PLACING THE STUDENT AT THE
CENTER OF THE CURRICULUM:
"Placing The Student At The Center Of The Curriculum," is a call for a major paradigm shift -- a shift from a predominantly objectivist and exclusive mindset that has dominated American education, particularly higher education, through a constructivist perspective, and to a Transpersonal and much more inclusive one.
Objectivism, often used synonymously with behaviorism assumes
the existence of reliable knowledge about the world. As learners, the goal is to gain this knowledge; as educators, to transmit it. Objectivists further assume that learners gain the same understanding from what is transmitted (...) Leaming therefore consists of assimilating that objective reality. The role of education is to help students learn about the real world. The goal of designers or teachers is to interpret events for them. Learners are told about the world and are expected to replicate its content and structure in their thinking {Jonassen, 1991 in Murphy http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle2b.html]
Placed in their best light, objectivist teaching methods [synonymously called "instructivism, direct teaching", "mastery learning"] and the teachers who use them are
"specific about what students are expected to learn, and they communicate these expectations clearly to their pupils; virtually all school time and energy are focused on the desired learning; testing provides frequent feedback on progress; success is rewarded; failure is not accepted; and effort continues until the goals are attained."[http://westview.tdsb.on.ca/Mathematics/articles/article.instructivism.html]
Objectivism has often been stereotyped to consist of
instructional practices revolving around paper and pencil assessment devices of questionable validity and reliability, monostylistic instructional delivery where the teacher's interpretation of subject matter is the only interpretation, a sterile content-centered orientation, ethnocentricity in the delivery and the content of instruction and a tacit indifference to the real and felt needs of students taking the classes, among other ills.
[Elizabeth Murphy, http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle2b.html]
The constructivist perspective presents an improvement [in this writer's opinion] on the former . The learner is believed to actively construct knowledge in their attempts to make sense of their world, then learning will likely emphasize the development of meaning and understanding. Constructivists generally claim that knowledge is not discovered and that the ideas teachers teach do not correspond to an objective reality.
"Constructivist learning is based on students' active participation in problem-solving and critical thinking regarding a learning activity which they find relevant and engaging. They are "constructing" their own knowledge by testing ideas and approaches based on their prior knowledge and experience, applying these to a new situation, and integrating the new knowledge gained with pre-existing intellectual constructs"
[Martin Brine http://curriculum.calstatela.edu/faculty/psparks/theorists/ 501const.htm]
Placed in their best light, constructivist teaching methods and the teachers who use them include or are guided by the following in their approaches to instruction
[Elizabeth Murphy, http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle2b.html]
Detractors of constructivism, too, have their stereotypes. They depict constructivism as:
hostile to standards, assessments, and accountability. In the ...[constructivist]... classroom, teachers are supposed to "facilitate," not teach. Teaching is scorned as didactic, almost authoritarian. Objective knowledge is replaced by learner-constructed knowledge, as though each child is ideally situated to reinvent what has been painfully learned by humankind over the centuries. This philosophy flowered in the 1960s in "free" schools and "open" classrooms. [http://westview.tdsb.on.ca/Mathematics/articles/article.instructivism.html]
This writerÕs teaching practice and experience affirms the problems cited in both of the foregoing approaches [as characterized by their respective stereotypes] and validates those elements of the two approaches that Òwork.Ó What is needed, he believes, is a model that contains the best elements of objectivism and constructivism, without their shortcomings. He believes he has found this in the transpersonal education model.
In transpersonal education,
the learner is encouraged to be awake and autonomous, to question, to explore all the corners and crevices of conscious experience, to seek meaning, to test outer limits, to check out frontiers and depths of the self. Transpersonal experience aims for a new kind of learner and a new kind of society. Beyond self-acceptance, it promotes self-transcendence. (Ferguson,1980, p. 288)
Transpersonal education combines the humaneness often lacking in objectivist instruction and is more intellectually rigorous than many constructivist approaches. According to Marilyn Ferguson, (1980):
Unlike most educational reform in the past, it is imbedded in sound science:
á Systems theory,
á An understanding of the integration of mind and body,
á Knowledge of the two major modes of consciousness and how they interact,
á The potential of altered and expanded states of consciousness.
á It emphasizes the continuum of knowledge, rather than "subjects," and the common ground of human experience, transcending ethnic or national differences.
á It aids the learner's search for meaning, the need to discern forms and patterns, the hunger for harmony.
á It deepens awareness of how a paradigm shifts, how frustration and struggle precede insights. (Ferguson, 1980, p. 288)
Transpersonal education has been described as Òeducation's Middle Way.Ó It is a new paradigm of learning which incorporates the discoveries of modern science and the discoveries of personal transformation.
The following table illustrates the differences between the older teaching paradigms and the transpersonal paradigm.
Older Paradigms Transpersonal Paradigm
|
Learning is á a product; á a destination |
Learning is á a process; á a journey |
|
Teacher á imparts knowledge á is the authority in the classroom á is the source of knowledge and interpretation á must be a disciplinarian á determines what is to be learned á rewards conformity á discourages dissent |
Teacher á sometimes imparts knowledge and directs instruction á sometimes facilitates learning á often shares authority with students but never professional responsibility á advocates for students á encourages autonomy á permits dissent á is a learner and learns from students |
|
Structure is á hierarchical and authoritarian á relatively rigid á prescribed by curriculum á lock step progress á ÒappropriateÓ ages for certain activities á age segregation á compartmentalization |
Structure is á egalitarian. á Relatively flexible á there are many ways to teach a given subject á flexibility and integration of age groupings á individual not automatically limited to certain subject matter by age |
|
Emphasis on á content, á acquiring a body of ÒrightÓ information once and for all á the external world á inner experience often considered inappropriate in school setting á meeting externally prescribed norms and standards of performance á theoretical, abstract or ÒbookÓ knowledge á audiovisual equipment, computers, tapes, texts and media --technology |
Emphasis on á learning how to learn, á how to ask good questions, á pay attention to the right things, á being open to and evaluating new concepts, á having access to information. á what is now known may change. á the importance of context á inner experience as a context for learning á exploring inner feelings á setting, achieving and exceeding personal learning goals and academic performances á transcending perceived performance limitations á theoretical and abstract knowledge heavily complimented by experiment and experience á appropriate technology, human relationships between teachers and learners of primary importance |
|
Bureaucratically determined, resistant to community input |
Encourages community input, even community control |
|
Education is seen as a social necessity for certain period of time, to inculcate minimum skills and train for a specific role |
Education is seen as a lifelong process, one only tangentially related to schools |
(Ferguson, 1980, p. 289-291)
Transpersonal education places the student at the center of the curriculum. Placing the student and his/her needs and/or experiences at the center of the curriculum and instruction connects subject matter with student needs and greatly facilitates learning. But what does this mean? It means that the transpersonal teacher
Learning is about change and transformation. The transpersonal teacher
senses a readiness in the student to change, He or she helps the student respond to more complex needs, transcending old knowledge and old levels of performance again and yet again.
The learner senses the teacher's perceptions of his/her readiness, the teacher's confidence or skepticism. He "reads" the teacher's expectations. TheÉ [transpersonal]Éteacher intuits the level of readiness, then probes, questions, leads. É allows time for assimilation, even retreat,. and understands that one cannot impose learning.
The É[transpersonal]É teacher helps the learner discover patterns and connections, fosters openness to strange new possibilities, and is a midwife to ideas. The teacher is a steersman, a catalyst, a facilitator-an agent of learning, but not the first cause.
TheÉ [transpersonal]É teacher must be willing to let go, to be wrong, to allow the learner another reality. The learner who has been encouraged to hear inner authority is tacitly welcome to disagree. Submission to outer authority is always provisional and temporary.
Like the spiritual teacher who enlarges or heals the self-image of the disciple, awakening him to his own potential, the Étranspersonal]Éteacher liberates the self, opens the eyes, makes the learner aware of choice. We only learn what we always knew.
We learn to walk through fears that held us back. In the transformative relationship with a..[transpersonal]É teacher, we move to the edge, our peace is disturbed, and we are challenged by what psychologist Frederick Perls called "a safe emergency." (adapted from Ferguson,1980, p. 292-293)