Keep it real!
True learning only takes place if it is useful and relevant in the social and physical context within which it will be used. Learners watch as the teacher carries out tasks and solves problems in an environment that reflects the many different ways that the knowledge will be put to use in the future.
Students actively communicate about and practice the skills needed to deal with a given situation and practice solving problems and carrying out tasks for that situation. Their motivation is intrinsic because they can see the problem and have an understanding that the learning will allow them to deal successfully with the problem. Students work together to solve problems and yet often times are given the same task to carry out so they can compare their results.
Before today’s educational model was created, (none too successfully in my opinion) all children learned by watching their elders as they performed everyday tasks. When a solution was needed for a task that the available adults could not model, they would seek out other experts in that area and come back to share the new learned technique.
Modern education has messed it all up. Subjects are separated and taught out of context. Students have no idea why they need to know what the teacher is teaching and have become clueless and bored. Take “computer” education for instance. Elementary schools have “computer teachers” who teach kids how to use word processing, spreadsheets, databases, and presentation software. We’re separating the tools from the tasks. I firmly believe that when a kids wants to learn how to make a presentation, he will learn the software pretty much on his own. A computer is a tool just like an encyclopedia, a calculator, or a ruler. “Computers” is not a subject. In the situated learning model, we should be teaching the students their way around a computer, demonstrate its capabilities, guide them as they learn to ask pertinent questions, and teach them how to THINK and ACT responsibly. We need to teach them how to use the tool safely and effectively. We don’t need to turn them into little secretaries!
Rebecca Kirstein: Oh my! I love that my son had to take computer class. Yes, he hated it and found it boring. But, you know what, he uses those tools in all of his other classes seamlessly. Sometimes you do need to learn how to use the tools on their own. I had to learn to use Excel in my engineering courses without any instruction. I wasted a lot of time trying to figure out how to create the pie chart with the proper axis titles. To me the key is applying the knowledge you learn. It would be a shame if he took computer class and never had to apply the knowledge. That is what makes apprentiship so sucessful. You apply what you have learned to a real situation. Studnets do need to learn material before they are required to use it. It is so hard to learn and apply at the same time.
Reebcca Kirstein: Sorry about the bad spelling. It would not let me edit. Here is a redo:
Rebecca Kirstein: Oh my! I love that my son had to take computer class. Yes, he hated it and found it boring. But, you know what; he uses those tools in all of his other classes seamlessly. Sometimes you do need to learn how to use the tool. I had to learn to use Excel in my engineering courses without any instruction. I wasted a lot of time trying to figure out how to create the pie chart with the proper axis titles. To me the key is applying the knowledge you learn. It would be a shame if he took computer class and never had to apply the knowledge. That is what makes apprenticeship so successful. You apply what you have learned to a real situation. Students do need to learn material before they are required to use it. It is so hard to learn and apply at the same time.
Wow! What a post, Jill! I agree with much of what you said… that it’s all about context and what we teach kids should involve application rather than just learning “stuff” for the sake of learning it. The only piece I can’t jump on board with 100% is that all learning or true learning is immediately meaningful within a social/physical context. I have to admit (shocking myself as I’m typing this) that I think there has to be a give and a take… there has to be more than just learning “useful” skills and the “stuffs” that today’s current educational model deals in. (Stuffs = for lack of a better term.) While I think education should be about learning within a context, I still think there are some pieces that kids don’t hold – and sometimes that means a little direct instruction. I don’t know – will have to keep pondering this one.
I totally agree with the whole “computer” class concept. Your post also made me think about a Statistics for the Biological Sciences. The professor never applied what we were learning to real-life examples that we may come across in the laboratory. That would have been useful in my (and many others) understanding of the material.
Jill, as a “computer teacher” I completely agree with you! I have the worst time coming up with projects to implement the skills I’m teaching in my computer lab. I beg every year for my school to use me as a resource for teachers. Teaching computer skills would be much more beneficial if the students found meaning! For example, I taught excel to one of my 8th grade students 2 years ago (as a 6th grader). This year she came in for math help during her lunch period because the homework called for the use of spreadsheet software to learn about compound interest, APR, etc. I helped her out and retaught excel. She told me that she would have paid much better attention during our excel lesson if she knew it could help her with financial info & math. I think that students should be taught the skill when it becomes necessary to learn, this way they have a unique interest in the subject and are not just learning for the sake of learning!
Information literacy is another skill, like “computers” that makes a lot sense to teach within the context of it’s use–e.g., learn how to search when needing to do research for a paper, for example. But, there are also situations in which it makes sense to teach the skills as a stand-alone module, as with a senior research project, or graduate student dissertation–although they are still tied to a project.
I think this is a really great model. But I’m feeling a bit contrary, so, let me say that I don’t think that everything we learn needs to be something that will be applied to a real world situation. Even skills like information seeking, or computer programs–they can and should be integrated with real world-based activities—but they can also be learned on their own–which allows for more in-depth learning, perhaps more theory, or philosophical aspects. Even kids will, at times, voluntarily study and learn stuff that doesn’t have a real application.
Eleanor
Jill, as Angie said, it seems to me that separating the subjects can be helpful. I have seen where there are times when teachers do have to spell out why a particular subject is relevant and how it is beneficial in other areas. My knitting students are always astounded when I show them how to apply math in understanding and completing patterns!
In terms of basic technology instruction, good point about not teaching computers for the sake of teaching computers, but needing to model for students why a particular application can be useful in a subject or field. A health teacher, for example, might model how to create a spreadsheet to track calorie intake, then scaffold students as they learn to do this on their own with sample formulas. It becomes a much more relevant exercise than just studying how to make formulas.