The Dome at MIT
In my last blog post I wrote about our evolving educational systems and one of the things I mentioned was MIT’s Open Course Ware program and how great it is that they give away their courses for free.
GLP’s astute marketing manager,Debra Cagwin,took some time to check out their offerings and uncovered their Guidelines on Learning that Inform Teaching. Gee,we thought,these guidelines sound an awful lot like Dialogue Education,don’t they?
So I checked out this publication,which is essentially a list of resources for teachers,a treasure trove of research and articles about the following topics:
- Engaging students in learning
- Contextualizing students’ learning experiences
- Creating an inclusive learning and teaching experience
- Designing an engaging,contextualized and inclusive curriculum
- Teaching an engaging,contextualized and inclusive curriculum
Here’s a sample of the kind of thing you’ll find in this publication:
Analysis of the literature suggests that students must do more than just listen:they must read,write,discuss,or be engaged in solving problems. Most important,to be actively involved,students must engage in higher order thinking tasks such as analysis,synthesis,and evaluation.
Bonwell,C. &Eison,J.,Active Learning:Creating Excitement in the Classroom,ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education,Washington,D.C. (1991). http://ericae.net/db/edo/ED340272.htm or http://www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/91-9dig.htm
Are we right? Doesn’t this sound like what we Dialogue Educators use every day in our learning environments?
Or how about this?
There are many roads to learning. People bring different talents and styles of learning to college. Brilliant students in the seminar room may be all thumbs in the lab or art studio. Students rich in hands-on experience may not do so well with theory. Students need the opportunity to show their talents and learn in ways that work for them. Then they can be pushed to learn in new ways that do not come so easily.
Chickering,A. &Gamson,Z.,“Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education,” AAHE Bulletin,vol. 39,no. 7,p. 6 (1987). http://learningcommons.evergreen.edu/pdf/fall1987.pdf
Lest you think we’re affiliated with MIT,we’re not (but we could be . . . “Hey,MIT,how about hiring some great Dialogue Educators?!”). We’re just spreading the good word about this terrific list of resources. We hope they help inform your work with Dialogue Education.
Check out the complete guidelines here:http://web.mit.edu/tll/learning-guidelines-2008.pdf.
Find anything you like?
Do you not think that in the lower grades that some of this dialogue comes easier for children in an unofficial type of way. I used to work with young children,preschool through fifth grade. They talk all the time and pretty much tell it like it is. I think children are better at participating in dialogue than adults are. Adults are very much afraid to say the wrong thing that their classmates may think they are stupid or do not know what they are talking about. I agree with the fact that I do not think this type of teaching and learning is used much in college classrooms around my area. As a matter of fact,I am not sure many have even heard of dialogue education. We all discuss developing critical thinking and problem solving skills and student-centered learning,but using the true term,dialogue education and learning is not typical conversation from teachers around me.
Yes,kids are not as jaded,for sure,and tend to say it like it is,which can surely be refreshing.
Hopefully you’ll be able to introduce the folks around you to Dialogue Education –Jane’s book “Learning to Listen,Learning to Teach”makes a great gift.
While GLP and surely other educational entities promote these principles of learning,do you think it is pervasive across K-12 education and in colleges/universities? In light of Tony Wagner’s (2008) research,I tend to think it is not yet pervasive. What are your thoughts?
I tend to agree with you,Kristine,that it’s not yet pervasive,especially in university settings. I’m not familiar with Tony Wagner’s 2008 research –can you enlighten me?
Hi Joan!
Tony Wagner’s text is one of my favorites- along with Dialogue Education of course!
His book is titled:The Global Achievement Gap:Why Even Our Best Schools Don’t Teach the New Survival Skills Our Children Need- and What We Can Do About It.
Wagner (2008) proposes a set of “survival skills”for teens as preparation for higher education and the world of work. They include:critical thinking and problem-solving;collaboration across networks and leading by influence;agility and adaptability;initiative and entrepreneurialism;effective oral and written communication;accessing and analyzing information;curiosity and imagination.
Here is a link to his site where there are videos/keynotes on his research and book:http://www.tonywagner.com/tag/videos
Peter,
You are so correct. The new technology has and if if hasn’t will change the classroom tremendously,I feel. Those of use that are not so tech-savy will have to become soon. I am writing my first hybrid course and am a little afraid to start it. I am taking an online class though and have to tell you that I love having my education right at my finger tips.
Kathy
Peter,
I think you are absolutely correct. Today’s technology in a way has made life easier,yet in many ways has made life more difficult. I think we have reached a different level of analysis and synthesis that needs to be reached. Active learning and engaging students in lessons are even more important today.
This is really a sore subject with me. Teachers who have been teaching a subject for a very long time in my opinion should become stronger and more effective in the classroom. Unfortunately,these too are typically the instructors that do not further their education,are not considered lifelong learners,and do not work on creating active classrooms and helping the student learn in means that best suit the student. I recently had a student tell me how much they were paying to be in my program and they expected me to teach them what they needed to know to go out there and make it in the real-world.
Rachel,isn’t that the truth? Sometimes you get value from what you’ve paid for,othertimes you don’t,and there’s not always a correlation between expense and quality,is there? Universities seem to have a lot of teachers who are content experts but not pedagogy experts,and it can make for some very dull “learning.”
I have always wondered why a good education is so expensive. Sometimes you get more out of free courses than when you spent thousands of dollars for courses and you can’t remember what you learned! I recall being in college and having to take four science courses as an English major. That was a brutal task! I actually called it “cruel and unusual punishment!”My point is that I have received more value from professional development workshops than when I took some classes I paid for. What MIT is doing is wonderful,and I hope more schools jump on the bandwagon!
A very close friend of mine who is into medal working took online free courses with MIT,and really enjoyed them. He said he learned a lot. They were wonderful. Very well done videos,that showed him step by step what to do. He thought they were great.
I thought it was a wonderful resource for him. It is not difficult to see how this type of learning is appreciated. It reminds me of all the video’s out on YouTube that explain how to do various tasks. They can be a wonderful source of information also.
Great insight,Peter,on the issue of how those higher level functions take on increased importance in our digital age. An important thing for us to consider,yes.
It isn’t surprising,really,that MIT’s research has sounds insights and sounds like Dialogue Education. Dialogue Education is really a codification of what makes for good learning and teaching. So:any insights about what makes for the practice of good learning and teaching will likely qualify as Dialogue Education.
One other point. In today’s hand-held information-at-our-fingertips-through-our-smart-phones workshops,those higher level functions like analysis,synthesis and evaluation are becoming more important,since knowledge and comprehension are really only a few taps away. I think it changes how we design for relevant and engaging learning.
Thanks for this Joan,
Peter Noteboom