The most recent edition of the New York Times section “Education Life” contains a provocative article called “Pedagogical Puzzle: New models for teacher preparation think outside the box. Are they too far out?”
One of the programs featured is called Relay Graduate School of Education (aka “Teacher U”), which has no building, forbids lectures from professors, and limits direct instruction from professors to 15-20 minutes. From what I can gather based on the article, it sounds like they go to the schools where the graduate students are already teaching, and provide opportunities for them to reflect on their practice, share ideas, and connect with experienced mentors.
That sounded good to me. Then, I read more.
Apparently, the graduate students don’t receive much direct instruction, but they do receive dozens of “modules,” many of them available online, and a series of worksheets that helps them digest the information in the module. Here’s an excerpt from the article (with a reference to Doug Lemov, author the 2010 book Teach Like a Champion):
“I am a believer,” said Zach Mack, 31, a Teacher U student whom I watched one day in June deliver a dynamic social studies lesson to his fourth grade class at Public School 139 in Flatbush, Brooklyn. He schedules each day down to the minute, and posts daily goals on the board so students can see them. “As Doug would say, “if you don’t have a plan for them, they have a plan for you.”
* * *
For millennia, human beings learned practical life wisdom from elders, in the context of solving the problems that faced them in their daily living. (See video of Seattle education consultant Anoo Padte below for a more elegant explanation of this concept.) They didn’t have special buildings where this type of learning happening.
Now, we’ve taken learning out of its natural context. We’ve designed institutions in such a way that kids are supposed to learn things that have no immediate relevance to their lives, simply because some grownups have told them that the information will be useful to them later.
This is a lie, of course, because the overwhelming majority of the lessons kids are taught in school will never be of any real use to them. (Kids are aware of this, by the way.)
These two factors—useless information presented to kids without any contextual relationship to their lives—has resulted in a system that is undeniably broken. We’ve simply resigned ourselves to the notion that teachers and students have to be adversaries: “if you don’t have a plan for them, they have a plan for you.” Our response to this broken system has been not to re-imagine the institutions, but to dedicate ourselves to the impossible task of making them work.
And yet, we have our moments. For example, in the passage quoted above, the teacher delivers “a dynamic social studies lesson” and “schedules each day down to the minute.” I’m sure it made for great theatre. And, students will typically cooperate with a charismatic teacher who is delivering a well-prepared, entertaining lesson plan.
But in the long term, will it “work”? I guess that depends on one’s definition of that word. If our goal is to raise standardized test scores, then possibly yes.
If, on the other hand, our goal is to help young people mature into adulthood with a powerful sense of self and an ability to solve real problems in the context of their lives, probably not.
* * *
But, all hope is not lost. It seems like Relay Graduate School of Education is actually dialed into something very powerful. Going to the schools where its graduate students are actually teaching, and providing opportunities for them to reflect on their practice, share ideas, and connect with experienced mentors—that’s great stuff!
Then, maybe they can help create K-12 schools that give kids a learning environment that is grounded in the those same, age-old principles.
(Join the discussion at www.facebook.com/reeducate. Get updates at www.twitter.com/reeducate.)