Whilst there are many aspects of Classical Education that distinguish it from other pedagogical philosophies, I have had the opportunity to focus on a particular facet this week whilst conducting Professional Development observations.
A ‘traditional’ classroom teacher might plan a lesson according to a list of learning objectives in a linear fashion, with each objective dependent on the acquisition of the previous one. While the scaffolding of these steps is appropriate, the drawbacks of this approach are quite significant. Firstly, no matter the proficiency of the teacher’s expertise in delivering the material, those students who do not comprehend a step in the chain may be lost for the remainder of the lesson, and then naturally disengage. Secondly, students who more readily grasp the objective, or already know it, will also disengage from the lesson and find some other way to occupy their time; usually resulting in a teacher’s constant reproof of, “Let’s focus on the lesson, ok?”
Enter Classical pedagogy. Instead of a one-size fits all approach (commonly referred to in the industry as ‘teaching to the middle of the class’) teachers create lesson plans by developing ‘Leading Questions’ around the desired learning objective. These open-ended, structured questions invite student exploration through discussion, and guide the trajectory of class towards the learning goal. Note that the depth of the learning goal stays the same in its integrity; only the method in how it is explored differs.
And what a difference! Students, regardless of skill level, still participate and remain engaged in the lesson. Consider a science lesson with the learning objective of “I will be able to name and identify defining characteristics of four types of clouds.” A trajectory of three well-planned Leading Questions would first ask students to remark on differences between shown images of cirrus or cumulus clouds, which would lead to a discussion of cloud characteristics. An uninitiated student may answer that both are white, whilst a more advanced student might comment on the different temperatures present in their formation. Both students are correct, and both are engaged in the discussion! Through conversation, less-advanced students benefit from the more-advanced students’ observations, and the more-advanced students gain perspectives from each other or all on that they may not have noticed. The teacher’s role then, would not be transmitting a lesson's worth of information to an audience, but to facilitate the discussion, record observations, and fill in knowledge gaps as per necessary.This methodology holds true with most every age group and school subject, and it is one we champion at our school.
As a parent, I recognize my greatest successes in educating my children occur when I converse with them on their respective levels of understanding (not always possible; see last week’s newsletter about late-night bananas). I urge you to try implementing the same approach with your little ones; their level of cognizance never ceases to amaze.
Wishing you a conversational weekend,
Sam Weisbrod
Headmaster
|