Methodological Dichotomy: Past Practice vs. Future Outcomes

Teaching is a funny thing. Right when you think you have it figured out you decide to try something new. Why? Because you realize what you’ve done can be better. I worked in the restaurant industry for 17 years; I adapted to new restaurants, new positions, and new leadership roles. One thing that is true about the industry is that it is incredibly stressful, but it is consistent. A full restaurant with massive table turnover never really varies from one to the next. Classrooms on the other hand, change from day to day. When entering the teaching profession I thought that I knew what being both proactive and reflective in a stressful environment meant. That is until I entered the classroom.

The one thing I’ve learned in my last 8 years of teaching is that I can always be better. There are always better ways to make sure that all learners are engaged, involved, and challenged. Part of the vocation is reflection. I find it essential to look at my classes and see areas in which I can improve. Thus, my practice must constantly evolve because I can always be better. That is where I think I will incorporate a diary into my tool box. After reading, Research Diary: A Tool for Scaffolding (Engin, 2011), I started to look at a diary as more than just a tool for CBT (cognitive behavioural therapy) and teenagers. As a Psychology major, I tend to see the world in that lens. Engin says, “…[she] became aware that her research diary was scaffolding her own construction of research knowledge.” (pg 296). Engin is saying that if she could use the diary to build her understanding, not only of the research itself, but her methods and intentions, than her research methodologies would be more sound. I diary as well, but in my head. However, what do I retain of my insights?  I find myself, at the end of every semester, wondering what I could have done better and how I would go about making that change. However, by the end of the semester, how much have I forgotten about what happened in my class? 5 months and 25 kids x 4 classes. That is a lot to expect to remember. If I were to diary daily, or at least weekly, I could remember with greater detail the areas in which something really worked or didn’t. I could write down what was intended and what ended up happening. I could avoid the 20/20 hindsight of somehow convincing myself that what worked is what was actually intended. If I were to start looking at the outcomes of a lesson, or unit, as it pertains to the intent of the lesson/unit in the first place than I would be able to either change my intentions because the outcome was better than I intended; or change the methodology I used so I could get the desired outcomes for the lesson/unit. I know that the idea of switching methodologies to steer outcomes is taboo in science and data collection because is it really reliable to cherry-pick the data you like to strengthen your position? However, in the classroom, the steering and scaffolding are essential to get the required student learning. My classrooms, and the learning that takes place there, are the research. My teaching and lesson success are the researched. I am the researcher. But what are the readers, the students and parents, expecting to see in my classroom and my delivery?

In this week’s classes we looked at the dichotic view some hold of what it is to properly educate. When we looked at the articles, Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Ananlysis of the Failures of the Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching by Kirschner, Sweller &Clark (2010) and Teaching for Meaningful Learning: A Review of Research on Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Learning by Barron& Darling-Hammond (2008) we saw two very divergent views of what is successful educational theory. Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark argue that, “…based on our current knowledge of human cognitive architecture, minimally guided instruction is likely to be ineffective”(pg. 76).  Whereas Barron and Darling-Hammond state that, “[students] gains in factual learning that are equivalent or superior to those who engage in traditional forms of learning.” (pg1 of book excerpt). I believe that this is the crux of where we find ourselves in the real world: Divided. As mentioned by Dr. Irvine in class, a colleague of hers likes to explain education as a pendulum. A ball swinging from extreme to extreme forever trying to correct the failings of its past position. As I teach my law students, life exists in the gray area. Finding a central position, though ideal, is not as easy as it sounds. I believe that, for example instituting a fully inquiry based system of learning without addressing the base knowledge required to start is a poor pedagogical choice. However, I believe that teaching nothing but facts and not allowing for individual thought and expression is equally as detrimental. The gray area is the fusion with sound scaffolded knowledge leading to an open expression of their learning.

We are products of our own education and of our own educational and chronological history. The parents to whom I will try to explain my new philosophy of the classroom, both inquiry and project based learning models, are products of their educational history. Students, who resist the change because they are products of their educational history and they have mastered the ways to succeed in the older, more familiar, style. We as educators have a unique job because everybody thinks they know what that job is. Almost everybody’s gone to school; therefore they understand being a teacher because they’ve seen people teach and have been taught themselves. The way they were taught will greatly influence their value on how I educate and education as a whole. Our classrooms are a research experiment for all to watch. We have to make sure our research (our practices) are sound, valid, and reliable. That does not mean that we only do what has been done before, because if we fail to define a new path forward in our own classrooms, that fit us as individual teachers, then our essence as an educator and facilitator will not be genuine.

I have failed in my classroom more times than I can count. Not because I am bad at my job, but because my expectations are high and I love taking risks and trying new ways of engaging learning and learners. There is always a better way to reach a student. There is always a better way to explain a problem. There is always a better way to teach a software program. I can always be better, more concise, more available, and more aware. In short, I can be better. I, like all of you, show up to work everyday ready to do my best. I, like all of you, do my best; and I, like all of you, show up the next day striving to do better than the day before.

By: Andrew Vogelsang