
This word is bandied about and I wonder if there is a generally recognized definition? Even a loose one?
From what I've seen during school visits, it seems to mean whatever the school and its mission says it means. Which makes the label not at all useful to me. However I could be persuaded otherwise if there's a DCUM out there who can point me to some generally agreed-upon traits that make a school "progressive." |
Maybe hippie? |
In Education classes in college, it means Non-traditional, but does not really have it's own definition. Traditional is when a child sits and is told the information, then is tested on knowledge of that information. Thus, progressive can be anything else: play-based, Montessori, Erikson Theory, etc. |
Progressive education if done correctly stress the following:
Emphasis on learning by doing – hands-on projects, experiential learning • Integrated curriculum focused on thematic units • Strong emphasis on problem solving and critical thinking • Group work and development of social skills • Understanding and action as the goals of learning as opposed to rote knowledge • Collaborative and cooperative learning projects • Education for social responsibility and democracy • Integration of community service and service learning projects into the daily curriculum • Selection of subject content by looking forward to ask what skills will be needed in future society • De-emphasis on textbooks in favor of varied learning resources • Emphasis on life-long learning and social skills • Assessment by evaluation of child’s projects and productions |
Does it work? |
Please don't reply, "it depends on what you mean by 'work'". |
Depends on your kid and their learning style - for mine, yes |
Agree w/ PP 16:09. My kids, for instance, seem to naturally gravitate toward this approach. Additionally, I went to a very traditional public high school that was at that time considered very strong academically - but a very non-traditional and progressive college. Wow, what a difference. For the first time I was truly challenged to think and to seek out answers - there was no 'failing'. Anything that you tried but didn't work was considered just a way to add another piece to the puzzle. Truly a 'learning from your mistakes' model, very much a scientific approach (forming a hypothesis and then trying different things to see what worked - and when something didn't you gleaned what you could from that and then tried something else). This was applied to all subjects, not just science. At first I nearly transferred because it seemed so hard and so different... but now looking back I feel it was truly critical and life-changing for me and how I approach the world and problem solve. And it's funny to me how I can see this is how the kids naturally seem to learn, without any pushing from us in that direction. I then wonder if this was my natural approach as well and then it just got squashed out of me during K-12 with my traditional schooling. Anyway, for what it is worth, I do think it "works" but as others have said it has to be the right fit. |