Imagine you have two teachers in school, the first one tells you, "You must memorize the contents of the book so you can learn." You do as you're told. The next subject teacher says, "You don't need to memorize that. You should focus on this aspect right now as it is what you need." You comply with their instructions as well. The first teacher says, "This will help you in the future. The book will give you what you need in the next years to come." The second teacher contradicts them again, "Don't focus too much on the future. Focus on what is happening right now." Whom do you think you will believe the most? The teacher who prepares you for the future or the one who introduces the concept of "You Only Live Once (YOLO)"?
I concealed my disagreement with one of my classmates when she said she disapprove with the teacher who introduced the concept of "You Only Live Once (YOLO)". It was obvious she wasn't paying attention to what the teacher was saying, or had some confusion in her mind. I wanted to respond, but not at the moment. Haha.
The teacher who focused on the future was the "Essentialist teacher." This idea comes from essentialist psychologists, who believe that a child's learning should be focused on what is written in the book. To be honest, most of my early teachers were like this. They believed that memorization exercises the brain, and students with a pictographic memory will be geniuses, while those who can't process information will be left behind.
This is the problem why many students don't want to continue their studies in college after graduation. The reason is that they struggle to process the information in the books, or they drop out after the next semester. College life is all about books and what the professors teach. This is what will be examined.
And then there are Progressivist teachers, who say, "Don't worry too much about the future, worry about it when the time comes." I have met a teacher like that, who walks into the classroom without a relevant book in hand. He says things are already stored in his head, and books are outdated these days. He was also my adviser for my college thesis, and his teaching style doesn't rely on books. It gave me a headache at that time, having a Progressivist adviser and an Essentialist panel for my study. They were cruel on my defense day, with the two of them disagreeing with my data and defending their own results. It was a stressful experience.
Students, or learners, are like a school of fish in an aquarium. Essentialists feed them by telling them to read and memorize the whole book, which is like pouring a whole can of food into the aquarium. What happens then? It becomes toxic. Progressivists, on the other hand, give them specially made food to address what they lack. When they see that a fish is a bit unhealthy, they balance its diet, and when they see it's full, they give it what it deserves.
Essentialists might think that feeding the fish for the future will make them grow up immediately. Progressivists say to enjoy the present, without worrying about the future YET.
Do you see why I disagreed with a classmate who said that Progressivist teachers were not good enough? Learners should be prepared for the future, and that's why they need to be pressured to work well.
The kind of learning these days is different from the old ways. Most 21st century teenagers won't learn from Essentialists because they focus more on what's happening right now, the trends, and survival skills. So, if I had to choose between being an Essentialist and a Progressivist teacher (which I will be in the coming months), I would choose to be a Progressivist, instead of relying solely on books.
Although Progressivist teachers may have come from being Essentialists, we need to have mastery of our teaching values. However, forcing the child's mind to study hard without giving them a choice is not good. We need to align with what the learners need, not just what the books say.
Learning is what I love. I have also come from being a student until now, so I understand why reading the whole book to learn won't happen in the 21st and 22nd centuries of teaching and learning. How about you? Do you prefer a teacher who prepares you for the future or one who helps you with what you need to know right now? It's fine if you disagree with me. Thank you for reading.
ALL PHOTOS BELONG TO @eunoia101
 | Hello, I am eunoia101, a student pursuing a Master's Degree and Units in Education. This blog serves as my personal educational journal where I document my observations and reflections from my studies. You can also help me pursuing my education by UPVOTE and REBLOG. Thank you.. |
|---|
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @eunoia101 ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
Congratulations @eunoia101! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 30000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Sadly the modern school system, primary school or college, doesn’t really help people much for the world. There aren’t enough people in the world as you say that learn in the way that they are instructing so it becomes very challenging for people to learn. John Taylor Gatto speaks of this a lot in his later years and now this form of education is not at all natural for children and even teens and adults. We learn a lot more by applying knowledge and hands on work, not memorization. I can tell you very few of the things that I memorized in college because it really wasn’t very important or helpful. The important stuff for me and my field I retained yes but the other stuff I couldn’t tell you right now about it. I could certainly read it again and update myself on it but beyond that, nope.