In creating an ideal setting, there are
three things that need to be considered in order to make this model work in the
best manner possible: the teachers, the students and the vision/mission
statement.
The Teachers
Teachers need to be well educated in human
development. A single course in developmental psychology is not sufficient to
accomplish this. Teachers need to understand through research as well as direct
observation and discussion how children of different ages naturally learn and
grow. They need to understand the basis for language acquisition, numeracy, and
abstract thinking. They need to understand what, how and when various
milestones are reached. They need to understand cognitive development in order
to encourage the student and adapt the environment appropriately. When a
teacher understands human development, that teacher is able to apply this
knowledge, recognize the behavior patterns of students, and encourage them at
the appropriate level.
This also allows teachers to better identify learners who have unique needs and to help to meet these needs. As it stands now, many teachers in the system have no background in special education whatsoever. This needs to change.
This also allows teachers to better identify learners who have unique needs and to help to meet these needs. As it stands now, many teachers in the system have no background in special education whatsoever. This needs to change.
All too often, the developmental aspect of teacher
training is neglected and teachers are given courses in subject matter instead.
While every teacher should be well-versed in his or her specialty subjects,
this should not be done at the expense of a thorough understanding of
development. Understanding of the subject matter should be the main focus of
the undergraduate degree; the teaching degree should focus on development. We
need to teach students, not subjects.
Only once prospective teachers have an
understanding of development should they begin to work on practical classroom
strategies.
Our society has a bad habit of looking down
on the teaching profession. Teachers are not treated as professionals with a
great deal of responsibility, but rather as fancy babysitters, at least by
some. Teachers are professionals though, with five or more years of post-secondary
education. They are responsible for the education of the coming generation,
which is something that will carry a lasting effect for decades to come. The
effects of a good teacher can be felt through the community. By supporting our
teachers, treating them as professionals and expecting professionalism from
them, we will help to elevate the image of the profession, attract the best
possible teachers to the profession, and provide the best possible future for
our children.
Institutions such as the Ontario College of
Teachers can help foster this improvement, by holding teachers accountable,
supporting professional development, and by fostering communication and sharing
of techniques, strategies and visions that work. Gaining and maintaining dialogue
among educators is a challenge we must undertake in order to improve our
educational system. All too often, teachers, especially newer ones, are left to
their own devices and must “reinvent the wheel” when there are many teachers
out there who have been there and can share their own valuable experiences. We
need to budget time for such dialogue. We also need to maintain a dialogue
between educators and the general public. There are many misconceptions
regarding teaching that could be easily dispelled through better communication
with the general public.
The Students
By emphasizing an understanding of human
development in teacher training, students can become the focus of education. It
may sound silly to say this, but all too often we are caught up in pedagogy,
politics, pre-defined curriculum and policies that we lose sight of the real
reason we are here: the students.
There is a tendency to view students in
financial terms: as commodities, customers, consumers or investments in the
future. Many of us come to education with an agenda of sorts, including social
justice, power or control (never a good reason to work with others!), idealism,
a quest for a sense of immortality by empowering students for the future, or
any number of other reasons. We need to be honest about these, and then let
them go. Our own agendas have no business here. I know that even that statement
is an agenda of sorts, but once the students arrive on the scene, it is one
that is easily transferred to them. If we are to encourage our students to
become active, engaged critical thinkers who seek out lifelong learning, we
need to empower them and rescind our own control in order to foster their
growth.
The Learning Environment
My own ideal for a learning environment
would be a mixture of Reggio Emilia and the Sudbury-style schools, with some elements of Waldorf, Montessori (as Maria herself described—not
the modern variations), The Teacher Tom’s approach, and
even “Maker Sheds” such as KWARTZlab.
There would be indoor and outdoor spaces in which to learn and explore, with spaces created for individual, small group and large group work.
There would be indoor and outdoor spaces in which to learn and explore, with spaces created for individual, small group and large group work.
Play and open exploration would take
priority over structure, although there would be a “rhythm” to each day and
each season. This would continue through all ages with materials and mentors
being available for students based on student interests. Students would have
regular counseling sessions with an advisor group to ensure they were on track
to meeting their own goals, and these goals would include academics, creative pursuits, physical development (fine and gross motor skill development), spiritual growth (philosophical, social), and general well-being (including physical and mental health). Students would be encouraged to arrange additional
mentorships and forge connections with various experts and professionals as
they became able to do so. Research would be paramount, from exploring
caterpillars to viewing distant galaxies, and everything in between. Students
would be encouraged to collaborate and also to share their work with other
students of different ages and experiences as a means for fostering in
communication skills necessary in most fields of endeavour. Age would be no
barrier for learning; all limits would be based on ability, aptitude, physical
limitations (ie. if you cannot reach the knobs, you cannot use the stove) and any
applicable legal limitations. Students with special needs would have access to
the mentors they need in order to work towards their potential. Since all
abilities would be mixed, yet each student would determine their own pathway,
tolerance would be encouraged through a non-competitive atmosphere. Older
students would have an opportunity to mentor younger students without being
compelled to do so.
The role of the teacher would become a
facilitator. The teacher would provide links to resources and opportunities, be
there to bounce ideas off of, ask open-ended questions to encourage students to
stretch their limits, and help students create long and short-term personal
goals and plan towards them.
The school would be similar to a Sudbury
school, except the teachers would take a slightly more hands-on role, and the
students would be required to explain their choices and review and update their goals on a regular basis.
The role of the teacher would be more
demanding because it would require monitoring of a wide variety of topics and
projects, and also a monitoring of available outside opportunities that might
be of relevance to the students, such as college/university courses, contests, science
fairs, performances, community events, gallery showings, etc.
Since the reporting would be based on
portfolios, there would be little testing involved. Anecdotal reports, notes
from counseling meetings, goal setting and reviews and physical projects would
form the bulk of the assessments.
Some challenges would include the use of
space, supervision, communication with community resources including mentors,
lab / workshop access, apprenticeships, and co-ordinating with online and
college/university programs. Working with less imposed structure demands a
great deal of organizational skill on the part of the facilitators, and this
would need to be recognized in advance. Excellent and regular communication
between the teachers as well as the administration and older students would be
imperative.
Some people are bound to balk at the idea
of less structure, but after much research as well as some 24 years of
experience in education, I believe that this is in fact the best and most
effective learning environment possible. It fosters the natural learning
patterns of young children, provides a stimulating environment in which to
explore ideas, and feedback in order to adapt and learn in an ongoing fashion.
Learning to make and set goals, then to follow up with them from an early age
will help foster study skills, time management and also enable students to make
connections between their goals and the foundation skills needed in order to
attain them. Support from teachers who act as facilitators and educational counselors
will help students work out their own learning pathways while providing support
as needed. When the learning is relevant and comes in an order that is logical
to and for the learner, it becomes deeper and better learned. The student
values it and understands its relevance, and can be free to embrace it.