We had the privilege of a guest speaker coming in to talk to us last week. Jeff Hopkins is a former school superintendent and the founder of the Pacific School of Innovation and Inquiry. We took a (virtual) tour of PSII, and then had a question and answers section with Jeff Hopkins. Students at PSII learn through inquiry projects as opposed to traditional methods, which affords students more choice than in a typical classroom. Another interesting aspect of PSII’s model is that students are not given percentages or letter grades, but are assessed based on a model that the school created.
Inquiry based projects give students the opportunity to customize their learning. By being given the power to choose, students feel empowered, take risks, and learn to take responsibility for themselves. Students are also more engaged, due to being able to choose subject matter that interests them! One thing that gives me pause, though, is that learning is completely based on inquiry projects. Many of our education courses have stressed the importance of giving different kinds of assignments and instruction, to both engage students as well as support the different ways students learn. I wonder if only having students learn using inquiry projects can hurt them in some way.
Jeff Hopkins mentioned during our question and answers session that many of his former students would share their university experience with him, and they felt that university was boring. Learning via inquiry projects became the norm for them, and deviating from that left them not feeling challenged in their courses. While this could show how well they’re prepared for university, as many students struggle to acclimatize to university, this does not ensure they’re prepared for success. Boredom in the classroom can translate into apathy towards what they’re studying, as well as low marks. For many students, academic performance determines whether or not they receive scholarships or the ability to participate in work study. This leads us to the question: is there too much of a good thing?
Inquiry based projects give students the opportunity to customize their learning. By being given the power to choose, students feel empowered, take risks, and learn to take responsibility for themselves. Students are also more engaged, due to being able to choose subject matter that interests them! One thing that gives me pause, though, is that learning is completely based on inquiry projects. Many of our education courses have stressed the importance of giving different kinds of assignments and instruction, to both engage students as well as support the different ways students learn. I wonder if only having students learn using inquiry projects can hurt them in some way.
Jeff Hopkins mentioned during our question and answers session that many of his former students would share their university experience with him, and they felt that university was boring. Learning via inquiry projects became the norm for them, and deviating from that left them not feeling challenged in their courses. While this could show how well they’re prepared for university, as many students struggle to acclimatize to university, this does not ensure they’re prepared for success. Boredom in the classroom can translate into apathy towards what they’re studying, as well as low marks. For many students, academic performance determines whether or not they receive scholarships or the ability to participate in work study. This leads us to the question: is there too much of a good thing?