Module Two: REFLECTION
|
In Module Two: Historical Foundations of Teaching and Learning, we had the opportunity to explore the works of various authors discussing the current state of the history of education. Many believe that this important component of teacher training has become non-existent, which is a neglectful flaw, for in order to understand the present, we must be able to appreciate the past. How can we stride confidently into the future, if we don't know where we came from? I return to my example of using a map and compass, in order to reach a destination, you need to know where you started, and where you currently are.
I found these readings further cemented my definitions from Module One, and brought up concepts applicable to my own context. Christou relates this best when he states that education is seen as a force for remedying ills and changing the future, which is something that the Paramedic certifying body has requested of our program - they want the program to impart a sense of professional responsibility to assist with and conduct research to drive the profession forward, not just be part of it. |
Christou discusses the demise of educational history within teacher education, and the detriment this is having on our developing teachers and educational system as a whole. As teacher education becomes standardized with increasing governmental control (52), trends of efficiency and accountability are the norms in both teacher education and the educational system they are training to enter (p.57).
It is argued that this is drastically narrowing the thought processes of these teacher candidates. If Faculties of Education were to bring focus onto educational history, this would foster critical thinking and reflection, both of the past, and of the future (p.55). Christou suggests history as stories would be of benefit in this teaching, and explore varying perspectives which would broaden reflection, and encourage the use of traditional texts to defend or counter these stories (p.59). Education is described as a constantly changing field, therefore is under constant reflection and innovation. It is important to understand this path, as learning is described as a building process, which is stronger if you know where and why the current state exists, in order to consider where it might go. It is thus a resource, for just like using a map and compass, if you don’t know where you are, you can never get to where you’re going. Learning is discussed as pertaining to reflection and questioning, and without it we are just creating drones of the status quo (p.57), which relates to my definition of learning as “is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience.” If we desire a change in public education towards greater inquiry and constructivism approaches, then mustn’t our teacher education model this approach? I would equate this to a recent request of paramedic schooling, where research physicians are requesting graduates to be research oriented and capable of critical reflection in order to drive the profession forward, not just partake in it. Is the public school system ready to welcome teachers that are willing to question the traditional and incorporate innovative ideas? Christou, T.M. (2010). Reflecting from the margins of education faculties: Refiguring the humanist, and finding a space for story in history. Brock Education, 20(1), 49–63. |
Hi Jason,
Your question really got me reflecting on my own teacher education experience in my undergrad. I really felt like our professors encouraged us to be innovative and to challenge the status quo, however, I do not think our provincial government is well aligned with this perspective. This disassociation between what we are taught and what the Ministry of Education expects of us makes the transition from student teacher to intern to teacher a difficult one. The big talk right now in Saskatchewan is that the government is going to combine all of our school divisions into one (this is just rumour, but it is a possibility nonetheless). The main concern with this among teachers is our loss of autonomy. Without autonomy, I believe that questioning and challenging the traditional is going to be even more difficult. Do you think your undergrad was trying to drive a culture shift towards innovation and new thinking? There is rationale behind schooling creating the change it wants to see, but are the graduates capable of doing this if the environment they’re entering is not ready for it? Baby steps I guess.
If Saskatchewan goes provincial, would the entire province be working under one central curriculum? Would you still have freedom to teach the content in a manner you see fit? Do you think a provincial system on the flip side could open the door for more collaboration? Say online communities surrounding grade three math support for example? By no means am I trying to downplay the likely legitimate concerns you expressed, just stepping to the side to view it from a different angle. Thanks for the thoughts! -Jason. |
In Sandwell’s article, The Great Unsolved Mysteries of Canadian History: Using a web-based archives to teach history, a new approach to teaching history is introduced. The premise is that students will access a website where primary documents are housed, and will be engaged in doing history, using these documents to solve the presented case, while simultaneously learning about traditional history class topics, such as politics, economics, and social norms for the time.
Relating this style of learning by discovery to my working definitions, I would argue that this is a highly innovative style of learning, though not necessarily truly creative as teaching history, and teaching by discovery, is not a new thing, but indeed this has put a new spin to teaching this topic, therefore is innovative. Throughout the article Sandwell describes the role of the teacher as a facilitator, so to this point the act of teaching is providing guidance, advice, and ensuring core concepts are covered. Learning is done by self and group inquiry, and involves an active process, which follows my definition that learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience, be it via direct instruction, or through interaction with their environment. Upon reviewing the website, it certainly achieves its initial goal of stimulating interest and promoting an intrinsic interest to pursue the topic. There are a variety of various modules or mysteries for students to work on, all seem to be the premise of an unsolved murder. Are there alternative mysteries or questions that could be pursued apart from murders? Could an investigation such as “What events led to World War I?” provide equal opportunity and interest? Although answers are readily available in any text, a selection of primary documents could be compiled that could incorporate various points of view, allow the student to discover the issues, form opinions, and still learn about particular social issues of the era. Additionally I wonder, does this type of learning by inquiry miss any factual information considered vital learning that may hinder the student in the future? Sandwell, R. (2005). The great unsolved mysteries of Canadian history: Using a web-based archives to teach history. Canadian Social Studies, 39(2). Retrieved from http://www2.education.ualberta.ca/css/Css_39_2/ARSandwell_unsolved_mysteries.htm |
Thanks for your review. I read this article as well and similar questions came to mind. I think questions like 'what events led to World War 1' would be a great way to approach learning in lower high school or even middle school. I think it would be interesting to branch out from simply murders / mysteries to teaching through promting questions in general. This is the way much of eduction is completed within the PYP and many parents of my students ask the question: how do you ensure you are covering everything? This is where having a sound curriculum comes into play tied in with teacher knowledge. I have been having another conversation in this course about teachers who have been asked to teach history without it being their major area. Teaching through inquiry for these teachers would be much more challenging if they did not have base knowledge to refer.
Jared. Thanks for the reply and review Jared. That's a great thought regarding teaching through questioning in general, and just to further that thought a bit, to have the students then work to answer them. I find value in often letting students figure things out for themselves, as too often they want simple quick-fix answers. I find this need for instant-gratification doesn't create as much meaning and learning compared to actually engaging with the material and finding or creating the knowledge themselves. Which I suppose is the premise behind leaving the textbook on the shelf, and undertaking this mystery solving approach.
-Jason. |
The complexity of intellectual currents: Duncan McArthur and Ontario’s progressivist curriculum reforms by Christou, details a brief account of the history of the progressivist reform during the interwar period of the 1940’s, being driven by Minister of Education, Duncan McArthur.
The old approach stressed subject matter that must be learned, whereas the progressive reform introduced other factors such as personality development and citizenship (p.687). This approach encouraged self-direction (accounting for learning to be relevant to student’s interests), questioning instead of blind acceptance (p.687), and was developed surrounding the themes of meliorism, efficiency, and child study (p.678). Within this reform, a new subject of social studies was introduced, which aligns with my definition of creativity, as it was something new, and was a driving force for positive change. My definition of teaching as an art, an ill-structured domain requiring the ability to adapt, is demonstrated by the emphasis that was also placed on reforming teacher education, to ensure teachers developed the skills to do this (p.689). McArthur raised an issue with the pre-reform educational model, where students were mandated to learn, and stated this did not motivate students, instead it was interest that best did this. This old model promoted superficial learning, and seldom related to the structure of knowledge or experience possessed by the pupil (pp.693-694). My definition of learning agrees with this, as learning is through the transformation of experience, and if the student has little applicable experience and therefore no relevance to the material, learning will be ineffective. I was also intrigued by the following ideas: Education seen as a force for remedying ills and changing the future, (p.682). Examinations were solitary and anti-social institutions, forcing fierce competition amongst students who should have been, ideally, cooperating to build learning, (p.688). Schools too frequently place emphasis on place in the procession, not the direction of it, (p.688). At the post-secondary level over the past several years, the general student population has increasingly shown an attitude of entitlement, an inability to cope with failure, and arrive ill-prepared for the rigors of further study and work-placement. Can / should this be considered at the primary/secondary level, or should further social studies and life readiness be incorporated at the college/university level? Christou, T. M. (2012). The complexity of intellectual currents: Duncan McArthur and Ontario’s progressivist curriculum reforms. Paedagogica Historica: International Journal of the History of Education, 49(5), 677–697. doi: 10.1080/00309230.2012.739181 |
Hi Jason,
This article does sound quite interesting and like your definition of learning specifically the relevance.(I took it out in my revised but wish I had not) . I am sure there maybe some subjects where is not a viable option (to have learning relevant to students interest), but luckily the experiences I have had allows for such inquiry. One of the challenges I have had and wonder if it is touched on in this article is how to monitor inquiry based learning in the classroom? Hi Leah,
Thanks for the thought. I agree, we are reading a fair bit about an inquiry based approach, but thus far we haven't seen much in the detail of assessing this type of learning. On one hand, I begin to wonder if part of this change involves teachers/students/the entire system becoming less concerned with evaluation, but I counter that with we still need to ensure students are gaining the skills and making connections with the material. In a previous discussion it was suggested this type of assessment might focus on a triad of elements, to include student-teacher discussion, class participation, and artifacts. In my program we're currently discussing how to build in genuine case-study and class discussion, and it was offered the best way to evaluate this is to assess the quantity and quality of group and class participation of each student. At first it would likely require a second evaluator in the class to sit and take notes of the participation, however once adept at this type of teaching, it's said instructors can become quite good at assessing all this themselves. Does that sound like something that could work in your classroom? |
Herbst explores what he calls a lack of direction and purpose within the history of education, in his 1999 article The History of Education: State of the Art at the Turn of the Century in Europe and North American. He identifies three major themes resulting in this: firstly, the field has not included the daily pedagogical practice of schooling, secondly, that the field has left that of teacher education in favor of the arts, and lastly, that current study only considers public education, leaving out private schools.
In speaking of education, I would contend this is comprised of teaching and learning. In the American history, progressivism is seen as an event, whereas in Europe reform is seen as wedded to public schooling (p.742). The latter European view describes a state of constant change, which aligns with my definition of teaching being a profession that necessitates constant adaptation. My definition also calls teaching the transmission of cultural wealth, which is precisely stated as the definition of education (p.745). The article briefly discusses the rise of new subjects, such as the history of women and ethnic studies, which would follow my definition of creativity, as something new was developed (p.739). Herbst raises an interesting point of view regarding current students, who show little enthusiasm for intellectual exploration and are instead seeking instructions on securing employment. Students have become mental robots who amass information without understanding its significance (p.740). Is this trend something that is a result of the educational system, societal upbringing, or a lack of teacher ability to adapt to these leaners and motivate the desired curiosity? The article concludes with thoughts on how to reinvigorate the history of education, with one such recommendation being the field return to its roots in professional education. I question the concreteness of this suggestion, can history of education not exist in both teacher education and arts/history faculties, albeit to varying depths and focus? This may keep the door open for further research, as well as build platforms for further discourse, and allow the paths of academic and functional beliefs to endure, and occasionally weave. Herbst, J. (1999). The history of education: State and the art at the turn of the century in Europe and North America. Paedegogia Historica: International Journal of the History of Education, 35(3), 737–747. doi: 10.1080/0030923990350308 |
Hello Jason,
Your response to the Herbst article seems to show a good deal of understanding. To answer your second question, it should definitely be a possibility to have both theoretical and practical studies in the history of education in different departments, though what chance there is of that is probably determined by the researchers themselves. If most researchers want to continue on the current path this discipline is on, it is unlikely that much will change. If there is the desire to update the history of education through practical study, it might require universities and local schools to work together to create educational opportunities for teachers and time in the classroom for researchers. Colin Hi Colin, that's a good point, the probability of having history of education throughout different departments may be limited to the number of historians and their interest in doing that. They perhaps went towards other faculties and focus for a reason. If the positions are created, will that bring them in? (Classic Field of Dreams reference.)
Bringing up the recommendations of Herbst, you mentioned updating the field through direct research in partnership with local schools, that makes me wonder if not only has some of the focus on the history of education declined, have we also begun to lose our present appreciation as well? Herbst says we need to look into the daily pedagogical activities, but if we're not doing that will we lose this too. Then how does one go forward with any sense of direction if you don't know where you came from, nor where you're at? Thanks! -Jason. |