In 2013, I wrote a publication about Edutopia, which examines the difference between students and students.
Since “teaching trends” become the basis for full -fledged training institutions (see Avenue: World School and Northern Star: Self -tuition for teens for two examples), these types of ideas are tested to the site, moved by desirable thinking and feel a good rhetoric to actual application in the real world.
Education constantly turns out to be seeking proof of success: X data that says it works, which looks like magic: then we could take and spray it in schools and areas everywhere and repeat the same success.
Of course, true training is personal, depending on the incredible complexities – and the incredibly personal nuance. No matter how rehearsed, like live music, it never sounds the same twice twice.
So what we want is less teaching and more learning.
And less students and more students.
In this article, I wrote that “by changing academic standards, with the development of technology and by changing student habits, schools are forced to consider new ways to create curricula and to engage students in the study room. Project training is among the most successful and powerful of these opportunities. So the process.”
Considering the curriculum creation tool that is based on training, it also makes sense to look at broader training models and foundations of school design.
“In this context of trying to make sense of exactly what progressive training was, in 2009 I outlined a graphic that visualizes 9 21st Century Training CharacteristicsAnd recently created a subsequent framework, A model of training from the inside outS
The four main goals of this model of training are:
- Authentic self -knowledge
- Diverse local and global interdependence
- Adaptively critical thinking
- New media literatures
Secondary goals include: purposeful use of the variety of digital media, developing the traditional definition of projects based on projects, the role of the play in training, curiosity and individual educational paths, which are digitally cured and transparent to all direct and indirect stakeholders.
In the training model inside out, the idea is personalized training from new drive mechanisms, eliminating passivity and complete integration with responsive and authentic communities-not by accident, these are also PBL elements. “
The point of school from the inside out
The idea of ‘School from the inside out“It is to turn the school, like a sock, inside out, to reincarnate to the surrounding community and the inherent maintenance systems. If this community is careful and systems are created for consistent monitoring and support of the learning process, the school is unintended by constantly doing wonders.
And if he fails to answer meaningfully? Well, we know where to go after that.
In the end, students are compatible with participants in a well -worn game. Schools have long taken the world, broke it in categories and played their research with points, evaluations of letters and concepts of progress and cooperation. This system can work, but only as far as we want successful students in “schools that work”.
The students are a little different. Students ask questionsInteract directly with the content, self -identify and strive to meet the curiosity and authentic needs of knowledge.
Students can also do this, but only while navigating the game, so many schools (and their teacher -oriented training models have become.
The difference between children and students is then reduced to the clarity of the purpose and the purity of the interaction between the child and the content.
One seeks knowledge, the other “success”.
