http://farmer.newsvine.com/_news/2007/03/19/621317-students-who-never-fail-teachers-who-do
I found this article and thought it pertained to our class discussion on 3-2. The article is abot the five steps a teacher must take in order to 'never have a student that fails.'.
The five steps were as follows: 1)Explaination 2)Demonstration 3)Practical Exercise 4)Testing or Examination 5)Critique
I thought all of these steps really related to the term competence. In our lecture, we discussed important environmental factors that involved one's competence. One of these was the challenge and feedback. In these steps, there are places for the practice (#3), challenge (#4), and feedback (#5). Another thing we also talked about in relation to supporting onces competence, was the structure-- offering support and guidance. Near the end of the article, the author described how he never had a student fail-- but if they didn't fully grasp the concepts from the first round (of steps 1-5) to start over until you've reached a point of success with the student. I believe having this system is a good way to not give up on a student and just fail them. But also, I do believe there can be an immense amount of motivation from the teacher, but what if the student has none? What if the student has no desire to succeed? Maybe then this system wouldn't work but a new system needs to be adapted so help change the student's mind about classwork.
I agree, that these steps may aid in setting up an environment to help students fulfill their need for competence. It also seems to relate to setting up an autonomy-supportive environment. At least two of the steps seem to be supportive and there are ways to make the other steps supportive of autonomy as well. The two that I can see as autonomy-supportive on their own are the explanation and the demonstration. The explanation step could include the rationale behind why what they are learning is important and also why the homework that is required of them will aid them in learning. If a teacher were to provide a demonstration he/she would have to use informational language to complete that demonstration.
I think that the phrase "Never have a student that fails" is a bit misleading. They are ignoring that sometimes tolerating failure can be helpful to the motivational process - especially in fulfilling the need for competence. I think that we have gotten too hung up on grades, that we have kept some students from trying things that would really challenge them and help them learn more complex things. It may be better to have the goal of 'Never have a student leave without accomplishing the goal of the class' be that learning information or processes or creating something new, etc.
There are students that have no motivation to learn the lessons that teachers set out to teach. I am not sure that there is a way to universally motivate all students but there has to be a better way than the current system.