Is it just a gimmick?

...on Friday, I find out.

Let me explain. I am fascinated with the interplay between "traditional" (often a word for tried and tested - sometimes a word for the woefully unexamined) and "progressive" classroom practice. I mostly argue that these are falsely dichotomised and actually, we should just do what works (according to your aims and objectives as a teacher and as a school). When thinking of what is often called "progressive" teaching practice, I am always careful to try and spot a gimmick, over something that can genuinely enhance learning.

And yet, such a seemingly gimmicky thing came to my mind when I was planning out a lesson looking at Plato's suggested virtues of a philosopher. Last year, I taught the section in the default style for a philosophy classroom (and rightly so) which is through socratic dialogue with my class. They read in advance, were hit with some written questions at the beginning of the lesson to gauge their understanding - which was good - and then we explored the concepts and delved deeper through discussion. Normally works. It didn't. I believe that unless something has reached the long-term memory, it may have once been understood, but not learnt, and as the term went by I kept asking questions, assuming a detailed knowledge of the virtues, but it became apparent that they had simply not gone in. The teaching (and the learning) had failed.

This year I have my class in a Biology lab, which is interesting for us seeking wisdom in abstraction. But it is also very good, because this wonderful room has a skeleton in it. In one of those "mad idea" moments I decided that rather than teach this in the same way (admittedly to different students) they were going to identify the virtues from the text, select a relevant quotation, and then come up with a critical point about it (why it is/is not necessary for a ruler to have this quality... or something). Then these were put on various coloured card and conceptually linked to a part of anatomy and stuck there. The attempt was to get them to process the ideas more thoroughly and in different ways, in a simple attempt to make them more memorable. I have no truck whatsoever with "learning styles" - we all learn different things in different ways and are not exclusively "visual" etc... but perhaps the blend of Sharpie pens, a 3D skeleton and a bit of movement might raise this apparently forgettable piece of the text up the cognitive retention priority.

The initial signs have been good, and I brought the virtues into a subsequent lesson, and I was impressed with the clarity and speed with which the class appeared to remember them. The real test is Friday, where without any priming, after a significant break, I will start by asking them to remind me of the key virtues of the skeleton/philosopher ruler. If they initially forget, think of the anatomy and trace back the links they previously made... we'll see.