William Cope
Wei Liu
Pinakini Shah
Greg Jack
Leah Goldberg
Nell C Rundle
Bahar AnahmiasNew Learning MOOC’s Updates
Being an Educator in "Interesting Times"
This Learning Module analyzes three pedagogical paradigms which we call "didactic", "authentic" and "transformative". It traces the ideas outlined in Chapters 1, 2 and 8 of New Learning, by Mary Kalantzis and Bill Cope.
Understanding these educational traditions matters as they are woven into everyday classroom practices. Many classrooms use a variety of these approaches. Educators should know the power of each, its historical and cultural purposes, when to deploy it, how it works when it does, and when it fails learners and society.
Video Mini-Lectures
Supporting Material
- Peters on the Knowledge Economy
- Political Leaders, Speaking of Education [Nelson Mandela, The First President of Post-Apartheid South Africa]
- Political Leaders, Speaking of Education [Aung San Suu Kyi, Burmese Opposition Leader and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate]
- Political Leaders, Speaking of Education [Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, President of Liberia and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate]
- Political Leaders, Speaking of Education [Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan]
Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.
Make an Update: Find a contemporary text of political rhetoric or public policy that sets social objectives for education (a video, a quote from a written text etc.). Comment on the substance (or lack thereof!) in this text.
A Personal Reflection on Alternative Schools in the Netherlands
In recent years, I’ve noticed a growing shift in the nature of education in the Netherlands, particularly in how students are encouraged to learn more independently and creatively. As someone who has experienced both traditional and alternative forms of education, I’ve seen firsthand how different approaches can shape students in very different ways.
One major change I've observed is the increased interest in Montessori and Waldorf schools. These schools focus more on the individual development of the child rather than a fixed curriculum. I attended regular school as a child, however my school experience was quite different from my friend who when to montessori or waldrof schools. My friend who went to a Montessori school had more freedom to choose what we wanted to learn and when. And my friend who went to a Waldorf school told me how art, nature, music and other practical skills played a central role in their education. These approaches are gaining more attention now, especially after the pandemic, as more parents and educators are rethinking what effective and meaningful education really looks like.
In a time when the job market is becoming more unpredictable and diverse, I believe that giving students space to explore their interests, develop soft skills, and build self-awareness is more valuable than ever. Alternative schools in the Netherlands seem to be ahead of the curve in this regard, offering an example of how education can adapt to the needs of a changing world.
https://www.sunbridge.edu/about/waldorf-education/
https://montessori-nw.org/about-montessori-education
https://www.ourkids.net/school/criticisms-montessori-answered
https://sgws.org/comparing-montessori-and-waldorf-education-a-look-at-preschool/
https://www.vrijescholen.nl/actueel/cijfers-weetjes-vrijescholen-2024-2025
Las ideas de Mandela, Suu Kyi, Sirleaf y Rania Al Abdullah nos muestran que la educación no es solo aprender a leer, escribir o sacar buenas calificaciones. Es mucho más: es una herramienta para cambiar nuestras vidas y nuestras sociedades.
Mandela habla desde la experiencia de un país dividido por el racismo. Para él, educar es sanar heridas, unir a la gente y construir un futuro mejor. Pero también señala una realidad dura: muchos niños, sobre todo en zonas rurales, no tienen acceso a una educación digna. Aung San Suu Kyi, por otro lado, nos recuerda que aprender no solo pasa en la escuela. Todos podemos ser aprendices si estamos dispuestos a entender el mundo y actuar con responsabilidad. Aprender, en su visión, es crecer como personas y como ciudadanos.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf nos lleva a otro punto importante: si queremos cambiar un país, tenemos que educar bien a los jóvenes, y sobre todo a las niñas. Ella les habla con fuerza: el aprendizaje no termina en el aula, continúa en el trabajo, en la vida, en las decisiones que tomamos cada día. Y Rania Al Abdullah nos hace ver que la educación debe empezar desde muy temprano, con buena nutrición, inclusión y calidad. Si no formamos bien a los más pequeños, las desigualdades se vuelven permanentes.
En suma, estas líderes nos dicen algo muy claro: la educación debe ser real, útil, humana. No se trata solo de ir a la escuela, sino de formar personas que piensen, sientan, trabajen, sueñen y hagan algo por los demás. Educar es dar herramientas para vivir mejor y convivir mejor.
Referencias:
https://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-1-new-learning/supporting-material/political-leaders-speaking-of-education-nelson-mandela
https://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-1-new-learning/supporting-material/political-leaders-speaking-of-education-aung-san-suu-kyi
https://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-1-new-learning/supporting-material/political-leaders-speaking-of-education-ellen-johnson-sirleaf
https://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-1-new-learning/supporting-material/political-leaders-speaking-of-education-queen-rania-al-abdullah
The ethos behind the Transformative Learning method has reminded me of something that I was told by a teacher in high school while in class. He mentioned that, while the internet has enabled us to access any and all information at any time and from any place, the role of the institution should evolve to filter out misinformation and disinformation for younger students. It is clear that this is not a New idea at all, despite its alternative name and misnomer New Learning. I do appreciate that, even in the more working class community I grew up in, I was still able to experience Transformative Learning in real time. It definitely gave me a better education than if I were to sit in a class all day listening to a lecture a la Didactic Learning.
Another idea that caught my attention was the idea that there are now multiple different types of literacy, as lined out in the article Towards Education Justice: Multiliteracies Revisited by Bill Cope and Mary Kalantzis. Because we now recognize how diverse the students' lifeworld can be, and because of how many different skills one needs to learn in order to excel in the world, it is imperative that we honor these experiences and skills within our pedagogy. I feel as if this might be a little bit easier for me to do; I am primarily taking this course for a children's theatre company that takes children's writing and turns them into plays. I will be working with a school soon to enable students to write and produce their own work. Since theatre is a multi-disciplinary art, I want to believe that I can encourage my upcoming students to find something that they feel like they can contribute to, whether that be writing the play, staging it, or performing it.
As both a learner and an educator, I’ve felt the thrilling shift in education—we're no longer confined to classrooms but instead riding digital waves across borders. What excites me most is how the boundary between student and teacher has blurred, transforming education into a vibrant, collaborative dance rather than a linear exchange of information.
I loved the idea shared recently about education becoming a living ecosystem where everyone teaches, learns, and grows simultaneously. @Anna, your thoughts on digital empathy resonated deeply—perhaps empathy is becoming our new literacy.
Let's keep riding these waves together!
It really excites me too how the student-teacher bond has changed! Personally, I believe that when students feel closer to their teachers, they’re more at ease and often more motivated to learn.
For example, I once had a terrible math teacher, and as a result, I didn’t like the subject and didn’t get good grades. A year later, I had an amazing teacher—she really listened to us, helped us, and engaged with us during class. That connection made a big difference, and my grades improved significantly. I truly hope more teachers will take the time to connect with their students like that.
One of the public policies that sets social objective for education is the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 (Republic Act No. 10533)
Republic Act No. 10533 (RA 10533), otherwise known as the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013, has expanded the years of schooling in basic education from 10 years to 12 years. In school year 2018-2019, an additional 2 years representing Grades 11 and 12 will be introduced in the basic education system through senior high school. Recognizing the need for additional support to students due to the added two years in basic education, the State, through RA 10533, further expanded Republic Act 8545 (RA 8545) to provide financial assistance to qualified grade 10 completers entering senior high school.
RA 10533 has mandated the Department of Education (DepEd) to formulate programs to enact the abovementioned provision of the law. In line with this, DepEd Order No. 11 series of 2015 (DO 11 s.2015) introduced the Senior High School Voucher Program (SHS VP) as a mechanism to provide financial assistance to senior high school students.
This act institutionalized the K to 12 programs, extending basic education to 12 years. It aims to provide a holistic education that equips Filipino students with 21st-century skills, preparing them for higher education, employment, and entrepreneurship. The law emphasizes inclusivity, ensuring that every Filipino has the right to quality education regardless of personal circumstances.
The Evolution of Didactic Education: Balancing Tradition with Modern Learning Needs
Didactic education, rooted in traditional teaching methods, has been a pillar of formal learning for centuries, influencing not only how knowledge is acquired but also how values such as discipline, obedience, and conformity are instilled in students. This approach, which emphasizes structured content and authority-based instruction, was designed to meet the needs of industrialized societies in the 19th and 20th centuries, where efficiency, uniformity, and compliance were essential.
A prominent literary example of this rigid educational system is found in Charles Dickens' Hard Times, where Mr. Gradgrind represents the quintessential figure of didactic education. His insistence on facts, facts, facts embodies a system that values the memorization and regurgitation of information over creativity, critical thinking, or student engagement. This method, while effective in maintaining order and a clear curriculum, often limited opportunities for students to explore their own curiosities or develop independent thinking skills.
In contemporary classrooms, remnants of this didactic approach are still evident, especially through practices like standardized testing and teacher-centered instruction. These systems are often seen as practical necessities to evaluate and manage large numbers of students. However, such methods can constrain students' ability to take charge of their learning and stifle the development of key skills required for success in the 21st century, such as creativity, problem-solving, and innovation.
The growing emphasis on student-centered learning models challenges the traditional didactic approach. Modern education increasingly prioritizes the development of skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, and adaptability—skills that are essential in a fast-changing, globalized world. Active learning, project-based learning (PBL), and inquiry-driven approaches provide students with opportunities to engage in hands-on, real-world problem solving, rather than simply memorizing facts. This shift towards more participatory and individualized learning models encourages students to become active agents in their education, fostering curiosity, motivation, and ownership of their learning process.
Despite these advancements, there remains an important question: Can didactic education methods be adapted to meet the goals of modern education, or is it necessary to fully transition to more dynamic, student-centered approaches? While the structure, discipline, and orderliness of didactic methods have their value, particularly in ensuring foundational knowledge, it is crucial to find a balance that integrates the strengths of traditional teaching with the flexibility required to nurture modern skills. Perhaps a hybrid approach that combines the best aspects of both methods—structure and creativity, authority and autonomy—might be the most effective way forward, ensuring that students develop both the foundational knowledge and the critical skills necessary for success in today’s complex world.
In considering this evolution, we must reflect on how educational systems can be designed to promote not just the acquisition of knowledge, but the cultivation of lifelong learning, curiosity, and the ability to think critically and solve problems. The future of education may lie in bridging the gap between tradition and innovation, ensuring that students are both well-prepared for academic success and equipped with the skills needed to thrive in an ever-changing society.
The Evolution of Didactic Education: Balancing Tradition with Modern Learning Needs
Didactic education, rooted in traditional teaching methods, has been a pillar of formal learning for centuries, influencing not only how knowledge is acquired but also how values such as discipline, obedience, and conformity are instilled in students. This approach, which emphasizes structured content and authority-based instruction, was designed to meet the needs of industrialized societies in the 19th and 20th centuries, where efficiency, uniformity, and compliance were essential.
A prominent literary example of this rigid educational system is found in Charles Dickens' Hard Times, where Mr. Gradgrind represents the quintessential figure of didactic education. His insistence on facts, facts, facts embodies a system that values the memorization and regurgitation of information over creativity, critical thinking, or student engagement. This method, while effective in maintaining order and a clear curriculum, often limited opportunities for students to explore their own curiosities or develop independent thinking skills.
In contemporary classrooms, remnants of this didactic approach are still evident, especially through practices like standardized testing and teacher-centered instruction. These systems are often seen as practical necessities to evaluate and manage large numbers of students. However, such methods can constrain students' ability to take charge of their learning and stifle the development of key skills required for success in the 21st century, such as creativity, problem-solving, and innovation.
The growing emphasis on student-centered learning models challenges the traditional didactic approach. Modern education increasingly prioritizes the development of skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, and adaptability—skills that are essential in a fast-changing, globalized world. Active learning, project-based learning (PBL), and inquiry-driven approaches provide students with opportunities to engage in hands-on, real-world problem solving, rather than simply memorizing facts. This shift towards more participatory and individualized learning models encourages students to become active agents in their education, fostering curiosity, motivation, and ownership of their learning process.
Despite these advancements, there remains an important question: Can didactic education methods be adapted to meet the goals of modern education, or is it necessary to fully transition to more dynamic, student-centered approaches? While the structure, discipline, and orderliness of didactic methods have their value, particularly in ensuring foundational knowledge, it is crucial to find a balance that integrates the strengths of traditional teaching with the flexibility required to nurture modern skills. Perhaps a hybrid approach that combines the best aspects of both methods—structure and creativity, authority and autonomy—might be the most effective way forward, ensuring that students develop both the foundational knowledge and the critical skills necessary for success in today’s complex world.
In considering this evolution, we must reflect on how educational systems can be designed to promote not just the acquisition of knowledge, but the cultivation of lifelong learning, curiosity, and the ability to think critically and solve problems. The future of education may lie in bridging the gap between tradition and innovation, ensuring that students are both well-prepared for academic success and equipped with the skills needed to thrive in an ever-changing society.
While transformative learning and multiliteracies approaches aim to address the contemporary challenges of education with more inclusive and active methodologies, it is important to assess their effectiveness and feasibility in different school contexts. First, the implicit rejection of traditional didactic learning as passive and outdated overlooks the fact that this form of instruction also serves essential purposes: it helps structure knowledge, ensures a common foundation, and allows for the accurate transmission of complex content—especially in subjects like math, science, or history, where critical thinking cannot develop without a solid base of information.
Moreover, the idea that schools should filter information for students in the digital age can be problematic. Although the intention is to protect them from misinformation, this could lead to excessive intellectual guardianship, limiting their autonomy. Instead of filtering content, the real educational challenge should be to teach students how to question, compare sources, and develop their own criteria for truth.
Regarding multiliteracies, while it is valuable to recognize that students learn and express themselves in diverse ways, this can become unfeasible in under-resourced educational settings or in overcrowded classrooms, where teachers are required to comply with official programs and standardized assessments. Integrating multiple forms of literacy demands time, specialized teacher training, and adequate materials—conditions far from the reality of many educational systems.
Lastly, while arts education (such as theatre) offers an attractive application of transformative learning, not all school contexts can replicate that experience. Not every subject has such a broad expressive dimension, and not all students are motivated by the same things. Idealizing this approach without acknowledging its limits can lead to frustration for both teachers and students.
The Evolution of Didactic Education: Balancing Tradition with Modern Learning Needs
Didactic education, rooted in traditional teaching methods, has been a pillar of formal learning for centuries, influencing not only how knowledge is acquired but also how values such as discipline, obedience, and conformity are instilled in students. This approach, which emphasizes structured content and authority-based instruction, was designed to meet the needs of industrialized societies in the 19th and 20th centuries, where efficiency, uniformity, and compliance were essential.
A prominent literary example of this rigid educational system is found in Charles Dickens' Hard Times, where Mr. Gradgrind represents the quintessential figure of didactic education. His insistence on facts, facts, facts embodies a system that values the memorization and regurgitation of information over creativity, critical thinking, or student engagement. This method, while effective in maintaining order and a clear curriculum, often limited opportunities for students to explore their own curiosities or develop independent thinking skills.
In contemporary classrooms, remnants of this didactic approach are still evident, especially through practices like standardized testing and teacher-centered instruction. These systems are often seen as practical necessities to evaluate and manage large numbers of students. However, such methods can constrain students' ability to take charge of their learning and stifle the development of key skills required for success in the 21st century, such as creativity, problem-solving, and innovation.
The growing emphasis on student-centered learning models challenges the traditional didactic approach. Modern education increasingly prioritizes the development of skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, and adaptability—skills that are essential in a fast-changing, globalized world. Active learning, project-based learning (PBL), and inquiry-driven approaches provide students with opportunities to engage in hands-on, real-world problem solving, rather than simply memorizing facts. This shift towards more participatory and individualized learning models encourages students to become active agents in their education, fostering curiosity, motivation, and ownership of their learning process.
Despite these advancements, there remains an important question: Can didactic education methods be adapted to meet the goals of modern education, or is it necessary to fully transition to more dynamic, student-centered approaches? While the structure, discipline, and orderliness of didactic methods have their value, particularly in ensuring foundational knowledge, it is crucial to find a balance that integrates the strengths of traditional teaching with the flexibility required to nurture modern skills. Perhaps a hybrid approach that combines the best aspects of both methods—structure and creativity, authority and autonomy—might be the most effective way forward, ensuring that students develop both the foundational knowledge and the critical skills necessary for success in today’s complex world.
In considering this evolution, we must reflect on how educational systems can be designed to promote not just the acquisition of knowledge, but the cultivation of lifelong learning, curiosity, and the ability to think critically and solve problems. The future of education may lie in bridging the gap between tradition and innovation, ensuring that students are both well-prepared for academic success and equipped with the skills needed to thrive in an ever-changing society.
I think this is why Transformative learning is so important @Bernadette Vidallon. It enables students to interact with the material as opposed to sitting there and attempting to absorb it via osmosis. Not to mention that Didactic learning is not even that old of a concept, apparently didactic learning was more of a 19th century invention! In a way, we're really circling back to the basics of how learning is supposed to be done, through innate curiosity and interaction.
It touches on an essential debate on contemporary education. Didactic Education traditionally characterized by a teacher-centered, lecture-based approach, has played a central role in shaping learning environments for centuries. However, the rapid advancement of technology, the emphasis on 21st century skills and deeper understanding of how students learn have led to significant changes in how education is delivered.
The Evolution of Didactic Education: Balancing Tradition with Modern Learning Needs
Didactic education, rooted in traditional teaching methods, has been a pillar of formal learning for centuries, influencing not only how knowledge is acquired but also how values such as discipline, obedience, and conformity are instilled in students. This approach, which emphasizes structured content and authority-based instruction, was designed to meet the needs of industrialized societies in the 19th and 20th centuries, where efficiency, uniformity, and compliance were essential.
A prominent literary example of this rigid educational system is found in Charles Dickens' Hard Times, where Mr. Gradgrind represents the quintessential figure of didactic education. His insistence on facts, facts, facts embodies a system that values the memorization and regurgitation of information over creativity, critical thinking, or student engagement. This method, while effective in maintaining order and a clear curriculum, often limited opportunities for students to explore their own curiosities or develop independent thinking skills.
In contemporary classrooms, remnants of this didactic approach are still evident, especially through practices like standardized testing and teacher-centered instruction. These systems are often seen as practical necessities to evaluate and manage large numbers of students. However, such methods can constrain students' ability to take charge of their learning and stifle the development of key skills required for success in the 21st century, such as creativity, problem-solving, and innovation.
The growing emphasis on student-centered learning models challenges the traditional didactic approach. Modern education increasingly prioritizes the development of skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, and adaptability—skills that are essential in a fast-changing, globalized world. Active learning, project-based learning (PBL), and inquiry-driven approaches provide students with opportunities to engage in hands-on, real-world problem solving, rather than simply memorizing facts. This shift towards more participatory and individualized learning models encourages students to become active agents in their education, fostering curiosity, motivation, and ownership of their learning process.
Despite these advancements, there remains an important question: Can didactic education methods be adapted to meet the goals of modern education, or is it necessary to fully transition to more dynamic, student-centered approaches? While the structure, discipline, and orderliness of didactic methods have their value, particularly in ensuring foundational knowledge, it is crucial to find a balance that integrates the strengths of traditional teaching with the flexibility required to nurture modern skills. Perhaps a hybrid approach that combines the best aspects of both methods—structure and creativity, authority and autonomy—might be the most effective way forward, ensuring that students develop both the foundational knowledge and the critical skills necessary for success in today’s complex world.
In considering this evolution, we must reflect on how educational systems can be designed to promote not just the acquisition of knowledge, but the cultivation of lifelong learning, curiosity, and the ability to think critically and solve problems. The future of education may lie in bridging the gap between tradition and innovation, ensuring that students are both well-prepared for academic success and equipped with the skills needed to thrive in an ever-changing society.
The Evolution of Didactic Education: Balancing Tradition with Modern Learning Needs
Didactic education, rooted in traditional teaching methods, has been a pillar of formal learning for centuries, influencing not only how knowledge is acquired but also how values such as discipline, obedience, and conformity are instilled in students. This approach, which emphasizes structured content and authority-based instruction, was designed to meet the needs of industrialized societies in the 19th and 20th centuries, where efficiency, uniformity, and compliance were essential.
A prominent literary example of this rigid educational system is found in Charles Dickens' Hard Times, where Mr. Gradgrind represents the quintessential figure of didactic education. His insistence on facts, facts, facts embodies a system that values the memorization and regurgitation of information over creativity, critical thinking, or student engagement. This method, while effective in maintaining order and a clear curriculum, often limited opportunities for students to explore their own curiosities or develop independent thinking skills.
In contemporary classrooms, remnants of this didactic approach are still evident, especially through practices like standardized testing and teacher-centered instruction. These systems are often seen as practical necessities to evaluate and manage large numbers of students. However, such methods can constrain students' ability to take charge of their learning and stifle the development of key skills required for success in the 21st century, such as creativity, problem-solving, and innovation.
The growing emphasis on student-centered learning models challenges the traditional didactic approach. Modern education increasingly prioritizes the development of skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, and adaptability—skills that are essential in a fast-changing, globalized world. Active learning, project-based learning (PBL), and inquiry-driven approaches provide students with opportunities to engage in hands-on, real-world problem solving, rather than simply memorizing facts. This shift towards more participatory and individualized learning models encourages students to become active agents in their education, fostering curiosity, motivation, and ownership of their learning process.
Despite these advancements, there remains an important question: Can didactic education methods be adapted to meet the goals of modern education, or is it necessary to fully transition to more dynamic, student-centered approaches? While the structure, discipline, and orderliness of didactic methods have their value, particularly in ensuring foundational knowledge, it is crucial to find a balance that integrates the strengths of traditional teaching with the flexibility required to nurture modern skills. Perhaps a hybrid approach that combines the best aspects of both methods—structure and creativity, authority and autonomy—might be the most effective way forward, ensuring that students develop both the foundational knowledge and the critical skills necessary for success in today’s complex world.
In considering this evolution, we must reflect on how educational systems can be designed to promote not just the acquisition of knowledge, but the cultivation of lifelong learning, curiosity, and the ability to think critically and solve problems. The future of education may lie in bridging the gap between tradition and innovation, ensuring that students are both well-prepared for academic success and equipped with the skills needed to thrive in an ever-changing society.