Customization

I have been thinking about the concept of "customization" in the Challenge Centre.  A few weeks back, I worked with 14 students from my school, and I realized that by doubling this group, I would have a regular class size.  My first thought was "I wouldn't be doing this type of teaching, and the students wouldn't be doing this type of learning."  

The customization that is inherent in the Challenge Centre would not be possible in a "regular class", where a teacher is trying to teach a particular concept and make sure that each student has some form of mastery over it and understanding.  You don't get it....oh no what do we do..how can I help you?  You really get and need more....oh no, I'll get you to help student x who need a bit of review....you sort of get it...okay, here's a few more ideas to get you going and review it.... 
The pressure on a teacher to make sure that all levels of learning are occuring and that all learners are on task, thinking, doing, and understanding is quite overwhelming with so many different types of learners.  

This brings me back to Aldrich Clark's book, Unschooling Rules which I have been reviewing here and here . Aldrich Clark says "in education, customization is important like air is important".  In Vancouver, we tend to use the word "differentiation", but I like customization- less focus on learners being different and more on the learner as needing something in particular.

Aldrich goes on to state attributes in which kids differ, such as their facility with words, language, peers, authority, music, being separated from parents, need for food and sleep to name a few!

Then, he states that this rule (customization) seems to be both the most self-evident and the most disregarded.

How do we build in customization into our schools?  Can we do this?  I know that in the Challenge Centre, I  work with the concept of customization in all the work the students do.  This is the place to "go for it" and do something that interests you in a passion area.  And yet, I usually spend four days with the students, and  then they are off to their home school, and I'm teaching the next group.  
I do know that a great many students are getting some form of customization, or choice, or individualized instruction.  Many of the students I see are in very enriched environments, with lots of creative projects and assignments.  But are they getting enough? Is it enough?  

Aldrich then lists 15 models that are better for childhood learning than schools...this list includes:  summer camps, internships, family trips, organized sports, music and art classes, and libraries to name a few.

Often, I find students get this customization, and are involved in these "15 models" but usually it is after school.  Students I see are in music classes, competitive sports, after school writing programs, tutoring programs, reading programs, after school art classes, and the like.  These students are busy from 9 am to 6 or 7 pm with school and after school programming. This makes me wonder if they have enough time to play, relax, and spend with their families, which I believe is fundamentally important here.  

It is as if there are two sets of curriculum:  the school and the other.  How can we blend and make them one? How can we encourage students to follow their passions and really give them the opportunity to explore these passions?

Customization

I have been thinking about the concept of "customization" in the Challenge Centre.  A few weeks back, I worked with 14 students from my school, and I realized that by doubling this group, I would have a regular class size.  My first thought was "I wouldn't be doing this type of teaching, and the students wouldn't be doing this type of learning."  

The customization that is inherent in the Challenge Centre would not be possible in a "regular class", where a teacher is trying to teach a particular concept and make sure that each student has some form of mastery over it and understanding.  You don't get it....oh no what do we do..how can I help you?  You really get and need more....oh no, I'll get you to help student x who need a bit of review....you sort of get it...okay, here's a few more ideas to get you going and review it.... 
The pressure on a teacher to make sure that all levels of learning are occuring and that all learners are on task, thinking, doing, and understanding is quite overwhelming with so many different types of learners.  

This brings me back to Aldrich Clark's book, Unschooling Rules which I have been reviewing here and here . Aldrich Clark says "in education, customization is important like air is important".  In Vancouver, we tend to use the word "differentiation", but I like customization- less focus on learners being different and more on the learner as needing something in particular.

Aldrich goes on to state attributes in which kids differ, such as their facility with words, language, peers, authority, music, being separated from parents, need for food and sleep to name a few!

Then, he states that this rule (customization) seems to be both the most self-evident and the most disregarded.

How do we build in customization into our schools?  Can we do this?  I know that in the Challenge Centre, I  work with the concept of customization in all the work the students do.  This is the place to "go for it" and do something that interests you in a passion area.  And yet, I usually spend four days with the students, and  then they are off to their home school, and I'm teaching the next group.  
I do know that a great many students are getting some form of customization, or choice, or individualized instruction.  Many of the students I see are in very enriched environments, with lots of creative projects and assignments.  But are they getting enough? Is it enough?  

Aldrich then lists 15 models that are better for childhood learning than schools...this list includes:  summer camps, internships, family trips, organized sports, music and art classes, and libraries to name a few.

Often, I find students get this customization, and are involved in these "15 models" but usually it is after school.  Students I see are in music classes, competitive sports, after school writing programs, tutoring programs, reading programs, after school art classes, and the like.  These students are busy from 9 am to 6 or 7 pm with school and after school programming. This makes me wonder if they have enough time to play, relax, and spend with their families, which I believe is fundamentally important here.  

It is as if there are two sets of curriculum:  the school and the other.  How can we blend and make them one? How can we encourage students to follow their passions and really give them the opportunity to explore these passions?

Explore, then Play, and add Rigor

I have been reading Unschooling Rules 
by Clark Aldrich, and find it great to return to it again and again to reread the ideas.  If you are an educator, these ideas will sink in deeply.  I am always questioning what students learn and the nature of learning, and this book makes me reflect on how I teach.

As in my previous post (here), I stated there were a few rules that really stuck with me, and today the rule is

Explore, then Play, and add Rigor

Aldrich looks at the way a child learns to swim:  we want the new swimmer to enter the water, move around in the new world. Once the child is comfortable in the water, they start to play, and begin inventing small games.  Then, these games start off casually and then become more structured and complex. Finally, the children begin to test themselves through increasingly rigorous rules and specific challenges.  

Aldrich states that all three need to happen:  explore, play, and adding rigor.  

He states:  "Imagine how stunted and crippled and punitive the learning process would be without the exploration and play phases. "   

Aldrich then talks about state run industrial schools that  use tests and metrics to show student learning and teacher and student accountability (we are lucky in Vancouver in that our testing practices are not as rigorous as in the United States - but testing is an entirely different area that I could talk for hours about).  

Finally, he states that the "greatest challenge for all instructors and coaches is to create situations and learning environments that allow for not one or two but for all three phases to happen.

These ideas then lead into the next rule, which is "The ideal class size isn't thirty, or even fifteen, but more like five".

Wow.  I love this idea.  I usually work with groups of  10-14  students.  It is a remarkable experience.  The students get to talk with each other in meaningful ways, I get to talk to them in meaningful ways.  They get to explore and walk around.  We have great discussions.  And, most profoundly, I know that if I had to work with a group of 26 or more students, that my teaching would have to change.  I would have to return to teaching where I controlled and managed everything.  There would not be explore, play and add rigor, but there would be lots of deskwork, lining up, and making sure 26 or 27 students get something out of the lesson.

Finally, I run the challenge centre in the explore, play, add rigor way!  We look at what we know about concepts, we get our feet wet, we gently ease into the learning, and then we add rigor, and we get deeply into our topics.  I think that "explore, play, add rigor" is how we intuitively learn.  It is how we begin to master a topic or area.  It leads into apprenticeship and mentorship, and in a way, is about developing talent. It is authentic learning. It is not about "testing" but it is about "doing" and being an active participant in the learning. 

This leaves me thinking about many questions in how we organize learning and in what we teach.  Today, I am left thinking about:  "How can we build more explore, play and rigor into our classrooms at all levels and subject areas?". 

Explore, then Play, and add Rigor

I have been reading Unschooling Rules 
by Clark Aldrich, and find it great to return to it again and again to reread the ideas.  If you are an educator, these ideas will sink in deeply.  I am always questioning what students learn and the nature of learning, and this book makes me reflect on how I teach.

As in my previous post (here), I stated there were a few rules that really stuck with me, and today the rule is

Explore, then Play, and add Rigor

Aldrich looks at the way a child learns to swim:  we want the new swimmer to enter the water, move around in the new world. Once the child is comfortable in the water, they start to play, and begin inventing small games.  Then, these games start off casually and then become more structured and complex. Finally, the children begin to test themselves through increasingly rigorous rules and specific challenges.  

Aldrich states that all three need to happen:  explore, play, and adding rigor.  

He states:  "Imagine how stunted and crippled and punitive the learning process would be without the exploration and play phases. "   

Aldrich then talks about state run industrial schools that  use tests and metrics to show student learning and teacher and student accountability (we are lucky in Vancouver in that our testing practices are not as rigorous as in the United States - but testing is an entirely different area that I could talk for hours about).  

Finally, he states that the "greatest challenge for all instructors and coaches is to create situations and learning environments that allow for not one or two but for all three phases to happen.

These ideas then lead into the next rule, which is "The ideal class size isn't thirty, or even fifteen, but more like five".

Wow.  I love this idea.  I usually work with groups of  10-14  students.  It is a remarkable experience.  The students get to talk with each other in meaningful ways, I get to talk to them in meaningful ways.  They get to explore and walk around.  We have great discussions.  And, most profoundly, I know that if I had to work with a group of 26 or more students, that my teaching would have to change.  I would have to return to teaching where I controlled and managed everything.  There would not be explore, play and add rigor, but there would be lots of deskwork, lining up, and making sure 26 or 27 students get something out of the lesson.

Finally, I run the challenge centre in the explore, play, add rigor way!  We look at what we know about concepts, we get our feet wet, we gently ease into the learning, and then we add rigor, and we get deeply into our topics.  I think that "explore, play, add rigor" is how we intuitively learn.  It is how we begin to master a topic or area.  It leads into apprenticeship and mentorship, and in a way, is about developing talent. It is authentic learning. It is not about "testing" but it is about "doing" and being an active participant in the learning. 

This leaves me thinking about many questions in how we organize learning and in what we teach.  Today, I am left thinking about:  "How can we build more explore, play and rigor into our classrooms at all levels and subject areas?".