Tom McLean

Recent Activity

• 

  Tom commented on the article | almost 3 years ago

  Teach Broad, or Teach Deep? Coverage versus Depth

  Hi Clay

  
  

  Thanks for your response. This is in fact the 4th time that I have sat down and attempted to reply to your comment, all others have been lost one way or another, and so my fingers are crossed that I will actually make it to the ‘Submit Reply’ button.

  
  

  I will share a wee secret with you, I almost totally agree with your points. Having been an extremely disaffected high school student myself, I have great sympathy with students who are being subjected to, what you have termed, ’schooliness’. Surely education should be about learning something useful rather than reciting something pointless.

  
  

  As for your analogy about active learning, again, I am with you there. Prior to becoming a school teacher I spent a few years working as a sailing instructor that taught me a thing or too about the importance of active learning.

  
  

  A couple of the techniques we used to prepare students for their first taste of controlling the boat on the water were descriptions aided by simple diagrams and dry land drills. Students would listen to the instructor describing a ‘tack’ or ‘gybe’ whilst watching him relate the description to a diagram on the board. The instructor would then move on to allow the students to practice the mechanics of the turn using a couple of chairs, a stick and a bit of rope. Finally, having mastered the theory and the praticalities of what to do with their hands and feet, they would be cast adrift on the water to apply this learning in context.

  
  

  In my experience of high school the first step was used in almost every lesson, the second step was rarely ever used and the last step never employed except on field trips.

  
  

  More on field trips later.

  
  

  As for the experiment you mentioned, have you ever seen this guys attempt to pass A level sociology with only 2 weeks studying. Not sure about the aim or relevance of his experiment but I guess it does demonstrate that some people are able to ‘learn’ large chunks of information quickly more easily than others.

  
  

  http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2005/aug/16/schools.aslevels

  
  

  But can you really decide not to bother with certain aspects of the syllabus?

  
  

  What about our obligations to prepare students for exams?

  
  

  What would students want us to do? (I asked some of mine today-no answers yet)

  
  

  What about ambitious parents paying astronomical school fees in the hope of (exchange for) top grades and Harvard scholarships?

  
  

  I feel I have a professional responsibility regardless of my personal philosophy.

  
  

  It might be because I am a bit green when it comes to the high school teaching game but I would like to think that I can cover the content and also assist in students developing some useful understanding and skills. I hope that web 2.0 tech will help me on this quest. I will certainly try.

  
  

  Hmmmm fieldtrips.

  
  

  Now you would think that field trips would be a great way of developing understanding, making connections, demonstrating relevance or at least getting the students actively involved.

  
  

  Well, my experience of trips recently has been that the students spend a day walking around under the sun getting lectured to. That to me is the very essence of schooliness

  
  

  I will keep you posted about my attempts to do something useful on the field trip front