Responding to one of our discussions on Canvas has made me realize a great problem we face in education is scale and adaptability. Our readings this week, especially Dr. Kafai's, dove into learning perspectives based on the notion that the construction of knowledge is not just a one way street (instructionism). Perspectives that support learning models such as a constructionist approach, a learner-centered classroom, or social learning carefully consider the complex nature of learning and knowledge development. By all means I am supportive of this. Yet I do also see where the issues come to play.
An instructionist approach is easy to scale, and can easily be adapted for audiences of all types. The lecture given to a 10-person class in Philadelphia can be given to a 100 person class in Los Angeles if needed. Just stick someone wise in the front of the class, have enough seats (or not) for students, and away we go!
However, a learner-centered classroom has to consider the learners themselves, their experiences, etc. That would seem to get more difficult as the numbers in the classroom goes up. Constructionism and the idea of constructivism are awesome (and so vital to a lot of what I believe in when discussing the future of learning). But getting everyone, for example, access to software that facilitates these theories, or Lego blocks, or whatever, and keeping things structured and organized, also seems to be something that would be more difficult as the numbers go up. Finally, although social learning has lent itself to scalability through social media and other digital tools, the Weigle article (p.12) points out several pitfalls of this growth such as the majority dominating the vocal few, and challenges stemming from collaboration. Again, as numbers grow, these problems have to be considered.
But when thinking about straight-up instructionism, a lecturer can talk to hundreds of people, get the lesson out there, and as long as he can be heard through some type of audio system, the deed is done. Did everyone get it? Likely no. But those in favor of sage-on-the-stage can focus on how at least the knowledge was "put out there" for everyone to obtain.
So I do hope that over the next few years we take all of these marvelous forms of teaching, learning and pedagogical strategies/theories and create best practices for scalability, adaptability, and ultimately, sustainability. Those are strange words to use when discussing the classroom, but until we figure this out a bit more, the tried and true "sage on the stage" instructionist approach will reign supreme.
Marcus, I enjoyed your perspectives on this week's readings. I feel that instructionism certainly has its place in education. Oftentimes, the nature of the subject matter lends itself to lecture. If a teacher is conveying a set of facts, or is simply imparting information, then she can do so to the multitudes all at once. That is place where on-line learning can certainly be a benefit. In that situation, it would not matter if the lecture was being viewed live or as a recording. Asynchronous meetings would be great.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, if the concepts are complex and every stage of the process has to be monitored and evaluated, then the timing of the class and the size of the class take on more importance. I would be very uncomfortable teaching math classes without a significant portion of the time being spent in a synchronous environment. While I spend a portion of each class as the "sage on the stage", I know that true learning is only happening when the students are working and trying and making mistakes and correcting them.
So I agree with you that constructionist teaching, at this time, still needs to be done in smaller and more intimate settings where the teacher can really know and understand the learner.
Your post reminds me of a conversation I had with a faculty professional development director. She was telling me how sometimes in higher ed, students would rather listen to that 'sage on the stage' senior professor (expert) rather than be in a more hands-on classroom with a TA or junior faculty! That made me think about how we should work towards a blend of both to find the right balance. Scalability and the other big words on the other hand, is a tough one as always!
ReplyDeleteYes! Sometimes the learner wants -- and I believe needs -- that time to just have information transmitted to them. I personally have a insanely active classroom when I'm teaching; but at times I break it up with a few minutes of lecture. The lecture is almost like a "rest break" for my students, haha. I think it's necessary to do this because you want to give them a chance to gather themselves and process everything that's going on. I think that just having them sit down at times and listen to you can provide that opportunity.
DeleteMarcus-I like your -abilities. You have made me think about the shift from these learning theory -isms to the outcomes.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment Lee; those are some scary words to talk about in any context, especially when you talk about something like classroom management and the design of learning environments. But I think that, because the state of learning has evolved so much thanks to the emergence of new technologies, we really do have to think intentionally about not just the wonder of non-instructionist pedagogical strategies, but the systematic and strategic implementation of them as well. Or else they are all just cool ideas that only some, but not all, will be able to enjoy. Don't we want everyone to enjoy these great new ways of teaching and learning?
DeleteMarcus - You make a great point about scalability. It is interesting that as thee digital tools seem to solve some problems many others arise. At first glance many think that Khan Academy makes schools irrelevant. Obviously, this is far from the truth. Yes , we can transmit information to many people rather easily now, but, as educators, we know the real problem is whether anyone is really listening and understanding. While the solutions to real learning are not as easily scalable as posting a lecture new opportunities to connect and learn together are digitally available although not scalable.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment Raymond; it will be interesting to see if a shift happens where the focus turns to creating replicable models -- for all shapes, sizes, and types of learning cohorts -- of these new ways of connecting and learning. The thing with Khan Academy, it's a model that is sooooo easy to replicate. Because of that it will continue to gain momentum regardless if it's good or not.
DeleteOne of the big problems is that there are almost too many different ways of teaching and learning that are being promoted at the moment, without scalable models, and they're competing against each other. Maybe if we settle on 2-3 of these methods we could really put our heads together to create replicable, scalable models that work for learners everywhere.
You're definitely right about that, Marcus. There are a lot of competing models and theories, all gaining momentum. And like Bryan pointed out above, sometimes it seems that instructionism is necessary, though this is the model least in favor right now. And the way you describe your classroom does sound busy (lecture as rest break? :) ) but that might be the key - to find a balance that uses all approaches appropriately.
DeleteAnd you make a good point about the sage-on-the-stage, in that at least that gets the knowledge out there. For some students and for some learning goals, that might be enough.
To your last point, it does still seem strange to me that so many conversations at my school use the words "scalability, adaptability, and sustainability." But this is the challenge, right?
Marcus, I think you bring up some good points about scalability. That word seems to be cropping up everywhere I go these days. I just came from the P21 Summit and it seemed to be the question everyone was asking: is (x) scalable? My question is, what does scaling up mean? Does it mean everyone learns the same way across the country? Well that's antithetical to constructionism. Does it mean that everyone ends up with the same knowledge at the end across the country? Also antithetical. Same tools? Doesn't work. Same topics? Doesn't work.... and so on. I think the key to real constructivist learning opportunities is that they aren't susceptible to scaling measures because they take into consideration ecological aspects of individuals. And individuals can't be taken to scale....
ReplyDeleteYour comments on instructionism were so insightful. I feel like I've personally moved so far away from that kind of pedagogy that when I see it in my school (and I know so many people do it) that I bristle. I feel like my colleagues who complain most about how much their students didn't learn are the ones most "guilty" of teaching as telling. The question for me has never been, "what aren't my students doing?" but rather I try to ask myself "what can I do to help them learn?". It always makes me crazy when someone says, "I know I taught it". I think to myself, "you might have talked it, but did the students learn it?". Thanks for your thoughts.
ReplyDelete