Pearson's remarks call to mind my initial teacher education. Without a hint of irony, our 'teachers' would tell us that teaching doesn't necessarily induce learning, an idea that took root in many of the callow, impressionable minds before them. That's what we were taught! This mantra became almost gospel - a convenient absolution for pedagogical failure in the guise of progressive wisdom. If students failed to grasp concepts, well, that was simply the natural order of things. The teacher had 'taught'; whether learning occurred was apparently beyond their remit. Such thinking ushered in a widespread abandonment of direct instruction in favour of inquiry and discovery-based approaches that often left students to flounder in carefully orchestrated confusion, all in the name of constructivist orthodoxy (in this vein, read Robert Peal's 'Progressively Worse: The Burden of Bad Ideas in British Schools'). What began as a reasonable observation about the complexity of learning transformed into a puerile, feckless defence of constructivist teaching. The hero teacher narrative, which Pearson critiques, plays into this abdication of responsibility by casting the teacher as a noble facilitator, an inspiring Mr. Keating figure, rather than an instructional expert - someone who guides students toward their own discoveries rather than systematically building their knowledge, and in so doing, perpetuates the romantic fiction that learning is something that happens naturally when we are brave enough to simply get out of the way.
It is great for schools to have wonderful people (caring, smart, compassionate, engaged, well-rounded, honest, etc.) as teachers...but, it is their *teaching* that matters.
Pearson's remarks call to mind my initial teacher education. Without a hint of irony, our 'teachers' would tell us that teaching doesn't necessarily induce learning, an idea that took root in many of the callow, impressionable minds before them. That's what we were taught! This mantra became almost gospel - a convenient absolution for pedagogical failure in the guise of progressive wisdom. If students failed to grasp concepts, well, that was simply the natural order of things. The teacher had 'taught'; whether learning occurred was apparently beyond their remit. Such thinking ushered in a widespread abandonment of direct instruction in favour of inquiry and discovery-based approaches that often left students to flounder in carefully orchestrated confusion, all in the name of constructivist orthodoxy (in this vein, read Robert Peal's 'Progressively Worse: The Burden of Bad Ideas in British Schools'). What began as a reasonable observation about the complexity of learning transformed into a puerile, feckless defence of constructivist teaching. The hero teacher narrative, which Pearson critiques, plays into this abdication of responsibility by casting the teacher as a noble facilitator, an inspiring Mr. Keating figure, rather than an instructional expert - someone who guides students toward their own discoveries rather than systematically building their knowledge, and in so doing, perpetuates the romantic fiction that learning is something that happens naturally when we are brave enough to simply get out of the way.
Another good one, Mr-Dr Ashman. Thanks.
It is great for schools to have wonderful people (caring, smart, compassionate, engaged, well-rounded, honest, etc.) as teachers...but, it is their *teaching* that matters.