Looking Differently

A lot of the shift that we have to make in our classrooms involves reframing questions and looking at issues differently. An education that is composed mainly of learning discrete facts through rote and repetition, filling in reams of "drill and kill" worksheets meets a purpose and is effective at what it does. But what it mainly does is prepare students to be good "worker drones," who do what they are told and who believe in knowledge that comes to them as static, and pre-formed.

How do we get education reframed? When parents come to you and say something like "that isn't how we used to do it," and "are they really learning anything?" We need to make certain that we have answers to their questions and evidence to back ourselves up. Looking at schools and learning differently is an important part of school 2.0.

What counts as learning and knowledge?

Comments

[Quentin DSouza]

Hi Clarence,

I struggle with this quite a bit, as I do inservices with educators on a variety of topics including Web 2.0 tools. We are treading on paths that are new and there really isn't as much research in this area as there could be. I look to PHD candidates like Konrad Glogowski to demonstrate this through his thesis, as well as others in the K12 realm. So from a research based approach for Web 2.0 specifically - I struggle.

Mostly what I look at is how others (like yourself) are using the tools and what are their success and failures, and what can we learn to help our own implementations succeed. I also look at the bigger picture with regards to transformative education with technology - books like "Never Mind the Laptops" are great for sharing those ideas.

[Carolyn Foote]

To me, a lot of this centers around the idea of students as active participants in their own learning.

Particularly in the current environment, if students have a keen interest in learning, if they know how to "dig" for information, if they know how to ask deeper questions, then they are better prepared for their lives and for the workplace than if they can memorize or regurgitate pre-existing "knowledge."

I also believe we can learn that "core" knowledge, but also learn how to think deeply about it, and to see it as dynamic.

Students are often all too willing to be the passive drones you describe, because initially, it is more difficult to be active in your own learning--in secondary schools, especially, it seems like it requires a huge shift. Younger students still seem to have that sense of exploration more readily at hand.

I think inquiry based learning has huge potential to address some of these questions. Of course, since I'm a librarian, I tend towards approaching things from a more inquiry based model.

I think one thing many teachers are unprepared for is really learning how to teach in an inquiry based way, or how to ask questions and get students to talk, like the Socratic method.

This is one of the most challenging but rewarding skills a teacher can develop.

But beyond individual skill sets, I think the most value lies in a teacher who is mindful about their approach, who ponders how education is changing, and who walks in the classroom door thinking about how, as you said, they can "uncover" the material with students.

[Quentin D'Souza]

Started gathering some research here:

http://www.teachinghacks.com/wiki/index.php?title=Research