Naz Musings

Photo  credit: http://kategoldberg.weebly.com/uploads/

“Give the pupils something to do, not something to learn; and the doing is of such a nature as to demand thinking; learning naturally results.”  -John Dewey

John Dewey is renowned for his role in expressing the concept of progressive education. Progressive education is essentially a view of education that emphasizes the need to learn by doing, ie a ‘hands-on’ approach. This is the educational philosophy of pragmatism.

In some respect this is also aligned with Tyler’s approach to have education bring about significant changes in the student’s pattern of behavior.

In a practical school environment, I would like to see educators involve their students in practical hands on learning process. The concept being to encourage student to complete the task and while doing so, to be able to understand the problem and possible solutions as well as the reason why they opted to go with the preferred solution. The process of learning would involve discovery as well as teamwork and looking at other students attempts. Eg. A class studying algebra could have students working on revenue collection based on areas without using calculators and formal measuring devices. Students would need to understand standardization of measures as well as methods to assess areas of irregular shapes. Every problem in the exercise would involve different formulae. Students would be getting involved with their peers in understanding real world uses of formulas that are typically dry and not easy to remember. It would require them to think of better ways of doing the tasks efficiently. This is where they would learn while they have worked on the problems on hand.                        

Another example is when an educator has to introduce a topic about properties of seeds and their life cycles, germination or reproduction. Just by reading from the text and then assessing that chapter on the basis of questions will not make a child remember what, when and how the process occurs. But instead if we take them to a nursery or outdoor garden, give them some seeds and let them plant in the soil realize the life sustaining properties of water and sunlight. This gives them the opportunity to engage in outdoor activities by working with dirt, looking at the seed, and thinking creatively. How does it germinate, what are the colors, how long is the process? These questions will arise with the student’s curiosity and then answered by student herself because she got involved in the experiment. By giving those opportunity kids will learn to solve the problems mentally and reflect on their learning. Students have a sense of ownership over this work. The Educator’s role is to identify and setup such activities that support the learning identified in the syllabus as well as providing room for learners to grow.

 These kind of learning enables students to develop their critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, independence and social skills (teamwork) which can further be applied in future lives.

This method will be difficult in certain context. Firstly it is time and resource intensive. Often, it does not align with a time bound syllabus in typical courses. It can be expensive to make projects, arrange the resources for experiments or to plan an outdoor activity for students. In certain specialized programs, the practical component may still have to be exercises done on theories rather than in the field due to complexity of the subject. However the fact that the exercises are allowing for creative understanding and adaptation still means that the student is doing something on their own while working on the problem and learning in the process. The real world benefit would be that the student is well prepared to utilize these skills when they move to the next program or join the work force.

Schools should use ‘learning by doing’ philosophy and give educators the freedom to structure their course and direct their students to be independent as well as think critically and creatively.

I believe that as educators we are not just playing a role of facilitator to achieve the end product but engaging each and every student in the learning process. Such an educator will have the most impact on a student and likely shape their life and career.  

Curriculum is not just the syllabus or the end product. It involves the educator and student in the learning process and refined/baked in by practice.

 

 

Traditional approach was that curriculum is a body of knowledge that has to be transmitted.  The curriculum was misread to mean the syllabus. When we were in school, the teacher followed this traditional  approach using the textbook in the order it was laid out. While studying English literature we were expected to read and remember poems and passages which belonged to poets and authors who lived in 18^th and 19^th centuries. For someone who wanted to pursue a career as a journalist or a civil servant, this form of learning would only give them a degree but this expertise cannot be used in real world situations. 

 This model of curriculum it set by people who are part of a dominant group including senior bureaucrats. The knowledge that is being conveyed in the program is never neutral. It is typically driven by an agenda. An example of that was when we were studying history a particular king was always referred as evil simply because he fought a war with a king from another ethnic group. He was no more evil than other kings who ruled at the time.   The bureaucrats who prepared the coursework, selected writers from that ethnic group who exhibited their bias. This served no purpose other than brainwashing young adults.  

Newer method curriculum as a product has focus on vocational learning and education is treated as a technical exercise. The curriculum is set out as objectives to be achieved, a plan put in place and then applied in practice and then the students are measured for having achieved those objectives. This method was more conducive to prepare people for real life jobs wherein particular tasks were to be performed and competencies achieved.  

The Tyler’s Model  

                Educational objective—>>>Learning Experiences ->>>Organisation of Experience—->>>Assessment and Evaluation 

Tyler’s rationale approach provides easy step by step guide to plan and develop the curriculum. Teacher has a clear objective to aim thus resulting in a desired outcome. 

My personal exposure to Tyler model was when my brother did his vocational program in Electronic repairs. The program was set with clear objective, the course was planned and executed in an organized manner. Upon successful evaluation, he immediately joined the workforce. 

 Disadvantages of Tyler rationale are it overlooks the unpredictable nature of teaching and learning. It removes teacher from the equation. Considering the importance, it places on measuring results, the study matter has to be broken down into very small units. Students may complete all the small units but lack overall judgement. It is also difficult to measure real impact of the program on student’s life in the short-term. Both teacher and student tend to ignore unanticipated outcomes since it is not part of the final measurement.  

The benefit of this process is visible when students complete the program and are immediately available to join the workforce and be productive. This helps the improvement of the economic enterprise and maintain or enhance the status quo. 

References: Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) ‘Curriculum theory and practice’  

Kumanshiro shares and explains his own experience of “common sense” while he was in Nepal to teach school students. During his stay he realized that their school system and way of living is very different from where he came from (U.S). For him using water at home is a privilege whereas in Nepal it is used carefully for each and every purpose and a particular time frame. Eg. One can have bath only in the morning when water is on tap whereas for use at other times of the day water is typically stored and limited in availability.  The above description in his book is quite similar to my experience as I come from Mumbai India and the education system is similar. Teachers follow particular course pattern, curriculum is framed in a rigid lesson plan format and to sum it up all students are judged on the basis of standardized written tests across the hundreds of schools in the province. Even the tests answers sheets are assessed by a different teachers who score them strictly. Under certain circumstance if a teacher decides to follow her own teaching approach in a class of 60 students that class will certainly fall behind all the other classes of same grade and will suffer consequences in an extremely competitive examination system. Scoring less marks is not acceptable to progress in many educational institutions.

Canada’s education system allows more one to one student teacher engagement which helps them to have a creative outlook rather than just get them ready for the workforce with bookish knowledge. Having taught in junior high for more than eight years I have always wanted to encourage kids to think on their own understanding of the concepts or to come up independent positions on subjects without depending on the formal knowledge in the books, but found myself constricted by a number of factors (rigid course work, huge class sizes, time restrictions and format of exams). Teaching here in schools would allow me with a better opportunity to utilize my teaching skills meaningfully.