Week 1 Reflection - Reigeluth v Postman

Week One Reflection
Joe Sobeske

I’m not a fan of reflecting. It’s hard. It makes me think. It requires me to use higher cognitive functions which makes me tired…and better.

Before me today are two articles written by highly educated people. To grossly summarize, in one, the author sees the need of a paradigm shift in educational thinking; where technology is an indispensable part of the implementation of this change. The author of the other article sees no educational problem that can be solved by technology. Here’s what I think:

Reigeluth makes good points when he talks about a learner-focused paradigm. Few today would disagree that the teacher is more effective as the guide on the side rather than the sage on the stage. Or that teaching in meaningful contexts leads to better understanding. Much of this learner-focus sounds good at the theory level. Practically speaking, I take issue with much of what Reigeluth purports. I don’t believe his premise that our current educational system is Darwinistic and I don’t believe it is necessary to teach to a level of mastery before a student progresses. Reigeluth seems to think this learner-focused paradigm will eliminate what he calls “sorting.” I think the level of individualization of instruction he describes will result in even more stratification of students, not less. Let me explain.

WARNING: Here comes my pragmatic side: Most students are not highly motivated. If we let them have all the time they need to achieve mastery before moving to the next skill, many of them will take four years of High School to achieve mastery on the first skill. If students are left to explore only what they are interested in, many will flounder in indecision, not knowing what they want and will take the path of least resistance leaving them farther behind the motivated, goal-oriented students than they would have been under the “old” system. To quote a supervising teacher I had during my student teaching; “ the smart will get smarter and the dumb will get dumber”. A result arguably worse than “sorting.” Students need strong, caring teachers who can gently but firmly push them.

Students don’t gravitate toward exploring new ideas and if we left them to exclusively explore their own interests they would seldom be exposed to concepts outside their sphere of experiences. Here’s a quick example. One of my students is a long haired skateboarder type. He had no interest in joining our youth club Business Professionals of America (BPA). After speaking with his mother during parent-teacher conferences, I decided and she agreed that he should join. I told him he had no choice (a white lie). Prior to his involvement in BPA, this 16 year old student had never joined a school youth club or team of any kind, never competed in any formal academic contests, he had never even wore a tie. I didn’t leave it up to him, I pushed him into BPA regional contests. I forced him to prepare and convinced him to go to Goodwill and buy appropriate attire. I wish I could say he performed well enough to advance to State competition but I can say he was pushed way beyond his comfort zone, exposed to positive influences and he was made aware of a set of norms that were out of his sphere of experience. He would be a lesser person had he not been lead, somewhat reluctantly at first, into this learning experience. His comments to other classmates and his awareness of common business etiquette demonstrates a growth of maturity on his part. The “authenticity” and “self-directed learning” that Reigeluth describes would have left this student out this valuable experience.

I’m beginning to like Neil Postman. He is simple. Technology in the classroom is fine, he seems to say, as long as we know before hand why we need it. I don’t think I’m taking too much liberty by saying he would agree that technology could and should be used to fix educational problems but if some educational piece isn’t broke, don’t try fixing it with technology. I can get behind that type of thinking with one proviso: we define “broke” as not the best teaching practice. In other words, if some learning can happen better with technology, by all means use technology. I think Postman would agree.

What I really like about Postman is his courage to ask the fundamental question. What is the reason for education? I also like the panache he has in answering his own question: “to teach children how to behave in groups.” Simple, pithy and probably more right than wrong. I can’t wait to read the book he quotes by Robert Fulghum: All I Ever Really Needed to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. Students today do access to all the information in the world. They will flounder if they don’t have the skills needed to physically and appropriately act and react in the world. This key point, which Reigeluth gives a nod to (peer-assisted learning), Postman makes paramount. A motivated student will do what it takes to learn, even when it is hard. Ask any kid who taught his self how to fix his own computer; if they want to learn they will. The basic concept Postman would advocate us instilling into students is this: Do what you are supposed to do. If we teach students that, the teaching will take care of its self and we teachers can step in with technology to facilitate with best practices.

This all leads me back to my brain taxing reflecting. It is a good example of what Postman got me thinking about and perhaps it is a good parallel to what we need to do with students:

• Getting a Masters degree is what I’m supposed to do. It’s no opinion for me, it’s fact. It is a value I have acquired and I am motivated. We need to teach students this sense of responsibility to themselves.
• Left to my own devices I would not do this. I am pushed each time to do it. We need to push students to stretch their minds into areas where they perhaps are reluctant to go.
• When I’m through, my thoughts on the subject at hand are much clearer and I am able to articulate them easily and more intelligently. I feel smarter and more confident when I’m done. When students feel smarter and more confident they are better equipped to be productive in society and we have done our job.
  
  I think it’s time for a nap.