Blueprint for Moving to 21st Century Student-Centered Schools and Classrooms from The 21st Century Principal by J. Robinson

Blueprint for Moving to 21st Century Student-Centered Schools and C...

“Too many organizations---not just companies, but governments and nonprofits as well---still operate from assumptions about human potential and individual performance that are outdated, unexamined, and rooted more in folklore than in science.” Daniel Pink, Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motivates Us
It’s not just businesses that are still caught in outdated assumptions about performance and motivation. Schools are caught in that same time warp too. Much of how our classrooms and schools are structured and operate are designed to take advantage of extrinsic motivation, and we are finding that in the 21st century, this structure and way of operating no longer works. 

But the question is, how can we transform our schools so that they no longer operate under these outdated assumptions about student potential,  student performance, and student motivation? If one were to make a list of how our schools still operate and what these faulty and obsolete assumptions about education and schooling are, that list would look somewhat like this.
  • Students are motivated by grades.
  • Students are incapable of directing their own learning.
  • Classrooms (and schools) must operate under strict control with specific rules and consequences governing student behavior.
  • Teachers are the primary dispensers of learning in the classroom.
  • Education is something “done to students” rather than something in which they engage.
If these basic assumptions about classroom operations and education are faulty, what would would 21st century assumptions about how classrooms and school operations look like? In other words, what would a classroom or school operating under the principles described in Daniel Pink’s book, Drive: The Surprising Truth  about What Motivates Us look like? Perhaps educator Mark Barnes provides with some answers to that question in his new book ROLE Reversal: Achieving Uncommonly Excellent Results in the Studen...

In ROLE Reversal, Barnes describes what he terms a Results Only Learning Environment or ROLE. As the name implies, in a ROLE the focus is entirely on results, or student work. Also, in this environment, the principles of fostering intrinsic motivation described by Pink are implemented fully. According to Barnes, a ROLE basically upends many of the traditional assumptions about education and learning. Here’s some of ways these traditional assumptions are upended.

In a ROLE, or Results Only Learning Environment:
  • Grades and grading systems are replaced with a “narrative feedback system” that focuses specifically on student work and improving that work. In Barnes’ result-only classroom, teachers do not use numerical grades to provide feedback because numerical feedback systems fail to provide feedback students need to improve their performance. Instead, students are given extensive, comprehensive, and ongoing narrative feedback on their work. This feedback is specific and can be used by the student for work improvement. In ROLE Reversal, Barnes shows teachers how to provide this kind of feedback.
  • Instead of teacher-directed learning activities, students are given broad, long-term projects to complete, and they make the daily decisions on how to complete those projects. The intrinsic motivation model described by Pink demands that autonomy be employed to engage people in the tasks at hand. Under Barnes’ results-only classroom model, students engage in six-week long projects that provide a great deal of choice, or autonomy, on how and what is learned and when. Autonomy is a built-in component of his results-only classroom practice.
  • Classroom rules and consequences are jettisoned and the use of opportunities to engage in meaningful work, collaborating with peers, and trust/respect are used instead to manage classroom behavior. Too often, classrooms become more about focusing on the enforcement of rules rather than the learning students are being asked to do. In Barnes’ results-only classroom, behavior is managed through well-designed, engaging, and collaborative learning projects that leave students little time to engage in problem behaviors. Also, the results-only classroom described by Barnes fosters a high-level of respect and trust that makes having rules and consequences less necessary.
  • Teachers are no longer the “dispensers of information/learning.” According to Barnes, in a ROLE, teachers become coaches and facilitators of student learning. In the results-only classroom, teachers step away from the front of the classroom and spend more time facilitating student learning and coaching students on their work. Teacher-centered activities like worksheets, quizzes, and homework are jettisoned. Instead, students engage in long-term, meaningful activities that challenge them.
  • Education and learning moves from being something done to students to something in which students actively engage in on a daily basis. The 20th century traditional model of education is very much still with us. The heart of that educational philosophy and model sees education as a process by which we subject students to, in order to add value determined by test scores. Under Barnes’ result-only model, education and learning is something students actively engage in every day. They are active participants in their learning.
Mark Barnes, Role Reversal
For the teacher and school leader looking for a model of learning that truly captures Daniel Pink’s principles of intrinsic motivation---autonomy, mastery, and purpose---Barnes’ book ROLE Reversal: Achieving Uncommonly Excellent Results in the Student-Centered Classroom offers just such a model. Best of all, Barnes results-only classroom offers the kind of classroom in which students achieve at higher levels. I highly recommend Mark Barnes’new book, ROLE Reversal: Achieving Uncommonly Excellent Results in the Student-Centered Classroom published by ASCD. This book would make an excellent book study to foster discussions in schools about how we can move toward the student-centered schools and classrooms we so desperately need in the 21st century.

Views: 228

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

These are wonderful small steps, however I would encourage educators to think ahead one more step:

 

1. Feedback is great, if a student wants your feedback. If we are truly beginning to trust our students more, then we need to respect their desire to keep some of their "work" private. Results may be 30 years from now but if we're supporting our students holistically there's a fantastic chance that growth, including unseen psychological/emotional growth is occurring.

 

2. Do we really need to provide project ideas or demand collaborative projects? I love Barnes' idea of empowering students to make daily decisions; I'm only suggesting that we include the projects themselves, or perhaps no project at all, depending on what the student feels they need to grow holistically. Providing full autonomy we begin to truly captivate the meaning of Pink's autonomy. Is it really autonomy if the teacher is providing the projects or even "choices" of provided projects?

 

3. Another excellent small step, however real collaboration implores sharing of power with the students themselves. This notion has a name, democracy, one person one vote on all matters of consequence to the students. If you truly respect and trust your kids through authentic empowerment then, and arguably only then, you can expect the students' respect and trust.

 

4. I agree wholeheartedly with Barnes push for coaching and facilitating, nicely said! Of course one way to find out what is meaningful and challenging to students is to ask them. One school, Second Foundation School, encourages students to put their lists of what they are interested to learn on a white board, when an idea coalesces a few colleagues interest a course is born.

 

5. Another well stated transition. The only caveat is that if we are shifting towards holistic education then we must allow for days when a student may not be actively engaged, the student may be working through other dimensions of their life besides academics. On that day/week/month their necessary priority is to work through the issues which have arisen in their life. Given time they will assuredly return to active engagement in academia.

 

Please note that if these additions to the excellent first steps provided by Barnes sound unrealistic, understand that they have been in practice for nearly 100 years, in Free Schools across the globe.

RSS

JOIN SL 2.0

SUBSCRIBE TO

SCHOOL LEADERSHIP 2.0

School Leadership 2.0 is the premier virtual learning community for school leaders from around the globe.  Our community is a subscription based paid service ($19.95/year or only $1.99 per month for a trial membership)  which will provide school leaders with outstanding resources. Learn more about membership to this service by clicking one our links below.

 

Click HERE to subscribe as an individual.

 

Click HERE to learn about group membership (i.e. association, leadership teams)

__________________

CREATE AN EMPLOYER PROFILE AND GET JOB ALERTS AT 

SCHOOLLEADERSHIPJOBS.COM

FOLLOW SL 2.0

© 2024   Created by William Brennan and Michael Keany   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service