Student Centered Learning

I've decided it's time to blog about my life as a teacher. After being painfully unemployed for 9 months, the perfect teaching gig appeared as a gift from the universe. That may sound very esoteric but I've come to believe that things happen for a reason. Being in a position of wanting a job, with a family to support and all, for so long, helped me discover a deep appreciation for many things in my life and a rich feeling of both gratitude and humbleness.

I've been a teacher for almost 10 years now; before that a research scientist for about 16. I'm the type of person that's probably wrapped a bit too tight at times. I love to explore ideas and concepts and discuss the philosophical foundations of almost anything. This process works best over a good beer or two.

Being a teacher has been fun; intense most of the time as I re-learn information and then find a way to make it both palatable and fun for an audience of teenagers. As I grew in my profession, I always felt that there was something missing; that the vehicle for delivery of information didn't quite fit the model for learning in the real world (especially as a scientist/science teacher). I've worked at 4 different high schools and always wondered why they went to great lengths to hire bright educators then put them in a position where they were expected to respond as a minion with little input into creating an environment that worked as a community of learning. I mean, most colleges and universities work that way. Why wouldn't high schools?

Everything happens for a reason; I truly believe this. I have found my niche. I was so discouraged and bitter after leaving my last position, I was ready to toss in the towel as a teacher and go back to science. I'm angry that my talent and intellect was viewed as a disposable commodity and not a resource. Sad.

I'm now teaching in a school (and school district) that has made a commitment to move towards "Student-centered learning". So what the heck is this and why is it different? I'm not sure I know the answer quite yet. I know that I am part of a process (and dialog) that is involved in perpetual change. That we have made the commitment to change how we view the education process, excuse me, the learning process. The biggest difference is the lens we view this learning process through.

• I don't teach anymore, I facilitate (I tell my students I am their "spirit-guide" through chemistry).
• Soon, there will not be specific classes. Students will complete a series of "topics". When they successfully complete a number of these topics, they will get credit for a "Chemistry" class. Topics may occur in more than one class. ie. if a teacher so chooses, a project in one class may cover more than one topic. So, I might design a project on the history of chemistry. Upon completion, the learner would get credit for one topic in chemistry but might also get credit for another topic in history. Or perhaps a topic in english if there is a writing component. So, the structure creates great potential for co-curricular dialog. This piece is evolving and will continue to evolve. Part of our last faculty workshop was a discussion of where we go next.
• A complete K-12 program of topics exists and the topics are assigned at each "grade-level" ("grades" as we know them will go away soon too). So, a complete continuum of learning is defined for all 12 years. How often does this happen? You would think every school district would have something like this in place. NOT! In my experience, there is a complete disconnect when one reaches the exterior walls of a school. Middle school science teachers have little to no idea what learning happens at the high school level and vice versa. The beginning of a class is usually a two-week diagnostic process to figure out what knowledge kids come to your class with. And, if you get kids from multiple middle schools....ugh.
• Students move at their own pace through my curriculum. Yes, this creates a multi-tasking nightmare and poses our biggest challenge. It means that the content of my classes has to be created, complete and designed to allow a great deal of autonomy.

There's so much more. What is most interesting is the outcome. I was dropped in to this mid-year. I always had this notion that Chemistry required a certain level of "intellectual maturity" and that it was a class mostly for juniors. This notion has gone out the window. I have high school freshman that are moving through my content at a pace faster than most of the juniors I've had in my past 9 years of teaching this subject. What a difference empowerment makes!

The biggest difference between traditional education and student-centered learning is; when students are left to moderate the pace of the class, it's much more enjoyable for them as they work in small groups and they move much more quickly than if the classroom is teacher directed. I can't yet attest to student understanding; it will take me a year to get my ducks in a row and be able to evaluate this. I know for sure that the outcome at the very least, is equivalent. But, if I had to guess, I'd say that this is a much more powerful way of learning. Best of all, it's a better paradigm for how knowledge is acquired in the real world.