A master artist emphasizes a role that encourages students to emulate the performance of the teacher, yet still provides a model by which students can show their own work to the class. A network connector, on the other hand, gives an image of a point of access through which students can connect to other learning opportunities, but seems to minimize the potential of a teacher to actually teach content. In the concierge model, the teacher takes on more of a guidance element, with the implication that he or she will lead students to content and learning experiences tailored to their individual needs.
Siemens' (2008) own model offers some variations on the three previous models in that he argues that the teacher is more of a curator. In other words, in addition to a concierge function that guides students to high quality and meaningful content, the curator teacher can also teach and provide in-depth knowledge about a particular resource if a student needs it.
I like Siemens' curator model better than the concierge model, and the concierge model better than the network administrator model. In short, the curator role seems to imply a more active role for the teacher than that of a concierge, who merely can guide students to good content. And a concierge seems to imply a more active and engaged role than that of a network administrator, who merely presents content to students with little thought to quality and personalization. The master artist role, on the other hand, implies an active teacher who can share expertise on a subject and inspire students to learn. While I like Siemens' curator model better than the master artist model, I can see how in certain environments the master artist model could work.
Having said this, all four models fall short. I don't like the curator model because it implies that the learning is one-way. A curator can present information on a museum topic and capture the attention of museum attendees, but it strikes me as a one-direction experience. Learning today in a digital environment, however, should engage the students in activities higher up in Bloom's Taxonomy. A curator doesn't capture this feeling.
I'm not sure that I have a good alternative yet, but I do think that a model presented by Wagner (2012) offers a better picture. He argues that a teacher in today's digital world functions as a coach, providing instruction and activities to students as they strive to explore and learn in complex and engaging environments. I like this model better because the image of a coach strikes me as someone who provides opportunities and interesting activities to students, yet at the same time is there with them, side by side, helping them to succeed. It's engaging, fast-paced, and centered on the student's learning, not the teacher's presentational skills.
If you're interested in hearing more of Wagner, I've embedded a TED talk he recently gave on play, passion, and purpose.
References
Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://itforum.coe.uga.edu/Paper105/Siemens.pdf
Wagner, Tony. (2012, December 11). Opening Keynote Speech. Speech presented at the TIES 2012 Educational Conference, Minneapolis, MN.
Photo Attribution
axlape, via flickr Creative Commons License.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteYou might be right: It is possible that a curator may provide a one-direction experience, but I think that a good curator can function as a coach too and find ways to engage students in activities that develops high order thinking skills. I had one curator at my university who certainly was an excellent coach for all her students.
I watched Wagner’s TED talk. I agree with him: passion and purpose are very important. In my opinion, only people passionate about teaching and learning should teach.
Lena
Mike,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the key note!
I think that active involvement by the educator is a must, although I don't think continuous engagement is the same as active involvement. There needs to be time in classroom instruction where the student questions themselves, identifies their argument, and then resolves their question with an educator involved in the process.
I enjoyed listening to Wagner and liked he was focused on how we learn to use the information we have, rather than seeking continuously for new information. This is not saying we don't need to learn, but if all we do is learn and don't collaborate (share) then we miss opportunities to grow.
Jerry
Lena - Thanks for your comment. Your observations on the curator at your university are interesting. I'm envious. The curators I've worked with have usually been centered on creating great experiences for their visitors, but have not been directly focused on working with visitors. Overall, I suppose the term itself isn't as central as the idea, which is that whoever is in charge of the learning works directly with students to improve their performance and skills.
ReplyDeleteJerry - Yes, I agree, and apologize if my post was unclear. Engagement can be created by a great lecture, but active involvement is a different and higher goal that implies students creating, building, exploring, and questioning themselves. This is just the point I think that Wagner is making when he focuses on play, passion, and purpose. How do we find ways to personalize learning so that students will drive themselves to learn?
ReplyDelete