My second grader at YY says it's the best school in the world. Missed school during the blizzard. Love of learning.

Anonymous wrote:>>>> For those in inquiry-based schools, what do you like about it?

My first-grader at ITS bounds out of bed each morning and can't wait to get to school. What I like is how the school fosters that sense of joy and works to nurture kids' (i.e., future grownups') imaginations.

+1 in 3rd grade at ITS

Anonymous wrote:This is how my child's teacher teaches in his Title I EOTP PK classroom. That's just good ECE teaching.

That's great to hear. I hear many PK classes around the city teach in similar fashions. What episode be ideal is if they foster that same environment in older grades while still focusing on academic rigor.

>>>> For those in inquiry-based schools, what do you like about it?

My first-grader at ITS bounds out of bed each morning and can't wait to get to school. What I like is how the school fosters that sense of joy and works to nurture kids' (i.e., future grownups') imaginations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't this how all schools teach now?

No.

Many early education programs use a variation of this. Where things change in DCPS is starting at 1st grade. The approach is less inquiry based and more traditional learning. Some schools have flexibility in how they approach learning and have more project based learning but most DCPS utilize a more traditional model.

This is how my child's teacher teaches in his Title I EOTP PK classroom. That's just good ECE teaching.

Anonymous wrote:Isn't this how all schools teach now?

No.

Isn't this how all schools teach now?

+1 And the next time the child goes for a nature walk with the teacher, he/she is more likely to make more connections and start asking their own questions. Then, the teacher will spend most of the time just answering their questions. The child will become more and more curious and interested in whatever subject their studying.

My child's experience in an inquiry school setting looks something like this on a daily basis:

Teacher: Let's go on a nature walk. What do you see.

PK3 Student: I see grass.

Teacher: What do you notice about the grass? Examine it - What does it look like? Smell it - How does it smell? Touch it - How does it feel?

PK3 Student: It's green. It's long. It smells like Spring.

Teacher: What else smells like Spring?

PK3 Student: The flowers. And the air smells like Spring after it rains.

Teacher: How does rain affect the flowers and the grass?

PK3 Student: It makes them grow.

Teacher: [At this point, the teacher find out what the kid knows then gives detailed information to fill in the gaps. Then, confirms that the child has learned something new.]

From what I learned by attending 15 open houses for PK3, everyone tells you what you want to hear: student-centered, inquiry-based, teachers as facilitators of learning etc., but the big difference is how kids behave in class, are they really free to study what they are interested, or are they directed? are the excited about what they do, or are they bored, etc. So I suggest, instead of listening to what they tell you, try to make time and go see for yourself. Open houses are really good, an additional option is to get a separate appointment and tour it alone with an existing parent, that way you can sneak into classrooms and see exactly how things are, instead of seeing what they want you to see on the open house.

Not that anyone is lying to you, that is not my point. My point is, everyone things that what they do is best, but the true picture of what they do is in the classrooms, and I suggest seeing that and going with your gut, rather than just hearing or reading about it

Here is a really good overview of inquiry in the classroom and now it can range from guided inquiry to open inquiry etc...compared to didactic teaching. It's focused on the primary years program (IB), but goes beyond that.

Hope it helps.

http://pypinquiry.wikispaces.com/file/view/Supplementary+Workbook+-+3S,+Inquiry+in+the+PYP+-+Babin+%26+Rhoads.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have positive reviews of this type of learning for early elementary especially? I thought I'd love it, but it's just too hard for my young child who is more of a concrete thinker to grasp the concepts through type of learning. I think it's better suited to fit older elementary/middle school students.

??? I don't understand your question. I found inquiry learning to be very concrete. My DC uses manipulatives or hands-on games for most of his learning. The teachers are given flexibility to make learning individual for each student by asking them questions and tailoring lessons to each child's (or the whole classroom's) needs. Inquiry works great for early elementary school. Kids normally ask a lot of questions about their world. With inquiry, teachers are told to answer each question and delve deeper to teach expanded concepts. The teacher can then use whatever he/she thinks will communicate the concepts best - playing a game, writing in a journal, reading a specific book, doing art, etc. I like that it's concrete but flexible.

The way it works at DC's school is that they give a subject and then ask the kids to come up with questions, respond to other's questions, and sometimes discuss them as well. The teacher doesn't answer questions. It involves a lot of critical thinking which my child just isn't ready for.

"The teacher doesn't answer questions" -- I think that is not completely true. It's not like they aren't getting basic instruction in math and reading. Will the teacher encourage them to figure it out rather than just tell them the answer? Yes.

EL Haynes, Mundo Verde and Capital City all use expeditionary approach focused on hands-on learning and field work.

Inspired teaching has a similar model with inquiry based learning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a traditional school, the curriculum (therefore the teacher and standardized tests) are the focus of the school day. The teacher often stands at the front of the room and primarily gives instructions. The main goal is for kids to follow directions and learn the material. Like the catholic school I went to. Traditional schools can be any school - private or public.

In a non-traditional school (like Montessori or Inquiry), the focus is on the student. Students and their questions inform the curriculum and what happens in the classrooms. The teachers are more facilitators of learning that instructors. The children lead and the teacher follows in these classes.

Are any schools "traditional" in the way your describe anymore?

+1 -- especially in early education.

When we were entering the pk3 lottery (2014), almost every ECE program (charter, DCPS, private) had elements of experiential learning. Some programs were more heavily oriented around the concept, but every program we looked at had an experimental component. My sense was that "experimental learning" is now fairly widely embraced.

I think the programs start to diverge in the upper grades (3rd+) as testing starts and the focus shifts towards testing outcomes.

Actually no, the upper grades are also project and theme oriented. You won't likely find many classrooms with rows of desks facing a teacher. Everything is set up for group work, independent exploration, and learning stations. Instead of old-school tests, student show mastery through self selected projects (research papers, videos, power point presentations, original plays, puppetry, dioramas, posters, newspapers, try-board displays, original games, and on and on and on). There are still traditional tests, but also a lot creative work that requires a different kind of thinking and expression.