I was recently having a discussion with some educator friends about the challenges of teaching in New York City. Whether one is a private, public, or charter teacher, some problems seem to overlap. Where there may be discrepancies around available resources, all teachers agree that the greatest challenge in teaching is the need to modify lessons to meet the needs of all students. That wasn’t always the case. In days past, some teachers were the know-it-alls who would create lesson plans, throw it in the air, and whomever caught the idea was considered smart. As time has progressed, and research has improved, we know there are various learning and teaching styles, and that every classroom will have at 10% of children experiencing learning challenges. So, how does a teacher ensure that they do not essentialize a lesson, reaching only “the one” type of child, or reaching only “the many” type of child?
The book, The Great Ideas: A Synopticon of Great Books of The Western World (Adler, 1990), provides some interesting tips to resist the tendency to teach to one type of child. Adler (1990, pgs. 283-284) argues that “the one” or “the many” are interchangeable in any point in time. It basically depends on where the power lies at the time. In the classroom, the power may sadly be in the “hands” of school’s chosen curricula. If a teacher is not adept at modifying, only one type of child is at an advantage. In classroom management, teachers have the challenge of providing each child with what they need. There are some who say, “I’ll teach as many as I can, and those who don’t want to learn will fend for themselves.” There are others who do little else but manage the classroom, but never provide new information, interactions, or opportunities to practice new skills. The skilled teacher is the person who’s found the sweet spot, understanding that the entire class-session is management. Creating centers that are multi-disciplinary and multi-modal is classroom management that takes learning styles into account. There is no “the one” or “the many”. Both are always present, and the skilled teacher attends to both.
Teachers should be concerned with how a child is able to risk, be kind, and fail in their class, almost daily. A child who does not struggle or face something “different” in a classroom at some point in the day did not learn that day. Similarly, a child who does nothing but struggle, and can never find a point of victory, that is actually highlighted, has learned nothing in the class that day either. School should be the place where rigor is no longer undefined. Rigor should not be determined by how long or complicated a task is. Rigor is the level at which, or the algorithm (and this is very idiosyncratic) an individual is able observe or interact with ambiguity, experience victory and failure somewhere in it, and still feel safe in their being. The balance can only be won when the teacher has taken the time to know and understand before trying to “teach” in the formal sense.
Adler, M. (Ed.). (1990). The great ideas: A syntopicon of great books of the western world (Vol. 3).
