Is the Curriculum Information Rich but Knowledge Poor?
Two events this morning lie behind this entry.
The first was feedback on a student’s learning journal entry for an academic development course. The student (academic) was raising the perennial problem of how to develop authentic assessment techniques while also delivering the required content.
The second was a symposium where similar students (more academics) were presenting the work they were doing on the use of learning technologies to enhance learning. These technologies included the use of podcasts to provide feedback on student assessments, wiki’s to engage students in process-heavy tasks, videocasts to enhance skills development, etc.
These events prompted in me a line of reflection about academic identity, knowledge, and teaching.
As academics we are largely defined in terms of knowledge, of the epistemic tribes we belong to, our knowledge communities. We variously describe these as disciplines and they are structured by core concepts, epistemological debates, conferences, peer-reviewed journals. Our ‘license’ as academics is the doctorate, a training in engagement with particular knowledges and recognised knowers. But, this is not a license to teach. Teaching is something different all together. Indeed, one can construct a very successful academic career without ever engaging substantively in issues of teaching and learning.
If our academic identities are sou bound up in knowledge of particular kinds, and our standing in our academic tribes often based on our successful performance with these knowledges, it is probably not surprising that our ‘teaching’ should often be described in terms of delivering knowledge. We talk about curriculum as if it were coterminous with content, and that content was the same as knowledge.
But what passes as ‘knowledge’ is actually INFORMATION. We throw bits of information at students, telling them that it is required content, that their professional competency, for instance, is dependent on their mastering of this content. We do this despite the experiential and scholarly knowledge that it doesn’t work. Students do not really come out of this process knowledgeable and certainly seldom wise.
But we continue in this vein.
So, we state, with apparent, authority, that we can’t really develop authentic assessment because it comes up against the primary need to ‘deliver’ the curriculum.
One of the many inspiring things about the symposium this morning was the fact that there are people from across all disciplines who quietly and diligently develop their craft as educators, thinking, reflecting, risking, changing, in conditions that are not always conducive to this endeavour.
So, experiencing directly the reality that students were not taking in the information and methodologies that they did REQUIRE, this colleague imagined how it could be if students used a research mode instead of the usual lab work, imagined what the possibilities would be if the classroom was flipped and students actually engaged with the information so transforming it into KNOWLEDGE.
This was just one example out of a number I witnessed this morning.
I makes me honoured to be part of such a community of scholarly educators.