In many ways, I am "on my own" in my classroom. Different from the other teachers in the building, I write all of my curriculum (with the exception of Math) and am responsible for teaching the Indiana Academic Standards at the level of gifted/talented learners.
They learn differently (hence the classroom for them) and so my methods of teaching must be different so as to address their unique styles.
And, since I am different, I don't have anyone in the building to bounce ideas off of or to touch base with about what I am doing and how.
Of course, I hear a lot about how the other teachers teach- through our daily morning IIB meeting, at lunch, and as I interact with them in various ways.
Sometimes I compare my teaching methods to theirs and wonder if I am doing best practices. And one thing I wonder often about is the amount of direct instruction I do, where I stand at the front of the classroom, present concepts, and tell about them. As a direct result of the testing focus in education, it seems as though more and more teachers are spending inordinate amounts of time in direct instruction, at least from my observations.
So, of course, I question my own methods which are heavy on facilitated instruction. (Shorter teaching times with longer periods for the kiddos to explore, do, discuss.) I often ask myself, "Should I be doing that or should I change?" "Are my students getting enough content the way I teach, or should I change and go back to a more traditional style of teaching?"
In the past, it was not quite the issue as the focus was not as heavy on student performance measured by mandated state assessments. When I would reflect and wonder about my teaching methods, I would recall something another High Ability teacher said once to a parent, "My class will look different because we ARE different. I won't teach more than ten minutes or so on a topic." And she then explained the why behind her instructional style and why facilitated instruction was better for her gifted students.
That became my gauge, my measuring stick whenever I wondered if I needed to change my methods.
But things have changed in the ensuing years. Pressure to succeed, to show measurable results, is intense. And while I don't think I shortchange my kiddos, I do actively seek ways to improve what I do. Every day I reflect on what went well that day and what I could/should change.
And so, as I reflect here at home in the summer, I am wondering again about providing more direct instruction. With no one to bounce my ideas off of, I read education blogs and try to discover what other teachers like me might be doing as they address these same pressures.
Today I found a couple of articles from Rebecca Alber who was writing about the student centered classroom. She writes on an education site that is a favorite of mine, Edutopia and had seven questions for a teacher to ask herself as she reflected on her classroom and teaching in an effort to be effective in what she does. The last question was about direct teaching. I read it and breathed a sigh of relief.
As the instructor, what is my "air time" each class session? How much direct instruction is there? How might I change some of that directed teaching to facilitating?
Here was a recent, modern, and research-based answer to my self-questioning. Despite all the external pressures to change, to be a "cookie cutter teacher" doing what everyone else does, my educational practice of shorter teaching bytes with longer times for exploration, experimentation, and self-directed leaning by the students is still considered a best practice (and not just for gifted kiddos!)
Alber includes a link to two other sites that examine direct instruction versus facilitated instruction, and then wraps up her insights with, as she calls it, a "well worn" quote from Confucious.
I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.
Well worn, it may be. But there is a LOT of education truth wrapped into those few words. I'll keep on with my facilitated instruction.
At the Machine Again
11 hours ago
