Dewey prefaces his thinking by explaining that it is not
enough to simply acknowledge that something is not working and therefore do the
complete opposite. While traditional instruction has been ineffective, he
states, “it does not follow that progressive education is a matter of planless
improvisation” (p.28). Rather, because every individual brings with him/her
prior experiences and internal conditions priming them for certain learning
opportunities, it is therefore a teacher’s job to most effectively orchestrate
an interaction between internal and objective (external) conditions that will
move a learner forward (p.42). He warns that this insight really only complicates the work of educators, and that we must now explore the methods of orchestrating these interactions. Dewey has framed the challenge for us, the other
writers have brought in some more concrete examples and insights into what it
will mean to enact this “progressive” form of education.
Gee brings
our attention to the achievement gap within schools and sheds some light on the
fact that the way we teach within schools may be keeping certain students from
reaching their potential. He advocates for a more “cultural” process of
learning involving “masters. . . creating an environment rich in support for
learners” (p.12).
Bransford
& Schwartz similarly argue that the goal should be to “place (students) on
a trajectory toward expertise” (p.68). They argue that the end goal itself does
not matter so much as having the tools and skillset to engage in the process of
reaching the end goal. The idea of knowing “with,” that “an educated person
thinks, perceives, and judges with everything that he has studied in school,
even though he can’t recall on demand,” places emphasis on experiences that
will help students grow and interact with the world in rich and meaningful ways
in future experiences (p.69-70).
Pea brings
in the idea of distributed intelligence, and the idea that intelligence is
accomplished rather than possessed (p.50). It is not so much about gaining
personal knowledge, but about being able to interact with the world (humans and
non-human objects) in effective ways. Students must learn how to interact with
versatile objects, tools created by others that store intelligence (measuring
tools, periodic table, maps, calculators, to name a few), as well as
collaborating with others in order to construct intelligence.
All authors
place an emphasis on experience, both past and future, and social interaction.
The view of what makes someone truly educated is changing and therefore, so is
the role of “educator.” It is less about passing knowledge down from one brain
to another, and more about setting up learning opportunities that will
challenge and build upon past and current experiences, allowing learners to
interact with and act on the world in deeper, productive ways.
Your last paragraph made me think of a quote from Pea. "Our productive activities change the world, thereby changing the ways in which the world can change us. By shaping nature and how our interactions with it are mediated, we change ourselves" (p.57). It is really interesting to me that the changes in education that they are advocating for can also be used to do the changing. While these actions are the goal, they are also the process.
ReplyDeleteYour last paragraph made me think of a quote from Pea. "Our productive activities change the world, thereby changing the ways in which the world can change us. By shaping nature and how our interactions with it are mediated, we change ourselves" (p.57). It is really interesting to me that the changes in education that they are advocating for can also be used to do the changing. While these actions are the goal, they are also the process.
ReplyDelete