Reinventing and Reuniting School Program Structures.
Monica Kochar
Learning Architect | Math Education Specialist | EdTech & Curriculum Consultant | Author & Trainer
This could be one of the most radical pieces of work that I have ever read! When I read it, I felt as if all our reform work has been just readjustment of a prison cell, and nothing more. And then comes the lady who breaks open the cell itself!
“New school designs, and even the reformation of existing school programs, need to do more than stay out of the box—they need to dump the box entirely.” (Jacobs, p.21)
?As per (Jacobs, p.2), there are 4 key structures that are set up for creating a school and these are:
?A school functions best when it takes these as 4 parts of a whole, interdependent, instead of each having a track of its own, independent of others. For this she has given (a) a macro view, taking examples from how students of different countries can learn together using technology; and (b) a micro view, where an individual teacher in a class can play around with space, curriculum, scheduling and groupings in a blended format with structure and freedom hand in hand.
?This reminds me, on a micro level, of a teacher I knew in a school that is in a forest in south of India (Krishnamurti Foundation India, n.d.). His students, tired of classroom once, asked if they could sit on a tree and work. He agreed and the class happened on a tree, with students and the teacher perched on different branches. He was a maths teacher and students were working on problems, all completely in harmony. If a student needed work to be corrected, he or she passed the notebook branch by branch to the teacher. Passers-by observed, smiled and walked on. The tree chosen of course was one that was huge (this school has trees as far as 100 years old) and steady with enough branches for 20 students.
The teacher had broken the cell! Within the structure of schedule and curriculum, he allowed flexibility in grouping and space. “Form should follow function”(Jacobs, p.21). His objective was that students need to learn. How and where it does not matter.
The classroom of the future would be dictated by the learner. The question at the heart would be ‘What is it that best serves this learner right now?’ And not a system or an ism.
However, one may wonder, when is the learner ready to take such decisions as are in his or her best interest?
?On a macro level, deep into south of India, there is a school, SAICE (Centre of Education, 1999). Curriculum in this school is divided into 2 phases: (a) run by the teachers and (b) run by the students.
领英推荐
?The curriculum and school structure is loosely held, ready to be changed if so required. If a student is unhappy with a teacher or subject, he or she is permitted to change it.
There is a blend of structure and fluidity. The overall schedule of the school is loosely structured: there is time to study, learn a hobby, play and meditate. Hence development of mind, emotions, body and spirit is encouraged. But the detailing is left to the students. There are no exams from kindergarten to PG but the certificate is acceptable throughout the world.
However, this school has maximum 10 students per group. Teachers start complaining if it goes more than 7 or 8. There is no special needs section as each child is special and unique programs can be developed for each of them.
?I do not know if such a model can be replicated everywhere. However, this seems to be a school that broke the forms in which most of the schools are caught. It has created a perfect blend of structure and freedom.
?“Form should follow function”?(Jacobs, p.21) is something that has broken the cells of my way of thinking! I used to think, till now, that I have done a lot of work in education. However it seems like I have just babbled like a child so far and have a long way to go!
?
References
?
?
Educator specializing in Critical-Thinking & Skill Development through Curricula Improvement and Project Management.
6 个月Thank you Monica Kochar, your article is very inspiring! It challenges the traditional “cells” of education and calls for reinvention, much like how in biology, the interconnectedness of cells is crucial for life. Your perspective on treating schools as a unified whole, rather than separate parts, resonates as a reminder that innovation only comes from change. Like a living organism, a learning organization requires flexibility, adaptability, and courage to step beyond traditional boundaries. Nice article!