completely different qualities. And it actually ceases to be pedagogy. And then it is really quite logical to force monkey children to pull closets, wash corridors, dig flower beds. Because monkeys. Not people …

The original

secondary education reformblogsAlexander Miroshnichenko

09/12/2017

If the claims of a dozen parents, you can believe that they were unlucky with the teachers, but if the majority?

A. Miroshnichenko: a good or bad teacher is not a lottery

Author: Alexander Miroshnichenko, actor, director, playwright.

About fortune

A hit parade of the most popular phrases from teachers in discussions with parents about education reform. Do you know what the most popular phrase is? We hear it almost every day and for all reasons. It sounds like this: « You’re just unlucky with teachers if you hate them so much. »

It means that thousands and thousands of facts of teacher unprofessionalism, incompetence, corruption are not facts, but personal complexes of parents who were unlucky with teachers.

I do not deny the fact that there are good teachers. And someone is really lucky to learn on their own or teach children to such professionals. But let’s be honest. These are the exceptions, not the rule. If 70 percent of parents from all over Ukraine complain about teachers, it is worth agreeing that we are all really unlucky with teachers. Or rather, I was unlucky with the System that produces such teachers.

There used to be a saying, « If three people tell you you’re drunk, go home and go to bed quietly. » And here. If the claims of a dozen parents – you can believe that Fortune really turned away from them and they just were unlucky with the teachers. And if the absolute majority is unlucky? What is the conclusion from this?

Looking for new teachers? But there is a good chance that everything will happen again.

%d blogueurs aiment cette page :