Natural Learning - What Schools Don’t Do by Steve Wycoff
I have to begin by saying that listening to Roger Schank inspired me too, I even posted about it at the time. It was one of the first podcasts of Wesley’s I heard and he really challenged my thinking, in fact I wonder if I can track back to hearing that podcast and that being the catalyst for the challenges I have faced in the last 18 months as I began to push back?
School improvement, are we really doing what our society requires?
Our schools are so NOT “fine they need tweaking”, there needs to be a fundamental shift in what the curriculum is addressing and what schools are supporting. We in New Zealand are quite blessed with the new curriculum, it is very new and shiny and very 21st Century perspective, however I wonder how these are being implemented in schools. It makes me wonder what the key pressures are on schools that truly define how the curriculum looks, it is not simply the National Curriculum.
Steven Wyckoff spends quite a bit of time talking about the analogue of learning to drive and someone made the comment that while you’re growing up you spend a long time watching people drive. I heard it said once that while you are learning to drive, driving instructors spend quite a while telling people where they need to look. “Focus on what is immediately in front, look out around parked cars”, etc. People’s closest sensory experience to driving? It’s sitting in the passenger seat. So a new driver has unlearn the passive ‘watching’, for example looking at someone walking over a footbridge for the whole time it takes for the car to pass under it. Drivers then need to learn to be active observers of the environment around them. There are so many things that students are learning that are wasting time… We DO need to spend more time on learning the skills that they are going to need in life.
So what DOES a curriculum look like?
What are the other pressures and issues we need address in school?
What are the school teacher:student ratio look like in New Zealand. Are there the same issues as in Kansas where the system needs to be adjusted to lower the ratio or is there a genuine issue around ratios?
“In order to do what?” Brings the curriculum into sharp focus. Steven links the need to focus education on ‘economic productivity’ for the future. But I want to consider, is there any value in learning for learnings- sake? Does it not do something for the brain development, regardless of purpose?
My next question: Are there quality apprenticeships or study-to-work programmes available in New Zealand that realistically address the issue applying students for the workforce?
As I was listening I was thinking this idea about applied learning and the links made to Ted McCain and the discussion/ presentations made by Ian Jukes in Napier last year.
I was discussing with a high-school principal the other day around the issues of NCEA level1 not meeting the expectations required for courses in NCEA level 2, let alone NCEA level1 OR 2 meeting expectations for the workforce.
So how are we going to measure success for the 21st Century, what are the skills required and EQUALLY, what is the core knowledge required for the future?
http:




