|
Dr Bob Grandin, University
of the Sunshine Coast
 Download this paper 251.98 Kb
Back to new Transitions - Re-Engagement Edition
When we discuss disengagement we are
talking about the failure of students to engage with a process that
is deemed to be "right". Can we not interpret the failure to
engage as a warning sign that there may be a failure to meet the
needs of all students? Is it possible that many students do not learn
in the way of traditional schooling - through the ordered
acquisition of information? Is the real issue with which we should be
concerned the disenfranchisement of a significant sized group of
people?
Early in the last century writers like
John Dewey (1916, 1937) wrote of the democratic empowerment of
education. If we are to have a free society then the voice of each
individual needs to be heard and education is the pathway to
understanding issues. Many that followed illustrated that the role of
schooling should be to prepare young people to be full and productive
partners in society. Paulo Freire and Ira Shor wrote about the
"Pedagogy of the Oppressed" either independently or together
(1970, 1987, 1996). They illustrated that the schooling process often
ensures that those that have limited power remain without power. Each
writer recognises that the real process of education is to empower
individuals to be able to take a democratic place within society. In
other words, the thoughts of individuals should be represented within
the group that they belong - they must be enfranchised.
We talk of schooling as an empowerment
process through which individuals can improve their
life-opportunities. But the history of schooling has been the use of
an academic process to classify the "worth" of young people. A
failure to meet standards of performance in academic tests meant
rejection. While there were many unskilled jobs this process was
lauded as a fair and just system that placed individuals in
appropriate tasks. Society was pleased that schools "helped"
children to leave school and move into a more meaningful existence.
We accepted that some people were just not "good learners". It
often surprised us that some of these individuals went on to be such
great successes in life and illustrated extensive knowledge - but
of course it was practical knowledge! But as the nature of society
has changed and we learn more about how people learn we are fast
recognising that schooling may not be a "fair and just" system
for all. Maybe it has not adjusted its "academic" approach to be
more inclusive and cater for the diversity within its student
population. Or does recent publicity focussing on a "return to
basics" indicate we are not happy to change the schooling process?
Does it continue to reflect that it is the fault of the
"non-learners" - the disenfranchised?
The theoretical basis to Diversity
For most of the 19th Century
schooling was only for the wealthy or the academically able. As the
move to schooling as a right for all children progressed through the
20th Century the actual process of schooling did not
change. It remained an academic process in which Reading, Writing and
Arithmetic were the key elements. It is interesting to note that
while listening, speaking and doing were natural developments in
children, the subjects of school were "un-natural" and had to be
developed through some form of teaching process. The fact that many
had gained knowledge and skills throughout centuries of development
without these formal subjects was not considered. The process which
had been used for academically able students continued. We now
understand that not all people learn in the same way. A process that
has "one size fits all" as a core ingredient in its structure
cannot possibly meet the needs of all. Schooling measures deficit
through this approach and becomes a rejection process. Schooling as
an inclusive approach must develop more flexible ways of delivering a
curriculum.
Our understanding of learning informs
us that it is socio-cultural in nature, each society develops its own
set of behaviours. Education is the growth into the ways of those
around us. We have been guided more recently by the writings of
Vygotsky (1962) and his understanding of the development of higher
order processes. In particular, individuals interpret any learning
experience within their own understanding of the world around them.
We know that this cannot be done for the individual by others.
However, it is a significant asset to have a more learned individual
who can assist in interpretation of the signals that are transmitted
by a culture. That knowledge and skill are learned by the individual,
rather than being taught by a teacher, is a contrary approach to the
ways of traditional schooling.
Many writers have helped us to
understand that there are multiple ways in which individuals approach
learning and provided various ways of representing them (for example,
Johnston 1996 - Learning Patterns; Dunn & Dunn 1984 -
Learning Styles; Myer-Briggs 1976 - Learning Processes). Howard
Gardner (1983) helped us to realise that there are many ways in which
individuals illustrate intelligence, not just linguistic or logical
mathematical as used in most areas of traditional schooling
assessment processes. Together these writers illustrate that there is
no one way in which students learn and that the enforcement of a
single approach can only manifest itself through problems of
disengagement.
Inclusive Schooling
In fairness to traditional schooling
there have been many movements in recent times to develop an
inclusive educational process. However, there is still a strong
movement within society to resolve perceived problems in achievement
through a "return to basics" or the past. What is difficult to
understand is the lack of understanding in the fact that if a process
only uses limited learning approaches to teach and assess then there
must be a group of people that are excluded from success. Any amount
of additional attention within the same format will not create
improved levels of engagement. What is essential is that diversity in
the way in which people learn is recognised. This then creates the
need for inclusive processes within the schooling system.
No amount of
"teaching" will enable the elephant to climb the tree! Yet each
character can learn to contribute within society and has a role to
play. What is skill/achievement for the elephant is not necessarily a
valuable achievement for the elephant seal.
Teachers who are inclusive, and are
able to reach out to the diversity of student strengths and needs,
usually have two basic positive beliefs about children's education:
- They are convinced that each child
has potential for learning and progress,
- They hold strong ethical
convictions about each child's right to a quality education within
a high valuing of social justice and equality.
There are three dimensions to
inclusion:
- An inclusive culture, in which all
students feel they are a part of the community:
- Inclusive policies, which promotes
inclusion within teaching practice within the school;
- Inclusive practices, where
classroom and extra-curricular activities encourage the
participation of all students and draw on their knowledge and
experience outside school
In a teacher's handbook for
responding to student diversity produced by the EU Commission,
Socrates Programme Comenius 2.1 Action (Training for School
Educational Staff) and released at a conference in Malta July 2007,
the following statement challenges one's own beliefs:
To be able to
respond to student diversity, the teacher needs to reflect on his or
her own beliefs about teaching and learning. This is particularly
necessary because most of us have been educated and are engaged in
teaching in school situations with a strong philosophy and practice
of one standard curriculum for all. We may find it ‘natural' to
label those who do not meet curricular norms as unfit for school.
Only by challenging our existing beliefs can we be enabled to
envisage different inclusive situations.
What Pedagogical Structures Promote
Inclusion
The critical change for an inclusive
schooling approach is one in which the students are an empowered part
of the teaching/learning process. No longer should the activity of
the classroom illustrate me (the teacher) and them (the students),
but rather us. There should be a teacher-learner partnership that
engenders a relationship within the curriculum delivery. As we
recognise and accept that learning is an individual approach, which
will manifest itself in the diverse ways that the students approach a
learning experience, there needs to be an atmosphere of
self-direction, partnership, and student-directed activity. Each
student must be able to construct new knowledge within his or her own
realm of understanding and have achievement recognised against past
performances or standards.
Negotiated Curriculum
For
students to be empowered the first thing is often that the voice of
the student is heard as each topic is raised. This can be as simple
as a teacher brainstorming the current understanding of the students
on a topic; a pre-activity for students to illustrate what they
already know; allowing different ways of approaching the learning of
a topic. The teacher should be an active participant in sharing what
they think would be a good way of approaching a topic. The critical
factor is, while the teacher will be well versed in the topic, that
they allow the student input to guide the delivery of the topic. This
implies that lesson plans will be flexible and responsive - not
directive.
Integration of Subject Areas
The
world in which the children live is not broken down into the eight
learning areas as distinctly different experiences. Similarly,
learning in the classroom needs to be holistic and illustrate the
interdependence of disciplines. Learning based upon real-world and
relevant experiences will help all children to recognise the role of
knowledge and especially helps those who find academic dissection of
topics difficult to comprehend. This approach is often illustrated
through allowing a student's interest to be the foundation through
which he or she learns reading, writing, mathematical, or scientific
skills. When we exclude a student's interests from the classroom we
create the foundation for disengagement - we diminish his or her
self-worth.
Grouping
Once we decide to
focus on each individual's approach to learning and allow
progression at their own rate, we challenge the placement of students
into groups designated for traditional organisation reasons - for
example by age. If the pedagogy of the classroom is to be based upon
a teacher/student partnership through which a learning relationship
is formed, then the groupings can be what are often termed a "home
group". This can extend across age levels, ability levels and the
socio-cultural divide. It may also be an advantage to maintain this
partnership beyond a single year to facilitate a nurturing process
towards empowering an individual.
Group Work
In a well-balanced
society people like to work together, the human race is made up of
social beings. Our normal manner of interaction is through talking.
This is especially the case during childhood and adolescence. Once
again, if we are focussing on individual progress, when students work
together, teach each other, and share the outcome of their joint
endeavours then there will be conversation, excitement, movement and
noise. Where this occurs a sense of cooperation develops and the
competition between individuals, integral to the process of
traditional schooling, is minimised.
Assessment
To complete the
focus on individual performance it is essential that authentic
assessment is used - students are able to reflect on progress to
improve performance through assessment; evaluation is based upon what
has been completed; testing focuses on relevant and not disjointed
topics; reporting is against standards achieved by the individual,
rather than against other students.
A way that can facilitate these
approaches is a contract-based approach to curriculum delivery. The
contract can provide the organisational structure through which
teachers can maintain a focus on individual and group progress. The
student's experience of learning under this system is reported in
Following Vygotsky to a Learner Centred School (Grandin 2006).
The outcome is a self-directed student who has developed lifelong
learning skills. While experience illustrates that the concept is
most easily integrated into the Early and Middle Phase of schooling,
many of these pedagogical structures have also been integrated into
the final years of schooling when a more discipline focus is
necessary for those preparing for university entrance.
Conclusion - A Call for
Transformation
The outcome of the traditional
schooling process has been disengagement by a significant proportion
of the student population. This covers many more students than those
actually disciplined or excluded by the system. I would argue that
this has occurred because of the disenfranchising nature of teacher
directed delivery in a one-size-fits-all approach to pedagogy. While
much has been written in policy documents about diversity and
inclusion, observation of school classrooms indicate that the
approach to behaviour management has been through teacher applied
power. This dictatorial situation exacerbates the relationship with
students who are struggling to find a "place" or "relevance"
in the classroom. Experience in many schools that apply alternative
approaches to pedagogy and curriculum delivery has been that
behaviour problems are minimised.
Similarly, the focus on National
Testing Standards uses a deficit model to identifying more clearly
those who are struggling with the traditional schooling process. When
research indicates (Grandin2007) that nearly 80% of the teaching
profession have achieved success at school and entered the profession
because they approach learning as an ordered gathering of
information, the traditional schooling process, it is not hard to see
why they may find it difficult to understand and change to other ways
of learning or delivering the curriculum. Our National funding of
teacher education needs to focus on this conundrum. I often feel that
the inflexible structures of traditional schooling continue to create
square holes into which they try and squeeze many round pegs.
Last year the Association of
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) in America established
a Commission on the Whole Child. The goals outlined in their final
report reflect the thrust of many recent educational innovations and
provide a focus for us all.
-
This report frames education
within the most fundamental context - the personalised engagement
and nurturing of the whole child.
-
It describes how the focus on
one-size-fits-all education has marginalised the uniqueness of our
children and eroded their capacity to learn in whole, healthy,
creative, and connected ways.
-
It offers a new learning
compact with our children - one that rightly puts children and
their learning needs within the centre of every educational program
and resource decision.
....This report
provides the impetus for educators, policymakers, parents, community
leaders, and other stakeholders to change the conversation
about learning and schooling from reforming its structures to
transforming its conditions so that each child can develop
his strengths and restore his unique capacities for intellectual,
social, emotional, physical and spiritual learning. (ASCD, 2007 p2)
Dr
Bob Grandin entered a career in teaching following an initial career
as a pilot in the Air Force. He was Principal of two schools in
Queensland for "disadvantaged" children. He then had 2 years in
the USA working out of Rowan University's Centre for Learning
assisting teachers recognise the learner in the classroom and working
with the Department of Human Services with institutionalised youth.
He is a Senior Lecturer at the University of the Sunshine Coast
teaching Learning about Learning, Diversity and Inclusion plus
Alternative School Pedagogies. He coordinates the Tertiary
Preparation Program, an alternative pathway into university. His
doctorate thesis was on Children's Experience of Learning in an
Alternative School.
References
ASCD (2007). The Learning Compact
Redefined: A Call to Action, Alexandria, VA.
Dewey, J (1916). Democracy and
Education, Macmillan, New York.
Dewey, J (1938). Experience and
Education, Macmillan, New York.
Dunn, R, Dunn, K.J. & Price, G.E.,
(1984). Learning Style Inventory, Price Systems, Lawrence, KS
Freire, P (1970). Pedagogy of the
Oppressed, Seabury, New York.
Gardner, H (1983). Frames of Mind:
The theory of Multiple Intelligences, Basic Books, New York
Grandin, R. G., (2006). Following
Vygotsky to a Learner Centred School, Post Pressed, Teneriffe,
Qld
Grandin, R. G., (2007). A Real
Challenge for Pre-service Teacher Education Courses, paper
presented to Let Me Learn Conference, Tarragona, Spain.
Johnston, C.A., (1996). Unlocking
the Will to Learn, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA
Myer, I., & Briggs, K., (1976).
Myers-Briggs type Indicator, Consulting Psychologist Press,
Palo Alto, CA.
Shor, I (1996). When Students Have
Power, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Shor, I & Freire, P (1987). A
Pedagogy for Liberation: Dialogues on Transforming Education,
Bergin-Garvey, Greenwood, Westport, CT
Vygotsky, L (1962). Thought and
Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
|
You are welcome to subscribe to the following RSS Feeds from this website: