Anna Engel: "There are more and more students who place little value on what they learn in the classroom."

BarcelonaAnna Engel is the coordinator of the interuniversity master's degree in educational psychology at Catalan universities. Educational psychology is the branch of study that focuses on the teaching and learning processes. Engel teaches future early childhood and primary school teachers and teaches classes in the master's degree in educational psychology to individuals who, in the future, will be dedicated to advising teachers. This week, she was one of the speakers on the "Let's Learn Together 2030" tour, a program promoted by BBVA whose objective is to promote lifelong learning and disseminate knowledge in an innovative way, which was held at the Teatre Lliure in Barcelona. In the academic field, the program has implemented its educational methodologies, which Engel also uses, in more than 5,500 schools across Spain.

What should the teachers of the future be like?

— They must be good professionals who empower students to promote and encourage them to express their interests and learning objectives and give them the freedom to decide how they want to learn. Collaboration among students and peers must be encouraged, and one of the key strategies is to make connections between what happens inside and outside the classroom. All of these are essential elements in training future teachers to enable them to design powerful learning environments.

One of your research areas is learning based on students' interests. What does this mean?

— In recent years, research has shown—and this is a global phenomenon—that an increasing number of students attach little meaning or value to what they learn in the classroom because it is poorly related to their interests, goals, and future expectations. And this gap between what is taught in school and what school should be creates disaffection. In response to this, we have been identifying strategies to combat it, and one of them is what we call personalizing learning—that is, giving personal value to what is taught in schools. Curricular content must be linked to what is close to the students, to their environment and their community. It's not about teaching decontextualized content, but rather connecting it to what they know, giving them leadership, and working with their interests.

Does that mean they choose what they study?

— No, this doesn't mean giving them a range of options and letting them choose. Let's ask ourselves why a student chooses one thing over another. It may be because a close friend decided it, and then they do too, but not because they're truly interested. The point of interest-based learning is to link students' interests with the curriculum and thus spark interest in those contents. It's more group work than individual work. And we need to talk about these interests, assess them, and compare them: where does that interest come from? It doesn't come naturally. And this is what's known as personalized learning, but it's recently become fashionable, and some people use it in different ways.

Can you give a practical example?

— There are some very good examples. We work with an elementary school that, in the initial phase, organizes field trips to places in its surroundings that might be interesting: from ruins to the local pharmacy. The students, along with their families, can choose the excursions. Groups are formed with the entire grade level, the visit is prepared, and once completed, when they return, they discuss how it went, what they learned, and answer any questions or concerns they may have. Once the questions are completed, the teacher reads them, and together they decide on seven or eight projects based on the questions. They link them to curricular content, but focus on the questions. And from these, they generate seven or eight projects and present them throughout the grade level. The choice must be reasoned. Students must explain why they want to participate in that project and justify it to the class. At each step, they are given a voice to express their interests and have some leeway to make decisions about what they want to learn. Let's imagine the question that arises: What would happen if an amusement park were built in our town? The project can have many aspects. One social, about what would happen to jobs, another linked to economic content, another in nature, about what would happen to forests... And the teachers give them the freedom to decide together where they want to take the project, but they have a pool of curricular content, which is what students will learn. And they will, but linked to a project that stems from their interests.

It's about giving students a voice.

— It's essential because they are the protagonists of learning. And giving them a voice must be accompanied by some decision-making. But this must also be learned. Initially, they are given a smaller margin for decision-making, and as they gain greater capacity to make reasoned decisions, they are given more options.

What should be the role of technology in the classroom?

— It can play a very important role, and it should, but only if we focus on uses that are truly enriching for teaching and learning. Because if not, it doesn't need to play any role. The potential of digital technologies to help students learn is enormous, but they must be used correctly. Training in their use is essential so that they benefit both student learning and teachers' teaching.

What should a good teacher have?

— They must have very clear principles on which to base their teaching. But what we must have are management teams that have a common understanding of what learning and teaching mean, and who are all working together. I believe the important thing is the teaching teams, and training work should be within the school itself, not so much with individual teachers. Educational centers and teams must be supported, taking into account the characteristics of their environment and their teaching staff.