I'm beginning to develop an uncomfortable feeling as the conversation on learning in the 21st century presses forward. In the excitement of having access to so many new tools and as interest in inquiry-based, student-directed learning gains hold I worry that some valuable aspects of education may be lost.
I worry that students will pursue only their own interests and will not be obliged to take mandatory courses. When I think of the courses I took in university, the ones that really rocked my world and altered my point of view were often the ones that I might not have taken if they had not been mandated. Obliging students to learn about ideas outside of their own personal interests is not a bad thing.
I need look no farther than my friend Manon, a highly skilled doctor, who went through high school and university focusing only on maths and sciences to illustrate this. Her education was streamed to her area of interest and she was not obliged to take history, political science nor courses in the arts. This was fine until her first trip to Paris. We both took our families to Paris during the same summer. For my husband and I, who have strong backgrounds in history, Paris was a fascinating place. Places had meaning and context and understanding that context provided a rich experience. We were able to share the historical perspectives and significance of places in the city with our daughters because we had knowledge (or schema) to draw upon. Manon, on the other hand, enjoyed Paris. It was pretty. She wishes though that she had had a broader education so that she could have understood the historical significance of the places that she saw. One could argue that she could have read more before her trip, but having a thorough understanding of any topic takes time. Building blocks need to be put in place and when she's working 36 hour shifts and single parenting two children, the time to read is not always there.
It also bothers me that the idea that we cannot learn from a lecturer at the front of the class is becoming accepted wisdom. That learning in this way is simply too boring to support any longer. It bothers me because, frankly, I like a good story teller. I've learned from good story tellers. I think back to one of the most skilled story tellers I have ever listened to: Dr. Roebuck at McMaster University. Dr. Roebuck was my English professor for a course on Shakespeare. His classes were usually jam-packed, often standing room only. Dr. Roebuck knew how to tell a story! He spoke in a fluent, engaging voice, with a breadth and depth of knowledge that is vivid in my memory. He always began with seemingly unconnected threads and would weave them together like a craftsman until they were tightly bound into a tapestry of story. I left each lecture enriched and altered. How many educators can say that about the classes they teach (myself included)?
I am a learner who learns by listening. I'm sure I'm not the only one. It would sadden me greatly if the story-teller educators were to go. This is for you Dr. Roebuck. Thank you.
I worry that students will pursue only their own interests and will not be obliged to take mandatory courses. When I think of the courses I took in university, the ones that really rocked my world and altered my point of view were often the ones that I might not have taken if they had not been mandated. Obliging students to learn about ideas outside of their own personal interests is not a bad thing.
I need look no farther than my friend Manon, a highly skilled doctor, who went through high school and university focusing only on maths and sciences to illustrate this. Her education was streamed to her area of interest and she was not obliged to take history, political science nor courses in the arts. This was fine until her first trip to Paris. We both took our families to Paris during the same summer. For my husband and I, who have strong backgrounds in history, Paris was a fascinating place. Places had meaning and context and understanding that context provided a rich experience. We were able to share the historical perspectives and significance of places in the city with our daughters because we had knowledge (or schema) to draw upon. Manon, on the other hand, enjoyed Paris. It was pretty. She wishes though that she had had a broader education so that she could have understood the historical significance of the places that she saw. One could argue that she could have read more before her trip, but having a thorough understanding of any topic takes time. Building blocks need to be put in place and when she's working 36 hour shifts and single parenting two children, the time to read is not always there.
It also bothers me that the idea that we cannot learn from a lecturer at the front of the class is becoming accepted wisdom. That learning in this way is simply too boring to support any longer. It bothers me because, frankly, I like a good story teller. I've learned from good story tellers. I think back to one of the most skilled story tellers I have ever listened to: Dr. Roebuck at McMaster University. Dr. Roebuck was my English professor for a course on Shakespeare. His classes were usually jam-packed, often standing room only. Dr. Roebuck knew how to tell a story! He spoke in a fluent, engaging voice, with a breadth and depth of knowledge that is vivid in my memory. He always began with seemingly unconnected threads and would weave them together like a craftsman until they were tightly bound into a tapestry of story. I left each lecture enriched and altered. How many educators can say that about the classes they teach (myself included)?
I am a learner who learns by listening. I'm sure I'm not the only one. It would sadden me greatly if the story-teller educators were to go. This is for you Dr. Roebuck. Thank you.
There will always be a need for a great storyteller! It's the boring lecture-style that is outdated, not the exciting storyteller.
ReplyDeleteI also think you have found one of the major potential flaws of the way education is moving. The pendulum could swing too far, again. I us teachers become motivators in an attempt to interest students outside their comfort/interest zone. Or, make at least one assignment/term to be about developing a new interest or exploring a new topic or collaborating with others on an interest of theirs... I think as long as we are aware of this potential problem, we can counter it (perhaps with an awesome story!)
As always, I think you've inspired a Blog in me... you are my stimulus, my muse! (Though later, after I go back to bed... Snow Day!) ps. I love the new name!
There is not one pedagogical approach that works, nor is best. Learning is complex filled with intentions of self and other. Student centered pedagogy does not mean that students chose the whole of what they will learn. Guidance still matters as does the quality of engagement. Empowerment is not to be confused with choice.
ReplyDeleteYou just took me back! Dr. Roebuck was an inspiration to me as well. He and Dr. Aziz were both amazing and inspiring professors. Happy memories :)
ReplyDeleteWell said Mary Ann. Learning is complex, guidance remains key. I suppose the true skill of a teacher lies in fostering an appropriate balance.
ReplyDeleteMs.
ReplyDeleteAnother fan. Those who had the opportunity to be in their classes were lucky students.