"On some level we know that if we become really involved with an area of knowledge, we learn it—with or without School, and in any case without the paraphernalia of curriculum and tests and segregation by age groups that School takes as axiomatic. We also know that if we do not become involved with the area of knowledge, we'll have trouble learning it with or without School's methods. . . . you can learn without being taught and often learn best when taught least." —Seymour Papert, The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer (1993), p. 141.
Seymour Papert coins a new term, "instructionism", to make a distinction between giving someone directions when they ask for them (instructing) and insisting that someone is dependent upon a constant stream of directions at all times (instructionism). There's nothing wrong with teaching per se—tutorials, demonstrations, and explanations all serve a purpose—the mistake is in the cultural mindset that assumes we can learn only when a teacher decides what, when and how we should learn.
In a school setting, teachers generally do not have the freedom to allow students to pursue their own interests at their own pace. Classes are organized by age, and curriculums are designed with a specific scope and sequence: in fifth grade, everyone must study U.S. history, earth science, and the metric system. Weekly lesson plans dictate what will be taught (and, hopefully, learned). There's a practical reason for this: when you have large numbers of students to educate, it's more efficient.
Although it's possible to follow a similar approach to homeschooling, and some do, it isn't necessary. In fact, it may even be counterproductive. If your goal as a home educator is to empower your children to learn on their own, why not begin by allowing them to follow their interests and see where they lead?
When children are allowed to choose what they will learn about from day to day and year to year, we may not always like their choices. For months at a time during the elementary years, I fretted silently while my kids staged plays, created worlds for their dolls, built with K'nex—and showed little or no interest in solving math problems or correcting grammar. In second grade, my daughter was especially interested in Japanese and typing. During the middle school years, my son was fascinated by the role-playing game Dungeons and Dragons.
So, it's a reasonable question: how do we reconcile what our children want to know with what we feel they ought to know? Asked another way: how do we allow our children to pursue their own interests without abandoning our desire for them to be fully literate, well-informed, productive citizens?
I believe we start by setting expectations high. My kids never doubted that their parents valued education. After all, we didn't choose to homeschool so our kids would be poorly educated and unprepared for life in the real world! Proficiency at reading, writing, and math was a non-negotiable goal. I also conveyed my firm belief in the importance of all types of literacy (scientific, historical, technological). Not knowing how our own government works? Unacceptable. Living life without ever being exposed to art, music or other cultures? That would be just plain sad.
My approach was to create a rich environment for learning, which included not only the raw materials for games, experiments and projects but also a network of diverse people, places and experiences. I continually presented my kids with a variety of new opportunities ("Would you be interested in this?"), took them places, and helped them to brainstorm ideas for what they might want to do next. Some of their interests waxed and waned, so we floundered a bit, changed course as needed. Within our family, we had to make compromises and attend events and activities based on someone else's interests (including my own). We also participated in informal classes and group activities, where the pleasure of spending time with friends encouraged interest in subjects that might have been unappealing otherwise.
As my kids grew older and began to refine their thinking about who they were and what they wanted to become, their ability to set goals and make longterm plans naturally improved. They learned to balance what they wanted to do with what they felt they "needed" to do. In other words, they became more responsible. By the time they were in high school, "interest-based" learning meant figuring out how their interests compared to the typical course of study for college-bound students. Where there were gaps, they found a way to fill them in.
I believe it is entirely possible to allow children to learn about what interests them without sacrificing the quality of their education. I consider all three of my kids well educated. However, it would not have been possible to follow this path if my children had been required to know a certain set of knowledge at a particular age. The way they learned on their own was meandering, uneven—and uniquely tailored to meet their own needs.
No comments:
Post a Comment