ABSTRACT
These two comments are offered as examples of an individual teacher’s assessment of two children’s topic work. We could begin to imagine the children the comments describe. It might even bring to mind similar children in our own classes. More careful analysis however could suggest other important avenues for our consideration about individual children and individual teachers in the topic work context. Is the response to David, for example, an indication of a conflict between his preferred way of working and that of his teacher? It could be argued that a comment such as that provided tells us as much about the teacher as it does about David. Similarly, the enthusiasm for Julie’s working style might be an indication of obvious similarities between Julie’s preferred approach and that of her teacher when engaged in classrooms activities. Topic work which provides opportunities for children to take responsibility for their own learning
raises important questions about the competence of all children to cope with the demands involved in negotiationg, coordinating and influencing their own learning. Recent research into children’s learning (Conner, 1982, 1986; Egan, 1986; Rowland, 1984; Claxton, 1984; Armstrong, 1980) reminds us of the ad hoc and often unsystematic nature of progress with phases of relative calm interspersed with amazing indications of development and progression. Alan Blyth (1987) succinctly describes this process of learning:
To me, as a non-technical observer, the model of children’s learning that makes sense is one in which children learn by fits and starts and some serendipity, now advancing rapidly, now resting on their oars or even drifting slightly backwards, and always liable to change direction and emphasis. Over the years, I believe, individual children learning in this way interact with the curriculum, sensitively conceived, in such a way as to make impressive general progress; but nobody can postulate a uniform process of learning, uniformly assessable, in the face of what is necessarily wayward and unplannable at the individual level. To do so would be to assume godlike powers and authority.
