I'm still hoping to join the previous post's discussion, but I just have to say...how can you NOT be inspired by that? How can we enact this in our school sites and the future?
(provided we aren't able to find jobs at expeditionary schools--I already checked, and the only one in Mpls/St Paul isn't hiring, so I'm out of luck)
Maybe I'm a terrible pessimist, but I did not get inspired by Berger specifically because he did not offer tips or advice on how to do project-based learning in large, traditional schools as opposed to in small charter schools where the whole faculty buys in to the expeditionary learning model. So, after the meeting, I asked him how to do such projects in a traditional school. He basically suggested that it's too hard to do it alone and just not working in traditional schools, saying that he's never seen a large, non-charter school be able to successfully implement such a school design and that it's too hard to sustain the work in because not everyone is on the same team. I also asked him about how to get training to do that kind of work if you did want to go it alone, and he said that attending the week-long PD would cost around $2,000 and that normally schools pay for the training and the school design implementation through Title I funds and fundraising. So I left the reception less than satisfied with Mr. Berger.
To an extent, I am in between Jean and Jacob's position.
Part of me was very much inspired by the work products that Berger showed. I agree with him that we under estimate what students, and people in general, (even ourselves in not infrequent moments of self-doubt), are capable of.
That said, I was disappointed by how his presentation applies to us, as Jean points out. So, now what? Given that we may choose to work in underfunded, large, public schools, what can we do? [As a side note, I found part of the presentation repetitive; and a field, and a field guide, and a field guide...]
An essential question, which he touched on, although not explicitly, is the social conditions of learning. Drill and kill instruction to prepare for tests doesn't promote learning and is part of a larger social and cultural malaise. I think we can work to create more meaningful purposes for learning (like writing a letter to a character in a novel rather than a 5 paragraph essay); to me, this is a worthwhile puzzle, how can content be relevant, interesting, accessible, and a way to work off what he was saying.
I hear the point about this approach depending on a mutually supportive group of teachers and adminstrators. Part of what I took away from the Kay's presentation on charter schools in the School Reform was that almost any system seems to work well when everyone agrees to the same objectives and methods. The question in my mind isn't so much "Is it possible to use Ron Berger's approach in my school?" as "How do I build cooperation among the teachers in my school?"
What I think I can immediately use from Berger's talk is the idea of emphasizing the revision process. I know that revising is key to my own learning and I think that there is a good deal of space in the curriculum for having students revise work.
Posts
Maybe I'm a terrible pessimist, but I did not get inspired by Berger specifically because he did not offer tips or advice on how to do project-based learning in large, traditional schools as opposed to in small charter schools where the whole faculty buys in to the expeditionary learning model. So, after the meeting, I asked him how to do such projects in a traditional school. He basically suggested that it's too hard to do it alone and just not working in traditional schools, saying that he's never seen a large, non-charter school be able to successfully implement such a school design and that it's too hard to sustain the work in because not everyone is on the same team. I also asked him about how to get training to do that kind of work if you did want to go it alone, and he said that attending the week-long PD would cost around $2,000 and that normally schools pay for the training and the school design implementation through Title I funds and fundraising. So I left the reception less than satisfied with Mr. Berger.
ReplyDeleteTo an extent, I am in between Jean and Jacob's position.
ReplyDeletePart of me was very much inspired by the work products that Berger showed. I agree with him that we under estimate what students, and people in general, (even ourselves in not infrequent moments of self-doubt), are capable of.
That said, I was disappointed by how his presentation applies to us, as Jean points out. So, now what? Given that we may choose to work in underfunded, large, public schools, what can we do? [As a side note, I found part of the presentation repetitive; and a field, and a field guide, and a field guide...]
An essential question, which he touched on, although not explicitly, is the social conditions of learning. Drill and kill instruction to prepare for tests doesn't promote learning and is part of a larger social and cultural malaise. I think we can work to create more meaningful purposes for learning (like writing a letter to a character in a novel rather than a 5 paragraph essay); to me, this is a worthwhile puzzle, how can content be relevant, interesting, accessible, and a way to work off what he was saying.
I hear the point about this approach depending on a mutually supportive group of teachers and adminstrators. Part of what I took away from the Kay's presentation on charter schools in the School Reform was that almost any system seems to work well when everyone agrees to the same objectives and methods. The question in my mind isn't so much "Is it possible to use Ron Berger's approach in my school?" as "How do I build cooperation among the teachers in my school?"
ReplyDeleteWhat I think I can immediately use from Berger's talk is the idea of emphasizing the revision process. I know that revising is key to my own learning and I think that there is a good deal of space in the curriculum for having students revise work.