Students don’t have a choice. They must be in school, and they are required to do what their teachers tell them or face the consequences. Educators have a choice. Why do so many choose ineffective and outdated strategies that feel like torture? It is no wonder that kids see the rigor of school like rigor mortis: stiff and dead!
Let’s start with the way that many students receive their precious learning: lecture. While I like a good monologue, I usually can’t repeat more than a few lines even after I’ve just heard it. When so many better methods are available to communicate content to kids, why would a teacher drone and on and on? In high schools and colleges alike, there are countless instructors putting kids to sleep, reading their slides, reiterating the textbook, and missing the point. Educational research is clear: the lecture is the least effective way to teach kids. In small amounts, here and there, it can supplement other strategies, but it should never (yes, I wrote never) be the primary method of instruction. Lecture is the first refuge of the weak teacher who has no other teaching tools. It is the favorite of the self-indulgent teacher, who likes to perform and entertain rather than teach, and it is the sure fire way to kill student motivation and engagement. Shut up and teach!
An NPR story looked at how colleges from Maryland to Harvard are finding that the lecture is not effective even in their science classes. The Arizona University study cited in NPR’s story found that, “The traditional lecture-based physics course produces little or no change in most students' fundamental understanding of how the physical world works.” The study’s author went on to state that, "The classes only seem to be really working for about 10 percent of the students…[a]nd I maintain, I think all the evidence indicates, that these 10 percent are the students that would learn it even without the instructor. They essentially learn it on their own.” So, lecturers, you are preaching to the choir.
And while we are discussing the lecture, why are many teachers obsessed with filling course with massive amounts of material? The lecture is long because the teacher has stuffed it with too much content. One has to wonder if whoever “designed” the curriculum could make choices, understood the subject well enough to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, or was far more enamored with the subject matter than with the idea of teaching it. In an age when almost any factual question can be researched in seconds using a device smaller than a piece of toast, is it so important to list them all on your PowerPoint slide, professor?
Once the kids have been subjected to archaic recitations of long lists of facts, they are then bludgeoned with tests. These tests are frequently so long that they are not only assessing students’ ability to regurgitate the material, but also if they can do so at breakneck speed. Tests at both high school and college level seem designed to trick and confuse even the most prepared students. Most of us don’t do our best work when we are rushing, yet countless students are evaluated this way.
Alfie Kohn, the renowned author of Punished By Rewards, noted in an article in the Washington Post that tests “are typically more about measuring the number of facts that have been crammed into students’ short-term memories than they are about assessing understanding.” Kohn goes on to note, “That’s why it’s so disconcerting to find teachers who are proud of their student-centered approach to instruction, who embrace active and interactive forms of learning, yet continue to rely on tests as the primary, or even sole, form of assessment in their classrooms.”
As I have noted in the past, grades are also used as a way to beat up students. Students who learn and demonstrate their learning throughout the term will get an averaged grade that penalizes them for learning because they were not proficient at the very beginning of class. Shouldn’t education change us? Shouldn’t we grow from the class? Shouldn’t the grade reflect that?
Assistant Professor Paul Thomas of Furman University sends his students an apology letter at the end of the term. He regrets having to give them a final grade, saying, “In my quest to honor the essential dignity of each one of you, then, I have fought the good fight against what I feel is deeply dehumanizing—grading.”
As the semester comes to a close, I examine each student and look at my record of his or her learning. I, too, wish that I did not have to reduce our wonderful process to a single letter. It devalues and diminishes the educational growth that has happened in our classroom. The best I can do is find a way to make the grade an aggregate of students’ proficiency in the skills we have practiced all the semester. How would you like eighteen weeks of your works to be reduced to a single letter? What does that say about what you have accomplished?
Good teachers work hard to foster their students’ learning. Good teachers carefully craft their lessons and assessments to facilitate student success. Lectures, overwhelming content, and dehumanizing and punitive grading are the antithesis of good education. Once upon a time, a long time ago, they were the only tools we had. The old quotation (attributed to many) says that, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.” Educators, stop nailing your students. It is time to use brave new tools!
