Reading this most excellent post by Ira Socol this morning got me thinking about the word “risk” and its use in a learning context. So often I hear that we in education need to “take more risks,” or that our kids need to do that, that “risk-taking” is an important part of learning.
And I totally agree.
But what is “risk” exactly? I mean, what’s the bar for “risk-taking?”
At it’s most basic level, as Ira suggests, it’s just doing something different, changing up the lesson, changing the environment, or trying a new technology. While I may not see these as “risky” practices at all, I understand how hard it is for some to do even that much. (Actually, maybe I don’t understand that, unless the adults feel no sense of a culture that supports (or expects) at least these kinds of minor tweaks.)
At it’s most extreme level, I would assume taking a risk would mean to put kids in harm’s way. To be honest, I don’t think I’ve ever seen or heard of someone doing that, regardless of how you define “harm.” (I’m sure someone will share a story of such “risk-taking” now that I’ve said that.)
So what is the “risk” that we’re really talking about?
Is it the “risk” of failure?
The “risk” of losing control?
The “risk” of not having permission?
I’m sure that’s a part of it, but it’s arguable how “risky” those things really are.
But my sense is this: The real risk people feel in education is around letting kids make decisions for themselves and have agency over their own learning. It’s also a risk to let teachers do that stuff, too, to let them be learners in their own right. That’s just not the way it’s done. We don’t trust “them” enough to learn with us instead of from “us” however you define those groups.
I wonder what we risk by doing that, by not making it about the learning rather than the teaching. I wonder what we risk by not creating cultures where learners are trusted, at every level, from the board to the administration to students to the community, to find and pursue meaningful and interesting questions that matter to them.
I wonder what we risk by not taking risks.
(Image credit: Anton Repponen)
Great post! There is no doubt people want and need to learn. Learning is in our DNA as a means for survival. In modern terms, learning to me, and I am not a teaching professional or a psychologist, is the active fulfillment of one’s curiosity.
I wonder what effect having a learning environment rather than a teaching environment would have on the behavioral issues we face in our education system. I dare say that an engaged learner is a better school citizen.
Interesting wonderings Will. There is risk in learning new things, or learning them in new ways. Like learning to ride a bike – there will be some uncertainty, discomfort, and possibly a few falls. We are all going somewhere; organizational change will occur when all stakeholders commit to learning, and share their learning experiences – warts and all. I saw this George Siemens quote somewhere on social media – can’t remember where, “The value is the pipeline, not what’s in the pipeline.” My interpretation, it’s not so much what we know, but how we come to know it? It’s risky to open up what has been traditionally a closed system.
Bob
Thanks for this Will.
Risk is in the eye of the beholder. We all have our own experiences and thresholds for what we determine to be a risk.
What I find most interesting about risk and our children is in their assessment of risk. In school, we do the risk assessment for them. They know it’s a safe place to try new things even if they are uncertain of the consequences.
Our children’s unsupervised play radius in the physical world continues to shrink while their digital play radius is expanding rapidly. They no longer learn the skills of risk assessment in the physical world that they will need in the digital world. I’m not sure the digital risks (and their consequences) they encounter online are real enough in their minds for them to transfer those skills into the real world.
How do we help students (and adults) draw parallels between risk assessment in the physical and digital worlds and the classroom?
You said, “(Actually, maybe I don’t understand that, unless the adults feel no sense of a culture that supports (or expects) at least these kinds of minor tweaks.).” Bingo! This is a large part that I see. And these are not seen as “minor tweaks” – what you refer to as minor tweaks are seen as scary, big change to many. I still hear from teachers in my classes that they love the ideas and all, but they can’t do those things. They are rated by the specifics (still) of what their reading and math blocks look like and “response to intervention.” And those 3 things take up almost the whole day. So they check off that they did a project for a week, did the Hour of Code thing, did 2 art pieces all year, did science during their school STEM/science night run by people they brought in. Most teachers that have taught for less than 15 years haven’t experienced teaching or expectations any different from that, in fact the list I just made is seen as integrating the subjects. And now the parents of their current students are coming from that NCLB era and that is their experience with education as well. Teachers see some value in the kinds of change you (and I) are promoting (which is progress) … but they do not feel supported in implementing it.