Endangered Teachers ... The new Dodo?

What are we ever going to do with subject XYZ?

We all were there, probably, at one point or another during high school.

In my case it was due to the fact that the marks I obtained in the particular subject was not very good. I was lucky, but some school friends were not. We start to fear going to the class because we just do not "get" the subject. Eventually this fear turns into anger which then transmorph into hate. As Yoda warns, "hate leads to the dark side..." which here means that instead of only skipping or not paying attention in the one class, teenagers end up skipping/hating school as a rule. By rebelling against the system, they are rewarded by their peers for being the rebel and speaking up for everyone, which acts as an example for younger children. As you can see, and probably remember, this effect keeps on snowballing and we end up with children who barely makes it out of school. This is not a new problem, except we have lost the stick of corporal punishment.

Therefore, if you are in the field of teaching and learning, you have to agree that the concept showcased by the "Independent Project" was one of the most fascinating and progressive ideas to date. Here you have children who acknowledge that they hated going to school and found a new way of learning through which they now enjoy schooling, even if they cover subjects that they never before enjoyed or excelled at. By investigating the teenager's brain development, this makes complete sense. In Teaching and Learning, the subject material emphasises the way in which an adolescent's brain works by explaining that a situation offering a reward for an action in front of peers, with an element of risk will be made with an emotional response every time (paraphrasing). The cognitive brain does not stand a chance.

Breaking it down into its individual parts, it is clear to see why this is the case. Firstly, having been through adolescence, we all know it is a time of extreme emotional turmoil and making emotional decisions are inevitable. Secondly, the learners are relying on one another to each do their part and as a result there is a reward of respect and status from your peers if you are able to teach them something new and positive rather than gaining recognition for negative behaviour. The particular teenagers are therefore "forced" to find an alternative means of gaining recognition from their peers and can only do it in a positive way. This effect is probably amplified by the fact that failing to deliver would not only be a failure to receive status, but would also lower your status within the group. This in my opinion is possible largely due to the fact that there are no adults to rebel against and thus gain recognition in that way.

When we couple the apparent outcome of the first experiment of the "Independent Project" with the empirical evidence provided by Sugata Mitra's "Hole in the Wall" experiment, the only logical conclusion is why had this not been attempted earlier? Not only does the evidence point to learners learning faster, but it seems to also suggest that the learners will also learn any topic that their peers decide is important. Having now found that it works, it can probably be seen as the holy grail in teaching and learning in that we can now get the kids of tomorrow to learn anything under the sun, learn it faster and do so with a thorough understanding of the subject matter. Pink Floyd hinted at this in 1979, yet no-one paid attention until now.

We already know that children are knowledge sponges. They only lose interest in learning because we hinder their learning process. With the internet being a source of instant knowledge distribution, maybe it is time that teachers realise their role in late childhood development (teaching) has reached its end in its current form. Our inherent human drive for independence seem to transcend all aspects of life including learning. It also seems to develop at an early age. Just try and help any child in their "self" stage and you will know it is impossible to help someone who does not want your help, even if they are 2 years old. You can only help them if/when they finally decide to ask for help, whichever method they use to let you know they're asking for help. This does not therefore necessarily mean that teachers will no longer be required, but rather that the role a teacher plays will need to shift from being the presenter of knowledge to being the fountain of knowledge.

Being a fountain of knowledge would therefore symbolise being on standby to provide someone with the knowledge they ask for when they ask for it, rather than providing the knowledge which you think is important to the person at the time. The "Independent Project" is a perfect example of this in that although the parent planted the seed, the idea was only acted on by the children and they only accessed the information from the adults to the extent that they needed their help to do so to realise the concept. Once they had it figured out they were better off on their own.

Therefore the trick to future proof yourself as a teacher will be to find the means of getting teenagers interested in the knowledge that you have AND getting them to return for more. The question therefore arises if this might be the beginning of the end of traditional teachers? In my mind, there is no difference between a fountain of knowledge teacher and a modern classroom teacher, except that the time of a modern classroom teacher might also be limited. Both are required to ensure that the child becomes interested enough to want to learn from you, rather than trying to force the child to learn with one possible exception.

With the internet being such a prolific distributor of knowledge, the possibility quite literally exist that if we do not adapt we might end up with a few fountains of knowledge in the world and everyone just accessing their knowledge. While this does bode well for fountains of knowledge, the nature of the internet is such that there will be far fewer fountains of knowledge than current teachers and these fountains will generally be the scientists / researchers themselves.
This pushes Arthur C. Clarke's quote of "Any teacher that can be replaced by a computer, should be" squarely into the realm of possibility whereby all teachers becomes an endangered species and "traditional old school" teachers will definitely be going the way of the Dodo.

Teachers therefore have 2 choices ...  Become a fountain of knowledge or go extinct.