I don’t know about you, but I love learning.
This week I had the opportunity to watch “Most Likley to Succeed“. This movie chronicles the lives of students at a charter school. However, this school teachings things a bit differently. They approach pedagogy and curriculum with an open mind and flexible lesson plans. The students get to choose a topic and work together to create a project to showcase their research and knowledge. I like this because it allows an authentic pedagogy to be employed in the classroom; however, it also allows the teachers to recoil into a didactic pedagogy for when the students find something they don’t know or don’t understand. This technique of teaching could be useful in a classroom, although, probably not to the same extent this is done in the charter school. The idea of this style of teaching is that it’s more like a real life “job” rather than a school. There is more emphasis on the process than the finished product, however, the finished product is still regarded as important. The way the students figure out how to work cooperatively in a group on a larger project is something a lot of people don’t get to try out until we are in the work force.
Yes, this movie is inspiring and entertaining but is it ideal?
No. It won’t be ideal for a lot of learners; there are students that learn well in the current didactic system. Nevertheless, the movie is a step to change pedagogy in the classroom as we see it. Right now we see the classroom and think one teacher, 30 pupils, and a lecture. That’s not how it has to be, and in fact that’s not how the new BC curriculum wants it to be either. The new curriculum is more open, allowing for students and teachers to explore the subjects on a more by-interest basis. There is room for interpretation and implementation of more place-based education and integration of Indigenous views and cultures are encouraged. I think this switch will allow for learners and teachers to be more comfortable navigating the curriculum at a pace that will include all classroom learners.
The charter school in the documentary offers non-renewable one year contracts to it’s teachers. As a teacher candidate this is a scary concept; little to no job security could create a toxic environment for the teachers which could eventually trickle down to the learners. Job security is important for teachers to be able to fully explore the use of different pedagogy and receive feedback and results from both their colleagues and their learners. Without teachers returning every year creating a strong relationship with learners will be difficult. I believe this will put learners in a position where they don’t know what to expect.
Yes, this does happen at most public schools when students move up a grade or take a different class, but these teachers usually aren’t brand new faces. Students have seen them wandering the halls, in pep rallies, and can probably ask their upper classmates what the teacher is like. I think predictability is important for learners when they are entering a new classroom. We don’t know what else those students have going on in their lives, and I don’t think school should be a place that could change at the drop of a hat (global pandemics aside).
Is this a crisis of curriculum or a crisis of the applications of the pedagogies used to express this curriculum to students? The curriculum in BC is on the rise to catching up and implementing learning using the new technologies created in the 21st century. BC is offering a more open ended curriculum to allow learners and teachers the ability to shape courses to what their wants and needs are; giving the learners a voice and choice in their own education will allow them to have agency in their learning and hopefully make them want to engage more with the curriculum. I think this is an important step in creating a welcoming space for all students in all classrooms.