10 characteristics of authentic learning

I argued yesterday that authentic learning is a vital part of education in the 21st Century. The need to create learning opportunities that are grounded in reality, and form a concrete basis for real world transferable knowledge and skills has never been more important. We also need authentic assessment for learning. Too often in school classrooms around the world the delivery of content is abstract, disconnected and decontextualised. Students are then regularly tested on their recall of what they have 'learnt' and graded as successes or failures. But exactly what is their success or failure? And what does this process of assessment teach students about the school system? Part of the problem is that content is delivered, with little opportunity for students to make personal sense of that content. Another problem is that students are then expected to replicate that 'knowledge' in a form that is recognisable as the original. Students are therefore learning exactly what is already known, rather than exploring new knowledge and gaining fresh insight on the world. 

Some have previously argued that students at this stage in their education require some knowledge that they can build on. True, but how long should this priming of initial knowledge be allowed to go on? When do we begin to develop independent, autonomous lifelong learners? Authentic learning (and authentic assessment) are related not only to the knowledge students receive, but also to the knowledge production they can themselves achieve. Such learning is not instant, nor can it be achieved over a brief time period. But it can be nurtured early. Complex and iterative learning of this kind takes a lifetime of study, and is always grounded in real world experience. Reeves et al (2002) have much to say about the characteristics of authentic learning, including an emphasis on personalised learning that can be achieved through ill structured problem based learning, where meaning is negotiated within collaborative learning environments, and learning can be situated within multiple contexts and perspectives. Their list of 10 characteristics below are a very useful toolkit for any teacher who wishes to ensure that authentic learning is supported in their classroom:  

1. Real-world relevance: Activities match as nearly as possible the real-world tasks of professionals in practice rather than decontextualized or classroom-based tasks.
2. Ill-defined: Activities require students to define the tasks and sub-tasks needed to complete the activity. 
3. Complex, sustained tasks: Activities are completed in days, weeks, and months rather than minutes or hours. They require significant investment of time and intellectual resources. 
4. Multiple perspectives: Provides the opportunity for students to examine the task from different perspectives using a variety of resources, and separate relevant from irrelevant information. 
5. Collaborative: Collaboration is integral and required for task completion. 
6. Value laden: Provide the opportunity to reflect and involve students’ beliefs and values.
7. Interdisciplinary: Activities encourage interdisciplinary perspectives and enable learners to play diverse roles and build expertise that is applicable beyond a single well-defined field or domain. 
8. Authentically assessed: Assessment is seamlessly integrated with learning in a manner that reflects how quality is judged in the real world.
9. Authentic products: Authentic activities create polished products valuable in their own right rather than as preparation for something else. 
10. Multiple possible outcomes: Activities allow a range and diversity of outcomes open to multiple solutions of an original nature, rather than a single correct response obtained by the application of predefined rules and procedures.

How much of this is currently being achieved in our schools? What would it take for schools to adopt some or all of these approaches?

'In real life, I assure you, there is no such thing as algebra.' - Fran Lebowitz.

References 

Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activity as a model for web-based learning. 2002 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, USA.

Web source

Photo by Dana Bateman

10 characteristics of authentic learning by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Authentic learning

In his 1970 book Deschooling Society, the radical philosopher Ivan Illich wrote: 'Most learning is not the result of instruction. It is rather the result of unhampered participation in a meaningful setting. Most people learn best by being "with it," yet school makes them identify their personal, cognitive growth with elaborate planning and manipulation.' 

This is a real challenge to many schools. Some of the most effective learning methods involve students doing and making, problem solving, and playing games, all of which comply with the notion of being in a meaningful setting. This kind of situated learning is powerful because it immerses students in contexts that are authentic. Medical students learn through problem based learning, often a complex situated form of education that places them in the role of decision maker. Pilots do a lot of their training in simulators, where 'real life' problems and challenges can be presented to them, and to which they must respond. This kind of learning, according to Jean Lave (1988), is powerful because it is rooted in context, and avoids much of the abstract nature of content that is delivered traditionally. Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) agree, believing that authentic learning contexts are vitally important if students are to acquire and develop cognitive skills that are transferable to real world living. 

So how do we bring these powerful ideas into school classrooms? Often, we see children bored or demotivated because they are presented with content that is abstract and meaningless, or without a specific context or 'situatedness'. It's not all bad news though. There is evidence that some schools are beginning to adopt authentic learning methods. Saltash.net, a school near to my home, managed to get around this issue by placing children in situations where they had to use tools and techniques to solve real life problems. In their small working farm located within the grounds of the school, they kept chickens, pigs and goats. The children took turns managing the farm, and were often required to purchase food for the animals, or sell eggs at the market. To do this they needed to know about how a market operates, and had to understand concepts such as supply and demand, profit and loss, sell by dates, and so on. Teaching them how to use an Excel spreadsheet would have been dull and boring if it was kept within the four walls of a classroom or ICT suite. Taking this skill outside and putting them in a position where they had to learn by applying spreadsheets to the problem of buying of corn and the selling of eggs at a good price and maintaining records placed their learning within a meaningful setting. There are endless examples of situated learning in a school near you. 

In one American school I visited, teachers chose two students each day who were tasked to edit and present the following day's morning news programme on school radio. All of the children took it in turns to be the morning DJs and news presenters, and their responsibility was to make sure their school was kept up to date on current affairs through their research, editing, filtering and presentation. Many schools in the UK are adopting the School Radio approach too, and children are relishing the challenge of informing their classmates and teachers, deciding on music playlists, reporting on weather and sport, while acquiring authentic critical, organisational and reflective skills. This is learning by stealth, and it is incredibly powerful.

Ultimately, it is the teacher's role to create learning contexts that support authentic learning. If teachers can situate learning in meaningful contexts and real life (or realistic) settings, not only will students become more motivated, they will also acquire authentic transferable skills that they can call upon for the rest of their lives.

References
Brown, J.S., Collins, A. and Duguid, S. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Illich, I. (1970) Deschooling Society. London: Marion Boyars Ltd.
Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Photo by Cobalt123


Authentic learning by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Conversation as curriculum

In my last blog post Content as curriculum? I lamented the current state of formal education and pointed to linear, content laden and outmoded curricula as a contributing factor. The post provoked a number of comments, some supportive, some antagonistic to my position, and one who perhaps played the man rather than the ball. Both sides fought their corners well, each arguing from a stance on the fundamental nature of teaching and learning, and the specific role that school plays in education. Some comments pointed out that resources, teacher styles, assessment methods and time were important factors in determining the relevance and efficacy of curricula in schools. But (and here I will continue to be provocative) I feel that some are missing the point completely. The point I am making is that content based delivery of the curriculum, and its traditional compartmentalisation of subjects constrain the understanding of students, and fail to prepare them for a dynamic world of work and life that is constantly changing. Today we have a vast array of technology at our fingertips, and - although I admit this is seldom enough to make informed decisions and knowledgeable actions on its own - combined with the appropriate skills and literacies, individuals will have the ability to apply creative solutions to problems they may encounter on a daily basis. My approach to any reformation of school curriculum would be to bias it toward procedural (knowing how) knowledge that can be applied in pragmatic ways to constantly changing conditions.

In his 1996 book Curriculum as Conversation, Arthur Applebee argued that much of the school curriculum of the time was based upon 'false premises and reflect a fundamental misconception of the nature of knowing. They strip knowledge of the contexts that give it meaning and vitality, and lead to an education that stresses knowledge-out-of-context rather than knowledge-in-action. In such a system students are taught about the traditions of the past, and not how to enter into and participate in those of the present and the future.' (p. 3) It is clear that in the 15 years since the book was published, little has changed. I have asked this question before, but I will ask it again. Are we preparing students for the past, or for the future?

In order to prepare students for the future, we need to understand that contexts are changing rapidly but much curriculum content does not, and can thus quickly become obsolete. We can therefore no longer afford to rely solely on content, and need to present more situated learning opportunities. Situated approaches to learning involve an emphasis on context, not just on content, and the best way to experience appropriate contexts is to do it for real. Carl Young (2004) relates the story of a language teacher who used pure conversation as the basis for all her teaching. Although this sounds like a no-brainer - an obvious method for language, which has conversation at its heart - it is actually quite profound. I believe similar dialogic approaches can and should be applied to the teaching of all subjects across the curriculum. My former colleague Alan Bleakley (2009) takes this a step further, arguing that much of education is sadly still based on power differentials between teacher and student, and calls for a more horizontal, democratised form of education where students have equal say in the process. Bleakley echoes the earlier work of Paulo Freire (1970) who pointed out that: "Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students." Bleakley goes on to elaborate that 'democracy in education requires interplay between the individual and the collective through authentic dialogue - as the reconstructionists suggest, constructing curriculum as an extended and complicated conversation.' (p. 300). To achieve this requires teachers to assume a role as learners, while students are allowed to become teachers, to facilitate the free and open dialogue that will constitute conversation as curriculum. Freire again: "Authentic thinking, thinking that is concerned about reality, does not take place in ivory tower isolation, but only in communication. If it is true that thought has meaning only when generated by action upon the world, the subordination of students to teachers becomes impossible."

It seems clear to me that to encourage open and frank dialogue in a formal learning environment, the power differential between teacher and student must be removed. When teachers wish to promote democratic learning, students are given license to challenge and encouraged to discuss, debate, argue. Passive consumption of delivered knowledge is replaced by full engagement with the subject matter through conversation. The conversation around the topic becomes the new curriculum, enabling each student to act as an open minded, independent thinker who can defend his or her position without resorting to dogmatic assertions based on partial understanding or incomplete knowledge. The best teachers encourage all students to participate and value all contributions, incorporating as many as possible into an extended conversation around the topic.

In the digital age, conversation as curriculum can be extended beyond the classroom through the use of social media and other communication technologies. Conversation for learning across a number of platforms suggests that two or more discussions can occur simultaneously. It may be impossible to change the curriculum we are tasked to deliver. However, teachers who appreciate the merits of conversation in a truly Socratic mode will redesign lessons to incorporate learning activities to reflect it.

References

Applebee, A. N. (1996) Curriculum as conversation: Transforming traditions of teaching and learning. London: University of Chicago Press.
Bleakley, A. (2009) Editorial: Curriculum as conversation. Advances in Health Science Education, 14 (3), 297-301.
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed London: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative
Young, C. A. (2004) Conversation as curriculum: Learning to teach English in rural America. The English Journal, 93 (6), 82.

Image by Simon Phipps


Content as curriculum? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.