WORKING SMARTER, NOT HARDER
situations, we must determine what information and skills are critical for student learning. Although students benefit from visuals, spending an hour or longer searching for flashy online images to include in a PowerPoint presentation doesn’t make sense when the presentation itself lasts only 15 minutes. That said, the Internet also provides us many tools, ideas, and opportunities that can support sustainability if we use them thoughtfully and are discriminating about their alignment with our learning goals.
Along the same lines, when planning, we must be able to effectively distinguish which classroom activities will result in quality learning by students. In describing what she calls the “Master Teacher Mindset,” Robyn Jackson (2009) notes that,
Master teachers know that it isn’t the amount of work that is important; it’s the quality of the work that matters. As a result, they don’t waste time on assignments or activities that will not effectively move students toward mastery. Master teachers understand that knowing what to stop doing is just as important as knowing what to do. (p. 156)
A “less is more” approach to planning and instruction supports sustainable teaching. In the situation described at the beginning of this section, one of the authors found herself spending a great deal of time providing feedback that students rarely reviewed or applied. Upon reflection, she realized this was because the assignment was considered complete, and the grade already recorded when students received their papers. She stopped writing extensive comments on final drafts of papers, and she spent more time coaching students throughout the writing process, cultivating expectations of excellence for their work. Providing more substantive feedback before students turned in their final work was a wiser and more effective way to spend her time.
We have seen in Question 2 that there may be times when less work by the teacher can result in more learning by students. A colleague of ours has become quite skilled at utilizing a problem-based learning approach with his high school science classes. Rather than designing every lab activity himself, he considers his curricular goals, presents a related and practical problem or question to his students, and encourages them to decide how they would like to respond. Students determine the course of action they wish to take, identify resources to utilize, and take ownership for their learning. The teacher’s role is not abandoned – he remains a source of content knowledge and facilitator of learning, but students assume a great deal of responsibility for how the class functions. He is also better able to focus on the development and learning of individual students and small groups, ultimately allowing for differentiation of instruction. Students choose how they will pursue the problem, and the teacher, based on interests, learning profiles, and readiness levels,
46 Virginia Educational Leadership Vol. 8 No. 1 Spring 2011
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93