Logic and Advancement

Kathie and I were having a conversation the other day when I think she stumbled onto an important truth. We were discussing my students and their inability in most cases to connect their actions to any consequences. No matter what grades they've been earning or how many warnings/threats/promises/what-have-you I give, they always seem totally surprised at their grade by the end. Even if I tell them they're going to fail and should drop the class, they will continue showing up, somehow hoping that by dint of sheer presence to pass; the odd part is that they will rarely make any change to their work or habits which lead them to fail in the first place. It's frustrating to seem to have no impact on their consciousness one way or another--it makes all that time spent giving feedback and answering questions seem useless.

Kathie then pointed out that it's a lack of logic--an inability to tie a cause to a result. We decided that perhaps an early education in basic logic could make a difference for a lot of folks from difficult backgrounds or at least with little other education. It makes sense, in a way. Many of these folks live in worlds where effects really don't seem to have identifiable causes. The government agencies that are so prevalent treat people like cattle, little caring about their personal stories. I remember vividly when we returned from Canada and were on MediCal for a short time when I didn't have a job: it didn't matter how we acted, what we did or said--our processing was long and confusing, and the resultant aid that was given out didn't seem dependent on anything but the whim of our case worker. Our treatment at the clinics we had to go to had nothing to do with how much aid we needed or the nature of our need, but on the scheduling and budgeting of bureaucrats far removed from our movements. As well, low-wage jobs rarely reward workers for hard work: if you're at McDonald's and you knock yourself out to do a great job, you still get the same pay as the guy who sits in back smoking all day, and any other rewards are mostly non-existant (promotion in fast food is usually very limited, with most management brought in from outside rather than raised from the ranks of floor workers). You get recognized by any such organization simply by being around for longer than anyone else--senority is one of the only measures of achievement available to them, and the only way to crack government services is to wait long enough for them to do something.

My students have a terrible sense of disenfranchisement, regarding voting or participation in anything beyond their own lives pointless because they can't really change their lot. For them, everything seems to be based on favoritism, who you know and who can give you an "in" to a better situation. In many cases, they are probably right, but that leads them to surrender in all areas, even those where their effort can make a difference, like school. It may be frustrating, but it does explain, in some ways, their unspoken, almost certainly unarticulated sense that just showing up for long enough in one spot is their best chance to get something, and why admonitions, either good or bad, have little effect. We might do more good at a stroke with mandatory logic and reasoning classes in grade schools than with any disciplinary or civic program. Yet another reason why a good education is vital to success: learning dates, formulas, and vocabulary may not immediately be useful, but a system that shows you your effort can lead to accomplishment (where work is graded thoughtfully and students are neither failed in a way that seems arbitrary nor passed on without regard to their work standards due to social promotion) is exactly what many of my students could have used.

Or so it seems to me.