Christmas is over. We had a Christmas tree in our house. It was covered in tinsel as well as blue and silver balls. My 21 month old son and I put the star on top. With it's twinkling lights, the tree was the most striking thing in the room, bound to be irresistible to an inquisitive toddler.
He has myriad toys in the same room as our Christmas tree. We insisted he not touch the tree. What do you think happened?
That tree resulted in many trips to the naughty corner (time out, for Americans and other foreigners). There are many reasons why we didn't want him to touch the tree (the baubles could break and injure him, stewardship of our son's understanding of personal property, etc) but it was inevitable that he disobey.
A big tree, in the middle of a space, more interesting than anything else, absolutely forbidden to touch. Remind you of anything?
The creation story is a rich allegory of human behaviour and can perhaps be applied to the classroom as well.
What do we mean when we say a student is “distracted”? Is distraction inevitable? Does technology create distraction, as many teachers say?
Saying that a student has become distracted means that they are not following the prescribed learning path. Prescribing a path for twenty or so students is limiting. It presupposes the needs of the student and that the teacher has godlike properties of pedagogical provision.
Recently, I've come to the conclusion that the person getting distracted is me.
The product of my distraction is vigorous lesson planning. I even prided myself on it. This year, I'm waiting until I meet my students and get to know the way they learn. I won't prescribe a theory of learning, technology or work schedule until they show me how they best learn. Even then I won't write the lessons. They can do it. I'll focus on feedback, facilitation and getting out of their way.
Following their passion in the classroom should be the default state for our students. How often do I factor this into my teaching?
Hi Gary,
ReplyDeleteIt might be worth taking a look at this animation on "Changing Education Paradigms":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=relmfu
Also good is this one on "Rewards and Recognition and How it Effects Performance":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc
Thanks, Glynn. Whatever you focus on grows. What happens when a teacher focuses on bad behaviour?
DeleteInteresting. Your approach seems to have a lot in common with iterative/agile approaches in software engineering. Previously (60s to 90s) the approach followed was known as the waterfall approach - you'd get the customers requirements up front, write endless documents, get them to sign off on the design, then build the software. It was inherited from bridge building and the like - you need a clear plan before you start, because you can't redesign a bridge once you start building it. Software isn't like that - you can change, redesign, swap components in and out. So with an iterative approach you build the software WITH the client - you build a part, then review it, go back and change it, in an iterative pattern until you reach the final product. It tends to result in better designs too that are less brittle and better able to cope with upgrades etc. The approach you've outlined here has a lot in common with that - gather information on the students (your clients in this analogy), get to know them, then develop a plan. You could also look at periodically reviewing that plan too (say every two months?)) and tweaking it.
ReplyDeleteI think the two examples are sympathetic. The expert is dying. I know some things, but it's better for me to listen than to talk. If I don't assume I know how to educate a child, I'll probably do a better job. In a crowded market (software design in this example) anything which strengthens the relationship with the client is vital. Listening is an underrated skill.
ReplyDelete