I wrote this article back in the mid nineties. I came across it the other day and found that even in the re-reading, it challenged my thinking. For that reason alone, I invite you to consider some of the ideas presented in this blog. I’d love to hear your thoughts.
***
One of the educational trends of the day is student-centered teaching. Traditionally, classrooms have been teacher-centered. Traditional teachers provide direct instruction and are the authority in a non-democratic classroom. Student-centered teaching methods provide food for thought, questions that need answers, problems that need solutions. Students work in groups to “teach themselves” in a democratic environment. The difference in power between the teacher and students is minimized. In the traditional classroom, the teacher is the power.In “Power and Caring”, George Noblit, a believer in student-centered learning. describes his experiences in the classroom of a powerful, traditional teacher, Pam. His belief system is consequently challenged. He states, “I now know that I originally did not accept her style, and what made it even more difficult for me was the fact that she generated evidence everyday that her style worked in her class.”
There are sound gains to be had in a student-centered classroom. But, in educations’ zeal to seize upon new approaches, let’s not forget, and throw out the benefits of a traditional classroom. The student centered classroom fosters critical skills, problem solving, peer interaction and democratic process. The traditional classroom can foster a respect for and trust of authority, an understanding of and respect for rules that we may not have control over, a security and comfort in ritual, a group cohesiveness, and a larger capacity to learn from the wisdom and experience of the teacher. Important learning occurs in both types of classrooms, although what is learned depends a lot on the personality and skills of the teacher, no matter the style. Nothing is black and white.
I am eclectic in my approach to teaching. I believe there is a time for student-centered learning and democratic classroom process. I also believe there is a time for traditional teaching, with the teacher as a caring authority. I was fortunate to experience both styles as an adult student. I attended a student-centered graduate school while also training in a traditional martial arts school. In reading Noblit’s account of his experiences, I could not help but draw definite parallels between the way Pam taught and the way a good traditional martial arts school is run.
Pam knew that “…caring in classrooms is not about democracy — it is about the ethical use of power.” The kung fu school I attend is very traditional. The Sifu (teacher) is kind, tender, protective, exacting, reasonably demanding and a definite authority. He sees my weak points, physically and mentally, and in a style that is sometimes paternal, sometimes humorous, always understanding, he pushes me to improve. “In Pam’s classroom, ineptness did not lead to your losing your responsibility. Instead, it led to a lot of coaching to get it right and a lot of room to figure it out for yourself.” And so it is in the martial arts class; I have to work to “get it right” and make room in my schedule to “figure it out for myself”. My self talk sometimes grumbles that my Sifu is too demanding. I sometimes feel frustrated. But I know that he is invested in my growth and development as a martial artist. That knowledge buffers the demands with warm acceptance and appreciation. Pam’s students know she is invested in them also. I question whether a totally student-centered classroom could foster that same type of relationship. As Pam praised her students and at the same time maintained high standards, Sifu commends what I do well, but doesn’t let up on my weak points. He pushes me to be more patient, more focused, to relax more, to practice more, to think more about the meaning of what I am doing, and think less about speed and making mistakes. There is more direct interaction between teacher and student in the traditional classroom when this type of coaching occurs.
Pam’s class is defined as a collective; individuals connected by responsibilities and obligations to the whole. The “kung fu family” is an integral part of my martial arts environment. Students help and respect each other. I take private lessons and group classes. The group classes are more difficult for me. In group classes, I’m more distracted and mistakes seem glaringly obvious, however, it is the very structure and routine of the group classes that gives me a sense of security. I know what is expected. There is comfort in the consistency and ritual of the traditional classroom. Because the environment is stable and supportive, more challenging skills can be taught. This raises the level of expectation for all students, motivating all to push limits and challenge themselves.
My experience as an adult student in a traditional classroom is invaluable. I realize the importance of every challenge that I face in that traditional school. I learn patience, focus, self-control, and trust. I learn to trust that authority, continuity, and caring, can be found in the same classroom. I also realize that the traditional classroom can be run by a power driven, self-centered, “teacher” who could not begin to provide the safe opportunities for learning and growth that Pam and my Sifu do. But that is not the fault of the traditional classroom model. A student-centered classroom with such a teacher would yield no better results.
References:
Noblit, “Power and Caring”, American Educational Research Journal, vol. 30, 1993.