Food for Thought: Teaching for Understanding Part 2

 Dear all,

Another awesome week at ISHCMC closes with HCMC STEAM Fair, Open House in Lower Primary, and Senior Football Teams in Thailand. So many good things going on around the school in all areas of student learning that it is impossible to record them all here.

This Food for Thought builds upon the ideas expressed last week and further reinforces our mission and vision for education. This article from Edsurge was shared with me following last week's post and discusses the important difference between Static and Dynamic knowledge. 

As Karen Cox points out in her blog Celebration education

"Not all learning is equal. Covering the material does not mean understanding, finishing a textbook does not indicate mastery. No real learning takes place until it moves from
surface knowledge to dynamic knowledge, to not only "know about" the information, but to be able to apply the skill or concept to real life accomplishment.
Surface/ Static  Knowledge
Surface knowledge is static and motionless, as when a student is exposed to facts or information, they then "know about" it, and they may even memorize it and pass a test where they repeat back the information, but there is no real understanding or application to life. Such surface knowledge diminishes the probability that long-term retention will occur. Yet this is the model that permeates modern education.
Dynamic Knowledge
Dynamic knowledge steps beyond just "know about" and steps into performance. It isactually doing something with the information, working with it, building skills and understanding on a deeper level. Dynamic knowledge is to gain a feel for something, to internalize information and have it become real and active in the learner's world. Students gain dynamic knowledge by experience. It takes more effort, but it reaps greater rewards."


Yet again this article paints a picture of a changing world in which jobs that require static knowledge are being replaced easily by technology and algorithms whereas those the involve dynamic knowledge a slightly harder to remove. 

“Over the past three decades, almost all job growth has come from the two categories of work that are nonroutine. … While routine jobs have gone nowhere over the past three decades, the number of people in knowledge work jobs has more than doubled, and there are no signs of that trend slowing. This strongly suggests that even though technology is eliminating some jobs, it’s creating even more in different fields.”


I refer again to the work of Yong Zhoa where her clearly articulates a changing world in which compliant labour based around static knowledge is no longer required and will be replaced. The article builds upon Zhoa's work with the complimentary work of Seth Goldin, again I have shared before, and his accusation that education today is stealing the dreams of the generation of students it is graduating, who are ill prepared for the world they face. His call for change is consistent with our movement to build a constructivist environment for learning and one in which students have the opportunity to create their own learning, relate to the real world and present to authentic audiences.

The article concludes by looking at the failings of universities and asks the important question; that if, as is characteristic of much of the learning in further education, it is built around the acquisition of static knowledge, is attending college/ university a worthwhile learning exercise for many of our students? Would they be better advised to be creating their own entrepreneurial projects, volunteering and interning in businesses? Simply is it time not only to rethink Primary and Secondary education but also further education?

One last thing to think about on the teaching for understanding strand. In the article last week it talked about the importance of embedding the learning skills and the need for consistent repetition before it became embedded. This interesting short video about riding a bike and how changing one fundamental aspect of this skill can completely disorientate our thinking. I believe the conclusion is clear that younger minds are more adaptable and that we must not miss the opportunity to develop creative, open minded and innovative thinkers as they journey through ISHCMC.

Have a good weekend,

Yours

Adrian