from other instructional models and frameworks, we will introduce questing and its components and provide an overview of what is in this book.
Discern Questing From Other Instructional Models and Frameworks
The appetite for an instructional model satisfies a craving for something tangible to guide instruction with a linear (or near linear) flow of steps, protocols, and tools. An instructional framework, which is what questing offers, does not do this; instead, it clearly defines the elements or choices and then uses those elements or choices consistently as the foundation for future models. Questing naturally nests within the instructional model of personalized learning. Allison Zmuda, Greg Curtis, and Diane Ullman (2015) define personalized learning as “a progressively student-driven model in which students deeply engage in meaningful, authentic, and rigorous challenges to demonstrate desired outcomes” (p. 7). Questing is very much in line with personalized learning’s purposeful choices about when the teacher takes the lead, when teachers and students co-create, and when students take the lead. Bena Kallick and Allison Zmuda (2017b) explain that the “teacher can turn the volume up or down, amplifying or reducing the amount of student agency as the teacher and students begin to feel more comfortable with student self-direction” (p. 54). Exhibiting this responsiveness and allowing this range are vital as you balance alignment with content standards, exposure to new ideas and ways of thinking, and identified areas for individual student growth.
Three learning models or frameworks may appear similar to questing—(1) individualization, (2) differentiation, and (3) project-based learning—because in them, students have increased control over certain aspects of their learning. Individualization, a student-centered framework, helps students own the pace of their learning as they tackle content-related problems. They can move at their own pace through a series of topics and demonstrate mastery when they’re ready. The teacher manages the learning by helping establish and monitor timelines, offering consultations when needed, and evaluating performance in light of desired results. However, individualization limits students’ control over what problems, questions, and challenges they tackle. In addition, students may not interact much with others. The goal may be more focused on completing a topic than engaging in robust learning experiences.
Differentiation allows students’ content, process, or product choices, but within the confines of what the teacher offers (which he or she determines based on individual students’ readiness, interests, and learning preferences). While offering choice, the learning designs typically are prescribed options or scaffolds that the teacher has vetted for alignment with specific learning goals, preferred ways of working, and scoring methods. The teacher functions as a designer, lead instructor, and evaluator. In addition, the teacher sets the pace and often designs instructional tools (such as centers or stations) to support learners in differentiated ways.
Project-based learning engages students in the pursuit of a worthy, challenging question or problem over an extended period of time. The students are responsible for delivering a public presentation, but unlike quests, the teacher is primarily responsible for forming the essential question and task, even if students contribute to the deliverables’ design. After the project’s launch, the teacher may facilitate ongoing work while relinquishing some control to students.
Quests are based specifically on what students determine is compelling, with few, if any, restrictions, though not necessarily without guidance. Quests are not necessarily monthlong projects, though they can be. A quest can occur during the process of learning a cell’s major components, for example. In addition, collaboration is an integral part of questing. While writing this book, we embraced the nonlinear and often messy reality of defining a framework. We understand the limits of working within a framework, including the inability to guarantee that if you follow certain steps, everything will go according to plan. We also understand the desire for exactly that kind of reassurance. But it simply isn’t possible with questing, and we address that as well—such as when talking about unexpected outcomes, for example.
Understand Questing and Its Components
To be sure, questing is not unit or curriculum design. You can employ questing with any unit by paying attention to three engagement tenets. We developed these tenets as a result of the interplay among brain-based research, game-based theory, and lots of learner observation. What we offer in this book clarifies some of the more challenging choices and elements within the questing framework more deeply.
Our three learner engagement tenets follow.
1. The learner engages with relevant, worthy inquiries and experiences that are interesting or emotionally gripping.
2. The learner engages in an active, intentional cycle with clear goals and right-sized, actionable steps.
3. The learner engages in social, collaborative opportunities that grow expertise.
The student and teacher experience engagement tenets through a design type. Both make deliberate design choices in the questing framework. In this book, we focus on (1) question design, (2) game design, and (3) network design. These are not the only designs through which students can quest, but they are the ones with which most teachers struggle.
Any one quest may include any combination of inquiry, game, and network design choices. Student and teacher make choices through these design lenses to grow their own expertise. What is relevant and worth investigating? What is interesting or emotionally gripping? What networks should I tap into?
After initially outlining something based on the quester’s interests, student and teacher design and redesign the details as the learning journey begins unfolding. Participants address details in a just-in-time manner, as they crop up, instead of in advance. This powerfully summarizes 21st century learning: discovering something of interest, working in a space with like-minded participants, and establishing either group or individual goals. Developing a prototype, pursuing social reform, or creating a film takes weeks, perhaps months, and represents possible products or events from a questing experience. Those weeks are filled with discovery, missteps, and wins both big and little. These are questers engaging in the learning process.
See What This Book Offers
To simply promote an experience and call it a quest does not mean the learner automatically experiences engagement and joyful learning. True questing means teachers encourage problem solvers, creators, and critical thinkers to adapt and grow with content, tools, and resources. To that end, the way a teacher facilitates a quest makes or breaks a student’s learning experience.
The Quest for Learning helps you build a repository of instructional techniques and approaches that generate and sustain quality questing experiences. We split this book into two parts. Part I (chapters 1 through 5) is about establishing questing’s foundations; part II (chapters 6 through 9) is about guiding quests. Chapter 1 clarifies why questing is a compelling method for boosting student engagement. Chapter 2 thoroughly explores the three tenets of engagement and introduces three design lenses. Subsequent chapters dig deeply into each design type as a collection of choices to be made while questing—chapter 3 digs deeper into question design choices, chapter
