Film+Annotation+5

Allison Mrugal 10/15/15 Film Annotation 5: Sust. Ed., 4280-01 Prof. Fortun
 * Free to Learn; Fast Times at Philly High **

Prompt: Watch these films about interesting teaching interventions, commenting on what you think they would accomplish, what they would not accomplish, and what they would require to be feasible. [|Free to Learn: A Radical Experiment in Education] (67 minutes) (read the comments, too) [|Fast Times at Phllly High] (35 minutes) (and read this on [|project-based learning])

Response: The teaching interventions shown in the film [|Fast Times at Phllly High] is different from those shown in the film [|Free to Learn: A Radical Experiment in Education]. The programs are similar in that they both offer students the means to develop themselves as individuals and also both struggle to teach the entire traditional curriculum in the standard budget. The programs differ in how prepared graduated students were for their future.

To start, project-based learning in the former film has received both accolades and criticism. Project-based learning provides interesting education, tangible goals, foresight of a future, and teamwork/building practice for students. It also encouraged students in the film Fast Times at Philly High to develop time management skills and other effective habits: students had to complete their typical, traditional classwork in order to participate in the project-based education. Criticism for the intervention stems from the program’s inability to cover all required topics in a standard educational curriculum, although most students do not remember or find all pieces of this information relevant to the later life. Project-based learning is also more expensive than traditional schooling since the student-teacher ratio is smaller and a greater number and diversity of materials are required for the various projects.

“Free” learning also receives both praise and disapproval. While The Free School allowed students to experience a childhood full of play, it also taught students the values associated with working together, personal development, common sense, practicality and resourcefulness. This type of education enrolls students in real-life problem solving and current events rather than those on a screen or only found in a textbook in traditional schooling. Furthermore, each student from The Free School appeared to have developed a strong understanding of community involvement and could value people for who they were. However, this program educates in a very slow manner creating endless arguments in the process, for example. The program also does not prepare students for higher education since they often have not learned the fundamental, applied mathematic, scientific and literary techniques provided to students in traditional education. Furthermore, this program requires a smaller student-teacher ratio and money for a greater number of field trips.

While each of these teaching interventions cannot teach all of the required, traditional curriculum to students, many of the students in these programs come away with a greater sense of self. The argument at hand is whether or not learning each unit in a traditional curriculum truly prepares a student to become an active and effective citizen. Further experimentation with these educational interventions will likely show the value of qualitative vs. quantitative curricula in primary schooling.