When discussing Experimental School / Educational Technology, the important thing is certainly not the set of textbooks. The most important, best, and most beautiful element of the Experimental / Educational Technology (CGD) program is its educational philosophy. It is not without reason that most people who have experienced the CGD / Experimental program like it and are ready to “go wild” with enthusiasm whenever that program comes under attack.
To me, the following philosophies of CGD / Experimental were far ahead of Vietnamese society at that time, and over time, that philosophy aligns more and more with modern educational thought. Here they are:
- Going to school must be joyful and happy (Every day coming to school is eagerly a happy day);
- Do not impose thoughts on students (if a teacher praises you, it is not because the teacher “likes you,” but sometimes because the teacher “likes your mother”);
- Students are taught different approaches (for example, learning the binary system before learning the decimal system);
- Students are encouraged to read literary books early (reading “Kieu”, Hugo, Balzac, for instance);
- Students are encouraged to think differently (for example: doing what they like and are passionate about. Being happy while “turning screws” is still better than being a PhD tormented by depression);
- Learning by experiencing instead of learning by rote (for example, playing the role of the “villain” in a play to understand the inner mind of the “villain”);
- Learn enough at school so as to learn less at home (Professor Dai did say that the CGD method needs to be taught by teachers. If parents do not know it, they cannot teach it, so there is no need to study at home);
- No grading, no ranking students (at the primary level) (This is a leap forward. Even now, people are still debating it).
This is precisely the “liberal arts” educational philosophy that international schools, universities in the US, and around the world are pursuing. While Broward College or Fulbright in Vietnam show off all day that they teach liberal arts, 40 years ago in Vietnam people were already teaching it (so American universities or international schools in Vietnam shouldn’t act sophisticated:))))
So if the CGD / Experimental curriculum is phased out, will the Experimental / CGD school model still exist? I firmly believe it certainly will. And it will continue to thrive. With such a philosophy, who wouldn’t want their child to study there? And that philosophy will become the leading philosophy of modern education.
Having said that, to be fair, I actually lean toward a view close to the National Appraisal Council that: after 40 years, it will definitely be necessary to change/edit many details in that curriculum, in both Mathematics and Vietnamese. Knock on wood, but for an old set of books that hasn’t been supplemented or revised for 40 years without detailed guidance, no matter how much I love it, I wouldn’t dare pass it either.
(By the way: Professor Dai and the editorial team were conservative and refused to revise, but there is a very nice thing that they also refused to defend copyright, giving it away for free to everyone, so there is no problem for us to revise it when making edits, right?)
I believe those edits won’t take too much time, and I am ready to invest in revising that set of books. Fans of CGD / Experimental have nothing to worry about. I also have faith that the National Appraisal Council consists of fair-minded people when re-evaluating the revised set of books.
Therefore, the debate about Professor Ho Ngoc Dai’s group’s Educational Technology (CGD) should never be a debate about textbooks, but must be a debate and a struggle to bring CGD’s humanistic and liberal arts educational philosophy into mainstream education.
Note (A):
The post reuses ideas written 1 year ago;
Anyone who wants to work as a middle manager in the education field or wants to revise this set of curriculum to be approved by the National Appraisal Council, please contact me. Those who like to work in Hue are even better.
Note (B):
In short, philosophy is important, while books are not important. Revising books takes just a quick 03 months to finish. So stop talking endlessly about books. The main point is left unsaid.
