BP6_2009121_AntiTeaching

Two glimpses.

Thoughts of a student

Dread. Same old class with the same old methods. No fun. NO change. Daily Oral Language on the board. Journal. Teacher talk. I pretend to listen. Friends catch my eye. Funny face. Book work. The worst. The clock ticks. Too long. Finished. Read silently. (Gasp). Bell rings. Thank goodness. Art!

Kids at play.

Let's play school. I'll be the teacher. Get your books. Read this story. Write your math. Here is your worksheet. Let me grade it. Everything is correct. You get an 'S+". You have an ‘F’. Here is more work. No talking. Stay in your seat.




How many of our students walk through similar sentiments? How many of them have this heaviness on a daily basis? As a kid, I can remember many days like the point of view above. Even as an adult learner, I know I learn best in an engaging environment. As a teacher I've had these days with my students. (The truth will set me free).

I'm old enough to remember the Little Rascals and the days of the dunce cap. A kid mirroring the images of school is a great game, loved mostly by girls. Are children still playing school today? Is the classroom still significant to children’s playtime? If so, what do we look like?

The focus of this entry is to think about the educational systems that are in place and assume that the system is inadequate for the majority of learners. If that assumption were true then what would work for those students? What systems would be needed to allow those students to flourish? My honest take is that there isn't one way that would work in every situation. Learning is a personal event. There is a generalization of how learning can be derived, however what really makes learning reach its highest degree is when it adds to the physical, social, cognitive, and emotional dimensions of the learner.

As a college professor Michael Wesh (2008)claims that the problem of education today is significance. Students have always lamented the familiar ‘why do I need to learn this’ or ‘what’s the point’ questions. And can educators blame them, especially the learners of the 6-12 sector of public education. As a middle school teacher I see how in this zone we sow the seeds of those questions. Learners are inundated with skill and drill and teach to the test methods that have no specific connections to real world career, jobs, or interests. In my opinion, students derive their connections to real world more from their personal interests and activities. Having a love of cycling can lead to becoming a XGame professional, tennis can lead to a viable career, a love of technology and computing makes students think tech school versus public education’s highly preferred ‘4 year college for all’ platform. Wesch speaks of putting his 500 students at the center of the learning and bowing out of the standard teacher centered instruction calling it ‘anti-teaching’.

At first gut I heard the rebel yell and cried ‘more, more, more’ like the 80’s song by icon Billy Idol when I read Wesch’s. I was ready to go rogue, but it wasn’t that kind of party necessarily. Wesch was trying to restore thinking of what teaching can and should be. It should be relevant to the learner and provide a purpose. What is content without a learner? Can you have a learner without content? Learning is natural and the world is content. The learner comes into contact with its environment and the environment provides a natural curriculum to be learned. A learner’s ability to grasp the curriculum is shaped by its mentors that guide the learner to understanding. That is education.

So, what is teaching? That is the question. Dr. Christopher Deason gave this question in an online learning environment to his month 3 graduate students, of which I was a part. I’ve shared his views and a student’s reply in the following video. It speaks to those ideals that Wesch is attempting to make relevant to the education community. As I don’t have a direct quote from Dr. Deason, I remember him saying that what we value as teachers really encourage how we view teaching and learning. It is what shapes who we are.


So then the question becomes what is central to the core of learning in the 21st century? How will this be achieved and how does the learner’s learning style now make a substantial impact on how learning will take place in formal education? In the advent of virtual learning, computers are literally on the table for discussion. Mobile technology and systems that promote curriculum development are becoming mainstays of college campuses and online learning. Course management systems are prevalent tools used by the education community to supervise online learning content and provide a way to compact a set of tools to provide interactions between students and course providers. This system is great for instructors whom are immigrants to current technology. Even though this warehouse of administrative tools is relevant to providing some efficient ways of interacting with students, they do not provide varying options for its use. In my experience as a teacher my school had the service provided by our district called eChalk. It gave every faculty and staff email address, Teachers could create web pages that could have a discussion board, bookmarked resources, class calendar and announcements, mini-pages for project activities and resources. Students were had email service and access to class pages. So it was more a management system for the teachers with limited technology for students. Initially students were excited by the ability, but disappointed that there was ‘no real purpose’ for having an email. Exploration was prohibited and teachers didn’t find ways to incorporate this technology so students would find the significance of the online experience valid beyond getting homework assignments. A very expensive system that isn’t used to it’s fullest potential.

On the other hand, sites like Google and Yahoo, are allowing it’s users to customize their homepages with gadgets, i.e. calendar, notepads, mini Facebook and Twitter interfaces, that put everything needed for productivity in one place. It creates a personal environment for the user. Like CMS everything is available and then some. Email, IM, RSS feeds, links, and all sorts of other gadgets allow users to create their own space according to their own needs. Professional learning environments (PLE) describes the tools, communities, and services that allow users to personalize and manage their own learning via a free online tool. The learner decides what is important, what is needed, who their contacts are, and manages their agenda via the platform (Educause, 2009). I can attest to PLE, even though at the time I had no idea of this concept. I’m an aspiring artist and have sought out an art group via Yahoo, which has a Facebook group and blog. I signed myself up and receive emails from the group, have made contacts with other group members in the art Flickr group, and have a lifeline of mentors as I draw, upload, and share my work. I do all this without a university. I scour the web for art lessons and subscribe to feeds of other artists so I can constantly feed my brain with my own personal preferences for art. A university could legitimize my abilities but it would cost me a great deal for the validation I may receive through my PLE. My interaction with my iGoogle has been my summer long PLE and I’ve truly missed it as stated in an earlier post.


Am I anti-teaching? I am Pro-Learner. I am passionate about the new ways we can reach our grey minded students who lack true significance of their learning efforts. I want to set my teaching practice free. So, truth be told, I am anti-teaching and anti-teaching is authentic teaching.


References:

More videos from Dr. Christopher Deason
http://feeds.feedburner.com/idnetwork

Meerts, J. (2003, October 20). Course management systems (CMS). Retrieved from Educause Web site http://net.educause.edu/or/library/pdf/DEC0202.pdf

Wesch, M. (2008 Spring). AntiTeaching confronting the crisis of significance. Educate Canada,48(2), 3-7. Retrieved from www.cea-ace.ca/media/en/AntiTeaching_Spring08.pdf