To me, teaching should be “self-directing” a student. In other words, a teacher is there, but doesn’t interfere with everything; students are allowed to do what they want to do (in our case, we are allowed to put poetry and anything else we’re interested in on our blogs - that’s what allowed me to write my posts on education). Teachers should be there to make sure the students are on the right track and to help them out if there are any problems - like when students meet failure or other obstacles on their journey.
Preaching is what most teachers do today. We sit in classrooms for a certain amount of time listening to the “Teacher’s Bible of Study,” devouring information. Projects are limited to be viewed only by the class, and occasionally meet the hallway display.
I guess that we all agree on the fact that we would never have read Shakespeare if it weren’t for AP Literature. However, I think it’s only our generation who wouldn’t read Shakespeare without a teacher threatening us with a grade book. We can’t learn for ourselves and choose appropriate studies because we always had the teacher by our side to tell us what to do. We’re toddlers that are still refusing to take that third wheel off our bicycles.
If we were left to do what we wanted to do, “learners” who are mature enough will self-guide themselves to read the greatest plays ever written. If we are left alone with responsibilities, young adults will start taking them seriously.
All we need is that first step. Schools are afraid to do something new. The school system is afraid to fail.
It is similar to when you leave home for the first time. You are pushed out of your comfort zone, and you’re the one that has to take responsibility for yourself: you need to pay the bills, you need to do your laundry. At first you stumble, and fail to pay some bills and the house may stink of undone laundry, but after a while, you pick yourself up and start taking responsibility. Maybe it’s not too early to give some of the responsibility to young adults to guide themselves to what they want to learn. We’re not animals; we won’t break out of the “bars” of school like wild beasts freed from a zoo.
Just give us a chance.
I think I would have to agree that ’schools’ are afraid to try new things (not in all cases), but I don’t think individual teachers are afraid to try new things. It should be about encouraging a culture whereby teachers and pupils are given the opportunity to attempt new things.
Perhaps the key is to find new ways of doing the things we’ve always done... but this doesn’t always mean the teacher should be leading the lesson! We should be using skills and knowledge where and when we can find it, and in a connected world, that means anyone, anywhere!
A good friend of mine keeps reminding us that it is the teach(vb. & n.) not the tech that matters... this has never been truer!
I think you touched on the very essence of what this is all about.
It disenchants the students and faculty alike. I taught in K-12 for nearly a decade — there is nothing I wanted to do more then engage students in critical thinking. But, the pressure of passing the State Test was what we as a school were graded on.
Sociology, Philanthropy, Art and dare I say Humanity are second to filling in the right bubble.
We need a “comments hall of fame” or “comments quotable” tradition to start in this space!
(Good luck on your finals, Nicole. We look forward to reading you when you can focus on more than the multiple choice bubbles.)
Perhaps this ties in with what you were saying about schools being afraid to fail. Most schools are comfortable with the way things are just now as they are a sure bet with passing, but I think as kids are getting more technical, teaching must follow suit. To an extent.
Great post!
Love this idea.
I have lots of questions....one day I may have more answers. I think school is what you make it. I do not complain openly, I get on with it and work around the edges to do what I think is exciting and interesting and different so that my students and my colleagues can walk away with a smile and a vigour and go out with a new idea or a fresh approach. This is what gets me through. I do not get bogged down with the system. I play the system.
Great work with students2oh!
Thank you for contributing. What you guys/gals are doing is great. I agree with you and I think 98% of us do; however, what do we do with the students that do not adapt?
How long do I let you fail before I help? What if your failure has influence on how I am viewed as a teacher?
Just something to think about.
Thanks again.
Ken
One of the challenges we face as educators is how to teach students to become directors of their own learning. Small children love to learn and experiment, yet somehow our current school system seems to squash that joy. I am very hopeful that this blog may provide some interesting insights as to ways in which public school educators, with students of all ability levels and backgrounds, can engage and empower our kids.
I agree entirely and I do from time to time let loose the reins and see what happens, and I am always surprised at the (usually) fantastic results. There are times when it is necessary for us to be a bit preachy though.
Keep it up.
I know exactly how you feel, I had to go through the same last year, and I suppose still this year. Another example aside from your art one is in music, when we are told what a song has to be like, what it should include... this is far from the way music should be taught.
I am excited about the potential this conversation opens for all of us. Thank you for leading and forcing us to reconsider our practice. Many of us reconsider every day! I suspect you will find many of us more in favor of encouraging the type of learning you describe than “preaching.” But I would love to see a discussion about what it looks like when it works. What elements are critical to you in a learning experience? You mention self-direction, independence, risk-taking. What else?
What was your most memorable learning experience and what made it terrific, valuable, fun?
It sounds like the model you are proposing would be more like an online course, with a community of learners and a facilitator.
Not all students are as motivated as the School 2.0 group, but, for those who can maintain focus and motivate themselves, this modern version of the traditional tutorial might just work.
Rather than bubbles, we need wings.
diane
diane
I’m interested in your ideas. And I think that you’re hearing some of us wonder how it would work, or if all students would be as motivated as you.
But I think we’re sort of working out of our pre-existing understanding of school when we ask that.
What if we started 1st grade that way, with students understanding that directing their own learning was the way the “school system” worked? Then by the time they reach high school, it’d be normal to expect that students help direct their own learning.
It’s interesting to think about what it would look like.
Thanks for the thought-provoking post!
But I too have “read quite a bit,” and researched a bit too - it tends to be a given when we reach middle age, and are educators. And I find your own logic (advanced diploma notwithstanding) a bit problematic too.
For example, giving credit to an entire educational system for being, implicitly, the necessary cause of our landing on the moon obscures the fact that many of the scientists who worked for the US gov’t at that time were actually foreigners - Nazis recruited after Hitler’s defeat, Warsaw Pact defectors, etc - and thus were not products of American education at all. So I’m not sure the argument is of the strongest logic there.
Second, even if I grant your premise above, the same educational system (or teacher-centered, lecture-based pedagogy) you seem to defend should therefore be held responsible for all the ills we see in American society today - a dumbed-down, semi-literate, epidemically obese, and politically unsophisticated populace more inclined to believe charlatans who claim Adam rode saddled dinosaurs when the earth was invented 4,000 years ago, than they are to believe Nobel Prize-winning scientists.
From Antiquity to the 1800’s, learning didn’t happen in the walled and belled boxes you claim put a man on the moon. Modern schools are a minor blip on the historical timeline of education.
Leonardo didn’t go to our schools. Shakespeare didn’t. And Einstein worked his stuff out as a clerk outside the ivory tower, not sitting at the feet of some mandarin with the authority to assign homework because he spent more years doing it than most people, and thereby worked his way from the student’s desk to the teacher’s desk.
There’s more to education than is dreamt of in your philosophy, I would argue. And I would point to alternatives like the Sudbury Schools (for a “radical” example), or simply the more constructivist Australian and New Zealand mainstream models, as places you might go if you would like to read more. Google will take you there.
To call something absurd is not to prove that it is. To point out logical flaws in an opposing argument is not to win a debate.
But my goodness, I thank you for the conversation.
I had the pleasure of working for two years in a pilot 1-to-1 laptop environment that was hugely successful. However, it wasn’t the laptops that made the difference, but the environment we were able to create. 55 learners (students), 2 learning leaders (teachers), one BIG room, wireless technology, few filters, connectedness, no bells, community, all-day together, flexible (no?) schedule, project-based learning, no textbooks....I could go on...
In short, it wasn’t about the technology. It was about the vision, the ideas, the connectedness with each other and the information. It was amazing. I can’t wait to go back!
“Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try.”
But since I am here... the earth was created 6000 years ago, not 4000. Adam was not documented to have ridden any dinosaurs, and God has “sold” more scrolls/tablets/books than any noted scholars (and was the first to implement creative commons attributes before they were even thought of).
Like the rest of you, I think debate is good for the brain. I just felt a new dendrite grow. Sweet.
Everything here is designed, edited, administered, developed and has been promoted by students. The ideas and the content of every single page and post is created by students. No classroom has taught us how to design a website, or to globally promote ourselves or even to create a movie from scratch, just to tell the world that we are here, ready to speak. All of us here have learned these skills... without someone “preaching” to us and telling us how we should be doing things. We may have asked others for guidance along the way - even then mostly from other students within the group - but it was only guidance. This is why I believe that what you are saying is flawed. Students can be left to their own devices and mentored/guided when necissary... you are witnessing the proof right here, on this blog, with the very students you feel would not cope with this type of learning.
I for one truely believe in Nicoles opinions within this post, and I am sorry you do not follow the logic... thank you for your critiscism.
The Bass Player
Thanks, I accept every point you make. I would additionally point out that an uneducated society would not pay the taxes necessary to develop and exercise the knowledge to get to the moon and that the Germans did not get there without coming here. Only our highly educated society has done that to date. The Soviet Union came close but when their immigrant scientists played out – well, you know the story. We were not the first in space, I know. But would an ignorant country or a country of people only learning what they want, without mentors or guidance, support such a great effort. I’ll avoid the point by point rebuttal as I do truly accept and see your points. But please acknowledge the world is full of conflicts. We have a president that finds evolution absurd yet supports distributing funds to increase knowledge in science and math and that, our president wants to leave no child behind but does not provide any funding for this worthy goal.
Sports bind innumerable communities to the financial support of the teachers of Shakespeare. And that, Luke needed and benefited from the guidance of Yoda (I hope you have permission to use my likeness on your home page.). Luke could have learned more but that rebel had to do what he wanted and save his friends and the galaxy far far away. But, that is Hollywood. Thank you for the engagement, I may be willing to slug it out some more but I was hoping a response from our would be agents of change that posted here.
PS Just so you know finding something absurd is always an expression of opinion and never proven.
I understand your point, but you have to understand the school cannot be the end all beat all for learning. They are inherently limited because of funding/time/training/..... There are many things I have learned after leaving high school. There are many things I have learned after graduate work. Yet, all of those learned things have been aided by what I learned in a public school, public community college, and public university setting from all types of educators. I do not think anyone truly believes that an organized educational setting is going to answer all of your needs. It was never meant to do that. It only became that after society began moving faster than the adults and we felt the need to incorporate more vocational training earlier into the schools which led to the belief that pretty much anything and everything should be taught in schools. Then sports took over and the rest is history.
You are doing the right thing here. Create a personal learning network to DIRECT your OWN learning. Now if you want to blame schools for not allowing you the time to do just that, then fine. I think there should be time built in. Google has proven the advantages of giving this type of time (although their staff has already mastered basic literacy and other educational content prior to engaging in the free exploration of new ideas). But you still got something from the preaching somewhere along the lines (content, decision-making, judgment, etc). No, there is no way I would want every teacher to preach all day every day, but there is a time and place for it. I learned even from those educators both good and bad things. Would students be better off without any lecturers and only students running around teaching themselves all day? Even you would have to disagree with that. There are limitations. What are those limitations? There is a place in education for self-directed learning. That is where the systemic change must come. Work toward that goal. I know I do.
Funny issues rising here about the “appropriateness” of “adults” responding to other adults on a post’s comment thread. I’ve never known a blog in any field that has an “only the writer can extend the conversation with the commenter” policy. Are we being patronizing, setting up double-standards, or otherwise changing the nature of blogging-as-conversation because of this new wrinkle in the landscape of edublogging?
If so, why?
On my own blog, comments are open territory. Isn’t that the norm? That way, poster, commenter, and lurker alike are enriched by the give-and-take of multiple viewpoints.
(Scott: I was referring to the Creation Museum, and indifferently loose with the numbers for “creation,” since they’re all without compelling evidence by scientific, rational standards - a few unscientific scientists notwithstanding. Can’t tell if you were being ironic or literal/fundamental, though!)
Draw your own conclusions, but treat yourself to one very provocative challenge to everything we believe is necessary for a child to become “educated.” If it doesn’t unsettle you, you’re not paying attention.
(The whole documentary is uploaded on YouTube in 8-10 minute segments.)
I would like to begin by saying that I am one of the people that believes there will always be a need for teachers in schools. I don’t want teachers out of a job, because in a lot of cases in school I would be lost without them, as you said preaching is useful... and I’m not going to dispute that.
Please do not read too much in to my comment, I do not want to blame schools at all, it was merely an example to put the point across that this type of learning can be effective.
You’re right, there should be some time in school dedicated to these sort of things, but at no point would I like the school day to consist only of individual learning. There is a balance which needs to be found, and I’m sure you would a agree. We cannot rely fully on either method in this day and age, and that’s a fact in my eyes.
Of course there are limitations, for one, we will always need to be kept focussed and on track, we will always need discipline, and will always require guidance of some kind with whatever task is set to us.
I would also like to add that the one thing I find most exciting about self-guided learning is the immense feeling of satisfaction you earn once a task is completed, once you have learned a new skill, don’t you agree? and don’t you agree that this sense of acheivement and also the learning experiences entailed within this type of learning is a great thing to experience?
I suppose the most important part of what I’m trying to say within this comment is that I believe strongly that there is no way forward with only self guided learning and that I was merely trying to give Michael an example of what can be done when students are left to their own devices.
Thanks again for your response
Knowledge is something that can be transmitted from an expert to a novice. For example, if I were teaching kindergarten students, I could give them the knowledge of how to write the letter “S” properly. I could demonstrate the creation of the letter, then offer them the opportunity to practice it, then assess what they’ve learned, and therefore determined if they’ve acquired knowledge.
Understanding, though, is different. It’s about bigger things. Once the students have the knowledge of how to write all the different letters, then they can apply that knowledge to an understanding, gained through experience (perhaps by writing sentences about their days, what they want to be when they grow up, etc) using those letters. They can begin to understand how the letters connect to create words and sentences and paragraphs.
There’s nothing wrong with teaching skills, especially to younger/novice learners. However, once students are adolescents, they should be able to apply the basic skills in an inquiry model to gain actual understanding about the world. The students who run this site have received the knowledge of their respective teachers. They know how to read and write, they know how to edit their own work, they know the rules of grammar. But it is through maintaining this blog that they can begin to understand how to communicate effectively, start conversations, contribute to the global debate.
Which is more valuable? I don’t know. But I do know which one launches spaceships (an example I use only because it seems to be the accepted measure of a society’s genius, at least in this thread). I’d be willing to bet that the first NASA scientists didn’t have classes in school about rocketry.
Regardless, your separation of definitions is a valid, pertinent one. That is the divider here.
I’m curious as well about the fates of unschooled learners.
But when you say
–it seems difficult to quantify because, as far as I can see, there’s no “normal” student entity in standard education.
Some students drop out, some don’t. Some thrive in school but not in the real world, and some perform poorly by school standards and succeed (whatever that might mean) in the real world.
This is what always vexes me about research, as you imply.
But I’m no statistician, so I’m beyond my ken here.
Fascinating video though, no? Lots of learning going on without schools deciding what kind or when.
I’d be curious to know what skills and understandings I would have if I’d been free to devote all those years of math and science I had - and have long since forgotten and never used - to learning something I wanted to learn.
Interesting life. (And Jeff W., very helpful clarifications and distinctions for me. Makes me think of the many, increasingly mainstream, calls to shorten high school so “adolescents” can get out into the world after learning those primary skills.)
I did watch the whole thing. I even visted the website and looked around. I saw testimonies from students about how much they liked it, but not about what they did with it in the long run. In the video I saw more about kids not working than working. That is not to say they are not working/learning. I am not implying that at all. I would have just liked to see more core area work and how they did it. And when I asked for data, I did not mean stats or test scores per se. What I meant was where are they now? Names like Einstein and Shakespeare were being thrown around so much as outcomes of this type of learning that I wondered how many went in that direction and how many ended up in bands wanting to be rock stars or just ended up working at Wal-Mart.
Again, I am just exploring the outcomes of the school, not denying its benefits.
You have hit the nail on the head and then drove the darn thing right through the floor. Exactly! Many teachers actually get in the way of education; most schools are not places of learning, but rather factories for mass producing “workers” or “college students.” Then, for most of the first two years of college, they have to unlearn all the ridiculous ideas that have been pounded into them. There are several reasons why this happens, but the main one is everybody is afraid to try something different or new.
I worked in a school in Interior Alaska for a while that was 100% project based learning. Students were allowed to choose what they wished to study, and teachers assisted them with structuring the outcome. We had students who actually built snow mobiles and dog sleds and then wrote elaborate reports about the process as well as produce a public presentation of their work. It was brilliant! The students got the point — learning is power and the ability to learn was completely in their hands. So after three years of this amazing program that taught students how to learn on their own and critical skills like creativity and problem solving abilities, guess what happened? They (administration of the district) closed us down! Why? Because how were the students going to pass the state graduation test without taking normal classes? This is a vicious cycle — tests without merit being used to measure learning without merit.
The only learning truly worth engaging in is the learning YOU choose to engage in. Students have the power to learn anything, if adults get out of the way and let them learn.
Tim
You said:
“I would also like to add that the one thing I find most exciting about self-guided learning is the immense feeling of satisfaction you earn once a task is completed, once you have learned a new skill, don’t you agree? and don’t you agree that this sense of achievement and also the learning experiences entailed within this type of learning is a great thing to experience?”
I agree 100%. I give my students a lot of leeway when it comes to topic selection in most of our projects. Many did not take advantage of it and failed miserably. Is it because they are bad students? Nah. I think it is because they were never given that much freedom and did not know how to handle it. By the end of the year, most were on track with expectations and more importantly, their own self-expectations.
There will always be students who either are buying time until graduation or just want to get by on the minimum. I guess that is why we have “minimum” wage jobs. I do not see you guys as that type. You would thrive in a setting where half your day was self-directed. I would love to facilitate that type of setting as an educator because I would learn as much as any student would. Heck, I work under the expectations that I do a lot of self-directed learning to teach other educators to be better at what they do.
So, I say keep it up. Your thoughts in your last comment were spot-on and exactly what I would expect from this group. When we agree, say it. When we disagree, debate it thoughtfully. It is the only way we grow as a group. Thanks for the conversation.
Mr. W,
I can’t agree more. We have a King Lear Street Talk wiki, and a Paradise Lost wiki - and honestly, I can say that they’ve helped me understand and appreciate those two literary arts more than any test or “essay.” Students leading the lesson has proved to work! Not only limiting to students from our school - but “people” from all over the world. Why limit the learning - and educating?
George,
I believe teachers need to look beyond their agenda and school book - not limiting themselves with a paper and pencil (not saying all teachers). But, I also believe students should also look beyond what the digital content has in store for them. It’s far more than Microsoft Word and MSN.
Jemma & Sean,
Can’t agree with you more. My music teacher wouldn’t let us go to a jazz concert for our “music” assignment. To her, the only music was classic.
And, saying this after a mid-term exam, I go to school to learn: memorize the teacher’s testing method, write down the testing dates, memorize information, take the test, and empty brain. Take me out of my comfort zone...
Julie,
Your questions are mine exactly, only from a learner’s point of view. Why do we have to work in student sweatshops - moving from one station to the next in strict intervals, punished if late. When is it time to boycott against student produced sweatshop produced products??
Ken,
Thank you. Students who do not adapt... that will be a problem - but is it worth it? - to risk the chance of those few who would “fail” with the changed system? Honestly, I don’t know. But, isn’t it worth it to try?
And, as for your questions - they are really hard. Teachers can’t assign a certain number of days to let them fail. But, what is considered failure? Fs? or, meeting an obstacle in path to achieve a certain goal? If we stop categorizing students as “F” through “A,” maybe the whole concept of failure would be different.
Teachers don’t have to be helping the student all the time, failure (defined properly) can lead to success. I think letting a student fail is a part of the process, and that balanced with guiding them and giving them advice - wisdom.
LPeters,
Thank you! And, that’s where the teacher comes in. 25 different students, 25 different directions. I agree with you that some would be self-directing themselves, some would be needing help. Before giving a grade to the students, maybe teachers can spend time helping those students know how/where to begin. Many students who fail at many things in life never learn how to do their laundry and pay their bills, but many students who succeed as a “perfect student,” also never learn how to do their laundry and pay their bills. Teachers don’t always have to teach and grade - what about teach and advise? - can we have that relationship?
Anne,
That’s what frustrates me the most. I feel like a hypocrite, writing about how the school system is not “right” and how it should change - yet I’m working on my applications every single day, taking SAT prep course, and taking as many APs as I can to squiggle myself into a decent college. Those who *went* to school and knows how it *should* work and parents who are part of the status quo makes it harder to stand out. (I think I went a bit off track.)
Molly,
Can we be the last generation to only read Shakespeare in high school because it was required?
I agree with you about our school system. Small children seem to love learning and experimenting. Where did that all go?... and why?
Adam,
Balancing out the preaching and the teaching!
Joyce,
To answer your question, elements that are critical to me in a learning experience is self-directing, independence, and risk-taking: eliminating the fear to fail. But, that can’t be all. Maybe, like some people are saying that there are times we have to “preach,” new methods of teaching needs to be present.
Like I’ve mentioned before to Mr W (and he mentioned his wiki), our AP Lit class has wikis set up for King Lear and Paradise Lost. To describe both of them, because this is what I really call “learning and teaching” compared to “preaching,” King Lear is run by students - students translate sections of King Lear into modern day sentences. And, I know I’m not the only one who’s learning from this translation - in other words, I’m not the only one motivated - because I know for a fact many of the students in my class learned much more from it, studying it with the actual text next to them. Also, student made videos of Paradise Lost - visual learning. Discussions on Ning about questions, literary arts, technology are more helpful; it engages the students with the teacher, and most importantly, other people outside of the school community.
I really invite everyone to check it out - and see how students are actually learning from all this.
Diane,
Sure, not all students are as motivated as us - who are actually speaking up. But, isn’t that the same thing now? Not all students are as motivated - so they aren’t learning - although they seem to be learning, because they are memorizing the information for a while for testing. Isn’t the whole purpose to learn - not memorize?
Carolyn,
Motivation level, in my opinion, would be much higher than what it is right now. We can’t suddenly change from “preaching” to self-directing in a second, so, like you said, we would start from 1st grade so that students would understand how to “self-direct.” Instead of placing more and more emphasis on testing the students and “preaching” as they grow older, maybe we should place less and less emphasis - let go of the rope instead of making it tighter - making room for self-directing.
Tim,
You prove my point exactly. Why limit students, “assuming” that they only have the capacity to devour information, when, if self-directed and set loose, we can build blogs like Students 2.0 and dog sleds. Give students some credit - and our passion. Or, at least, give us a chance to “earn” it.
Sorry if I go off subject