I once had the chance to discuss U.S. education with a group of high-achieving high school seniors. They all believed that they had received an excellent education and were well prepared for their future.
However, one young man surprised us when he said that although his parents were proud of his successes, they always added, ". . . but it's too bad you got a second-rate education." He then explained, "And do you know what they use as their example of my second-rate education? I don't know the presidents in order! Can you believe that?"
Actually, I can believe that, because in the past, we often judged people on their ability to memorize and recall facts. I remember going to the front of my English class and reciting, "Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow creeps in this petty pace from day to day. . . ." Every student in the class had to memorize this soliloquy from Macbeth, and we were graded on our ability to do so.
Proving my prowess at memorization on multiple-choice and true/false tests was a major part of my K–12 education, as it was for generations before me. That probably helps to explain why my generation popularized Trivial Pursuit and is tuning into TV's Who Wants To Be a Millionaire in record numbers.
But this emphasis on memorization began to be questioned with the arrival of information technologies and the Internet, which resulted in phenomenal growth of information in the world. The latest projections I have seen indicate that the information base of the world is now doubling every 12–18 months.
Certainly, not all of that information is accurate, appropriate, or applicable, but it is available to everyone at the click of a mouse. In the past, information in school was limited by the content of textbooks, the number of books and periodicals in the school library, and the amount of supplemental material the teachers chose to add to their lessons. But that was yesterday.
So, should we ask students to commit anything to memory when information can be accessed electronically so easily and rapidly? Of course we should, because memorization is still a useful tool in our lives. But it has become a tool of convenience rather than a tool of necessity.
The real question we need to address is: "What is worth knowing in the Age of Information?" More specifically, what should students study and what should they commit to memory as information grows exponentially while time in school remains constant?
To answer this question is not easy. Going back to the list of U.S. presidents, should our students study all presidents or just the more important ones? This question is loaded, as it was when I asked participants at Tennessee ASCD's conference if we could skip President James K. Polk so that we could spend more time on current presidents. Of course they didn't want their students to skip over a president from Tennessee.
When I talk about what is worth storing in our memories, I sometimes ask if a high school graduate today should recognize the name Thomas A. Edison and know something about his importance without having to look it up. Most people tell me that remembering Edison is important because his inventions so dramatically changed the way we live.
However, when I ask if students should recognize and know something about Karl Benz (credited as the father of the internal combustion engine automobile) or John Von Neumann (credited as the architect of the Computer Age), most people do not recognize these names. So what is worth committing to memory, and who should make that decision?
Undoubtedly, governmental agencies and those who produce textbooks, be they print or electronic, will play a major role in making such decisions. Experts such as E. D. Hirsch (Cultural Literacy) and Robert Marzano and John Kendall (Essential Knowledge) will help frame the discussion. But I truly believe that all educators worldwide need to grapple with these questions so that we are prepared to engage in the debate that is bound to surround this pivotal issue in reshaping our schools.