Two Teachers

Two teachers in the same room? This is something that i have done in the past (teaching CPR) and is mainly to help a new teacher facilitate, help demonstrate, ensure skills are performed correctly, answer questions, etc. Finkel goes into more detail in his book and discusses how beneficial "collegial teaching" can be. He lists 5 criteria that separate collegial teaching from other forms of team teaching.

• Two teachers must be equal
• Two teachers must be different
• Two teachers must act before their students primarily as intellectual colleagues
• Collegial course must be inquire-centered
• Teachers must conceive of their studetns in a new way

Ultimately, there is a shift between covering curriculum to participating in an inquiry. Collegial teaching is centered around the teacher-teacher relationship and not the student.

Can this really work??

If done effectively, students become auditors (listen to the two teachers different perspectives) and then are invited to participate as a "colleague" and not a "student". If the student can get past feeling and acting like a "student" they can participate fully. Finkel mentions that getting past their role of the student can be very challenging.

So, although I have co-taught a class, it was nothing like collegial teaching. I would think, being the pessimist that I am that for me, this would be difficult. Getting students to actively participate and think like a colleague and not a student of the class would be challenging. I can see how this would increase interest if you could get the buy in.

I also think this could be disastrous.

What other downfalls might this have?
Would this work in every class, in every subject?

I often revert back to "training" (short duration and/or one time only sessions, once per year or less where you dont get to see the students but one time) and wonder if this would work at all. If the students are unfamiliar with the topic, is this worth even attempting?

Refusing to teach

Too often in my opinion we place too much emphasis on lecture and too much focus on the teacher.  In this part of the book, Finkel discusses how a teacher can teach without speaking and actually refuses. He tells of a story of a teacher who says that certain days are for his teaching (lecture, teacher led discussion, etc) but on a particular class day each week, he will say very little. The first day = silence and only after 5 minutes does he speak but only to say that he was serious about not speaking and it is up to the class to determine how to use the class time. 

"By withholding his words, by refusing to leave, by making himself a near silent observer of the group, the teacher has magnified his own importance in the class in a strange way. The less he says, the more each word counts. The more he acts in accordance with the dictum that the class belongs to students, the more the class looks like a performance staged just for him." (p.114)

This initially terrifies me when I think about it. Refusing to say a word and letting the class know ahead of time that i wouldn't be saying a word is very non-traditional and I think would shock some students, just like Finkel's story in the book. I can however see how it can be very beneficial if done correctly. 

I think as I mentioned earlier, that there can be too much talking from the teacher. If the teacher actually tries to truly facilitate that students they can learn just as much. Just because there's a teacher in the room does not mean that the teacher knows everything and that the teacher can't learn something  from the students 

Does it take practice to refuse to teach? I would gather that it takes a great deal of courage to put this into place during a class action. I wonder how effective this can be in different subjects. What are the potential downfalls of refusing to teach? If the teacher is not prepared properly could this lead to major failure?  I would have to say yes, but even with the proper preparation can it still go the wrong direction that the teacher never anticipated? A direction that the teacher tried to prepare for?

Creating blueprints

A teacher creates a "blueprint" and lays it out for students to enhance or create experiential learning. Finkel discusses the blueprint and says that if the teacher does "keep his/her mouth shut", they will be able to effectively lay out a problem, then layout a blueprint for the entire experience they would like the students to ideally go through (beginning, middle, end), and finally, ensure the classroom is laid out so that the students, the problem and subject are the focus, not the teacher.

I still struggle with this concept, not because it doesn't work but because I think that so many people who come through health and safety workshops expect a lecture and are not prepared to "think" and just expect to sit in the back and go to sleep.  I think that laying out the blueprint can be difficult if, as Finkel also says, "you do not have a knowledge of the subject matter, how the subject matter is best learned and knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of students.

What are the downfalls to "laying out a blueprint"? If the teacher expects or would like to see the session go one direction and it goes an entirely new direction, is this a failure? What if the teacher is not entirely sure of the strengths and weaknesses of students? Will a blueprint truely fail if these things are not known?

I think creating a blueprint, presenting a problem, etc would be very useful for alot of students regardless of the subject if it is done correctly. However, doing so for the first time however can be intimidating. If I am not prepared for this to fail, will I fail before I begin.

Teaching through writing

Teaching though writing is mentioned in the book and would again be challenging for me. Again, specific focus on traditional semester long classes rather than short workshops. For me, many students I have in my workshops don't know how to use a computer so it would be difficult to write anything to them. Sure, I could type a letter but Finkel seems to emphasize reviewing a paper a student wrote. I'd have better luck pulling teeth than expecting custodial staff to write a paper based on what they learn. I can certainly see the benefit to this, as I have learned from various teachers over the years who provide written feedback but in this particular scenario, I would gather would not be very effective. I suppose the fact that I realize this is beneficial. I have to use different tools for different groups to get the results I would like.

Maybe I am missing something with this. Is there another way I could incorporate teaching through writing in a short 1-hour workshop?

Classes/Workshops

So much information on traditional classes, not short workshops. Finkel mentions that out of class groups can be beneficial. Giving a class project to help increase learning is difficult for me. Often times there is no chance for follow up. I will see students once per year and perhaps never again so this is difficult. Not necessarily impossible but difficult. The group can also complicate things. Those with a lower education level don't really want extra work to do. Even with a decent incentive, this may fail.

Although out of class groups may be very challenging for me, hopefully, as the book says, "informal out of class talking continues". If I were a fly on the wall, I would love to hear a student who had taken my workshop say, "that's to heavy and the posture is awkward. We need to get a cart or dolly to move this". I won't get to many opportunities to see this take place, but that is most ideal. The students recalls the information and applies this to the job. To get them to this point however, I have to present the information in the right way. Doing so over a short time period has been very challenging however. Discussions, demonstrations, videos, games, etc have all been used and just when I think the method may have worked, another group comes along and it is less effective. Now I know that no matter which method I use, I will never please everyone. I think that knowing this has made me a better teacher.

Facilitating

The more I try facilitating and encourage everyone in class to speak and learn from each other, the more comfortable I become with this and the more I see learning take place. Finkel mentions this in his book and says that teachers need to let students learn from each other but as a facilitator, need to act as a spotlight, keep everyone focused and productive and keep conversations orderly. Topics can easily get off track and a good facilitator knows when to bring things back together. It is a challenge but a way to allow for students to learn from one another with less talking from the teacher.

Learning from each other

Simple concept but often overlooked. I have to say that I am guilty of this. In the book, there was mention of learning from each other and not necessarily the teacher. Over the last 3 years in the AET program I have realized this more and more. I also witnessed this in one of my workshops. One student provided a detailed but very simple and real world example of how she has to change the way she does things because of her size. It seemed to really hit home for her classmate/co-worker. I was struggling somewhat to get the major point across but when she offered her example, it seemed to sink in. Simple but amazing to me. The hard part for me in some cases is to get the students to talk to begin with but I turn to the icebreakers initially. Such a simple yet effective tool to get everyone talking and involved. All I have done for the icebreaker is ask for their opinion on how to solve a problem and to discuss in a small group their ideas and then write them on the board. I have actually had to change the format of my workshops as I move through because the discussions take off on another direction (because of the icebreakers) and students in the class really seem to take over, in a positive way. I can steer things back the right way if they get off track but I let them "learn from each other" by brainstorming for solutions to problems and agreeing or disagreeing with each other. Odd coincidence that this has taken place at the same time I am reading this book. I have to say, I am enjoying it thus far and haven't disagreed with much.

Experts?

We discussed in 624 last year how elders are wise and have a great deal of knowledge which can be extremely useful but it seems we often don't ask as much of these individuals any more. It seems to me that we run to "google" for the quick easy answer. Although sometimes right and sometimes wrong, I am sure we'd all admit that the info is fairly quick and easy to find. The book mentions that we may seek out experts to impart knowledge but again, I believe this is changing? With the internet, it makes it much easier to find information without asking an elder who in the past, we would initially run to for information. The book also discusses that we can figure things out on our own without asking an elder. Is it wrong to seek out information elsewhere and not rely on our elders who may be considered an expert??

Let the books do the talking

As I have moved further on in this book I hear more and more that I find interesting and useful. However, one issue that is just not practical for me in my profession and that is Finkel's mention of "letting books do the talking." I can certainly see how a book can be extremely useful and without saying a word, the facilitator/teacher can help someone learn. In my profession however, when I teach short (commonly 1-2 hours in duration) workshops, it is impractical for me to use a book. Assigning even a short reading for a group I think would be challenging and typically unread. Depending on the group, a short reading may be useful however for a group I recently worked with, I am extremely positive that 90% of the group would absolutely despise any outside "homework" before the class. I have discussed "workshops" a great deal over the past 3 years and much of the things that I have found in the traditional textbooks that we utilize, do not focus on shorter duration workshops, especially those which are mandatory which I personally find extremely challenging. I haven't finished this book yet and perhaps there is more mention of this but we'll see. One book which I have really wanted to take a look at and have not had a chance yet is Telling Ain't Training 2nd Edition. I heard of this book several years ago from one of my classmates. Maybe time will allow for me to review this one soon.

Life experiences

What really hits home for me is putting myself in a given situation. In the very beginning of the book, telling a story about giving a friend directions to your house, although it may effective, your friend will learn best by going through the steps themselves. When thinking about my significant learning experiences, none of the very first few that came to mind had anything to do with school. Going on to further discuss good teaching, Finkel mentions, "good teaching is the creating of those circumstances that lead to significant learning in others."

Just because I felt that I had a good session today and I did not stumble over my words means very little if no one learned anything. I have to say that three years ago, this thought rarely came to mind. The more time passes, I understand this more and more. So far, I am very happy I found this book.

Starting out - Teaching with your Mouth Shut - Donald Finkel

Just reading the title and diving in a bit I cannot believe how much teachers speak in classes in comparison to students. I think it has become an expectation, at least in many of the "workshops" I have been involved with, that the students will just sit and listen. Too much emphasis has been placed on lecture and telling students what they should know. It wasn't until the AET program where I began to realize that you don't have to spew information to teach. I am excited to dive further into this book.