The Products of our Process

I've been thinking about the issue of student engagement a lot lately, in part because of the work we've been doing in my methods class and in part because of the work we've been doing in my New Literacies and Media Class.



My methods class has spent a lot of time talking about how to engage students in reading and writing. There's a lot of scaffolding involved: giving students writing prompts, using techniques like think/pair/share and praise/question/wish, and generally "operationalizing" the tasks we want students to do. Our goal is to help students succeed by providing a structured environment and plenty of support. We are encouraged to approach the same topics from a variety of different angles.

My New Literacies and Media class has focused on integrating technology into the classroom using TPCK, a three-prong approach to integrating Technology, Pedagogy, and Content Knowledge. The idea behind TPCK is that introducing technology only works when teachers also employ appropriate pedagogical strategies and select compatible content. 

In essence, both classes are interested in the how of teaching as much as the what of teaching. That makes sense to me. I also began to notice that both classes seem to be making a similar claim about teaching processes and student engagement: any topic can be engaging as long as it's taught the right way.


The optimist in me wants to believe that this is so. There is always a new way to approach an old topic, and an approach that worked with one group of students might not work with another class. But I wonder whether this focus on how obscures important questions about what and who. In other words, it ever okay to decide that a given topic just won't click with a certain group of students?


I'm not suggesting making blanket assumptions about "types" of students or broad chunks of subject matter. I would seriously question, for instance, a teacher who says, "Novels? Meh. I don't think they're worth teaching." I would also disagree with a teacher who suggested that students of certain genders, ages, or ethnic backgrounds always like certain texts or topics or that those same students never connect with certain texts or topics. As a general rule, I think generalizations are a bad idea :-)


But I do wonder whether some of our focus on how we teach is misplaced. If a group of students is struggling to connect with a class activity, it makes sense to try a new approach. But if that new approach also fails, it might be worth looking at the material being covered in addition to - or even instead of - the instructional methods. If that means that some classes read more poetry and some classes read more essays and some classes do more writing...well, I guess I'm okay with that. I wonder (and worry) whether my school administration will feel the same way.