As I mentioned in a previous post, my new course, Deschooling Parenthood, is starting soon. I wanted to give you a preview of some of the lessons from the course. We’ll start with the question of Instructionism today. Instructionism is the belief that learning is always and only the product of teaching. Watch this space for more previews in the next week!
-
In this section of the course, I want to talk in depth about a concept that call instructionism. I have also heard this called “the instruction assumption” but I like the term instructionism better, it implies something almost like a religion.
So what is instructionism? The basic story of learning that is sold by schools and bought by politicians, media, and implicitly, by most Americans, is that learning is the product of teaching. Let me say that again. Instructionism is the belief that learning is the product of teaching. Specifically, it’s the belief that learning is the product of carefully planned and sequenced, formalized instruction, taught by a trained expert. Good learning is the product of good teaching, which of course means that if learning isn't happening, the solution is better teaching.
This is a lie. Learning is a product of doing, thinking, reflecting, discussing, playing, experimenting, observing, imagining, practicing, resting, and most of all, of giving attention to what we find curious and interesting.
In my experience, most teachers know this at least intuitively. At a minimum, they know that learning only happens when you're paying attention. And attention only happens easily if you're interested. You can force yourself to pay attention to something boring for a period of time, but it’s exhausting and unpleasant. This is why good teachers try hard to make their lessons interesting and to give students plenty of opportunities for at least some active engagement.
But schools and school structures are still deeply mired in the belief that learning is a direct consequence of the quality, and especially, the quantity of teaching. It's hard to imagine a school that tries to solve a problem by saying, why don't we teach less and give the children more time to work things out for themselves? The suggestion that maybe we should do less is sacrilegious to instructionism. In my experience, actually doing so will get one labeled as neglectful.
But in the next few lessons, I'm going to explain why less instruction, less interference is precisely what most children need.
And I want be clear, teaching by itself is not inherently a bad thing. It has its place. It can be very useful, it can be very efficient, but we can’t see it as the only mechanism for learning or as the only tool in our toolbox for supporting learning and influencing children. So let's get started.
Once you start looking for it, you begin to see instructionism everywhere: in the media, in conversations about parenting, in marketing. In the comments, share your observations about where you see instructionism. Does it seem to be serving a positive purpose, or is it simply the default assumption.
Ready to find out more about the many ways children learn? Join us in Deschooling Parenthood, starting July 6!