Reflections on: Zull: From Brain to Mind (Part Four)

Chapter Four: Deeper Learning Through Integration

            In the fourth chapter, Zull aims to discuss how and why “we want learners to go beyond borrowed knowledge and skills and develop their own thoughts and ideas.” (84)  In this chapter Zull continues his overall themes of: choice in education and how an intrinsically motivated student is more apt to learn.  As a secondary teacher the two most striking sections in this chapter were “Integrating the Subjects” and “Dependency.”  His arguments are succinct and I find myself agreeing with him, yet I wonder how practical they could truly be. It would take a dramatic overhaul of the current education model. But then again, maybe we need to occasionally turn things on their head. We live in a different time period, and we have more knowledge. Why not use the new knowledge by putting it to better use in the classroom? As I read chapter four I found myself getting energized for next school year. I can easily imagine implementing Zull’s ideas in this chapter into my current classroom.

            One of the most obvious ways I can see implanting his ideas came in the section “Integrating the Subjects” on page 100.  I predominately teach 7^th and 8^th grade students, however, I fortunately get to also teach AP Language and Composition and AP Literature and Composition (the courses alternate each year).  This section got me thinking about my AP sections. In both sections students are required to read and dissect classic texts (in the form of: novels, essays, speeches etc.) in order to show an academic understanding of the author’s indent in writing or delivering the text.  An unavoidable truth about the course is that students possessing a strong grasp of history, particularly social history, do better than students who lack this background knowledge.  Every year I encourage students to take their history course seriously because it will help in their understanding of why these works are so highly valued by our society.  Zull would argue that the students are categorizing history as a standalone class and English as separate class. This may be the first time the students are seeing the importance of how one class can affect another. As I was reading this I kept thinking about how easily it would be to try and coordinate with the history teacher in order to try align our curriculums in a way that would be help our students.  Could we even co-teach at times in order to help fill in the gaps?

I attempted this idea with our AP Biology teacher this past year and it worked out really well. He had the students read a non-fiction book about a scientific principal they would cover in class and write an academic paper on the text.  I helped the students learn how to “read” a non-fiction work in order to write the paper and he helped them understand the ideas presented in the book.  We both felt that is was a rewarding experience for the students and as we had many of the same students it was mutually beneficial in that I was able to reinforce a reading and writing practice and he could use the assignment to differentiate his instruction based on the student’s interest.  I would love to take this model and apply to the history department. I think my students’ analysis would greatly improve if their historical background improved. Furthermore, as Zull suggests, if students begin to see how one course can impact another they may begin to see education as a whole, and not just “I like math, and hate English” so I try in one class and not the other.

            As much as the section energized me about next year the section “Dependency,” on page 104, filled me with courage to try something again.  In this section, Zull argues for more open-ended assignments that are student driven. I tried it this year - to mixed results. 

            Each week, I have the students read an article of the week. They can pick from four to six articles and they need to write a short response to the article. The articles range in difficulty and in topics.  For the most part, most students liked the articles.  Towards the middle of the year, I had the students select their favorite article, and then I gave them a couple of Fridays to further research the topic of their article.  I read that Apple and Google give their workers a “genius hour” and let them work on anything they want; I was trying to use this model in my classroom. To do this, I gave my students several Fridays to research and then they had to “present” me with something showing me what they learned. I encouraged brochures or posters.  Optimistically, it went okay. Realistically it went great for my “top” section and lower sections but not so great for my “middle” section. The top section ran with it, and loved it, furthermore the lower section really got into researching the topic. Their overall products were not as good, but the time and effort they put in was fascinating to watch. They genuinely were interested in learning. However, my “middle” group just wanted to complete the task. Their research was uninspired, and it showed in their work.

I was very disappointed in the outcome because I was hoping that if I gave students a choice, and let them discover information they would challenge themselves and be rewarded for their efforts by learning something on their own. Instead I felt like they just saw it as another assignment they needed to complete. At the end of the year I was leaning on not doing this part of the assignment again.  But after reading this book I feel re-energized about the assignment. I feel that Zull would encourage work like this, and it is possible that the students have never been allowed to do something like this before and didn’t know how to do it. So instead of being dejected and quitting I think I should double-down and do more assignments like this.  I obviously need to revisit the assignment and look at how I can change it to help my students best, and I need to patient. It may take some students several attempts at working in this structure to have success. I may struggle, but I feel that it is a valid struggle.

As previously, stated this chapter was very energizing for me. I liked how succinct his writing is and how he challenges the status quo.  I imagine he is an advocate for challenging students with difficult tasks, that have real outcomes. I think if I would have had him as a science teacher in high school, or college my career path may have been different.