麻豆精品

I鈥檝e been researching and teaching about student-centered education and intervention programs for over a decade. The research is clear 颅鈥� kids are more engaged in school when their education is personally meaningful and culturally relevant. Sure, some students do fine in a traditional school setting if the definition of success is high-scores on standardized tests and their ability to get into college. However, what is the price that many of them pay for this achievement?

Rates of anxiety and depression are skyrocketing in teens.听In a 2018 study by Pew Research Center,听听U.S. teens reported that anxiety and depression are significant problems in their community amongst people their age.听Experts report that academic and social pressures contribute to depression and anxiety.听We can only expect that between the pandemic, wildfires burning through much of the US, police brutality, and increasing division, young people are experiencing even more depression and anxiety in 2020. The young people who I talk with are sharing their concerns daily, and I can see it is taking a toll on them.

Schools can and should be a place where students feel supported and safe. However, far too many kids are marginalized by the school system, and 鈥済ood grades鈥� are not enough to prepare them for the challenges they will face today and as adults. To address these issues, many schools are starting to say they are student-centered, but it is rare in practice.听As many schools move to online learning because of COVID-19, the desire to control students instead of partnering with them is blatant.听Schools try to control what students wear, when they eat, and where and how they sit in their own homes.听Teachers are expected to police children鈥檚 bodies remotely.听In many of these situations, educators still claim to be student-centered or youth lead while giving students no voice in decisions affecting them.

I scoured the globe looking for an opportunity to be able to see proper student-centered education implemented. When I was offered a chance last year to teach at was promoted as a democratic learning environment, I jumped for it. The director enthusiastically stated the school was student-centered and that self-directed learning was supported by teachers who served as mentors. Within the first couple of weeks, I learned that the curriculum in most classes was set in stone, that staff did not understand what differentiated instruction was, and that students had limited or often no choice in what they studied or how they demonstrated their knowledge.

Additionally, punishment rather than positive behavior supports was standard practice. Students did not have a chance to make decisions about what affects them. For example, uniforms were mandatory and chosen by the director, students were not allowed to color their hair, and the bill of rights was given to them not created by them. When students voiced opposition, they were often told the decisions were already made and couldn鈥檛 be changed. In my classes, we discussed democratic education and watched videos of youth describing what it looks like when. Sometimes, I felt I was setting my students up for frustration by showing them what was possible while they were stuck in an oppressive environment.

I wish I could say that I was surprised by the contrast between how the school described itself and what actually transpired in the classroom. However, my experience at this school is not uncommon. I have observed in over 100 schools in different regions and have seen this dynamic play out in many of them. Unfortunately, 鈥渟tudent-centered鈥� and 鈥渟elf-directed鈥� have become buzz words in the educational sector. It is easy to type them onto your website pages, but it takes courage to break out of the status quo and trust in youth to put these constructs into practice.

Schools often use the terms student-centered, self-directed, youth lead, and project-based learning to recruit students, placate parents, and promote a social justice image. Since my previous experience of feeling like I had been duped, I鈥檝e been thinking a lot about why educators know these terms, and students strongly desire these types of learning environments, but schools still will not implement them. Although many factors come into play, three stand out 鈥� trust, control, and ego.

Trust:听Unfortunately, in many years of doing observations of adult interactions with young people, it is clear that adults often do not trust kids. Some are outward in their distrust, and others are more subtle. I often hear statements like, 鈥渋f we let kids do what they want, they would just play video games;鈥� 鈥渒ids just don鈥檛 have intrinsic motivation, they need deadlines;鈥� 鈥渨e have to make them do their work, they won鈥檛 do it on their own;鈥� and 鈥渢hey don鈥檛 know what they need.鈥�

True, kids LOVE video games, and that it isn鈥檛 a bad thing. If educators don鈥檛 use them as a tool for engagement, we are missing a huge opportunity to connect with our students. I admit I am not a fan of video games, and I have to check my biases; however, I am learning that there are many听, including improved memory, decision-making, and mental flexibility. I also had to admit that even the most ardent gamers will eventually want to do something else. So no, they won鈥檛 only play video games if we give them a choice in what they do with their day.

For example, one of my students who self-describes as a 鈥済amer鈥� expressed in an essay about how the democratic classroom helped him.