In Clarence Fisher’s Remote Access reference to a post from Students 2.0, the students of tomorrow will need to be able to solve problems for given tasks, and will need to think creatively in order to do so. It is not the technology that is so important, it is the thinking skills. “The effective students of tomorrow’s world will be independent learners, strong problem solvers and effective designers.” The way to get students to be this kind of learner is through project based learning and experiential learning. This presents a new challenge to teachers, how do you teach what the law requires you to teach, and still find the time to incorporate experiential and project based learning?

Andrew Oliver posts in his commentary: “The irony is that project based education is very much alive (and has been for decades) in the UK kindergarten. However as the student progresses through the school system and beyond into university projects are slowly replaced by the lecture method. We need to start getting students engaged with the subject again. Asking them for their opinions and their views and help them to develop a deeper emotional connection with the subject.” Anthony Chivetta responds: “I wonder how much of that decline is due to the (perceived) increase in need to be able to test students (using traditional methods) on the material they are learning (e.g. SAT/ACT, AP, IB, etc.). One issue that I didn’t touch on in my post is how teachers asses[s] project-based learning. I didn’t touch on it, because I think it misses the point entirely. Those assessments are often based on measures that are worthless for the students of tomorrow. The problem is that we have a circular dependency, standardized tests won’t change without curricular changes, and curriculum can’t deviate away from the tests.”

I think that Mr. Chivetta has hit the nail on the head, so to speak. Teachers, including myself, bow down to the pressures of testing, trying to prepare students for accountability, and little time can be devoted to teaching students the way they should be taught, which is hands-on, inquiry-based learning. It really does need to be a change in curricula to happen first, and it needs to happen at all grade levels. Andrew Oliver makes the point that students in younger grades do learn through activities, but that as they advance through school, learning is shifted to more lecture. So how does one initiate that change?

I recently found out that several departments in our school are being sent this summer to professional development on project-based learning. I hope to get some useful ideas here. My thoughts about my own way of teaching is that maybe I go too in-depth and spend too much time on the factual content, with drill and practice, hoping to prepare students for standardized testing, and not devoting more time on the application of the content.

If students had more input into their own education at my school, I wonder what they would say? Sounds like a good topic for discussion. I will let you know the results.