(Continued from Exploring the Phantom Tollbooth, Part 1.)

The end
Since the class was so interested in building the “Castle in the Air,” they did just that. The castle, constructed with masking tape and an assortment of cereal boxes, was still somewhat intact when the novel was finished and the day arrived for viewing the movie. The children watched intently as they gobbled popcorn. The plan for that day had been to finish the story in the classroom by going to the castle (in-role), rescuing the princesses, and watching the castle crumble to the ground (demolishing the construction). However, when the movie ended, the children were demanding explanations for changes that were made in the movie, asking “Hey, what about...” or “That’s not the way its supposed to happen!”

Because they had a genuine interest in discussing the differences between the movie and the novel, we opted to do that instead. The class began by making a list of the changes that were made in the movie, then we discussed them briefly. This was actually somewhat rushed since time was running short and there was much to do before dismissal for Easter break.

When we got together to discuss the project afterwards, we had some difficulty drawing the connection between all the various activities which had taken place, that is, linking them together as a whole. We wanted the students to think, to make connections with each other so we could have a better understanding of their knowledge. Good, we gave them opportunities to think. Just like Milo’s character in the story, they took a closer look at some ordinary things and talked about them. But what did they learn from it?

We asked some students what they remembered from the unit to see if they connected our activities to the book. Linda asked the students if they recalled or remembered the Point of View activity and its purpose, only two were able to say “It was to look at stuff differently.” Could we have learned more by staying with one avenue of interest and studying it more in-depth? Would that have engaged the students? Did the students find any value in the work that we did in this unit? In our discussion, we found that like Milo in the novel, the students also found value in thinking about things, even if they could not explain why.

Looking back at our primary goal of providing opportunities to explore within the context of the novel, we indeed accomplished our goal. Yet while we were progressing through the unit, we worried about the results, the format, the process, and the appearance of our lessons. Letting go of these worries as we look at the project in hindsight, has enabled us to look back on the experience and appreciate it. In closing, the following are our reflections on the project and its outcome:

Linda: For me, I think I have begun to let go of those worries for all time. I looked at the project, and felt that I had to have more academics shoved in there somewhere to make it worth my time because of the pressures of first grade. At first, I really wanted more. But at the end, we looked back at what our objective was, and the objective was just to explore some aspects of the book - and we did just that. There was no pressure from the project to include a lot of academics, no pressure to accomplish something very specific that could be tested and measured. We wanted ideas and thoughts acted out and drawn. We did that.

I am looking at how I can structure my program next year - and I am facing the eternal struggle of figuring out that balance between inquiry/projects and skill practice. I am not completely sure how, yet, but I think I can weave something together that will satisfy me.

I think we mentioned this earlier, but in the novel, Milo returns from the Kingdom of Wisdom with a new way of looking at things. He doesn't attribute that to his visit through the tollbooth, but the impact is there and immediately affects his life. I think that my students came away with a slightly different way of looking at some things, a new story in their minds with interesting characters and ideas on some concepts they had taken for granted. They do not realize, I think, that it came from the novel, and I know that many parents and teachers do not see this either. But I know it, and eventually the kids will know it too, and that new knowledge is more powerful than knowing the sound for F.

Sylvia: As the project came to a close Linda and I complained that, much like the novel, our unit seemed disjointed to us although we were focusing on the literature with each session. In the future, what I would do differently would be to allow students to set some goals of their own for the project and really allow them to go in that direction rather than presenting them with ideas we wish for them to expound upon. I still question the notion of exploring one avenue more intensively rather than changing each week. We felt compelled to change things to keep their attention, but I still suspect that they may have had the stamina to remain with one topic if it was one chosen by each individual or group. Of course this never occured to me, at least not very clearly, as we were planning the unit. During the project, the students were bored with the novel at times so we were not encouraged to focus on one topic.

There were definitely times when we shared concerns about using this approach as part of the regular curriculum. Letting go of those traditional concerns was necessary in our evaluation of the project since those traditional evaluative criteria were not exactly applicable. We recalled our goal and it was accomplished. We still questioned how we would evaluate students as inquirers, what to show the parents as evidence of their thinking, how would an administrator assess an inquiry session as a lesson. At this early stage, I couldn’t answer these questions in detail. These are realities of schooling that present challenges for making changes. Being presented with these challenges, I am prompted to find ways to adapt this approach to meet evaluative criteria. In my own future teaching, I hope to integrate the inquiry/project approach into my curriculum. I suspect that once a teacher develops the technique to suite her own style and methods of teaching, its value will become evident through the improving changes in students, the classroom environment which nurtures discovery, and hopefully project work will reflect the students’ investment.

What I found useful in this project was that we had the opportunity to construct our own knowledge of teaching with inquiry as students of inquiry ourselves. I have stated on occasion that now having the project complete, I would do it again quite differently the next time. Now I can choose what I find useful and discard ideas that just didn’t work. I had no such experience to draw from before. As students, we were not provided with a specific basis to begin from but were left to explore this method with partners. Interestingly, I am more enthusiastic about this approach since my own exposure to it has kept me engaged and wondering for the entire semester.