Creating Significant Learning Environments
Ramsey Musallam a science teacher offers the following 3 rules to spark learning and challenge to change our current teaching paradigm.
Educators need to leave behind their simple roles as disseminators of content and embrace a new paradigm of cultivators of curiosity and inquiry. (6:02)
If we really want to take advantage of all the opportunities that the digital information age offers, we need to move away from fixed mindset to growth mindset thinking. Carol Dweck, Professor of Psychology at Stanford University, the author of Mindset: The New Psychology of Success
In contrast Dweck explains that students with a Growth Mindset believe that they can develop their intelligence over time and subsequently will:
The fixed mindset, or as it is more often referred to as innate intelligence, was the widely accepted theory of cognitive development until 60’s when UC Berkley professor Mark Rosenzweig replicable studies made the case for the environmental impact on brain development and plasticity. It is now widely accepted that the brain remains plastic and adapts to our constantly changing environment which is foundational to Dweck’s argument for the growth mindset.
This notion of adapting to a constantly changing environment is also important when we consider our move from a static print information age to the dynamic digital information age.
The emphases of the print information age and print culture include:
Therefore, the greatest challenge of the print information age is finding existing or fixed information. A learning environment that is based on the print culture will emphasize memorization and regurgitation of standardized information.
In contrast the emphasis of the digital information age and digital culture include:
The greatest challenge of the digital information age will be assessing Information and making meaningful connections between existing information and new information that is developed. A learning environment that is based on digital culture will emphasize, creation, communication, and participation as primary and hold information simply as a commodity or a product of interconnected human endeavours.
Considering that we have moved into and have been in the digital information age for at least the past two decades we need to consider our roles as educators and look long and hard at the changes we need to make to our learning systems. The following questions are central to how I will be responding to how I see my role as an educator in the 21st Century:
Helping learners assess the vast amounts of information that is available and giving them necessary skills and abilities that they need to make meaningful and useful connections is more important than it has ever been. Learning is an active and dynamic process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current/past knowledge. The making of meaningful connections in the digital information age is key to the learning and knowing.
We need to move from fixed mindset thinking and the passive educational environment of main lecture points, rubrics, individual competition and standardized testing to growth mindset thinking of active learning, dynamic interactivity, critical and analytical thinking, collaboration and meaningful projects.
Absence of Thought in Education
I have been pondering Grant Wiggins blog post on the absence of thought in education. The following quote demonstrates Wiggins frustration with our current system or process of education–which is a frustration that I share:
If all I do is “teach” you things and then you have to show me you “learned” them, strictly speaking, there is no need for either of us to really think. A need to think only emerges when the work itself is designed to make us both question, really question what we are doing.
Thus, even good schooling may make a “good” student or teacher even less thoughtful. How could it be otherwise, if we simply just do our work, and the work is time-consuming? Our students may graduate without having learned to be thoughtful and many teachers may never grow. One can get straight A’s in almost every school if one merely does all the work. This is not a new idea: I am just updating Plato’s Allegory of the Cave.
I have been a critic of the information delivery model of education or what I like to refer to as “recipe and regurgitation” model of instruction my entire academic career. I have not only been a critic of this model I have been working to provide alternatives both in my professional and personal life. Back in 1997 I developed constructivist learning approach called Inquisitivism which emphasizes stimulating a learner’s latent or lost curiosity by creating a learning environment that offers learners “real world” and hands-on learning experiences. This approach has been the foundation for all my instruction and the graduate and undergraduate courses I have taught face2face and online. It has also been a fundamental component of the Creating Significant Learning Environments institutes and various workshops that I have conducted as the Director of Faculty Enrichment at Abilene Christian University.
Making it About the Learning
Because of my dislike of our current model of instruction and my belief in creating significant learning environments my wife and I have also home educated our two boys. We have chosen to create a learning environment in our home and community that uses all aspects of daily life as opportunities for learning. My boys have learned by living, doing, exploring, and creating and have grown into very intelligent and well-rounded teens. It is fair to say that because of my roles as a Home Educator, Learning Theorist, a Professor, Manager of Educational Technology, Director of Faculty Enrichment and most recently as a Vice President Academic I not only have some inside knowledge of our system I also have many years of experience trying to “fix the system” by promoting and applying alternatives…SO I have earned the right to be critical. I also have the right to be critical because the failing in our current educational system adversely impacts my eldest son Levi.
Levi’s Story
Over the past several years we have lived in smaller cities that had very vibrant homeschool communities so my sons were involved in drama companies, bands, sports teams, volunteer organizations and in general had an exceptionally vibrant social experience. Upon our return to Edmonton, Alberta which is ten times larger than where have lived before, we found that opportunities for connecting to a homeschool community that provided a strong social outlet were lacking. In addition, the influence and sway of Alberta Education and the Alberta curriculum were very strong. So when Levi decided he would like to give a traditional public high school a try because we wanted to experience the social dynamic of a school setting I obliged.
Levi’s started public high school half way through his grade 10 year and his first term experience by his standards was satisfactory. He played rugby, co-wrote and performed a drama production, made several friends and had a very positive social experience. Academically, he found that there was lots of busy work but overall public school was much easier than home education he didn’t have to go as deep and make the learning his own. I managed to keep my frustration in check as I helped him with his Science and Social 10 programs which were designed on the information dump principle and used the recipe and regurgitation model of instruction. Levi lucked out in Math 10 to get a recent University graduate who was still somewhat idealistic and caring enough to think that learning was important so his Math 10 experience was very positive. His math experience was also improved significantly through his tutorial sessions with Dr. Zoltan Berkes and amazing Physics Professor from Concordia University who took Levi under his wing and helped him to appreciate how Mathematics combined with Physics can explain the world. Levi’s final overall average for the year was high enough for him to qualify for the Rutherford Scholarship.
When Going Till You Know is Too Much
When we reviewed Levi’s first semester experience in public school this past summer the social factor of school that he enjoyed so much (there are many more girls at school then there is a home) was enough for me to begrudgingly overlook the long hours, make work assignments and the recipe and regurgitation approach that he was experiencing. Ironically and unfortunately, Levi found the recipe and regurgitation approach easier because he didn’t have to work as hard despite the greater time commitment. I repeatedly reminded myself and my wife that the fundamentals of learning that we instilled in Levi would ensure that he could do well in a public school or any other environment. Furthermore, when he was highly motivated or serious about learning something he was interested in he still applied the “go till you know” or “mastery” learning approach that he grew up with…this made me feel a bit better about the learning aspect of his high school experience.
This fall, Levi’s experience with public high school is not as positive as was his first semester…but he is dealing with it much better than I am; hence this post. Since he did well last term he decided to take on the University prep route and register in all 20 level courses. Social, Biology, and Math 20 were the core academic courses for this first term and Chemistry, Physics, and English are the planned core courses for next term. When you factor in his electives and other extracurricular activities he is a typical busy teen. Despite the recipe and regulation nature of Biology and Science in general in the Alberta curriculum, the class is going well. Social is much better because the instructor requires that all readings be done outside of class to prepare for deep discussions in class, so this is a very positive.
Math is not so positive. The instructor’s priority is to cover the content to prepare the students for Math 30. He warned the students that they would be moving through the content quickly so it was their responsibility to keep up. In addition to the focus of “covering the content” the Math curriculum in Alberta has changed and instructors and students are facing “new math”. Unfortunately, when your priority is to cover the content then nothing will be missed in the new curriculum because it takes most instructors one or two terms through the content to determine what is really necessary. Levi’s tutor Dr. Berkes, a highly regarded Physicist, wasn’t too clear on where this new Math curriculum was going so the tutorial sessions were not as helpful as they could be because he wasn’t able to help Levi make a meaningful connection between the math and the real world.
All these factors combined and resulted in Levi spending large amounts of time on his math homework yet he struggled to make meaning in the work. After doing poorly on his first quiz and being concerned about the second quiz Levi was beginning to be concerned that all the extra time he would need to spend on Math to understand it fully would take away from the time he needed to spend on Biology and Social. When I asked Levi what he wasn’t understanding or was missing he replied:
…it’s not that I don’t understand the Math, there is just so much stuff to cover and it takes me longer to get through the work… I don’t just want to understand 60 or 70% of it and move on, I need to understand it all and I just don’t have the time. If I spend all my time on Math my grades in Biology and Social won’t be as good…
As a result of a subsequent conversation with Levi and my wife, we felt that it would be best for Levi to drop the Math and do it at a later time–but we needed to be certain. We also considered Levi switching to the lower level Math for this term to help him prepare for redoing Math 20 in the future so my wife and Levi had a conversation with the Math 20-2 instructor and the school guidance counselor. We found that there is very little connection between the two levels of Math and since Levi is a month into the term he has a lot of content to cover in order to catch up. This would mean that he would be spending significant time on his own catching up on the three units of work he missed while staying current with the new content. The instructor said that the first three units were not cumulative and didn’t build on each other so it was possible to do all the catch-up work while working on the new content. If Levi did all the work then he would do fine in the course.
Preparation for Learning doesn’t Prepare one for School
So Levi’s problem is that he doesn’t want to just do the work and understand 60% or even 70% material he wants to understand it all but this just takes too long. Perhaps, this is where I am to blame and need to apologize to my son for not preparing him for school. In a home education environment, you can take the time to fully understand every concept before you move on and this is how Levi spent the previous 16 years. In contrast, by grade 10 most kids in the public system have 10 years of “covering the content” and “doing the work” and the “A” students, for the most part, are the ones have done the work. The “A” students are also, for the most part, the students who have figured out how the educational system works and know that if they do the work they will get the grades that they want regardless if they have learned anything or not. Many of these students not only expect an “A” but demand it because they have learned to equate doing the work with an “A”.
This leads me back to my opening thought about Grant Wiggins post on going deeper and the absence of thought in education. There are consequences to these sorts of idealistic musing. Educational reformers like Wiggins and myself can postulate and promote all these wonderful notions of going deeper and changing our classrooms and even our schools to be learning centered, but until we fully reform our system kids like Levi and many more will be caught in between where they will be suited for learning but not suited for school.
Levi will be fine. He will do Math 20 and 30 but he may need to do them in a different way… in a way that will give him the time he needs to fully understand and learn. Despite all my work at trying to change the system I still need to apologize to my son.
Sorry Levi, I have prepared you for learning but I didn’t prepare you for school.
Is an apology enough or should we be doing even more to fix these problems?
Power of Learning Environments
A recent trip to Whistler and a visit to the Whistler Air Dome, commonly referred to as the foampit, has reaffirmed the importance and power of learning environments and has caused me to take a more significant stand on the role that the environment and circumstances play in learning. I have been arguing since the mid 90’s that learning is dependent upon the creation of an effective learning environment and the immersion of the learner in that environment. A learning environment can be a classroom, an online course or anywhere for that matter where learning can take place. I have also argued that learning is the responsibility of the learner and that teachers are not able to make a student learn–the best that teachers can do is develop or establish the environment, immerse the student in that environment and then motivate and inspire the learner to take ownership of their learning. When learning takes place a teacher is really just the facilitator who helps the learner navigate the learning environment and process.
Whistler Air Dome – A Significant Learning Environment
So how does a visit to one of the world’s foremost extreme biking destinations reaffirm my faith in learning environments? Consider the following…
My younger son Caleb decided that he would like to learn how to do a backflip on his mountain bike and he knew a visit to the foampit would give him the safest and most pain-free way of mastering this stunt. For those who aren’t familiar with downhill mountain biking and racing, dirt jumping, slopestyle and other forms of extreme biking there is one unfortunate reality that a rider constantly faces. It is not a matter of if one will get hurt, but when and how badly will the rider be injured. So when a rider can work on dangerous stunts like back and front flips, tailwhips, x-overs and more and potentially eliminate or lessen the chance of getting hurt they will jump at the chance (pardon my pun).
Videos and Pictures of Significant Learning
This first video is Caleb’s 5th or 6th attempt at the backflip and the first time he successfully landed the stunt.
Unfortunately, videos do not fully reveal the scale and intensity of the stunts. The starting point for the stunt is a very narrow platform 25 feet above the ground. The ramp that the riders hit goes from flat to completely vertical in just over 6 feet. The acrobatics are taking place approximately 8-12 feet above the foampit and when you add the 6-foot height of the foampit it is not uncommon for a rider to be performing a stunt 14-18 feet above the ground.
The following video and pictures of my older son Levi performing a tailwhip (spinning your bike 360 degrees below you and then landing back on the bike) should provide another perspective of the height and intensity that is required to complete some of these stunts.
In the picture below you can see that Levi is starting to whip the back end of the bike forward while getting his legs out of the way.
Levi’s bike is whipped out and turned 180 degrees–hence the name “tailwhip”
Levi is preparing to get back on the pedals by raising his legs high in the air. All this happens in less than a couple of seconds.
While the blocks of foam significantly lessen the impact, a rider can still get hurt by landing on their bike or hitting the side of the pit or even by landing out of control. Despite the fact, the stunts performed in the foampit can potentially result in pain and injury my boys didn’t hesitate to expand their skills because the alternative of attempting and missing a stunt on the slopes or course would guarantee a significant amount of pain and the potential for a serious injury.
Informal Learning
The foampit environment is designed to enable riders to perform extreme stunts in relative safety. Everything in the environment contributes to helping riders perform stunts that they normally would be afraid to do elsewhere. The ramps and all platforms in the pit area are extreme enough that the average or even experienced cross county cyclist would not be willing to attempt–the environment is only for those riders who are willing to take the risks required to do the extreme stunts.
Peer Instruction & Social Support
Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of the environment is that outside of two short (4-5 day) bike camps there are no formal instructors or instruction of any kind. Even in the bike camps, the instruction that happens is less formal and really should just be viewed as coaching.
But this doesn’t mean instruction or coaching isn’t happening at all–it does, but it happens informally or as part of the social and peer dynamic of the foampit environment. In the video below you will notice a conversation between my son Caleb on the right and another rider.
You will also notice that other rider is offering tips and is even showing Caleb how to move and Caleb is emulating or imitating those moves. In this environment, more experienced riders readily offer advice and direction. Most riders will comment, encourage and cheer on other riders. Success is shared by the whole group through cheers and other accolades when a rider finally makes a stunt. Peer instruction and support happens on its own with no formal process. The social dynamic is a very significant part of the learning environment and in just less than 3 hours my boys were able to grow their skills substantially.
Over the years we have learned that the downhill mountain biking, dirt jumping, and extreme biking community is highly competitive but it is also very supportive and encouraging. The music, clothes, speech, peer support and mannerism all point to a unique social community and this social community takes care of its own. The social dynamic is a very significant part of the environment that you will find in extreme biking in places like Whistler, the North Shore, and locations that are dedicated to promoting these sports. But the environment as a whole contributes to significant learning. One doesn’t become a championship surfer on the Canadian prairies nor can one become a professional mountain bike racer or slopestyle champion on the prairies.
What will it take to use the power of well-designed learning environments in our traditional educational systems? Can we get there through evolution or revolution?
In the Family Matters blog Kevin East recommends that we regularly tell our children:
1. You are my son/daughter. This states ownership on my part, and identity on theirs…
2. I love you. This is one of those phrases I don’t think I can say enough…
3. I am proud of you. My pride in them is not because of performance, but because they are mine…
My wife passed on this wonderful link and I have been thinking about the importance of these three powerful phrases in building our children’s self worth and identity. I have also been thinking about the role that these positive reinforcements play in establishing an effective learning environment. In my post Quality time is spelled “TIME” I referred to the James Dobson statement “morality, values and beliefs are not taught rather they are caught.” By positively reinforcing your children you are not only affirming their value and self worth you are modelling positive encouragement and motivating your children to do the same. The learning that can happen in this type of environment is not dependent upon rewarding performance or other external factors. The motivation to be the best one can be, which is a never ending learning process, comes from intrinsic factors of confidence, security and assurance.
While intrinsically motivating our own children, or children within our extended family, is part of our responsibilities as parents I suggest it is also part of our responsibility as teachers. Unfortunately, political correctness and other societal norms and conventions prevent us from telling our students that we love them, but we can still let them know that we truly value and respect them. We can let them know that by being our students they will be respected, valued and appreciated. We can also let them know that we are proud of them and by doing so we will have created the foundation for a learning environment that is based on intrinsically motivating our learners to grow and be the best that they can be.
This isn’t just a well meaning platitude. Intrinsically motivating our students to learn is much more effective than that performance based “carrot and stick” methods. If we recall Daniel Pink’s research revealed in his book, Drive, and the video below the carrot and stick are only useful for simple straight forward tasks that require little or no thought. But for tasks that are more complicated and require conceptual and creative thinking (deeper learning) the carrots and sticks do not work. Pink argues that the science shows that people are purpose driven, care about mastery very deeply and want to be self directed.
