The Case for NOT Covering Curriculum

While teaching a session of "Classroom Management ER" for alternative certification teachers last weekend, I shared an analogy that resonated with great enthusiasm. Here it is. The novice teachers were describing incidents of student misbehavior that seemed linked to boredom, confusion, and general "disconnection" to the lessons and teachers. We probed situations and discussed ways to engage the students, re-align assessments, and spend more time with students "saying, showing, and doing" instead of the teacher being the center of attention for 50 minutes. The teachers were not convinced. "How can we COVER the curriculum if students talk? We need ALL the time to COVER the curriculum!"

I stood there for a moment, and then said this: "You COVER a sick person with a blanket. You COVER your nose and mouth when you cough. Are you telling me that your students are sick? Do they need to be covered or do they need to be taught?"

There was a heavy pause and then laughter. The mandate to "cover" material, curriculum, standards....whatever...is ridiculous. That is not teaching. The kids tune you out because they are not engaged, convinced, or connected. In the end, time is wasted and nobody is happy.

Put the brakes on and focus on smaller, more meaningful chunks of learning in which you present, demonstrate, illustrate or share  some schema and then give the students opportunities to construct meaning. Let them get their paws on and their teeth into the material. Allow their healthy minds and creative spirits to make meaning.

Our students are not sick, but we are trying as hard as we can to make them ill, when we insist on "Covering the Curriculum".