Inquiry Based Learning
How I understand it.
I am best in stories. So here it goes.
My mother recently came back from a trip to Australia, and
brought me a boomerang. It came with a
tri-folded one page pamphlet, printed on neon pink paper and featured a picture
of a man in very short shorts. On one of
the first pleasant weather days that we had in a while, a friend texted me and
asked if I want to go do something outside. We went to a local park and thought
we would try to throw this boomerang. Certain that we would be boomerang world
champs in the next few minutes, we whipped out the pamphlet. Not surprising, we
did not end up with a single successful boomerang throw. We read the
instructions but after a few failed attempts we gave up saying “we should have
YouTubed this.” This story is what finally made me understand student directed,
inquiry based learning. Let’s pretend for a second that the end learning goal
is that students know how to throw a boomerang (you can substitute just about
any learning goal, but let us go with my boomerang goal). How would a teacher, especially
one who does not know how to throw a boomerang, teach kids how to throw a
boomerang? This got me thinking about creating the ideal learning conditions,
versus teaching. In traditional teaching, I would need to know how to throw a boomerang,
be an expert actually, able to analyze the various throws of the students and
find the mistakes and be able to provide feedback and correct mistakes. I have no idea how to throw a boomerang, but I
do know how to teach learning. Here is what I would do: I would have a resource
list of YouTube videos, articles about boomerang throwing, maybe some
information about famous boomerang throwers and their advice, and give them
full access to a library and the internet. I would then provide a whole bunch
of boomerangs, a wide open space and some digital video cameras. Here is how it
would go down. I would start with the goal, be able to correctly throw a
boomerang. I would design a way to prove that students have gained this
knowledge – Students will email me a video of them correctly throwing a
boomerang by Friday (if I was really good, I would have them create a YouTube
video explaining to someone else how to correctly throw a boomerang with
demonstrations). I would lay out a process for them. First students will
research the correct way to throw a boomerang. Students will create a list of criteria
for success for boomerang throws (what makes a boomerang throw “correct?”)They
will then try to throw the boomerang based on their research, and video
themselves (or a partner). They will critique their own video based on the
criteria which they established. Students will compare their video to expert
videos that they found online. They will
then correct mistakes, and try again, and again, and again, going through the
critique cycle until they have a throw that they consider correct, and can
submit, along with the student established criteria for success.
This all sounds great, right? OK let’s break it down:
What did the teacher do?
1)
Chose a learning goal
2)
Provided materials and resources
3)
Created a process for students to follow
4)
Had a concrete goal and deadline.
What did the students do?
1)
Researched the topic in a way that met their style
of learning (If I learn best via videos, I am going to naturally watch videos,
if I learn best from reading, then I can get a book)
2)
Created criteria of success – They knew what
they had to do to be successful and were invested in that success because they
created what that meant.
3)
Completed tasks, collected data, analyzed their data.
This is usually what teachers do, but
why? Kids will get so much more out of finding the mistakes and correcting
them, than they will if we tell them what to do.
4)
Completed an assessment.
5)
Most importantly: learned how to learn! Whether
or not they will ever need to throw a boomerang in their life is irrelevant.
They now know how to learn something, independent of anyone else. So next time something comes up and they want
to know how to fix a car, get into college, write a great paper, build a
website, whatever, the process is the same.
The students did the work! Traditional teaching has been an
expert at the front of the room imparting knowledge to a group. We live in an
amazing age. No longer do we need to depend on someone else knowing the subject
matter. But rather, with the internet,
everyone has access, instantly, to the entire collective knowledge of all
mankind! In this model the teacher facilitates. They do more work on the
back end, of preparing materials, having clear expectations and learning
outcomes, and almost zero time “teaching.” They are the sheep herder, steering
the flock and catching those who stray away, or need a little extra support. The
teacher is no longer the grand marshal leading the parade, but the person in
the back making sure the parade moves forward. This is a HUGE paradigm shift
for some people.
Side note/personal note: The DCPS coaching plan focuses on
the “teaching.” It has mandated demonstration lessons, and co-teaching. If the
design and facilitation is done correctly, there should be such minimal time
devoted to teacher led lessons, that is would seem almost silly to devote so much
time to coaching this part of teaching/learning. Rather that time could be
spent on the back end, the planning side. Coaches should help teachers create
the learning experience, not necessarily help with the delivery. In student driven learning, it is exactly
that, the student is driving, the teacher provided the map. So why is our
coaching program looking like driver’s ed for teachers and not map making? We
are forcing teaching and learning back to the 50s and wondering why it is not
moving forward. I wonder no longer. The DCPS coaching program, as it is currently,
and IMPACT, focus heavily on the delivery of lessons. The traditional teacher
standing in front of students, telling them something, hoping that they “get”
whatever the teacher is saying, is outdated. How about, help teachers create learning
experiences where students are the drivers, let coaches focus on helping
teachers with planning more than lesson delivery, and focus IMPACT on how well
students know how to learn, not how
well teachers know how to teach.
