Educational approaches can take two paths: information (transmission of knowledge) and action (lived experiences). These two complementary approaches engage the learner’s inner action, driven by the desire to learn.
In an educational context, the goal is to transmit knowledge and skills to those being guided. There is the path of information, which involves delivering knowledge about sciences, subjects, or methods. And there is the path of action, which allows them to live experiences through which they acquire skills. I argue that there is a dialectic between transmitted information and lived actions, as in every educational situation, we move from one to the other.
Which of the two is more effective? Is one more effective than the other? And above all, how can we build complementarity between these two approaches? What is acquired through action? And what is acquired through receiving information?
Whether in a listening situation or an action situation, what we acquire comes from our inner action.
I can be sitting in a classroom, receiving information, and not retain any of it due to a lack of attention. Being attentive is an action. It may not be visible externally, but it is indeed an action that consumes energy and requires effort.
Some perform this action by taking many notes. Others by doing something else at the same time (which I don’t really believe in, by the way). Others simply listen, making sure not to forget anything.
Whether people are sitting facing someone speaking to them or collaborating on a project while moving around, fundamentally, for them to learn something, they are in action in every educational situation. What drives this action? The engine of action is desire, that is, the desire to learn and the desire to learn in the way proposed to them. Learners must feel a sense of fulfillment, even if it requires effort and work in the learning situation.
We must therefore mobilize their reasons for learning what we want to teach them or for experiencing what we propose.
There is a notable difference between the informational educational approach and the external action-based approach. In information, we aim to control what is delivered to the learners. We seek to teach them specific things. Whereas in action, we also have learning objectives, but learners can, through these actions, acquire much more than what we had planned, such as social or relational skills.
This is not less effective; in fact, it is better, as they learn in a broader, richer, and more extensive way, and their journey becomes more unique. By remaining in an informational situation, we can expect, particularly through subsequent evaluation, precise learning outcomes. But in the same way, each person will retain what seems important to them and connect it to their prior knowledge, as learning is the formation of new neural connections.
What must be worked on above all is the desire to learn, the reason for the person being in that place. Even if they don’t want to be there, it is still a reason. Therefore, the full and complete place given to learners in their relationship with educators is essential and will engage them inwardly, regardless of the educational situation.
Here you will find educational tools, practical and conceptual. These tools are based on the experiences and thinking that I have been developing in a large number of contexts since the 1990s. I have developed a singular, operative pedagogical practice, inspired by Célestin Freinet’s methods among others, adapted to contemporary human issues and to the tools of the 21st Century.
Pedagogy is an experimental practice, which has its theories, its history and its thinkers. It is a central construction tool in the educational field but also beyond, in the framework of professional interactions or cultural mediation for example. Thus the usefulness of the methods and reflections you will find here goes beyond the context of teaching.