In the last post, we looked at inquiry-based education as an alternative to industrial education. Let's briefly look at some of each approach's attributes.

Style and Methods

During the period of industrialization in our country, industrial education was introduced to prepare workers for the emerging factories. As we transitioned from an agricultural society to an industrial one, our education system also had to adapt to meet the needs of this new era. Like the standardized systems in factories, education focused on standardized learning to cater to mass consumption.

The Prussian model had a significant impact on the development of public education in the United States. In 1843, Horace Mann, often referred to as the father of American public education, visited schools in Prussia. The standardized curriculum, hierarchical structure, and emphasis on discipline in the Prussian model were well-suited to the needs of a factory model. In these models, students played a more passive role in their education, receiving information from their teachers with limited input of their own. Personal engagement was also limited as the class needed to be standardized for the model to work.

Inquiry-based education is an alternative to the most common education method in the United States. However, it is not a new form of education and can be traced back to the 5th century BCE and the Socratic Method. In this method, questions are used to foster deeper thinking on a topic. Assumptions are challenged, and critical thinking and questioning are encouraged.

As inquiry-based education moved into the realm of childhood education starting in the late 19th century, an emphasis on autonomy, reflection, personalization, hands-on learning, and projects developed. The concept of active engagement is essential. Learners do not passively receive information. Instead, they question, work with, and participate in the discovery of information. Montessori, Project-Based Learning, Reggio Emilia, and the International Baccalaureate (IB) are all models that utilize inquiry-based learning.

Teaching Style

In industrial education, teachers have direct control over every aspect of the classroom. Managing behavior and enforcing rules is crucial for the system to function. This control allows teachers to guide students through a standardized curriculum with the goal of conforming to set standards. The teacher's responsibility is to deliver content efficiently and effectively so that the group meets standardized benchmarks.

In inquiry-based education, adults are guides, asking questions and encouraging critical thinking and discovery. They facilitate hands-on activities and discussions and must get to know each learner to effectively support them on their individual learning journey. This involves understanding what personalized assistance each learner might need to meet their specific goals.

(Link to post on teaching style.)

Classroom Environment

Industrial education is known for its structured factory-like setting with desks in rows. It is a teacher-centered environment designed for the teacher to deliver information through lectures and direct instruction. The focus is on compliance and uniformity, with students listening to lectures, taking notes and quizzes, working on worksheets, and memorizing facts to prepare for tests. There is little room for creativity or critical thinking.

Inquiry-based education is known for dynamic spaces set up for group work, individual study, and hands-on projects. Collaboration and problem-solving are emphasized, as are open dialogue, debate, and creativity. Exploration and critical thinking, both individually and in groups, are used to deliver information.

(Link to post on Classroom Environment.)

Assessment

Exams and standardized tests are important assessment tools in industrial education. Student performance is evaluated based on scores from these summative assessments. Final grades are determined by these tests as well as other factors such as participation, homework, and classwork, as deemed relevant by the teacher or someone in a higher position. This final grade reflects the student's grasp of the subject.

Inquiry-based education uses regular formative assessments to give feedback and support, to create an environment of ongoing improvement. Feedback encourages reflection, enabling learners to employ metacognition to enhance their understanding of the learning process. Portfolios and projects are showcased to demonstrate growth and the learner's comprehension of a particular subject.

(Link to post on assessment.)

Conclusion

Today's schools are moving away from the traditional factory model of education associated with the Industrial Era. This shift is aimed at better serving the needs of our post-industrial society.

But finding an alternative at the scale of a district or large school is difficult due to inertia and the need for efficiency, especially when educating a large number of people. Factories are efficient. The risk of losing that efficiency makes it challenging to integrate other options. Additionally, behavior can be an issue. Children with behavior issues who require strict discipline to prevent them from disrupting the learning process for the whole class may be unable to thrive in an inquiry-based model, as they may lack the social skills needed for the dynamic environment and group projects.

As a small school, Aspire Savannah is free to operate on an inquiry-based model. What from the above do you think makes us the most foreign and "alternative" to you? I think assessment is the one that throws most people for a loop. The idea of a letter grade being assigned is ingrained in us all. We'll look at that in depth in the next post.

What we know as a traditional school in the US follows the Industrial Model of Education, also called the Factory Model. 

In the late 18th century, the US moved from an agricultural economy to an industrialized one. As a society, we needed to industrialize education. Factories needed an interchangeable workforce with the same basic reading, writing, and math skills to follow instructions and do repetitive tasks. We needed interchangeable, obedient workers to keep our industrialized society humming along. 

Industrialization was the latest and greatest. It was creating wealth and modernizing the country. Mass production and efficiency were inspiring everything at the time. But you don't have to work with children to know all children are different. If you have more than one child, you know all kids are different. Chances are you adjust your parenting and communication style for your different children. You do not think of them as interchangeable widgets. 

To send a person somewhere where they are treated like a widget, no different from the other widgets, how does that make sense in today's world? At the time the Industrial Model, while not the most exciting education model for anyone who loves learning, did fill a need in society. However, our world has changed. Fewer and fewer jobs are in factories or operate in a factory-style fashion.

Today, schools are changing to move away from a factory model. They must do so to be relevant in a post-industrial economy. Think about that: we are living in a post-industrial economy. So then, why continue an industrial education model? Most schools don't want to retain a factory model. But it's difficult to significantly shift from the model after being entrenched in the large bureaucracy and hierarchical structure that has existed and defined the Industrial Model for over 200 years.

While we often call the factory model "traditional education," remember it has never been used exclusively worldwide. Nor was it the original model for education. 

One example of a different model, there are many, is the Montessori Method. In the late 19th century, a woman named Maria Montessori started to develop a method of education. She was a scientist who created her method mainly through observation and careful use of the scientific method. She was inspired by the idea that every person has an inner teacher and that their inner teacher can be cultivated. Her method leans on inquiry-based learning. After living through two world wars, she also had a dream that education could be a way to cultivate peace in the world. 

Her inspiration was not to create a workforce to feed industry. It was the idea of the child as a genius and to make the world more welcoming for all people. 

Aspire Savannah does not follow the Industrial Model of Education. We're new enough and small enough not to be saddled with a preexisting bureaucratic authority to slow innovation. We have the luxury of picking our own inspirations. We follow an inquiry-based model, not an industrial model. We are inspired by the Montessori Method, Joseph Renzulli's Three Ring Concept of Giftedness, The Autonomous Learner Model of Gifted Education and other innovators in the realm of inquiry-based learning. We are inspired by the idea of our learners finding their genius through personalized inquiry to become their best selves, for their own inner joy and ultimately to share with the world. After all, someday, they will be the stewards of our world.

Inspiration matters, it shapes everything that happens downline. What has inspired the learning model you most connect with? Is it an "alternative" to the Industrial Model? In the next post, we'll look at industrial vs inquiry and what inspired the two models.

This swirly mess is basically what math started to look like in my brain.

At 41 years old, I watched a Montessori instructor in Chicago demonstrate dynamic addition with the Golden Beads. In a Montessori classroom this work is introduced at the primary (pre-K and kindergarten) level.

My heart jumped a little as he worked through adding the two addends and arriving at a sum. So that's what carrying the one meant! Really meant. Of course, it's a base ten number system! I see it. I was giddy as math became much more dynamic for me. I could see why dynamic addition problems were... dynamic. And in true Montessori fashion, that concrete knowledge led to a new conceptual understanding of base ten.

As a small child, I carried the one faithfully on my papers, repeating exactly what my teacher put on the board to come to the correct calculation. I was good at following directions. For me, mimicking the teacher's steps and carrying the one was easy enough.

I now realize, I wasn't taught math. I was taught a series of directions to follow to arrive at a correct calculation. As long as I could memorize and apply that, it looked like I was learning math. Memorizing math facts is useful and necessary, but it doesn't necessarily mean you will be good at higher math.

This is why my math skills deceptively seemed to wane in some areas of math as I got older. I say deceptively because I had never really been "good" at math. How could I be good? I had never been taught math. I was taught to memorize and execute a set of directions.

I continued to consistently receive pretty good grades in math and was on a higher math track (we tracked in the 80s), so why would anyone intervene? I was leaning on my ability to memorize and follow instructions. I was not picking up mathematical thinking. In math classes, this was enough for the tests and plenty for the college entrance exams. But it was definitely not enough to excite me to explore a math or science field beyond high school. Plus, if I had, I'm sure I would have done horribly without a proper foundation.

I was happy to leave more complicated math behind. I remember many times when I had no idea what was going on. Any time we deviated from the memorized steps, it was a language I didn't speak. Lipstick (good planning and processing skills) on a pig (my actual critical thinking math skills).

Were my planning and processing skills at a young age such a known/comfortable strength that I leaned into them to never turn back, no matter the class, curriculum, or instructor? Or could a different kind of math curriculum and instruction have opened me to the language of math, not just the rote processes? Who knows? Maybe my brain was not ready until the ripe old age of 41. Maybe the rote processes were so ingrained in me that I was blind, put to sleep. But what a joy it was to discover the beauty in math, even if it was late. Math is one of the things I most enjoy in my work today.

I hope the changes from Common Core and the ways math is now taught will give children a better math experience than my rote calculation experience in the 80s. Instruction has changed a lot in traditional school settings. Many manipulatives are available these days that work similarly to the Golden Beads, and there are curriculums that focus on problem-solving instead of rote repetition. It certainly requires a willingness to engage your mind and stick with challenging problems, but taking on a math curriculum that fosters critical thinking will prepare you for more than just a test. It's a great time to be a math learner!

Note: Are you unhappy with your school's math program and looking for a supplement? Art of Problem Solving (they have Beast Academy for younger learners) prepares learners for the higher level of math thinking they will experience in college math classes. It is great as a supplement to a school that is not able to serve your child well in math or for homeschooling.