Deconstructing to reconstruct the teacher-learner paradigm

"TEACHER:    Welcome to school, Pippi. I hope you will enjoy yourself here and learn a great deal.

PIPPI:      Yes, and I hope I'll get some Christmas vacation. That is the reason I¹ve come. It's only
            fair, you know.

TEACHER:    If you would first tell me your whole name, I'll register you in school.

PIPPI:      My name is Pippilotta Delicatessa Windowshade Mackrelmint Efraim's Daughter
            Longstocking, daughter of Captain Efraim Longstocking, formerly the Terror of the Sea,
            now a cannibal king. Pippi is really only a nickname, because Papa thought Pippilotta
            was too long to say.

TEACHER:    Well, then, we shall call you Pippi, too. But now suppose we test you a little and see
            what you know. Pippi, can you tell me what seven and five are?

PIPPI:      (shocked) Well, if you don't know that yourself, I'm certainly not going to tell you!"
(Adapted from Pippi Goes to School by Astrid Lindgren
http://www.timelessteacherstuff.com/readerstheater/PippiGoesToSchool.html)
***
Let us join Pippi in daring to question the teacher's role, shall we?

Let's begin with knowledge.
In the information age, what can we really teach that the students can't find on the internet?  That's not a rhetorical question, there are answers.  But it's essential that we realise that the information we purport to provide can just as easily be found elsewhere, and most likely of better quality too. 
So what do we offer that the internet doesn't?  To a certain extent, we offer a scope and sequence to follow.  For example, it's easy to find grammar rules and translations of words online, but we offer a structured way of learning a language.  There are online programs which do this, but I would say not as well. 
We certainly offer the discipline to complete the work and progress, which is harder to find when you're studying on your own.
We offer our passion for whatever it is we're teaching, for whatever that's worth to our students.
We could offer personalisation, but all too often we don't.  The stand-and-deliver type of lecture, especially when it slavishly follows a textbook, offers nothing that couldn't be better done online. 

However, when we differentiate our students, design projects and games for them, develop assignments in line with their interests and abilities, and generally treat them as individuals...Ahhh, THEN we begin to offer value for time.

What about mastery?  Don't we know more and better than our students?  Simply put, yes.  I speak better English than my learners do.  But does this automatically confer upon me the right to determine what my students should do in my class, how they should do it, and how long it should take?  Do I then get to be judge, jury and executioner by setting the agenda, designing the assessment and determining whether or not students have achieved what I think they should?  In reality, no; all that is taken care of by distant authorities, governments and textbook publishers; but in the classroom I represent this vast body who makes these decisions.  The students are rarely empowered to take such decisions for themselves. 

These ideas are not new: the point has been made before by the likes of John Dewey, Maria Montessori, Paolo Freire and many others. 

My action research is based on a simple question: if we wanted to deconstruct the current teacher-learner paradigm in order to better reconstruct it, how would we go about it?

My answer is to redesign our teaching method using what we know from the related fields of game design and motivation, then see how it impacts the teacher-learner relationship.

• Would there be less confrontation between what the teacher wants and what the students want?
• Would the teacher be in a better position to respond to the learners as whole individuals rather than a homogenous group?
• Would the teacher be able to scaffold the students not only in the academic learning process but also in the skills necessary for a 21st century adult to have?
• Would it be possible for feedback to usurp numerical grades as the endpoint of assessment?
• Would the teacher find herself exploring more of her own humanity with the students, sharing her own passions and interests rather than simply being a purveyor of facts and on-duty class management cop?