Our educational system is stuck in a Henry Ford production line model that views students as the “objects” of the educational enterprise rather than as “participants” in the educational enterprise. What would you “learn” about the business of living if you spent 12+ years in the postion of an “object”?
(The following commentary is from a correspondence initiated by Alan Pippenger of Tallahassee, Florida in which he asks for ideas regarding the development of a systems oriented middle-school curriculum.)
I began my education and instructional design consulting career as a teacher and principal in public education. I specialized in the field then called “Alternative Education” which was dedicated to exploring alternatives to the so called “comprehensive” Henry Ford production line model. The high school I founded in 1974 under the “Necessary Small High School” provisions in the state of California, was built upon theoretical and methodological foundations that were fundamentally different from the production line model of education and, though I did not know of it at time, was entirely consistent with the teachings of Dr. W. E. Deming.
The dominant theory behind our current approach to education is mistaken. it views students as OBJECTS of the educational enterprise rather than PARTICIPANTS in the educational enterprise. A more useful theory recognizes that students (i.e. human beings) do not acquire knowledge. They create knowledge. The job of school faculty, administration, and staff is to facilitate and steer the process of knowledge creation.
This is based in a theory of knowledge that explains that knowledge is not external “stuff” that is contained in some repository. Knowing is an active process propelled by the continuous interactive generation of a community narrative. The school I led using this theory was cohesive. It produced excellent results on standardize tests and had the highest attendance rates in the district. In other words, it worked. Resistance to the school from “educational professionals” outside the school grew in direct proportion to the school’s success.
When I meet with teachers I always begin by asking them to explain their theory of how leaning occurs. They are invariably confused. At best, they come up with an incoherent jumble of theories from their college reading lists. At worst, they have only some management and control practices they use for their own survival in the classroom jungle.
Too many teachers, administrators and parents have no idea what learning means or how it occurs. They only know results in the form of test scores and grades. On that basis, they will do anything to maximize those results. The destruction wrought by this single minded focus on outcomes is incalculable.
Pingback: Business 101 for the New Economic Age: The Efficiency Myth | Three Sigma Systems
OK, this sounds interesting, but what does it mean specifically?
Key argument: “Knowing is an active process propelled by the continuous interactive generation of a community narrative”.
What do you mean by that? I agree that focus on results only won’t improve a system. So how is treating students as participants different from treating them as objects in the educational enterprise? How would learning occur in this case?
Regards, Frank
Hi Frank,
I have only a few minutes to reply at this moment so I will be very brief—too brief. But if this continues to interest you, post again.
All narratives (stories) are communal. They are a process of telling that goes on between people. There are no truly private narratives. “My story” that tells who I am and how I got to be me is a story that has been constructed by myself in interaction with others. Likewise, communities, clubs, workplaces, nations, etc. are all narratives.
Narratives are stories and like all stories they have a theoretical basis. This means that in the course of our lives as individuals and groups, we move forward as actors with some purpose or intention. Most purposes arise as we deal with problems and challenges of life. Our intentions are to act to solve problems, fill needs and fulfill desires. Whether we recognize or not, at the center of our narratives are theories about how the world works and how we have met past challenges and might meet future challenges.
So learning is actually a socially interactive process of addressing the world through actions based in theory and then seeing what works better and what works worse. Learning is actually a process in which knowledge is created by a community that constructs theory in order to deal with life’s challenges. This process operates at many levels of experience but the principle is the same.
So teachers do not carry knowledge. Knowledge is not a thing. It cannot be repeated and it cannot be copies. Knowledge is something that people are constantly creating as they move forward in life. When a teacher recounts something they “know” they are recounting a theory of the world. The student does not “receive” that knowledge but responds to the teacher as one more experience in the course of living. The adept teacher who understands what is going on, will insinuate herself as a participant in the knowledge creating process. Having learned a theory of knowledge creation, she will facilitate the process of story telling for classroom of students or a single student.
1. She will drop the idea of “treating” students, or anyone else for that matter. People are not diseases to be treated.
2. Every lesson plan will always take the form of a question that pertains to an aim or purpose and then prompt a discussion of method (which is always based in theory). For example, “If we can agree that this (insert aim here) is worth doing, how might we proceed?” It is not necessary to do battle over aims. Many variations on a theme will do just fine.
Children can do this at a very early age, including pre-schoolers.
3. Given an aim, she will ask “By what method shall we go forward?” or words to that effect. You and I know that this begins a process of hypothesis formation—”If this, then that”. It is not necessary for the students to “know” that this is what is going on. The process is quite natural and it is the process that matters.
4. She will act as a facilitator to clarify competing hypotheses and move the debate forward.
5. She will come up with a way to chose among the theories. The method chosen is not very important, so long as the hypothesis to be tested is among those produced in the discussion. For example, I have had students propose magical methods. We tried them. They didn’t work. NEXT!
6. Work out how to run a process that tests the hypothesis and then run it and evaluate by measurement and observation.
7. Adopt the theory-based method, revise it or abandon it. New questions and aims will flow from the process allowing everyone to move forward.
It is not difficult to teach teachers to steer using this method and remain within the general curriculum guidelines. I have done this.