The Mantle of the Expert

The mantle of the expert is a system for learning through the active imagination and enquiry methodology.  It was developed by the educator Dorothy Heathcote. She sees the mantle of the expert as “an active urgent, purposeful view of learning, in which knowledge is to be operated on and not merely taken in.” (Heathcote & Bolton, 1996)

The mantle of the expert makes the learners pretend as if they are the experts. Through the work the pupils do they create an imaginary enterprise.  They then work on an imaginary job as if they were the real people in charge. This project work creates opportunities for the children to explore the curriculum in any subject. The “enterprise” part provides the context for learning. This is good for teachers and pupils alike as the teacher could bring together different areas of the curriculum, rather than trying to teach them separately. It is a ‘drama’ based way of learning, this allows for more imagination skills to be used as well as the classes developing ways to “see through each other’s eyes” helping young people develop ownership over their enterprise. (Mantleoftehexpert.com, 2014)The pupils are motivated by the challenge and chance of making their enterprise work. They also take great pride in their work. The mantle of the expert also allows the pupils to get a hands on approach to learning and be fully involved in projects. These projects give them a great idea of what they are studying in a very memorable environment

The aim of reducing subject boundaries resonates with the work of Dewey whose focus was to involve learners in problem-solving. Having strong problem solving skills is a great trait to work on and have for the future for these children who would participate in the mantle of the expert.

The only disadvantage I could think of Is that this may only be beneficial to children who are not shy and want to have a hands on approach to learning, whilst some children may well want to take a step back and not have such a lead role in the enterprise. However, it could be possible that by giving these children a specific task in the group (which is something that happens in this way of learning) they can excel and their confidence can grow so they feel that their opinions do matter and are valued.

I believe that both Heathcote and Wenger share a concern that all learning has to be situated within a recognisable scenario for the pupils but Heathcote creates her social context in a way which tries to replicate the real world. Wenger and Heathcote share a common concern that learning is too often separated from familiar normal life and happens in a separate space, and that testing happens ‘out of context’ in an atmosphere that discourages most collaborative work. (Wenger, 1998)

 

When we took part in our project we had to make our own company which we called Jools & Sons. We then had to build a bridge with materials that would cost under a certain amount. This involved us researching material costs and finding out key information about bridge building. We also all collaborated our ideas in a way that benefited one another. We also made our bridges unique to ourselves to give ourselves a unique selling point by making our bridge colourful. Here is our finished bridge/tunnel design.

 

Does Education kill creativity?

School is where we go to learn, socialise and to gain an education which then sets us up for the rest of our lives to find a job. However, does the way we get taught in school turn us into robots who have had lost all their creativity?

You would think that schools would openly try to promote the idea of creativity and what use it can be for pupils but school can leave pupils that are highly creative and intelligent feel that they are not simply because the thing they were good at in school wasn’t valued, or was actually stigmatised. (Robinson, 2006)

After watching Ken Robinson’s Ted talk “how schools kill creativity” which is embedded onto this post, it has grown my understanding on what is wrong with creativity in schools today.

In the video, Robinson (2006) explains to us how schools kill creativity. He believes that children will take a guess at answers even if they don’t know the answer. This is because they’re not frightened of being wrong. This links with creativity as if you’re afraid of taking the risk of being wrong, you'll never come up with anything original. After going through school where it is taught that being wrong is a bad thing, by the time these children get to adulthood, most would have lost their creativeness. Robinson sees that they have become frightened of being wrong. We stigmatize mistakes in the national education systems, mistakes are seen as the worst thing you can make. Robinson shows that our schools through the way that there is only one right answer that we don't grow into creativity, we grow out of it. Or as Robinson said, we get educated out if it.

A new education system based on using non-traditional approaches to problems would help us to make new/better connections with each other. This new education system would encourage the importance of an environment which encourages and values creativity and imagination. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1999)

This would lead to more people finding their true talents in life instead of being stuck in a job they chose to do because they were told not to follow their dreams because there were only slim chances of a job.

To lead on to this point, during class we heard a quote from Ken Robinson's book The Element (2009), it was on Matt Groening (the creator of the Simpsons) and why he did not like school. He was told by both his teachers and parents to lead a different career path with his life completely and to make sure he had a solid profession, go to college and got a predetermined destination career. This in which Groening saw as boring. He did not want to do a job he did not want to do and hated to do and instead pursued artistry despite the risks. Our school system does not support people who have vulnerable but incredible ambitions because they see them as to unlikely when instead we should support the artistry of our students. (Robinson, 2009)