This week, we revisited the work of Howard Gardner and his principle of multiple intelligences. It helps remind me that I should not cater to just one or two intelligence types. I should do my best to incorporate all seven types of intelligence. The reasons for this are important. First, no one learns everything. Second, not all people learn the same way. Third, not all people have the same interests and abilities. A learner-centered approach, then, is taking into account your students first and foremost in the teaching process. I think this is the way to go. In my discussion posts, I did talk about having a balance, though. Learner-centered does not mean making your classroom a fully democratic environment. The teacher is still in charge. But allowing students a good degree of control over their learning is essential to motivation and trust. Learner-centered does not mean lowering the standard either. I’m a firm believer in keeping the bar high and helping students work toward it.

American psychologist Carl Rogers believed that people should learn because they want to learn. He believed in a therapeutic approach that takes into account a child’s mental and emotional health. Ways to incorporate this include building a climate of trust, participatory decision making, motivation through discovery, and teacher as facilitator of learning.

A final major take-away point for me this week is the idea of subject matter as a tool to explore values and decisions. This ties into my Moral Issues in Education class. This helps me frame the units and content of my curriculum by thinking of the values and decisions that are present in each area of study.

Charlotte Mason, a leading inspiration behind the home school movement

This week, I was reminded of the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning. The former is the process of reasoning from particular to general and the latter is reasoning from general to specific. One powerful example of inductive instruction is inquiry. Students pursue solutions to authentic problems by asking and refining questions, debating ideas, making predictions, designing plans, gathering information, and communicating ideas. This type of instruction is learner-centered, so students enjoy taking ownership and producing results of which they can be proud.

I have used inquiry this past year in my classes to make learning more exciting. I want to unleash the potential of my students and go far beyond worksheets and spoon-fed knowledge. In particular, my Bible class students used inquiry to produce a class book, a set of skits, professional-looking greeting cards, and other artifacts that demonstrated their understanding of content. During these times, I enjoy my role as guide, facilitator, and encourager, leaving the natural burden of learning to be picked up eagerly by young, receptive minds.

I also discovered this week a lady from which the home school movement owes much debt for inspiration and technique – Charlotte Mason. Born in Wales in 1842, Mason was passionate about education. She established her own teacher training school in England and founded the Parents’ National Education Union. Mason believed children would benefit more from a calm, natural learning environment with encouragement from parents. This in stark contrast to the often stressful and difficult environment of schools and classrooms.

Mason believed that history and literature were intrinsically linked and that they should be taught together using source material and original accounts whenever possible to support the literature. She believed that our minds naturally search out connections in life and learning, and that as educators/parents, we should take full advantage of that. If given the right environment, a student’s imagination and thirst for knowledge will naturally bestir themselves.

There are many things that are attractive about Mason’s philosophy. She had some wonderful ideas about how children learn best, and I think on most points, she is absolutely right. The home school movement in the United States flourishes today, thanks in large part to Mason’s work. As a classroom teacher at a large Christian school, I’d like to work hard to adopt a number of her key educational ideas.

What’s Clear to Me

I understand that essentialist education grew out of a response to progressive education. While progressive education is learner-centered and promotes student interest and curiosity as well as social and emotional learning, essentialist education is concerned with the true purpose of education – to give each student the basic skills and knowledge needed to live life. As such, the essentialist model is teacher-centered and focused on student discipline and performance.  I understand that E. D. Hirsch Jr. is a major proponent of essentialist education. After publishing his highly popular book Cultural Literacy, h wrote a series of books highlighting what a student should learn at each grade level. These books remain popular and highly used today.

I can also understand that there seems to be a marriage of these two models in the standards and teaching we are witnessing today. While standards-based instruction is part of every state’s educational framework, the ways in which these are fostered include numerous examples of progressive education, such as cooperative learning, learning styles, personality tests, etc.

What’s Not Clear to Me

I suppose I still need clarification on which model might be more dominant in the future. Which way are we headed? Will education reform in the U.S. lean more heavily on one or the other? Is a mix of both the best solution to our many education-related problems?

It is also unclear to me which one is more highly favored by educational “experts” and thinkers today. How big is the support for each?

Pictured with this comment is an example of essentialist education – one of the books in E. D. Hirsch Jr.’s popular education series, highlighting what students should know at each level or grade of their education.