Some people seem to be sold on the videos of Mr. Khan of Khan Academy. However, in “tutoring” mathematics, Mr. Khan does nothing but deliver the exact same methodology as the texts and as current public education. He is a video version of paper texts, showing, in essentials and fundamentals, nothing original whatsoever. He basically reads from textbooks.
If Mr. Khan comes to grasp his errors, states them publicly, and starts promoting a rational, objective pedagogy, curriculum, and philosophy, then I will give him kudos. Until then, he is part of the problem, not part of the solution, and I recommend against him and his work.
In “The Dangerous Mr. Khan” (National Association of Scholars, June 07, 2011), David Clemens attacks also Mr. Khan’s teaching of history. Mr. Clemens says at the beginning of his article:
So is the Khan video approach a “disruptive technology” which undermines the existing deathbed educational model by doing it faster, better, and cheaper? Mr. Gates thinks so. “It’s a revolution,” he enthuses. “Everyone should check it out.” (www.khanacademy.org) Wearing his education reformer hat, Mr. Gates declares himself “superhappy.”
© 2011 National Association of Scholars. All rights reserved.
Mr. Gates is fundamentally wrong; he certainly knows computer software and business, but he does not know education or philosophy. Khan might do it faster and cheaper, but he does it in the same way, not better. He is in no way different in fundamentals or philosophy from, as Mr. Clemens puts it, “the existing deathbed educational model.” Hence there is no “undermining” or “revolution,” and certainly nothing to be “superhappy” about here; there is merely conformity and agreement, and reason to worry.
Mr. Clemens goes on to say:
Mr. Khan observes that “from FDR’s point of view, Hitler definitely was in the wrong here.” This observation is so odd, that I have to hit the pause button and take a moment to think about it. In Mr. Khan’s History, whether Hitler should have invaded Poland or not is just a matter of viewpoint, wrong in FDR’s (and probably Poland’s) but okey-dokey in Hitler’s. Everything is a matter of viewpoint, perspective, and cultural positioning, therefore nothing is essentially right or wrong, to be applauded or condemned. Here Mr. Khan stands exposed as possessing a historical perspective steeped in academia’s standard issue, postmodern, left-leaning narrative of cultural relativism, multiculturalism, and moral equivalence.
© 2011 National Association of Scholars. All rights reserved.
This is a major criticism. If true (I have not seen Mr. Khan’s history videos), then Mr. Khan is teaching skepticism: the denial of certainty, principle, and timeless truth. No thanks. Skepticism is a major philosophic error, as are moral and cultural relativism, all of which lead to personal and cultural frustration and disaster. And if true, this pretty much trashes Mr. Khan’s videos; they would be of no objective value whatsoever.
Mr. Clemens also wrote:
