“Bears 32 and 856 face off on the Brooks River, July 6, 2018”by KatmaiNPS is licensed under CC PDM 1.0

In Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching by Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller, and Richard E. Clark (2010), they explored the perceived challenges of minimum guidance environment from a testing perspective. They specifically defined learning “as a change in long-term memory” (p. 75) and state that “the aim of all instruction is to alter long-term memory. If nothing has changed in long-term memory, nothing has been learned”  (p. 77). As this is their definition of learning, they are then able to move to standardized tests as methods of measuring learning, and move the act of learning from a competency based approach to a more content memorization approach. When I think of my movement, navigation and success throughout my life, I have leaned on my long-term memory, but have also prided my growth on my ability to adapt and to learn. It was not the content that was floating around in my brain that helped me succeed, it was the ability to bring new content into my brain when it was needed. My ability to learn has been a larger benefit to me then what I have actually learned, specifically related to the content and knowledge that I hold. A large aspect of standardized tests lean more on the content that is engrained in our brains, and less on our ability to learn when we need to. This causes me to question the whole argument that Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark present.

For the past three years, I have worked at the school board level, where we are interested in levels of system change and accountability. For this purpose, we need data that is accurate and as unbiased as possible to be able to measure trends and implementation success of our programs. We also need a layer of accountability embedded into our level of teaching. For this reason, we lean on standardized tests to measure growth within our students and our district. I believe in teacher autonomy, but also have conflicts. What is the answer when some of our teachers do not get through their content, and do not accurately report on their content coverage? How can we measure, using data, the success of programs and initiatives unless we have benchmarks for comparison?

Please note that I am making the assumption that coverage of the curriculum is a requirement for success in school, which is a whole other debate that I may cover at another point. All I will say on this topic is if we require all teachers to get through the curriculum and a students working grade level indicates the amount of curriculum they are supposed to have covered, they will face challenges in later grades if they have unreported gaps in their knowledge. Of course, this is also making the assumption that teachers are not creating individualized student plans and teaching each student at their appropriate level, as diagnosed by that teacher.

This is where my own conflict arises. I understand the importance of standardized data and how data can help indicate the success of programs within a district, however, I am a huge proponent of competency-based learning and focusing on as a means for success in navigating life, not a state of memorizing a portion of knowledge.

Teaching for Meaningful Learning: A Review of Research on Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Learning by Dr. Brigid Barron and Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond, StanfordU explores approaches to a pedagogy where it is “no longer enough to simply transmit information that students memorize and store for future use. Education today must focus on helping students learn how to learn, so they can manage the demands of changing information, technologies, jobs, and social conditions” (p. 3). This really speaks to my heart and beliefs of what we need to focus on within education. It is how I wish I was taught, how I want my children taught, and how I encourage teachers that I coach to teach. In fact, as part of my role as the Math and Science consultant for our district, I run a Numeracy Network where we meet through video conferencing once a month. My first two years running the network explored the state of math in our district and I worked to open teachers’ eyes to moving away from set algorithms and memorization. For this last year, we did a book study on Mathematical Mindsets by Jo Boaler (@joboaler). I found it interesting that Barron and Hammond actually pulled from Boaler’s research to support their point.

This methodology may speak close to my heart, however, I still feel that there needs to be a clear balance and scaffolding to help students make the largest impact in their own learning. I can specifically remember working with a teacher that was trying to have her senior high students break away from a traditional worksheet and test environment and adopt a portfolio environment. The teacher would explain what the outcomes of the class are, have occasional sessions to expose students to the content, but then students were given the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge of the outcomes as they saw fit, and present it in a portfolio. The teacher was upset because her students were not generating any content for their portfolios. As we looked over the class and had a deep talk about where they were, we leaned on the simple fact that these students had never been exposed to this methodology in their past. They probably were not creating portfolios because they did not know how. We then generated an approach that was more scaffolded, and helped the students generate their content for their portfolios. It was still a struggle, however, there was much more progress when they had a clearer understanding of what was expected of them and how to do it.

I personally believe that the sweet spot lies in providing students with an opportunity to explore and learn their own methods for inquiry-based learning/projec- based learning/problem-solving/etc, but providing them the support, knowledge, and guidance that they individually need. This is where teachers come in. It is not about letting them work things out Lord of the Flies style, it is about showing them how to navigate the world and giving them the confidence to reach outside of their comfort zone and try new things. In the end, what would you rather your children to be? Walking computers full of trivia that seek to find what everyone expects of them so they please their “superiors?” Or would you want confident individuals who may not know the answer to every question, but have the skills and capacity to find the answer, as well as the audacity that they believe they can?