Is taking 20% of only a few hours with a particular teacher going to be enough? It might be hard for students to do anything worthwhile with such a short timelength split over weeks. I'd go as far as to say it might be frustrating because the idea is awesome but they won't be able to really achieve stuff in this context. Still a great initiative!
I wish that, starting with high school, most teaching was project-based and schools worked to enable students to discover and learn stuff they care about, rather than shoving knowledge down one's throat. Want to make video games? Learn woodwork? Build an electronic device? Learn cooking? Schools should strive to provide a framework to make those things happen!
I think teaching people to be passive and keeping them from being productive until their twenties is a huge factor in school failure, dropping out and lots of social issues (at least in France where I'm from).
I would think that 20% would be enough to make a difference. The main thing the students need is the catalyst -- once they get started, I could foresee many (not all) students spent much more than 20% of their time simply because they are actually enjoying school and enjoying learning.
I think this is one of the real questions I had when deciding whether or not to do it. But, in terms of my class, I want to give students that ownership and freedom even if it is for a short time period.
I wish that, starting with high school, most teaching was project-based and schools worked to enable students to discover and learn stuff they care about, rather than shoving knowledge down one's throat. Want to make video games? Learn woodwork? Build an electronic device? Learn cooking? Schools should strive to provide a framework to make those things happen!
I think teaching people to be passive and keeping them from being productive until their twenties is a huge factor in school failure, dropping out and lots of social issues (at least in France where I'm from).