Student satisfaction does not mean student benefit

Our society behaves in a contradictory way with minors

License Creative Commons

Paco Benítez

“Prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child”[1]

A few weeks ago, while reading an article by my colleague Juan Fernández, I came across one of those obvious things that, although being obvious, are nevertheless frequently unnoticed by the population. It said: “If teaching innovation aims to improve student learning, it is not then appropriate to evaluate student satisfaction. It may be that students are more satisfied, but for other reasons. It also happens sometimes that, despite being less satisfied, they learn more“.

I said this is obvious because all along history, educators and families have assumed that bending to the satisfaction of children and adolescents is counterproductive from the point of view of their education and development. To give an example that is also obvious, if a child wants to have a chocolate croissant for dinner, the most sensible thing for his parents is not to satisfy his will, but the other way around. And this, moreover, is done for his own good, to protect him from his self-harming will.

Well, it seems that the latest methodological trends of the so-called “new” education, as long as the pupils may feel happy with what they’re doing in the class and what the teacher proposes to them, It’s enough to be taken for granted that there has been an impact on quality. Nevertheless, the real thing is that the only criterion (or at least the most important) that should be taken into account to evaluate this “innovation” should be whether there has been a positive impact on learning. Evaluating is always a complex task, and even more so evaluating any pedagogical method. But the truth is that the objective data extracted from the external tests carried out by our students show us that learning is plummeting.

Let’s continue with some obvious questions related to student satisfaction. Will students prefer a method in which they play and a teacher who does not demand responsibilities from them, or who demands continuous effort and work in the classroom and at home? Will students prefer to move on to the next grade or graduate even if they have failed several subjects, or being unable to do so in these cases? Will students prefer to deal with topics of interest in class such as football, reggaeton or porn, or learning about art history, fractals or the nervous system? In short, I could continue writing questions where the obvious answer of the students would be the first option of each one, no need to go on…

The book by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff, The Coddling of the American Mind, alerts us to the risks to the mental health of young people posed by overprotection resulting from an upbringing and an educational system that makes them grow up in cotton wool. We are currently witnessing an epidemic of anxiety and depression in our youth, which, according to the authors, is the result of a fragility resulting precisely from the fact of constantly protecting their satisfaction. Facing difficulties and overcoming frustrations is not something pleasant, but it is something necessary to forge a strong and adult character.

We could also talk about the famous student satisfaction surveys and their evaluation of subjects, which today many centers carry out at the end of each evaluation or at the end of each course. I am not saying that the intentions involved behind are not good, but from my experience I can tell you that they become a joke. It is well known that great power means great responsibility, but are students mature and educated enough to value the work of a teacher? Let me say no (although it may no sound trendy).

An educational system that has students immersed in a false bubble that often makes them believe that they are prepared for what they really are not, is it not, even if it suits their satisfaction, something counterproductive for their personal, academic and professional future?

I will end with another quote from another magnificent work, ‘La crisis de la autoridad’ (The Crisis of Authority), by the judge and author Natalia Velilla: “We are making a mistake when we treat children and adolescents as people with the capacity to decide, since parental authority and minority have a protective purpose for personalities in formation. Our society behaves in a contradictory way with minors, equating to the point of confusion the “dignity” of the person with “autonomy of the will”: children have dignity, they must be respected, informed, valued and listened, according to their level of maturity, but they do not have the capacity to act fully, since their desires do not necessarily coincide with what suits them.”

________________________________________

Links/Webgraphy

Juan Fernández: https://www.eldebate.com/cultura/20231007/evaluar-innovacion-educativa-navegar-mares-revueltos_144727.html

Pruebas externas: https://www.epdata.es/datos/espana-pisa-datos-graficos/484

Epidemia de ansiedad y depresión en nuestra juventud: https://www.alimente.elconfidencial.com/bienestar/2022-12-13/uno-cinco-adolescentes-problema-salud-mental_3538490/

Falsa burbuja: https://www.pressreader.com/spain/el-mundo-andalucia-weekend/20231008/281883007988473

____________________________________________________

[1] Introductory quote from The Coddling of the American Mind, by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff.

Source: educational EVIDENCE

Rights: Creative Commons