Applied Learning

We got home yesterday from a fantastic final summer trip to the Dells.  School starts today, and my kiddo is very anxious.  He does not like the way traditional school works.  And I don’t mean he’s just a whiney kid who’d rather be home playing video games (though yes, he loves video games).  What I mean is that he cannot understand why he has to sit still for 8 hours a day, learn at the pace of what is considered “average” (sometimes he needs to move a bit slower, other times a whole lot faster), only gets physical activity for 30 minutes on non-PE days, and is constantly at the mercy of grown-ups who mainly see policing students' behavior as their primary focus.  Where is the joy?  What are they really learning?  What is the point of all this???

But back to the drive home.  I was looking for a podcast on Daoism I’d just added to my playlist, but being totally inept with technology, it was nowhere to be found.  Instead, I was given a suggestion based on podcasts I follow: Hidden Brain’s “How our Brains Learn”.

Some people yell at the TV when they get excited during a football game.  I yell at the car radio when the podcast guest is saying everything I’ve ever thought. 

There were so many incredible points, and they said it much better than I ever could, so PLEASE add it to your queue.  But in the meantime, I want to share my experiences and thoughts on one of the big questions from this episode:

Is it really necessary to cram kids’ heads full of foundational knowledge before we ask them to apply it? 

By 2nd grade, for example, kids can read and do basic math well enough that they could be doing a whole lot more than learning content and skills.  This podcast suggested that education has it backwards.  We should be starting with the big questions, the problems that face us all, the things that give life meaning.  By investigating these questions and challenges, students then have to continue developing and learning additional skills/knowledge to complete their tasks of investigation.  This self-directed learning model allows students to follow their own curiosity, make meaningful connections to topics bigger than themselves, and develop “transcendental thinking,” all while still working on those required foundational skills. 

WHY is this NOT what we are doing in schools? 

In my own work at the University, I pushed for the same shift in thinking when it comes to General Education courses. 

I taught Theatre Appreciation for 10 years.  At first, I made the typical mistake of asking students to learn terminology, etc.  I thought it was because if I didn’t require them to “prove” they’d done the reading (through quizzes, etc.), they wouldn’t do the reading.  Honestly, they didn’t do it anyway.

Why not?  Because they felt forced to take a class on a topic they were absolutely NOT interested in.  Plus, when you hear “Theatre”, you think acting, which can be super scary.  Nobody suspects there’s a whole career in Theatre related to welding and carpentry and spreadsheets and physics. 

But once I started getting over my imposter syndrome of being a university instructor (assuming I had to insist on “academic rigor”, even in my 2-credit gen ed course), I stopped and asked myself what the students REALLY needed to learn in my course.  I’m not saying they shouldn’t take it seriously, or that these 2 credits didn’t matter.  What I mean is that learning about the Greek paraskenion or knowing what year Shakespeare was born is only going to help people on a quiz show or pub trivia.  Did my students working towards a career in marketing or physical therapy really need these nuggets of info to be successful?

Or - could the practice of theatre be used as a tool to help them develop abilities they might actually put to good use?  (This is my driving force as a theatre educator and was the topic of my master’s thesis, btw.)

Maybe I made this transition quicker than most because applied learning has been my passion since falling into Technical Theatre in my first few weeks at college.  I seriously don’t think I would have finished a four-year-degree had I not found a career path that was almost entirely applied learning.  And personally, I think this model has done WONDERS to increase the traditional knowledge and skills I was supposed to be learning in foundational courses (but often didn’t because I was very bored and disengaged).

For example, when you design costumes for a play, you have to do loads of research.  Not only do you need to understand the time period and what people wore, but you must consider context, personality (including psychology of the character) and the knowledge and/or stereotypes your audience will most likely bring in the door with them.  You can’t just pull anything out of a closet and choose whatever fits the actor best.

TANGENT:  You might be thinking this is stupid, that it doesn’t really matter, but tell that to the Vietnam veteran I met following a high school production for which I’d designed costumes when just starting my career.  I made the mistake of assuming all army boots looked the same and went with whatever we had in stock.  For this audience member, my lack of attention to detail made an impact, and not in a good way.  It took him out of the poignant period piece and reinforced the disrespectful attitude of many towards the experience of these soldiers.  So yes, it matters.

Personally, I only learn history when in story-format.  I’ve learned much more from the productions I’ve worked on than from any textbook.

So, in my Theatre Appreciation gen ed course, I focused on the stories.  I chucked all the assignments involving memorizing content or terms and eventually eliminated grades all together.  Instead, I asked the students to work in groups throughout the semester to write and produce their own short production in the classroom.  Each week I provided readings and in-class activities relating to a specific topic (playwrighting, directing, acting, scenery, costumes, sound, props, and stage management), then allowed them time in their groups to put that knowledge to work as they developed their script and delegated tasks. 

What did they learn?  How to organize a group project effectively so each person contributes using their strengths and interests.  Conflict resolution when they had disagreements.  Accountability to the team and how to handle team members not pulling their weight (I made it clear they would not be penalized for others’ poor work – there were no grades anyway).  How to craft a story to convey an idea and make their audience think (they were required to find a topic with no clear answer, avoiding theatre as propaganda or a PSA).  Communication, both written (with me and each other) and verbal, including using body language and vocal skills effectively.  Psychology of design, such as what message you send or ambiance you create with the design elements you choose.  Organization to ensure the production ran smoothly the day of, including incorporating props and sound cues. 

I could write a whole book on this process – it was something I spent all ten years developing and felt was extremely effective in using theatre as a tool to teach valuable skills for any career.  Did they also learn about theatre?  Absolutely.  They now have a sense of how it works and why it matters.  They can blame me if they don’t win on Jeopardy!, but I think most of them are better off.

I pushed for years to reform our entire Gen Ed program to flip the focus as I had done, placing the emphasis on transferable skills (Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, Problem-Solving, Teamwork, Communication, etc. – see the VALUE Rubrics if you are an education nerd).  I believe General Education (which should really start in grade school or middle school) would greatly benefit from renaming courses to emphasize this different approach.  For example, what if instead of going to Math, Science, History, etc., you went to Teamwork class or Problem-Solving class?  There could be units lasting a few months in which you learned the skill through various lenses, such as Theatre or Forensic Science or Environmental Studies or anything!

Our Gen Ed program introduced a First Year Seminar requirement while I was teaching there, and I had the privilege of teaching it several times.  I LOVED teaching this class, because it was designed exactly as I proposed above.  Each instructor chose a topic (mine was FAILURE!), and then used that topic as a lens through which to practice skills necessary for college.  At least, that was the intent.  What I struggled with was seeing that many other professors still taught and tested on content.  It is very difficult to switch your brain to see learning from the “backwards” view of starting with a challenge and then asking the students to practice the skills/learn the content as needed on the way to meeting their goals.

And if you think it’s hard for professors, it’s nearly impossible for the students.  By the time they hit college, most of the students are so used to the typical format of school that this model is annoyingly challenging.  While I had a TON of students who loved it, I also had several who complained that I should just give them an article to read then quiz them on it – cramming and memorizing (and subsequently forgetting it all) was fast, familiar, and didn’t tax their brains. 

I am heartbroken thinking that this is what the school system might do to my own curious child.  Right now, he REFUSES to memorize and regurgitate.  He questions the system and is advocating for his education.  I love it, so I’m not too worried.  But he gets in trouble with others for not falling in line and doing what he’s supposed to do (let’s just be honest here, the school system was literally designed to make good little factory workers with a common base of knowledge…).  He gets extremely anxious about being punished all the time, and I can’t blame him – how does it make sense to be penalized for wanting to have agency in your own life, in a country supposedly so devoted to freedom? 

But I digress.  My main point here, I suppose, is that this podcast captured SO much of my own education philosophy.  I’m relieved that others (with way more expertise than I have!) are talking about this.  As our kids go back to school today or in the coming weeks, I hope we can all take a page out of their books and annoy the BAKAWK out of everyone by asking: Why DO they have to learn this stuff?