Core Knowledge AND Critical Thinking, Please

Some bloggers continue to suggest that increased focus on creativity and critical thinking skills threatens basic literacy, numeracy, and knowledge in the disciplines.

On the Core Knowledge blog, Robert Pondiscio shows eloquently how the symbolism in President Obama's inaugural speech would be lost on those without knowledge of history.
He questions the impact of the speech on children. He asks: "How many of our children, instead of seeing mere novelty, comprehend fully and viscerally the improbable closing of a historical loop they have just witnessed?"

While no child could be expected to comprehend the full historic impact of the speech, I think many will comprehend it "viscerally" because they have been witnesses, and they have heard family stories. They have asked questions and wondered. I think many will be motivated to learn more about the struggles mentioned in the speech because they know they have witnessed something important.

As a person educated in the liberal arts and a lifelong seeker of knowledge, I know my content knowledge of history, literature, and the Bible significantly deepened my understanding of what the President was saying in his speech. But most of my mental activities during and after the speech were along these lines:

I remembered stories my grandparents and parents told of the Depression and saw vividly in my mind household artifacts from that time. I recalled the metallic smell of my grandfather coming in from the steel mill. I remembered models of the Gemini spacecraft my brother built. I remembered my uncle's letters home from Viet Nam and the tears of girls in my neighborhood whose brothers and boyfriends were shipping out. I mentally replayed news clips of the civil rights movement during my childhood and remembered being in sixth grade and seeing a photo of a bleeding, prostrate black man being beaten as I tried to read a textbook on race relations because O wanted to know why so many white adults seemed to be troubled by Martin Luther King. I remembered our black garbage man standing in the kitchen and giving my mother his take on the riots of 1968. I heard his voice clearly. No textbook accounts came to mind, nor did I remember any lectures—except one nun trying to make us view the civil rights movement through the eyes of black people. I remembered her simple but profound words.

Basic literacy skills acquired in school made it possible for me to use books in making sense of those experiences. The content knowledge I acquired in school made my experiences more meaningful. But what engaged me and made me want to learn about historical events did not happen because of an excellent curriculum.

I acquired the content knowledge that gave the speech meaning because of my own unique way of thinking about the world. Wanting to understand my world determined what I decided was important to know and what I paid attention to and pondered during and after my school experience. I believe that more opportunities to ask and explore good questions and share knowledge in creative ways would have enriched my understanding even more, sharpened my thirst for core knowledge, and made a better scholar out of me.

I remember so many questions not answered in my textbooks and history classes: What is communism? How could such things happen to Anne Frank? Why are blacks unwelcome in our neighborhood? Why should Americans die in Viet Nam?

Here's another: Why do some want to make everything an either-or proposition?

I think what we need now is "Yes . . . and . . . "

The Core Knowledge Blog and others (see tomorrow's post) acknowledge that content and critical thinking are inseparable, but then they set about exposing the inadequacy of critical thinking for making sense of history or solving problems. Is content knowledge all we will need to understand war in the Middle East or negotiate a treaty or craft an effective energy policy?