In the book Education Myths: An evidence-informed guide for teachers, Tom Sherrington examines the myth that teacher-led instruction and student centered learning are opposites. He starts by presenting a commercially created poster from 2016 that illustrates the myth and the purposeful and oppositional positioning of these two types of instruction.
He then comments on the poster:
“In this poster, the opposition is explicit; unequivocal. And utterly ludicrous” (pg 72)
He is correct in this statement and goes on further to examine issues that support both sides of this poster and positions the role of teachers and students as a balance within the classroom.
He further examines how in the research community there are proponents heavily invested in both sides of the instructional debate. At first glance it appears the differences between teacher-led and student-let are clear. But with further analysis he provides examples where both sides are saying the same thing, but within a different context. And here is the key, as is most issues in education, the easy answer is not necessarily the correct one. The context in this debate focuses more on the prior knowledge of the learner. A novice learner will need more guidance and will benefit from teacher-led instruction while a learner with extensive prior knowledge may do well with a student centered focus. In the end, as it always has been, the teacher makes that decision in almost ‘real-time’. Which is probably why when research comes out that shows a teaching method as superior, the teacher will say ‘maybe it works for the researcher, but i know my kids and this wouldn’t work in my classroom.’ The teacher’s comment is more reflective of their teaching context rather than the evidence produced in a different teaching context.
The debate around this myth points to a balance between teacher and student lead instruction. Depending on the context, one type of instruction may be better than the other. While Sherrington suggests this balance is inherent in the classroom, there is a benefit to understanding why one type of instruction at a particular time is better than the other or when a blend of the two may be appropriate. This leads us to a third type of instruction. The Learning Centered Classroom. This classroom is created when a teacher makes instructional decisions based on the evidence available to them. This evidence is collected from the research base, the classroom context and their own experiences. The decisions are not viewed as preferring one type of instruction over the other, but considers the learning goals, the classroom and time available as the rationale for any learning activity.
I’d like to focus on the words at the top of the poster created to explain the differences between teacher-led and student-led learning environments. If you look back at the poster you will see near the top that teacher-led means command and control and student-led means engage and empower. Then below a series of seven statements describing the differences between the two learning environments. At first glance it’s clear that the teacher controlled environment is all about what’s best for the teacher and the student controlled environment is what’s best for the child. To side with the teacher puts you in the ‘bad person’ category. I mean, how could any disagree that having students deep and passionate about their learning is the key to education. The number of people that I have heard say this and then somehow attribute it to their unwavering commitment to student centered learning is uncountable. And to disagree with this makes you uninterested in the best interests of the child. In a way you are made to feel like Darth Vader or some other popular culture villain while these other enlightened educators represent the rebel alliance of Luke Skywalker and his friends. Nothing could be further from the truth.
When I was in grade 5 there was a moment where I knew I wanted to be a teacher. It was always my answer to the dreaded question “what do you want to be when you grow up?”. When I finished my very first class of teaching grade 9 Science, I knew I was in the right place. My career eventually expanded to supporting teachers through resource development and professional development. It was a tough, but correct decision to leave the classroom. Throughout my career, two things have been constant. Relationships with the students are everything and teaching is unbelievably complex.
I’m always perplexed when educational leaders talk about the importance of relationships in classrooms. They talk like it’s some secret they have discovered and all will be solved if you just have a better relationship with your students. Why do we listen to this and reflect on how we can be better at our jobs? If you don’t think having good relationships with your students isn’t important, you shouldn’t be in the job of teaching. Seriously, find some other way to use your skills. I realize we remember a teacher that we didn’t get along with, but that doesn’t mean they did or didn’t care. I can’t imagine going into your job day after day not knowing my relationships with those thirty other humans is the most important part of my job. So, let’s just agree that relationships are hard wired into our job. Yes we can use the research to find strategies to improve how we do this, but let’s just stop pretending we just discovered this as a new way to build learning environments.
Learning environments are not an either or proposition. The poster clearly creates this illusion. There are things a teacher should do and not do. Positioning all the best qualities of a learner as something we just have to release through our passive guidance like Obi-Wan Kenobi allowing Luke Skywalker to find the Force through Luke’s own exploration. And heaven forbid the teacher step in and provide any direct guidance. This kind of edubabble is so seductive. It’s easy to understand, it’s emotional and at first glance appears to solve all sorts of problems around student learning. All I have to do according to the poster is encourage all learners to find their gifts and talents to be self-aware and advocate for their own needs while I, as the teacher, inspire them to find passion on subject matter.
Uh….. right…..
Classrooms, schools, and educational institutions are complex systems with many moving parts. Many have used the ecosystem metaphor to describe how everything functions. I think they’re right. So, whenever we have a black and white or clear solution to a problem, we better look long and hard at it. One of my mentors used to describe educational issues as being on an elastic band. Put yourself on the rubber band and feel how the sides of the issue are pulling on you. That tension you feel are the good parts of each side. The challenge is to find the spot on the elastic band where you can get a balance of tensions. That is the issue with this poster. It only presents a binary choice. I believe there is a sweet spot between these two sides that I call the Learning Centered Classroom. And this blog will explore the characteristics of the Learning Centered Classroom and the tensions needed to create it in your classroom.
So I invite you to join me on a journey I call the Imperative of Learning. Let’s take the focus of what evidence the research provides to guide us to create the Learning Centered classroom. I believe the last decade has provided insight into how we learn as humans that is different from what we may have been taught in our teacher training. Along with this evidence are practical, useful strategies that can be implemented in your classroom to support all your students. As I learned this summer while climbing Mt Kilimanjaro, in Swahili we say ‘Twende, Twende.”
_______
Barton, C., & Bennett, T. (2019). The Research ED Guide to Education Myths: An Evidence-Informed Guide for Teachers. John Catt Educational.
Poster – credit in image