Open learning

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Open learning consistently looks at the student side and is all learning that is self-determined by the students . The term open learning is still used in a very undifferentiated manner in schools and in pedagogical discussions.

Multi-dimensional determination grid

Following Benner and Brügelmann, Falko Peschel uses a multi-dimensional identification grid to show to what extent open learning is made possible in regular school lessons or the lessons can be changed in such a way that the degree of open learning can be increased. This makes it possible for students to measure more self-determination in relation to their own learning.

Open learning can therefore be used clearly within the framework of this determination grid. Any forms of learning can be compared with one another in terms of the degree of openness.

dimension Open Student sets Closed
Organizationally Allowing completely free time management, location and

Long-term partner choice - long-term work plans

When do you work with whom where? The teacher determines when who can work with whom and where.
Methodical Tasks are carried out at different levels /

Working side by side with a wide variety of approaches,
free expression is a fundamental element

How you do that? The teacher determines the methodical access to the learning object
Contentwise Interdisciplinary work projects (math, language,
science, etc. side by side)
What do you do? The teacher specifies specific, subject-specific tasks
Social Self-government of the class community How do you live and work together? The teacher determines how we work together and also regulates the social life of the class
Personally "Over-school relationship" aimed at equality There is no equality between students and teachers, either in class or in school

Learning organization

Learners are no longer dependent on (subject) didactic material hierarchies, they are not tied to learning for subjects. Rather, their interests determine their interdisciplinary learning process and the social process in the class.

Everyone can - through suitable forms of organization of the shared learning time, which are fundamentally different from conventional lessons - contribute their interests and determine how they use the learning time. Other students who have similar interests can either enter into a cooperation or work on their individual questions about this complex. In this way, individualized work projects emerge from the mixture of interests. The learners negotiate the necessary learning times among themselves. Everyone can decide on such a work project or start another one themselves. It can also happen that only one learner is working on a project.

The results of the work project are presented to the class community. The participants in the project answer questions from the class community according to their level of knowledge. So either new work projects can arise or the topic is dormant for an indefinite period of time.

Freinet pedagogy

In the Freinet pedagogy , these work projects are documented and collected and thus form the memory of the class. Because not only the results are documented, but also the working and research methods, i.e. the way in which this working result was created, this memory is not only a knowledge store, but also a method reservoir.

Teaching role

The role of teacher is undergoing a radical change: instead of controlling whether students are learning what they are supposed to learn, the teacher is a facilitator of learning who helps each student to learn, examine, observe what interests them, and to consciously control this process. Instead of considering the deficit (you can't do that yet!), There is a view that supports the learner's self (I've already found that out) and support based on the individual growth of the learner, possibly with references to unknowns, important relationships, on contradictions etc. It is crucial that the learner alone determines the intensity and direction of the holistic learning process.

In addition, the teacher no longer determines the social process and the interactions of the class beyond the class. The learners are responsible for these processes themselves - the teacher is only part of them. He no longer centralizes the learning process on himself through his knowledge advantage, he no longer enforces social norms qua office, the establishment of external contacts of the learners (e.g. when exploring) is no longer solely dependent on him. Even adherence to the social norms that the learners themselves have set is not the teacher's job. He is also not the criminal authority for established offenses.

The teacher must not withdraw into the role of the mute observer and leave the class to its own devices. He is the one who supports and promotes all activities of the learners - be it in technical / interdisciplinary respect, in social respect or also in relation to external contacts. He is the 'party' of every learner - also in social terms.

Source:

Student role

The student role is also undergoing a radical change. Instead of being the object of 'teachings', each learner is now the subject of his or her own learning.

Instead of leaning back comfortably and accepting or refusing (or even torpedoing) the material offered, consuming learning material and using suitable strategies to more or less effectively achieve the set requirements, with open learning in the (unfamiliar) situation, he does not have to learn, but to learn. Hence, there can be significant difficulties in moving from 'traditional teaching' to open learning.

In addition, students can no longer rely on the organizing hand of the teacher, but learn for themselves to get to know, to accept or to defend themselves against individually different views and modes of action. You learn to be considerate of each other and at the same time to fight for a place in the study group. They learn that their own actions have consequences for others and that they can be held responsible for these consequences by the community of learners.

If this form of learning is already practiced in elementary school, so to speak from the beginning, these conversion problems do not arise in this form.

Nevertheless, children have already gained 'life experience' before school and act in the class based on this experience. Over time, these different action strategies of the children develop into rules that the children need in order to get along with one another and to pursue their interests and needs. These rules do not have the status for the children who have such rules for adults.

Source:

Personality development and learning

Nonetheless, the learners have to reflect again and again as to whether or not what they are doing uses the opportunities available in the class to work on work projects. To put it bluntly: Are computer games a work project or a leisure activity? If the learner persists, he or she is free to pursue his or her interests. At this point it becomes clear that open learning also includes individual time management and value attitudes and formation and thus has an effect on personality development far beyond conventional teaching.

Each learner has to decide for himself what to do and what not. The class plays the role of the “public”. B. Establish rules, set limits. Any member of the class can then identify violations and put them up for discussion. In Freinet pedagogy this happens in the class council , in Summerhill it happens in the tribunal. The community decides after discussion.

School success and open learning

Seen over the elementary school period of 4 years, the above-average learning success of the students is proven. Peschel pays special attention to learning development. In each area (writing / spelling, reading, arithmetic) he examines whether the performance of the children is at least average, whether the spread or the development of the spread is not higher than usual and whether the group of "weak" children is different is at least average. In all areas he can see that the results are significantly high. For each area he comes to the statement: "The claim that ... can only be learned at class level with an explicit course must at least be relativized after these results".

criticism

The criticism of open learning assumes that learning in school without formal lessons, without a teacher who has a technical overview and therefore determines what should be learned, without motivation from the teacher, does not take place or takes place only very randomly. Reference is made to the teachers' daily experience. Open learning is therefore inefficient and unsystematic. Orderly lessons alone make it possible to convey content in a meaningful sequence and thus also to present complex content appropriately and correctly.

There is also always a mixture of "open learning" and (educational reform) learning from different directions. These forms of learning claim to be "open", but determine the content of the "openness" quite differently - namely much more limited. The determination grids enable this previously impossible comparison.

Other - older - definitions of open teaching relate only to one or more dimensions and only allow openness - the free decision of the students - to a limited extent. So z. E.g. at Eiko Jürgens the openness to the dimensions: organizational openness is only partially made possible, methodical and social openness is partially restricted depending on the task, and content-related openness is almost not made possible at all. Personal openness (equality) is not even addressed by Jürgens.

literature

  • F. Peschel: Open lessons. Idea, reality, perspective and a tried and tested concept for discussion. Schneider Verlag, Hohengehren 2002, ISBN 3-89676-531-0 , dissertation Uni Siegen, (price for excellent scientific work).
    • Volume 1: General didactic considerations.
    • Volume 2: Didactic considerations.
  • F. Peschel: Open teaching: idea, reality, perspective and a tried and tested concept in evaluation. 2 parts. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler 2003, ISBN 3-89676-714-3 (2nd unchanged edition: ibid 2006, ISBN 3-8340-0136-8 ; 3rd unchanged edition: ibid 2010, ISBN 978-3-8340-0136- 8 ).
  • Carl R. Rogers : Learning in Freedom. On educational reform in schools and universities. Kösel-Verlag, Munich 1974, ISBN 3-466-42042-3 (Original: Freedom to learn. Merrill, Columbus OH 1969, ISBN 0-675-09519-0 ( Studies of the person )).
  • J. Göndör (2013): Open teaching: ... here I learn what I want! About the freedom to shape your own learning in class, Edition Winterwork, Borsdorf. ISBN 978-3-86468-520-0

also open teaching, but as a general term (more open teaching forms):

  • Michael Bannach: Self-determined learning. Free work on topics of your choice. Schneider Verlag Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler 2002, ISBN 3-89676-525-6 ( Basics of School Education 41), (At the same time: Berlin, Hochsch. Der Künste, Diss., 2001).

Web links

also open teaching, but as a general term (more open teaching forms):

Footnotes

  1. ^ F. Peschel: Open teaching. Part II, Schneiderverlag, Hohengehren 2002, p. 36 ff.
  2. freinet.paed.com and freinet.paed.com June 20, 2008, 2:05 pm
  3. ^ F. Peschel: Open teaching. Part II, Schneiderverlag, Hohengehren 2002, p. 253 ff.
  4. ^ F. Peschel: Open teaching. Part II, Schneiderverlag, Hohengehren 2002, p. 246 ff.
  5. Peschel 2006, chap. 12: Development at class level, chap. 13: Developments in the field of learning to write and spell, chap. 14: Developments in the field of reading, chap. 15: Developments in the field of arithmetic, chap. 16: Performance development of children who appear to be less able to perform, chap. 17: Performance development of children who do not appear to be able to attend regular schools
  6. ^ Peschel, 2006, e.g. B. for arithmetic: p. 665 f.
  7. Eiko Jürgens: The 'new' reform pedagogy and the open teaching movement. 2004 (6th edition).