New teaching practices are needed to engage students with practical - real or hypothetical - problems that connect them to the world beyond the classroom, that are not restricted by subject boundaries, and that are linked to students' prior knowledge
EDWARD ROY KRISHNAN, PHD
Today's school system was originally established to fulfil the needs of the industrial revolution.
People were trained (not to be confused with educated) and equipped to take up working-class job positions in various commercially oriented settings. Specialisation of skills and knowledge was important, and people were trained to be functionally good in one or more areas of work as required and dictated by the job market.
This explains why the system is characterised as being highly rigid. This also explains why the system did not emphasize the enhancement of creative potential of individuals.
In other words, schools themselves were like "factories". The factory-like schools "produced" workers who possess a set of knowledge and skills required for a specific job.
Because of this, the tremendous opportunities one could have had to explore and discover the marvellous ways in which his/her brain naturally learns (acquires knowledge), connects, analyses, extends, refines and applies knowledge is very much compromised.
While the school system fulfilled its limited purpose, it did so at the cost of wrecking the potential of millions of people who didn't think beyond having a job that paid them to maintain their middle-class lifestyle.
Education must be meaningful
The schools of the industrial age didn't bother to tell and/or show students why they were to learn what they were learning. This frustrated many, including teachers. Students were frustrated because they couldn't make sense of the act of trying to learn something that had no obvious connection with what they already knew - practical living - and what would benefit them in the future. Teachers faced many disciplinary problems presented by students that stemmed from a lack of motivation and interest in seemingly meaningless lessons.
Meaningful education does more than merely prepare people for work. It helps people to assimilate knowledge into their personal schema by making the learning experiences and materials relevant and useful. It enhances creativity naturally by encouraging students to connect with lessons at personal and interpersonal levels.
Research on connectedness
A three-year research project called "The Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study" was conducted by researchers from the School of Education at the University of Queensland, Australia, from 1998 to 2000. The research required extensive observation and study of classroom practices.
Researchers made detailed observations and statistical analyses of 975 classroom lessons offered in 24 schools over three years. The study investigated possible relationships (connections) between school-based management practices and enhanced student outcomes, both academic and social.
The study had many significant findings, but one is worthy of our immediate attention and response. It found that "connectedness" was the least-experienced pedagogical phenomenon in the 24 schools, across subjects, teachers, teaching styles and learning preferences.
Connectedness obtained the lowest score when compared to its counterpart pedagogical dimensions (elements of productive pedagogy), such as: intellectual quality, supportive classroom environment and recognition of difference.
Implications of study
From the study, we may conclude that there is a great and immediate need to pay more attention to connecting students' work (learning materials) to their biographies (personal mental structures and schema) and the world outside the classroom (present and future life-demands), using innovative, productive, constructive and creative teaching approaches.
How to do it
The following teaching practices could be utilised to ensure that students are engaged with practical, either real or hypothetical, problems that connect them to the world beyond the classroom that are not restricted by subject boundaries and that are linked to their prior knowledge. Here are some examples:
Knowledge integration: Does the lesson integrate a range of subject areas?
Integrated school knowledge is identifiable when either explicit attempts are made to connect two or more sets of subject area knowledge, or when no subject area boundaries are readily seen.
Topics or problems that either require knowledge from multiple areas, or that have no clear subject-area bases in the first place, highlight curricula that integrate school subject knowledge.
Non-integrated school knowledge is typically segregated or divided in such a way that specific sets of knowledge and skills are (relatively) unique and discrete to each specified school subject area.
Segregated knowledge is identified by clear boundaries between subject areas. Connections between knowledge in different segregated subject areas are less and less clear the stronger the boundary is between the knowledge areas. In the extreme, such boundaries prevent any interrelation of different subject areas.
Background knowledge: Are links with students' background knowledge made sufficiently explicit?
"High-connection" lessons provide students with opportunities to make connections between their linguistic, cultural, world knowledge and experience, and the topics, skills and competencies being taught. Background knowledge may include community knowledge, local trends, personal experience, media and popular culture sources.
"Low-connection" lessons introduce new content, skills and competencies without any direct or explicit opportunities to explore what prior knowledge students have of the topic, and without any attempts to provide relevant or key background knowledge that might enhance students' comprehension and understanding of the "new" material being offered.
Connectedness to the world: Is the lesson, activity, or task connected to competencies or concerns beyond the classroom?
Connectedness describes the extent to which the lesson has value and meaning beyond the instructional context, making a connection to the larger social context within which all students live.
Two areas in which students can experience connectedness is in trying to solve a (1) real-world (2) public problem. In other words, students can be asked to confront an actual contemporary issue or problem, such as applying statistical analysis in preparing a report to the city council on the homeless.
Presented properly by a conscientious teacher, students would be challenged to activate their personal experiences regarding the homeless in their neighbourhoods.
An effectively high level of connectedness can be achieved when the lesson entails one or both of these.
In a low-connectedness lesson with little or no value beyond the classroom, activities are deemed important for success only in school (now or later), but for no other aspects of life. Student work has no impact on others and serves only to certify their level of competence or compliance with the norms and routines of formal schooling.
Problem-based curriculum: Is there a focus on identifying and solving intellectual or real-world problems?
A problem-based curriculum is identified by lessons where students are presented with a specific real, practical, or hypothetical problem (or set of problems) to solve.
Problems are defined as having no specified correct solution, requiring knowledge construction on the part of the students and requiring sustained attention beyond a single lesson.
These types of core teaching methodologies are sorely needed throughout Thailand on a daily basis. Let's all work to put them firmly in place.
Dr Edward Roy Krishnan is a regular contributor to 'Education' and is the assistant to the president of Academic Affairs at Wells International School. He also lectures in the Graduate School of Psychology, Assumption University, and in the Faculty of Education, St Theresa INTI College. He can be contacted at edward@wells-school.com .
Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Next
