The teaching and learning environment has changed along with classroom theory and practice. This synopsis of literature on teaching strategies offers ...
A Research Brief for Practitioners:
Promising Instructional Strategies for Alberta Teachers for Alberta School Improvement Branch (AISI) Dr. Eugene G. Kowch Faculty of Education University of Calgary © Kowch, 2005
Table of Contents
Abstract
3
Executive Summary: Quick Facts & Key Findings
3
What is class size research telling us? Foreground and Background Issues
7 8
Keeping Up in a Changing Profession: Key Factors Influencing Promising Instructional Methodologies
9
How to use this Research Brief
11
2 Section A: Instruction Basics –A review of the instruction design process Considering your philosophical stance
14 14
Section B: An Overview of Teaching Methods and Instructional Strategies
19
I. The Behavior System Family of Teaching Methods i. Mastery Learning ii. Direct Instruction iii. Simulation Learning
19 20 21 24
II. The Information Processing (IP) Family of Teaching Methods i. Inquiry Based Teaching ii. Indirect Instruction Strategies iii. Teaching Learning from Advance Organizers
25
III. The Social Family of Teaching Models i. Democratic Classrooms ii. Challenges for Social Teaching Models
37 39 40
IV. The Personal Family of Teaching Models i. Non Directive Teaching ii. Profiling Learners: Styles & Intelligences iii. Differentiated Learning Environments
41 41 42 45
32 36
Summary
47
References
48
Online References/Resources
54
3
Abstract
The teaching and learning environment has changed along with classroom theory and practice. This synopsis of literature on teaching strategies offers educators a capsule portraying the current instructional design methods followed by an organized summary of classroom instructional strategy categories organized into four compartments. The purpose of this document is to give educators a summary of teaching methods by category, and to demonstrate trends for the instructional strategies in the future. Think of it as a review of theory that is organized for the Alberta school futures. The plethora of teaching strategies in existence means that practical examples are mentioned but not explored here for parsimony. This report offers a ‘shopping list’ according to teaching method categories, along with details about each method and strategy. The document is based on effective practices and created by the University/AISI partnership so that educators may find, compare and contrast older and newer classroom strategies and trends so that they can explore and review their own instructional strategies in a changing learning environment.
Executive Summary: Quick Facts and Key Findings
Though research is inconclusive about the direct benefits of smaller class sizes on student learning outcomes, Alberta teachers are very interested in continued, excellent results from their classroom instruction strategies. After a decade of innovations and strategic policies directed at institutions and professional development (class size, school improvement and teacher professional development initiatives), Alberta teachers are positioned to continue their high student achievement ranking by considering, among other things, a focus on classroom instruction for a new, social learning, technology integrated era. This summary shows the major factors influencing that focus today:
1. There will be more specific kinds of instruction or teaching strategies and less of certain strategies in the next few years. The teaching and learning environment has changed from an objectivist (stand and deliver) teacher stance to a more subjectivist stance (focused on inquiry or social, problem solving). Teachers and teaching researchers observe a consistent trend today that there is too much information and expertise in the world. More and more, we understand that the teacher can not be a knowledge fount, or be managers of (objective) knowledge provision. Teachers understand that promising instructional practice today means taking a subjective or “it depends” stance about the process of setting
4 learning goals, content, and the creation of a learning environment that is embedded with specific teaching and learning strategies.
The significant shifts in teacher and instructional practice today are mapped below by comparing what teachers are doing “more” and what they are doing “less” in class (Vaughan, 2005; Daniels & Bizar, 1998). Less o o o o o o o o o o o
Whole class instruction. e.g., lecturing Student passivity: sitting, listening, receiving and absorbing information Prizing and rewarding of silence in the learning environment Classroom or environment time devoted to worksheets and ‘seatwork’ Student time spent reading textbooks and basal readers Attempt by teachers to ‘cover’ large volumes of subject content Rote memorization of facts and details Competition among students for grades and related stresses Tracking or leveling students into “ability groups” Use of pull-out special programs Use of and reliance on standardized tests More
o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Inquiry or challenge-oriented, hands-on learning social learning environments Active learning in the environment, complete with increased but constructive noise Emphasis on higher order thinking about principles and concepts Time devoted to reading original books, often with guidance Student responsibility for managing learning (goal setting, record keeping, etc.) Modeling principles of civic duty and democracy in the learning environment Focus on civics, moral reasoning and character development in the classroom An ethic of caring in instructional arrangements (Lickona, 1993) Cooperative and collaborative learning activity, more often with technology as a communication/socialization enabler Individualized activities in a social setting (with scaffolding) in the integrated, differentiated classroom More varied and cooperative roles for teachers, parents and administrators in the learning events Reliance on teacher’s descriptions and assessment of student growth and learning achievements Blending of social and information processing (inquiry) models of teaching
2. The processes for designing a learning environment or “instruction” remain effective, whether the process is elaborated or simplified, or if it is not practiced in a linear sequence. This process has been renamed variously as ‘universal design for learning’, ‘backwards design’ or simply as ‘instructional design’, but the root process for creating instruction remains. The instruction process today results in a
5 more engaging, problem based, social interactive learning environment that occurs with the following list of key elements in no prescribed order (Kowch, 2005; Ross, Morrisson & Kemp, 2003). o
Planning, where the teacher defines a range of specific learning outcomes, identifying a range of specific learning objectives for the event by considering learner characteristics.
o
Content or learning problems are sequenced or ordered so that the student has the necessary prerequisite knowledge before subsequent or contingent, more complex teaching and learning events occur. Acceptable evidence is gathered for assessment.
o
Teaching methods and strategies are chosen by the teacher to create a learning environment to maximize learner achievement from a range of defined objectives.
o
The learning event occurs (“instruction”), more often today as socially interactive learning among students. Inquiry learning environments are rich with discussion, questions, research and student motivation.
o
Formative learning outcomes or assessment for learning occurs so that on reflection and before the next time this event is offered, the teacher can determine whether the objectives, sequencing, teaching strategies or the instructional event itself was successful. There is but one measure of success – learner achievement of a portion of the range of teacher specified learning outcomes.
o
Redesign, which involves tweaking and adjusting the learning environment for new contexts and students involved in learning.
3. Inquiry learning environments, where social interaction and investigation occur via information processing, are most popular and follow the long term trend in teaching strategies to create more social, interactive, problem solving learning environments in the classroom. This literature is divergent and conflicting, and mostly praxis based today (This is true for both the teachers and the learners, as teachers are learning with each other to create new, facilitated learning spaces in different settings (Alberta Learning, 2004; Drayton & Falk, 2001; DuFour and Eaker, 1998). The following elements define the Alberta Inquiry Model (Alberta Learning, 2004) for constructivist teaching: o
o o o o o o
Planning – facilitating the process of investigation with the learner(s), including teacher designing learner outcome ranges and criteria for assessing student achievement. The learner chooses a question (or problem) to drive research toward an answer. The process results in student centered learning. Retrieving – learner gathers relevant information on the problem. Processing – making sense of the challenges in the project Creating – solutions and new meaning, and new learning strategies Sharing - with other learners and content experts Evaluating - with other learners, the teacher and through self reflection
Constructivist learning and teaching theory underpin the more diverse, forming inquiry scholarly literature base and, as such, can provide guidelines for instruction in this manner (Driscoll, 2001; Phillips, 1995)
6 o
The constructivist teacher designs conditions for learning, which are: o Embed learning in complex, realistic and relevant environments (Duffy and Cunningham, 1996). o Provide for social negotiation as an integral part of learning (Honebein, 1996). o Support multiple perspectives and the use of multiple modes of representation (Spiro et al., 1995). o Encourage ownership in learning (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996).
Scaffolding is an important newer teaching strategy used across constructivist or inquiry learning environments. This means that the teacher generates a learning environment by creating subjective (inquiry) teaching strategies taking an inquiry or ‘wonderment’ stance to teaching and learning (Larkin, 2002; Jonassen, 2001; Driscoll, 2001). The following scaffolding processes work for constructivist (inquiry) teaching strategists: Pre-engagement with the learner and the curriculum (before the learning event) Active and accurate diagnostics of student needs and understandings Providing tailored assistance when the learner requires it Facilitating, not directing, but maintaining the pursuit of the goals of the inquiry, in concert with the range of desired learning outcomes for the inquiry event o Giving feedback to the learner o Controlling frustration and risk in student directed inquiries/explorations o Assisting learner internalization, independence and generalization of the inquiry findings to other contexts Using scaffolding throughout the lesson means that teachers may need first to model how to perform a new or difficult task, then to work with students to perform the task, then to have students work with a partner to complete the task, and finally to have individual students demonstrate their task mastery. o o o o
o
4. There is a lot to keep up with as instructional design and classroom teaching models/strategies change or must be adapted to particular teaching contexts. A lot of the literature on leadership and curriculum development points to a trend that may be the answer for teachers in this situation – genuine teams of professionals who work to keep each other up to date, continuously improving through shared practice (teaching) and collaborative PD.
“It’s as simple as this: I can not improve my craft in isolation from others. To improve, I must have formats, structures, and plans for reflecting on, changing, and assessing my practice [which] must be continually tested and upgraded with my colleagues” (Glickman, 2002).
The quality and nature of teacher PD will have to improve for this to happen. The work of Fullan, Barth, Lieberman, Lortie, Marzano, Newmann, Odden, Wiggins, Sarason and Warren has led us to understand the key idea behind teachers successfully teaching teachers is expected to result in the following instructional improvement capabilities (adapted from Schmoker, 2004): •
Higher quality solutions to instructional problems,
7 • • • • •
Increased confidence among faculty, Increased ability to support one another’s strengths and to accommodate, weaknesses, More systematic assistance to beginning teachers, The ability to examine an expanded pool of ideas, methods and materials in the time available An inquiry stance to long term professional development (Cochrane-Smith, 2001) via the planned creation of communities of learning for o
Knowledge-for-practice (the expert teacher constantly updates teaching strategies based on university validated research)
o
Knowledge-in-practice (expert teachers can articulate and make explicit the knowledge implicit in wise action and to articulate this knowledge for and with less accomplished or new teachers (p. 52).
Recommended Sources for Alberta Teachers: Of all the collected works studied for this synopsis, for busy teachers the author suggests Joyce & Calhoun’s (2004) book on teaching methodologies. Frieberg & Driscoll (2004) also offer a simply excellent book on universal teaching strategies that provides an overview and examples of teaching strategies includes teaching trends, planning, instruction design, effective use of time, learning strategies, questioning, practice, group learning, reflection, media and assessment. This synopsis of course covers many sources, but the two resources mentioned here are good consolidated resources on teaching for any professional library.
Question: What is Class Size Research Telling Us? Answer: There is A Renewed Need for us to Focus on Instructional Strategies in the Classroom Good teaching is good teaching. There is more to improved learning outcomes than school governance, teacher development or policy support. The next few pages explore the issue of class size, which is thought by some to be directly related to student learning outcomes. Class size change can be a structural support for school improvement, whereas classroom instructional strategy is a process support for school improvement that is more directly related to teaching practice and learning outcomes. It is important to understand both structural and process support for school change/ Research findings show us the inconclusiveness of class size support on learning outcomes – research that points more to a need for a focus on good teaching strategies to improve learning outcomes. The section also shows how to use this research brief, including a model showing how the four (main) teaching method groups map onto our shifting education world view – to help you consider the main method groups (sections in this report) and your personal world view of teaching. At the end of this section, and after using this report to find teaching strategies that fit for you, ask yourself “Does my strategy fit with my world view for
8 this learning event?” There is a distinct trend toward more constructivist, social learning in popular literature and the best methods research. Different teaching styles mean different readers may find that some teaching practices work just fine, in well chosen contexts, when the teacher has a behaviorist world view (as in teaching safety), a congnitivist world view (when teaching children learning strategies), a constructivist view (when social learning and problem solving matters). Checking your world view or ontology toward a teaching environment that you are creating might help you choose from the four teaching methods families categorized for you in this report.
To teach in a continuously improving school, we must be able to shop well for teaching strategies that make a difference. This synopsis offers such a guide and some content for such shopping. It is said that the primary role of education is to “increase student capacity for personal growth, social growth and academic learning” and that this is accomplished primarily by good teaching practices (sometimes called “methods” or “instructional methodologies” that form the core of a part of today’s professionally created, successful learning environments in schools (Joyce, Weil & Calhoun, 2004, p. v). Foreground and Background Issues In the foreground, this synopsis summarizes and focuses on: •
instructional design and instruction element basics
•
trends and teaching methodology models, sorted by category, with definitions and instructional strategy examples.
As teachers, we need to know how and when to pick different instructional strategies today to create robust social learning environments, particularly when classroom management issues do not prevail, affording we, as teachers, the chance to do so (Glickman, 2002; Bornsedt & Stecher, 2002, p.44). This synopsis is a resource to support teachers and administrators seeking to improve schools in Alberta.
In the background, this literature synopsis integrates current research on class size, new education policy, administration and governance presses on instructional methods and professional development. Significant background factors impacting student learning achievement are: •
Quality teacher development (PD) and lifelong learning
•
Quality instructional praxis, (teaching!) -- other factors have less impact.
For example, the perceptions of educators have been significantly impacted by environmental factors like class size (Statz & Stecher, 2000). Class size is proven to have an important positive effect on teacher, parent and administrator attitudes and motivation toward schooling, where smaller classes are widely believed to positively impact job satisfaction and morale in the school (Glass et al., 1982; Edmonton Public Schools and
9 Faculty of Education, U of A; 2001). But research on reduced class size, as an environmental factor, has not been conclusively defined as either a positive or negative causal factor for either lower or higher learning outcomes for average learners (Canadian Council on Learning, 2005). Perhaps because this kind of work is like studying to see cause/effect between traffic speed limits (policy for the greater good) to driver performance in driver training. A far more important factor for (school) student learning outcomes and achievement is quality teaching (Dustman, 2003; Statz & Stecher, 2000, p. 313; Hanushek, 1999; Zahorik, 1997; Zeigler, 1997).
There is a need for more theory, research and development on class size and student achievement – especially in the Canadian context. As controversial as it is, there is evidence that even important policy environmental factors like class size impact student learning achievement much less than a factor like quality teaching and instruction .(Hanushek, 1999, p. 159; Rivken, Hanushek & Kain, 1998). Indeed, significant empirical research done across the California school system following class size reduction, found that “a significant weakness in the literature on class size is the lack of any strong theory of why smaller classes would be expected to produce better achievement (Anderson cited in Statz & Stecher, 2000, p. 315). In large studies of statewide class reduction programmes, small increases in the use of hands-on activities, interest centers and cooperative groups led to slightly more individualized instruction, but the dominant mode or method of teaching remained (unchanged) as direct instruction (Zahorik, 1999; p.52; Betts & Shkolnik, 1999). In the most recent state-wide research, elementary California teachers in reduced-size classes report providing more individual instruction for their student than did teachers in non reduced size classes but there was less evidence that teachers changed teaching methodology, instructional strategy or content coverage (Bornsedt & Stecher, 2002). Class size research (too much of it is not from Canada) related to student achievement shows mixed cause/effect relationships at best (Dustmann, 2003; Krueger, 20003; Nye, 1999). The bulk of the literature points out that from Tennessee to California, no proven benefits exist for low achieving learners (Nye, 1999; Biddle & Berliner, 2002. From this uncertain literature however, one finding is certain – student learning is significantly impacted by teaching methods and strategies.
Keeping Up In a Changing Profession: Key Factors Influencing Promising Instructional Methodologies in Alberta Classrooms A good deal of the literature surveyed here shows that the role of the teacher is changing in a changing school institution within a knowledge economy, and that teacher preparation for teaching (including instructional methodology professional development) is changing too.
10 As teachers, we need to know how and when to pick different instructional strategies to create robust social learning environments, particularly when classroom management issues do not prevail. (Glickman, 2002; Bornsedt & Stecher, 2002, p.44). This synopsis is a resource to support these teachers.
This literature synopsis categorizes instructional models and teaching strategies for teachers to shop – so that school improvement professionals (teachers) can answer the question: “As teachers, are we choosing instructional strategies to match student needs and school learning conditions today?”
Education leadership scholars urge leaders and teachers today toward a new kind of professionalism as an important new backdrop for the creation of promising classroom instruction methods. As schools improve, through the Alberta Initiative for School Improvement, teachers are continuously working within a changing profession – a profession that is no longer the profession we knew when we first learned teaching methods at university:
This cannot be the professionalism of the old, in which teachers had autonomy to teach in the ways they wished or were most familiar to them. There is no value in reviving the Julie Andrews curriculum – “these are a few of my favorite things” … Teachers can no longer take refuge in the basic premises of the pre-professional age: that teaching is managerially hard but technically simple; that once you have qualified to teach, you know the basics of teaching forever; and that from then on, teaching is something you work at improving yourself, through trial and error, in our own classes … (Hargreaves, 2003, p. 24).
Literature trends indicate that both the scholarly and classroom teacher philosophical stances on teaching methods and strategies continued to change over the last decade. We teach more now with the consideration that human thinking (cognition) is as important as the social environment (Vygotsky, 1978). So the challenge is to design and set up for learners in a more subjective, constructivist environment, as opposed to older transmission or objectivist environments (Jonassen, 2001; ). As teachers, we will develop our professional practices together, less so in one-shot PD events and more as a planned series of events: “An across-the-life-span perspective on professional development makes salient the role of communities and their intellectual projects over time” (Cochrane-Smith & Lytle, 2001). This shift in our own teacher development is
…in the future, we will have to truly support teacher awareness and teacher use of more and varied teaching methods (Hargreaves, 2003; Sergiovanni, 2005).
marked by a drift away from personal teaching models, also called “student centered” models (Rogers, 1987) toward strategies employing a combination of personal and social “inquiry” stances on teaching and active learning (Hargreaves, 2003; Cochrane-Smith & Lytle, 2001; Alberta Education, 2004). While all teaching stances remain in practice in our classrooms, the literature today indicates a strong shift in research and practice – a distinct shift toward the social family of methods (Joyce &
11 Calhoun, 2004). The increased availability of teaching and learning communication technologies (ICTs) is an actuator in this change toward more social learning processes – processes where the technology “disappears” and the child to child conversation is key to learning outcomes (Rose & Meyer, 2002; New London Group, 1996; Thurlow, Lengel & Tomic, 2004).
Selecting Instructional Strategies for Different Contexts: How to Use This Literature Synopsis A literature synopsis can offer an indication of literature types and results, but it can not offer deep and detailed guidelines and analysis for practice. This synopsis is organized into sections: •
Section A: Provides teachers and administrators with a brief review of the key elements and the contexts of instruction. The purpose of this section is to remind teachers that we often need to know our instructional design process as well as our teaching philosophy before we select an instructional strategy. It is a ‘refresher’ for teachers, mapping instructional strategies for those who are in the greater act of teaching. Section A is: a survey of the basic science of instructional design process to illustrate the critical elements of any instruction, regardless of strategy because when combined with self-reflection by a teacher to determine personal philosophical stance toward instruction in a given situation, this instructional design knowledge helps teachers choose an instructional strategy that is part of a complete learning event (Bereiter & Scardimalia, 1998).
•
Section B: Provides an overview of teaching methods and strategies, from the literature today, considering trends. Section B is: o
A categorized taxonomy of teaching methods and definitions, and
o
a compilation of basic teaching models that are categorized into four families of practice (after Joyce and Calhoun, 2004).
Within the (4) main categories or families of teaching methods organizing this synopsis, teachers can review and select specific instructional strategies that have been sorted from the literature and placed by this author within each teaching method family.
These families of methods are all backed by empirical and formal research, and represent a wide spectrum of educational philosophies and ideologies which are well outside the focus of this synopsis. That said, because this is a review of trends in teaching strategy, it is helpful first to classify the ‘shopping list’ of teaching methods offered here along a simple continuum that defines two (opposite) polarities or ideologies in education, as Jonassen’s work points out – the continuum ranging from objectivist to subjectivist world views.
12 What is an objectivist vs. subjectivist world view? These are the kinds of stances a teacher takes to teaching and learning before they consider instruction, design or strategy, and they are important features affecting how we choose our teaching methods, and how we lead our schools (Cibulka, 1999).
Quite simply, if a teacher approaches the creation of a learning event with the dominant stance that there exists a formula for both teaching and learning – a formula that needs to be applied well for successful learner outcomes, this teacher has an objectivist world view. Such a teacher could take any one of the teaching models and strategies in this report and apply them clinically, with more research, and expect a desired learner outcome. On the other hand, if a teacher approaches the creation of a learning event with the dominant stance that both the teaching and learning processes depend on a great many variables, conditions and ideas held by both by the teacher and the learner (for example: the social environment, diversity in learners and teachers, the teacher can not know all the content), then this teacher has a subjectivist or ‘it depends’ world view of the teaching process. Such a teacher could take, with care, parts of each method and combine them to create a learning environment where learner outcomes would be expected, but within a range of expectation. A graphical depiction of the subjective/objective world view continuum is offered in Figure 3:
Behavioral Systems Teaching Methods
Information Processing Teaching Methods
Behaviorism (observable performance)
Cognitivism (mental schema)
Constructivism (Inquiry)
Personal Teaching Methods
Objective World View Knowledge creation is A product – it is more external to learner
Physical Reality matters
Postmodernism
No grand narratives..
Social Reality matters
Social Teaching Methods
Pluralism Eclecticism Truth Complexity
Subjective World View Knowledge creation is a Process – it is more internal to learner and to the learner environment © Kowch, 2004
This Figure demonstrates (with tremendous simplification), where each of the four main teaching methodologies fit in terms of teaching world view (ontology). The arrow at the bottom indicates the objective
13 to subjective trend in teaching found in the literature today. This figure can be used to organize your thinking as you ‘shop’ for teaching methods and strategies within this report. For example, if you have a certain teaching moment / context in mind, and you have a constructivist world view about that teaching event, the corresponding (most helpful) section in this report will most likely be the Information Processing or Social Teaching methods sections. Conversely, if you do not know what your world view about a particular teaching event may be, but you know that you prefer one of the four teaching methodologies categorized in the figure (the white boxes), then you might start by reading that methods section to find specific instructional strategies. The point of Figure 3 is to roughly associate teaching philosophy with the categories of teaching methods here – so that you can see if your method matches your philosophy. Any method may fit in any philosophy in a particular context – but in general, teaching methods map reasonably to ontologies in Figure 3. The trend today is to take a more subjectivist view of instructional strategizing and instructional design (Jonassen, 2001; Alberta Learning, 2004). While these teaching models and strategies are organized and typified here by their classical (research) world view, teachers who shop for models should know their own world view and preferences to select methods that suit them. The table below correlates the 4 main teaching method categories in this report to a corresponding teaching world view. Teaching Method Category In This Synopsis
Predominant “World View of the Category”
Behavioral Systems Methods Information Processing Methods Personal Methods Social Methods
Objectivist Objectivist Objectivist and Subjectivist Subjectivist
“I do not want the peace which passeth under-standing; I want the understanding which bringeth peace.” Helen Keller (Cited in Jones, 1997)
14
Section A: Instruction Basics – A Review of Instructional Design Processes
•
Knowledge of Instructional Design concepts provides teachers with a foundation for instructional method selection / choices.
The selection of an instructional strategy is really part of an overall process of instructional design (Morrison, Ross & Kemp, 2003). All teachers learn methods of
The Instructional design is a process or plan that a teacher develops to apply instructional theory, so as to ensure that the design of a learning environment or a learning event leads to quality learning outcomes (Morrison, Ross & Kemp, 2003).
instruction in Canadian universities, but over the life span of a teaching career, reviewing these methods and trying new variations or attempting completely new methods is difficult but important work (Clifford, Friesen & Lock, 2004). Knowing how students learn (learning theory) is foundational to instruction or learning environment design, so instructional theory (and practice) is based upon how teachers ensure that the desired student learning occurs – where learning is defined as “a persistent change in a person’s potential” (Driscoll, 2000).
John Dewey (1900) saw a need for a science or a process that would translate what was learned through research into practical applications for instruction, so the search for good applications of learning and teaching methods is not new but it is ever-changing (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000). Teachers know that designing effective instruction of any kind requires the teacher to focus on the learner, on the learning situation and on how instruction is delivered. Learning theories can be sorted into three main categories: (1) behaviorist (Skinner, 1954), (2) cognitive (Piaget, 1958) or social-cognitive (Bruner, 1973; Jonassen, 2001), therefore the related instructional designs can be categorized this way as well. While instructional design processes are particularly successful for technology integrated learning environments, the process works in any teaching and learning situation (Rose & Meyer, 2002; Dick, Carey & Carey, 2001). New teachers in particular are being exposed to technology supported inquiry instruction, learning that technology can be part of the communication and interaction process within a well designed instructional learning environment (LaGrange & Foulke, 2004; Kozma, 2003).
15 Before Selecting a Design For Instruction, Consider your Philosophical Stance to the Situation: As reflective teacher professionals (Glickman, 2002), our own individual approach to the idea of creating a learning environment
An instructional design process focuses on the learner rather than on the content, technology or the curriculum (Smith & Ragan, 1999; Dick, Carey & Carey, 2001).
precedes our work to plan instruction or to look for teaching and learning strategies. Knowing our philosophical standpoint before we come to plan instruction (our philosophical stance) is critical to successful teaching (Schmoker, 2004; Darling-Hammond, 2001). This sounds intuitive, but how many times do we, as teachers, compare particular classroom activities (which work best in particular teaching methodologies) to see if the philosophy behind the chosen classroom strategy or activity matches the philosophy behind the model? Our philosophy of teaching and instruction should match, both in theory and in practice (Friere, 1995). For example, if we hold an objective view toward teaching in a certain context (say teaching fractions), and we choose a collaborative or group problem-solving instructional event, we create an inquiry or social learning event type. Most often, because inquiry is a subjective process and objective processes often involve direct instruction (lecture), in this example the teacher would ‘tack on’ the practice (social learning) event and disconnect it from the lecture part of the lesson. While this can work, the different philosophies about teaching can confuse students, who are actually learning to learn in the same way we are teaching them (Alfasi, 1998).
In 2001, Dr. David Jonassen challenged teachers who design instruction to reflect, well ahead of instructional strategizing or planning, about our own teaching philosophy because that stance
A well designed generative instructional strategy, as part of an instructional design, prompts or motivates the learner to actively make connections between what the learner already knows and the new information (Grabowski, 1996).
impacts the kinds of instructional strategies we choose. From the plethora of teaching models and strategies existing today, it is easier to select these strategies (from Section B) if first you know your own philosophical approach to instruction in a specific instance (Driscoll, 2000). Jonassen (2001) challenged teachers to realize that all teaching exists along a philosophical continuum ranging from objectivist (behaviorist) to subjectivist (social interactionist) teaching stances. Jonassen’s objectivist teaching philosophy can be demonstrated: (we know how learners learn so we can ‘fill them up’ with knowledge) versus subjective teaching philosophy which is demonstrated: (learners learn in situations and by bouncing learning off other learners – so we can only facilitate learning, we can not direct it). For this reason, the instructional strategies in Section B are sorted in ranges from objective to subjective, so that after you determine what philosophical stance you are taking to the teaching event, you can select appropriate instructional strategies. The inquiry stance, for example, is subjectivist, so you would likely choose information processing, social family of methods and strategies, or a blend of these methods to teach (See Section B) (Cochrane-Smith & Lytle, 2001).
16 Once we know our instruction ‘stance’ or philosophy for a certain situation, we can better apply the instructional design elements as part of a process of planning out successful, repeatable learner outcomes. This process includes selecting instructional strategies for a learning environment. The nine basic steps in the instructional design process are: (after Morrisson, Ross & Kemp, 2003): 1. Needs analysis: identify the instructional problem and specify goals for designing the learning event. 2. Examine and profile learner characteristics in this context. 3. Identify the instructional content (curriculum). 4. Specify the learner outcomes (instructional objectives) or a range of outcomes. 5. Sequence content within each instructional unit for logical learning. 6. Select and design instructional strategies, matching strategy to teaching method (Section B) so that each learner can achieve the objectives. 7. Plan the instructional message, delivery mode (i.e. distance, face to face or blended), and develop the instruction. 8. Develop assessment criteria and assessment measurements to assess learner achievement of the objectives. 9. Select resources and technology/media to support instruction and learning activities.
Instructional design is based upon a scholarly field of understandings about teaching and learning, integrating many learning theories, different types of cognitive models, and various learning events that match both the learner and the instructor. Though these processes might be well known to instructional designers, they sometimes are not known by teachers. Gagne’s classical list of instructional events provides an example of the art and science of linking learner, teacher, learning and teaching in specific situations for reliable learning outcomes. The nine events of instruction are listed here as an example of a sequence of instructional events with examples of teaching practices to assure learning (cognition) (Gagne, Briggs & Wager, 1988). 1. Gain Attention: Pique the learners' interest in the subject. Example: Show a s’more. Talk about how delicious it is. 2. Inform Learner of Objective: Let the learners know what they will be learning. Example: Today, we will learn how to make a s'more. 3. Recall Prior Knowledge: Get the learners to think about what they already know. Example: Has anyone ever had a s'more? Where? When? What is it made of?
17 4. Present Material: Teach the topic. Example: Show learners how to make a s'more. 5. Provide Guided Learning: Help the learners follow along as the topic is presented. Example: Provide picture posters of steps involved in making a s'more. 6. Elicit Performance: Ask learners to do what they have been taught. Example: Give learners ingredients to make their own s'more. 7. Provide Feedback: Inform learners of their performance. Example: Circulate around the classroom to observe and help learners. 8. Assess Performance: Evaluate learners on their knowledge of the topic. Example: Examine learners' s'mores. If correctly made, they get to eat them. 9. Enhance Retention and Transfer: Aid learners in remembering and applying the new skill. Example: Have learners make s'mores for a snack during the week or a class field trip. An excellent information source for matching instruction to particular learning events can be found here: http://education.calumet.purdue.edu/vockell/edpsybook/Edpsy3/edpsy3_instruction.htm So to summarize, instructional design (ISD) is a process for designing a teaching event, course or program. This process is particularly useful for technology enhanced learning (ICT) environments but applies to all teaching and learning processes (Laferriere et al., 2001; Morrison & Lowther, 2002). Not everyone has the luxury of a complete instructional design process, but for large projects or unit/year planning, using this process adds quality to both the instruction and the student learning.
The instructional design process is changing as teachers and children change to match school teaching and leadership environments today -- but the basic elements or processes involved in ISD remain as a framework for designing our teaching event or environment to include the proper selection of an instructional (teaching) strategy (Kowch, 2004). Today, popular instructional design models include Universal Design for Learning (Rose & Meyers, 2003), Backward Design (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998) and Core Methods (Ross, Morrisson & Kemp, 2004) but the basic process of setting learning outcomes and selecting instructional strategies remains. This is merely a refresher for teachers to say that selecting an instructional strategy (from the many models and kinds in this document) is only a part of the instructional design process. For review, the instructional design models below demonstrate two popular modern processes. Both models include an instructional strategy selection subjective (non linear) and more objective (more linear) step as part of the design of instructional events or environments. Good instructional design is the framework for successful teaching strategy selection.
18
Figure 1: The Ross, Morrison & Kemp Instructional Design Process Indicating the Instructional Strategy Step
The following more traditional instructional design model from Dick and Carey (2001) also includes an instructional strategy step:
Figure 2: The Dick and Carey (2001) Instructional Design Process Indicating the Instructional Strategy Step
19
Section B: An Overview of Teaching Methods and Instructional Strategies
The primary goal of instruction is to give students tools and situations that increase their learning ability by observable behavior learner improvement. The primary role of education is to increase student capacity for personal growth, social growth, and academic learning. In this section, the literature and research on instructional or teaching methods has been classified into four main categories: Behavioral Systems Methods Information Processing Methods Personal Methods Social Methods
This is a four category collection of instruction models from the literature. Examples and strategies for teaching in each category are embedded in each section.
A. The Behavioral Systems Family of Teaching Models We are what we practice – in a time when ‘best practices’ are common guidelines for professional work, practice and behaviors are not so far from our professional world. It may surprise you to find, as you read this section, how much we blend behavioral teaching strategies right now, today, across classes and schools.
As learners, how do we learn more productive behaviors via practice? In some classrooms and contexts, bit by bit, block by block, we climb our way up a ladder of mastery. In others, we teach by direct instruction using objectivist stances on teaching because facts must be known and this works for
In this section, teaching method literature and research has been classified into four main categories.
us. Yet in other classes, we teach and learn a lot from quasi-realities or simulations where we can experience environments and problems beyond our present (real world) experience. This section is compiled largely by organizing and integrating key literature and resources from two primary sources: (Joyce & Calhoun, 2004; Saskatchewan Education, 2005), with many other sources. •
The behavioral system of teaching methods has three broad categories: Mastery learning, Direct Instruction and Simulations. While this is the least researched area in instructional strategy (with the exception of
20 simulation and gaming strategies), the strategies work when designed well and applied in a positive environment.
i. Mastery learning – Teaching strategies for learning to learn.
Mastery learning is a framework for planning instructional sequences. As part of the Information Processing (IP) teaching methods family, mastery learning (and associated teaching) is a highly teacher
The key characteristics of an effective instructional event using mastery lecture teaching (instruction) strategy : • • • • • • • •
Careful planning and limiting of lesson objectives (don’t overload) Learning event objectives are shared with the learners Sequencing and chunking of material into ‘bite sizes’ Regular opportunities for student interaction Good oral and visual presentation of ideas A summary of key concepts and how they inter relate Ongoing checking of student understanding Immediate, meaningful follow-up activities
centered, straightforward, optimistic and clear teaching method. In a positive social climate, with careful instructional design, this teacher-centered instruction can be encouraging to students who have difficulty organizing their learning (Carroll, 1971; Bloom, 1971).
o
Individually prescribed instruction or programs (IPP) teaching strategies place students on a program, with prescribed materials and aides as they work, usually independently, toward accomplishment that is measured by criteria referenced testing and similar formative evaluation methodologies (Carroll, 1971).
o
Mastery lectures are a teaching strategy often misused or overused, resulting in a general disdain by teachers for this strategy mostly because interactive lecture strategies, suitable for learners today, are not understood (Good & Brophy, 1990). The Mastery lecture is effective for: i.
Presentation of information that is not accessible to students
ii.
Introduction of a topic prior to practice
iii.
Connecting student prior learning and personal experiences to the content at hand
iv.
Providing instructions about a task
v.
Summarizing or synthesizing material
vi.
Providing additional instructions when students have difficulty learning the material on their own.
21
o
Mastery learning research demonstrates that related teaching strategies like language laboratories work, and that today multimedia or computer assisted language learning (CALL) labs are used the most as a teaching strategy for language mastery learning (Kessler, 2003). Seen also as a complementary tool in the classroom, recent research indicates that today three new, more subjective instructional strategies work for teaching language in elementary classrooms using CALL (Bax, 2003). These strategic instruction modifications are: i.
open use (use it in a free format without structure),
ii.
restricted use (use only specific parts or programs to teach certain mastery, like vocabulary acquisition, in conjunction with non computer assisted learning and activities, or
iii.
integrated use (use CALL with classroom and field based activity)
ii. Direct Instruction – Teaching strategies for learning to learn.
Direct instruction, part of the Information Processing teaching method family, features of this highly teacher centered strategy are: a high degree of teacher direction, modest learning achievements, poor learning achievements if used too often, a high degree of teacher control, classroom management systems (particularly time management) and a high expectation of students. A major goal is maximization of student learning time (coverage). Direct instruction strategy follows the “I do, We do, They do” axiom. The basic strategy is to orient the learner toward a new concept, offer controlled practice to the learner, offer academic (not behavioral) feedback, set criteria for measuring learner achievement, and use a final (summative) exam to measure total learner achievement.
The general process for a detailed direct instruction strategy, designed and delivered appropriately, is summarized in Phases 1 to 5 below. Direct instruction is the least popular and most negatively stereotyped teaching method among the instructional trends in professional
The most common application of direct instruction happens in the study of basic information and skills in the core curriculum areas, especially in “Head Start” type programs and in language and mathematics programs (Becker, 1977).
literature today – but the process is included for you here so as to demonstrate that across the hall or in your own class, for certain learning outcomes under certain conditions, direct instruction may be in use to varying degrees:
22 The process for detailed direct instruction: Phase 1: Orientation • Teacher establishes content of the lesson • Teacher reviews previous learning • Teacher establishes objectives • Teacher establishes the procedures for the lesson Phase 2: Presentation • Teacher explains/demonstrates new concept or skill • Teacher provides visual representation of the task • Teacher checks for understanding
The Direct Instruction: Processes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Orientation Presentation Structured Practice Guided Practice Independent Practice
Phase 3: Structured Practice • Teacher leads group through practice examples in lock step • Students respond to questions • Teacher provides corrective feedback for errors and reinforces correct practice. Phase 4: Guided Practice • Students practice semi-independently (teacher watches over but does not participate) • Teacher circulates, monitoring students • Teacher provides feedback through praise and prompt Phase 5: Independent Practice • Students practice o Students practice independently at home or in class to mastery standards set by the teacher •
Direct instruction strategies include: demonstrations, didactic questioning (what, where, when and how questions, drill and practice and explicit teaching (the talk in a lesson is based on what the student knows – sometimes this is called the KWL process for instruction (what do we know, what do we want to know, and what have we learned (Edwards-Groves, 1999).
Demonstrations – a demonstration, classically known as part of instruction in science education, is step-by-step revelations of parts of a process or concepts that can be learned by following or exploring a sequence of inter related events. A demonstration can be a learning event for an online (independent) learner who is not near a teacher, or for a learner who watches a teacher. There are plenty of high quality online demonstrations for Physics (Sprott, 2005), for example. An excellent example of how computer based demonstrations (via animation) allow interactivity (stop/go and zoom in) is offered here at the PBS site: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/closetohome/animation/neuron-main.html •
countless examples of demonstrations (processes) are on the world wide web
23 •
teleconferencing is well suited as a media choice (another part of the instructional design process (Dick and Carey, 2001) to this teaching strategy
•
computer conferences allow great demonstrations with far away experts (social learning)
•
multi user object oriented environments allow students to interact with online modules (animations, for example) and other students to discuss a learning challenge (DU Educational Technology Services, 2005)
•
An excellent resource for demonstrations in the classroom can be found at http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/bestpractice/demo/index.html This resource includes descriptions, process, examples, assessments and resources (Saskatchewan Learning, 2005).
Didactic questioning - Didactic questioning offers the teacher a way to structure the learning process (McNeil & Wiles, 1990). Didactic questions tend to be convergent, factual, and often begin with "what," "where," "when," and "how." They can be effectively used to diagnose recall and comprehension skills, to draw on prior learning experiences, to determine the extent to which lesson objectives were achieved, to provide practice, and to aid retention of information or processes.
Drill and practice –Drill is a structured, repetitive review of previously learned concepts to a predetermined level of mastery. To be meaningful to learners, the skills built through drill-and-practice should become the building blocks for more meaningful learning. Detailed description and drill/practice web sites for teaching mathematics are included from the Saskatoon Public School site: http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/DE/PD/instr/strats/drill/inde x.html
Direct Instruction: Strategies: •
Demonstrations
•
Didactic Questioning
•
Drill and Practice
•
Explicit Teaching
Explicit teaching – Most often used to teach reading, explicit teaching builds on what the learner knows. The teacher practices instructional talk that clearly explains each step of the learning and instruction, so this is close to a metacognitive strategy (Edwards-Groves, 1999). For example, think-aloud teaching strategies in reading depend upon student verbalization of thoughts as they read and thus bring into the open the strategies they use to understand a text (Oster, 2001). Such an explicit teaching strategy, also considered a personal learning strategy, lets the teacher explicitly discover student learning techniques and to base further instruction on that knowledge. A resource to get you started in this area can be found at: http://www.myread.org/explicit.htm.
24
iii. Simulation Learning – Teaching strategies for students who play a role in a quasi-real environment, usually on computer. Simulation learning is, oddly, in the behavioral systems method family but it should, today, be in the IP or even constructivist methods family as this technique has advanced with affordable school technologies to create synthetic learning events, not just to create observable (learning) behaviors. Simulation learning is an attempt to represent reality in the learning environment – depending on the interactive nature of the simulation (computers), interactivity and social space could be non-existent or really quite robust (are other people or learners in the same simulation with the learner, is the database full and relational, is feedback fast enough). As such, simulation could fit as well as a teaching strategy in the social family of models, but current methodology scholars (Joyce, Calhoun) place it in the behaviorist family. •
In simulation learning, students play the roles of persons engaged in real life (learning) pursuits. Elements of the real world are simplified and presented in a form that can be accessible. In simulations, students learn the consequences of their actions (behavior). This is a much less teacher centered model, but scholars seem to include it in the behaviorist category. Most learning simulations do require observable behavior and game playing, but the learning can be very real (Wade, 1997).
•
The environmental consequences of student choices are played (fed) back to them. Learning in cybernetic terms is sensorally experiencing the environmental consequences of one’s behavior and engaging in self-corrective behavior. Instruction in cybernetic terms is designed to create a full – feedback environment for the learner (Joyce & Calhoun, 2004).
•
The advantage of simulator based learning is that the learning environment can be greatly simplified compared to real-life learning experiences, which can have distracters.
•
Simulations must be created by exemplary instructional designers who know the interplay between technology, cognition and human/computer interfaces (Ross, Morrison & Kemp, 2003).
Teachers have 4 roles in simulation instructional strategies: 1. Explaining –Teacher explanation introduces the simulation environment best. 2. Refereeing – Teachers provide guidance on moral issues and conduct as they do in any classroom. 3. Coaching – Teachers give learners advice on how to make choices, but not as an expert. 4. Discussing – Post learning event debriefing helps the teacher and the learner see what difficulties and insights the students had. •
The general process for a simulation instructional strategy is listed here:
25 Phase 1: Orientation Present the broad topic of the simulation and the concepts to be incorporated into the simulation (activity) at hand. Explain simulation and/or gaming Provide overview of the simulation Phase 2: Participant Training Set up the scenario (rules, roles, procedures, scoring, types of decisions to be made, goals) Assign roles Hold an abbreviated practice session or demonstration Phase 3: Simulation Operations Conduct the activity Feedback and Evaluation (of performance and decision making) Continue simulation event Phase 4: Participant Debriefing (any or all of the following) Summarize events and perceptions with learners Summarize difficulties, ambiguities and insights Analyze the process – are the learning outcomes being achieved? Relate simulation activity to course content if appropriate Appraise and redesign the simulation. With increasingly affordable, powerful technology in schools, and the rise of educational technology expertise (instructional design) now more available to teachers there is an expectation that more simulation and game based learning will continue to be a trend worth watching, especially for distance education teachers and learners (Aldrich, 2003).
Case study research indicates that the effectiveness of these teaching strategy factors is an important decision making factor for fast-tracking learners, and for deciding upon resource management to support accelerated learning (Park et al, 2003). We can expect to see more of this emerging instructional strategy in schools.
B. The Information Processing (IP) Family of Teaching Models The world today is overflowing with information, but not all information is accessible via computers and technology. Information processing, in instructional design terms, is a cognitive model for thinking and learning (and teaching). How we can best acquire information, organize it, and explain it is a challenge for teachers who strategize learning events
Information Processing teaching models, based on developmental and behavioral psychology learning models proliferate today and include: Inquiry Indirect Instruction (Inductive thinking) and Advance Organizer teaching methods and strategies. As such, there is more detail for teachers in this section.
26 and instruction – a challenge that will be a bigger part of successful teaching practice in the future (Wilson & Merrill, 2005).
Information processing as a process, depends on our understanding of psychology models that range from objective (behaviorist) to subjective (developmental), and the term does not mean machine information processing – though the educational technology field in education combines cognitive psychology and learner/machine interaction theory as the basis for such instructional design (Jonassen, 2001; Dick et al, 2001; Kowch, 2005). There are several strategies for achieving robust learning outcomes using the information processing teaching method and its related teaching strategies.
Inquiry teaching methodology is still classified in the IP family of models (Joyce and Calhoun, 2004) because traditionally, curriculum and instruction people see information gathering (often with the use of technology) as a machine – like process. As software engineering and the information systems technology (IT) theory of today has changed and are starting to converge, so too has this changed our Inquiry pedagogy (and instructional design processes) from an objective stance about learning environments to a subjective stance (Jonassen, 2001; Kozma, 2003; Twigg, 2003; Cochrane-Smith, 2001). Inquiry and exploration, using whatever means (machines or people) is becoming as social as it can be mechanical – so this author expects Inquiry to eventually end up in the “Social” family of methods, or as the common ground between IP and Social teaching methods.
i. Inquiry Based Teaching In the literature on teaching methods, there are two kinds of inquiry teaching “models” in the literature – “scientific inquiry” and just plain “inquiry”.
There are very wide and often inconsistent definitions of non-scientific type inquiry as teaching method, practices or strategies, particularly in elementary education (Newman et al., 2004) but the practice is by far the most popular teaching method trend in the practical and some theoretical research literature today. The word sparked an industry, and scholars need to catch up by relating core teaching models to existing practice and descriptive studies on ‘best practices’ and the like. It may be that in this case, practice is a little ahead of theory. The most
Inquiry, a subjective method unlike objective Scientific Inquiry, is a teaching strategy that is founded in constructivist teaching and learning (method) theory, where the learner is placed (or chooses among options) in a social context and learns by using cognitive processes and social interaction to devise questions. Learners develop questions and find answers to those questions while they achieve well designed learning outcomes for the event (Jonassen, 2001).
subjectivist approaches to inquiry teaching fit better in the In very subjective constructivist learning environments, students also choose content and assessment parameters.
27 social family of models (Item C in Section B) because they really depend on socialization as part of the learning process – whereas less subjective approaches to inquiry require teachers to scaffold learning and facilitate the process – not quite a natural social setting. The least subjective inquiry method is scientific inquiry, which is an objective, teacher centered approach. It has resulted in learning outcome achievement for many years; hence the literature on the core methodology is older. •
Scientific Inquiry: Often called a ‘training model’ because this is a prescribed or formal method for teaching. Teachers who use this model and related strategies use the method of the scientists. The method has deep roots in science teaching since the 1950s (Schwab, 1965). This model is objectivist and teacher centered. Research on the method tells us that when teachers design scientific inquiry strategies for learning, students are brought directly into the scientific process. Scientists take weeks to use the method, but teachers compress the method to apply in one lesson. The effects of this are that inquiry “training” results in an increased understanding of science, productivity in creative thinking, and skills achievement for the acquisition of information (Kelsey, 2001). The method has traits in common with the social method family because students are often invited to act in the role of the scientist. Scientific inquiry teaching and inquiry teaching share some common features.
•
5 phases frame the creation of learning environments using the scientific inquiry model (Suchman, 1962): Phase 1: Confrontation with the Problem • Teacher explains scientific investigation procedures and rules • Teacher presents discrepant event Phase 2: Data Gathering and Verification • Learner verifies the nature of objects and conditions • Learner verifies the occurrence of the problem in a situation or context
The 5 Phases In the Creation of Scientific (Inquiry Model) Learning Environments
Student:)
Phase 3: Data Gathering and Experimentation Learner isolates variables Learner forms a hypothesis and tests causal relationships between variables
• • • • •
Confront the problem (given) Data is gathered and verified Learner isolates variables and creates a hypothesis Explanation is formulated Learner analyzes the learning strategy
Phase Four: Organizing and Formulating an Explanation Learner formulates rules or explanations for outcomes of the experiment Phase 5: Analysis of the Inquiry Process Learner analyzes the inquiry strategy Learner develops more effective strategies.
28 •
Inquiry:
The emerging inquiry methodology research is voluminous, wide and varied – so the
author makes no claim here to present anything other than a very general outline on Inquiry methodology in this emerging field. An excellent source on Inquiry teaching concepts is Alberta Learning’s “Focus on Inquiry” (2004) document, and an outstanding resource for teaching with inquiry is offered at the University of Urbana-Champagne web site: http://www.inquiry.uiuc.edu/us/inquiry_page.php. The definition of ‘inquiry’ teaching in the literature is varied, plenty and often conflicting. So many definitions of inquiry abound in literature that it is impossible to choose one out of context – but the general definitions all refer to John Dewey’s work of nearly a century ago. The North Carolina Research Education Laboratory echoes Dewey’s words to offer perhaps a very good definition:
“For students this method of learning ends the listen to learn paradigm of the classroom and gives them a real and authentic goal and real challenges to overcome. For the teacher, inquiry based education ends their paradigm of talking to teach and recasts them in the role of a colleague and mentor engaged in the same quest as the other younger learners around” (NCREL & NCS, 1997).
The first element of inquiry is an event the learner can react to and puzzle over – a problem to be solved (Thelen, 1960; Brown & Duguid, 2002)
A more scholarly definition is based on extensive literature review and studies of teaching methods that demonstrate Inquiry as a method that has grown from the cognitive science teaching methodologies flowing from Constructivism - is offered as perhaps a better definition of Inquiry teaching and learning. Indeed, most of the grounded literature on Inquiry teaching methods is based in the literature of
The conditions for constructivist learning are: 1.
Embed learning in complex, realistic and relevant environments (Duffy and Cunningham, 1996).
2.
Provide for social negotiation as an integral part of learning (Honebein, 1996). For example, when we study Columbus, students may ask each other and debate the merit of colonization. Here we see a negotiated learning outcome. The content of learning can be created by negotiation to a degree.
3.
Support multiple learner perspectives and the use of multiple modes of representation (Spiro et al., 1995).
constructivism. •
Constructivism:
Learning theories based on
cognitive psychology include Bruner’s social learning theories and Vygotsky’s social formation of the mind (Developmental) interact ional approaches to social development (Driscoll, 2000). An emphasis on socialization informed the constructivist learning theorists.
Constructivist literature indicates how teachers teach when “learning is a process where students are
Encourage learner ownership in learning (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996).
29 involved in their learning, formulate questions, investigate widely and then build new understandings, meanings and knowledge” (Alberta Learning, 2004).
Driscoll (2001) summarizes Constructivist teaching strategy goals (learner reasoning, critical thinking, retention, self regulation and reflection). These goals are achieved by using instructional methods for teaching that are consistent with constructivist learning theory. Learning environments are to be complex, realistic, relevant environments with authentic activity, social negotiation and multiple perspectives and modes for learners. These learning places promote learner ownership of the learning and self-awareness in knowledge construction. The methods of instruction include microworlds (simulations), problem based learning, collaborative learning, open ended learning environments, plays, debates and social interaction. These constructivist principles are echoed in Alberta’s foundational document on Inquiry (Alberta Learning, 2004) where Oberg and Branch offer an Inquiry Model for teaching.
This Inquiry teaching model has six parts (modified slightly from Alberta Learning, 2004):
Planning the learning event(s) o o o o o o
Retrieving Information o o o o o
Identify a topic area for inquiry (with the learner OR group of learners) – some call this developing the inquiry or research question for which an answer is sought by the learner. Identify possible information sources Identify the audience and presentation format for social interaction Establish evaluation criteria to check if the learning outcomes (learner achievement) match those planned in the learning environment (instructional) design Create an inquiry question Outline a plan for inquiry with the student (not for the student)
Develop an information retrieval (data gathering) plan with the learner Locate and collect resources Select relevant information Evaluate the validity and reliability, and appropriateness of the information Review and revise the planning based on limitations or new findings from the resources
Processing Information o o o o
The Six Parts of the Inquiry Teaching Model (Instructional strategy)
Students and teachers (students do the leg-work) • • • • •
Plan the learning Retrieve the information Process the information Create an answer or set of answers to the inquiry question Share the results and explore alternatives Evaluate the learning outcomes from the event(s)
Establish a focus for inquiry with the learner • Learner chooses pertinent information Record and organize the information, perhaps by theme related to the question Make connections and inferences from the information about the problem
30 o
Creating an Answer to the Inquiry Question o o o
Learner organizes the information to make sense of it (categorize, interpret) Learner creates a product (a representation) of the entire inquiry as a result (process equals product here), considering the audience Revise and edit, possibly with peer reviewers
Sharing / Social Interaction o o o o
Outline a plan for inquiry with the student (not for the student)
Communicate the question, the process for solving and the solution to others (often peers) Means listening and presenting Learner presents new understandings Social group demonstrates good behavior It is here that the model overlaps with the Social Family of Methods (Section D).
Evaluating the learning outcomes/learner achievements o
o o
Evaluate the product in terms of process fidelity and learner engagement and see if the learner has met or exceeded the learning objectives set in the instructional design before it all began – use conventional diagnostic, formative and summative processes (Gronlund, 1998). Evaluate the inquiry process and the plan for fidelity Learner reviews and revises this inquiry
This terminology has been adopted throughout this literature synopsis. An excellent web site on inquiry that offers more basic detail about inquiry teaching strategy processes, examples, assessment and resources (Saskatchewan Learning and the Regina Public Schools, 2005): http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/bestpractice/inquiry/process.html. More in-depth study of Inquiry teaching methods can be found at this excellent site from the University of Illinois (Urbana Champagne, 2005). http://inquiry.uiuc.edu/
Inquiry – A view from the Social Family of Teaching Methods (in Section C:) Often, we teach students in groups. Section C discusses the issue that inquiry learning and teaching can
The role of a teacher in group inquiry is to:
occur in two teaching model families. Thelen (1981) and
1. 2.
Sharan (1990) originally developed the concept of partnered or group teaching and learning according to two
3.
concepts: 4.
1. Inquiry is stimulated by confrontation with a problem
facilitate the group process (and roles) intervene in the group to channel its energy into potentially educative (curriculum related) activities supervise these activities so that (learner) personal meaning comes from the experience A first class library and collections of (safe) resources are critical for learners in this exploratory environment. Children are encouraged to contact experts beyond the school on the problem as well.
(Thelen, 1990)
31 2. Knowledge results from the inquiry
Thelen prescribes a democratic classroom for teaching and learning via group inquiry, but teachers know that democratic learning is only one context for creating an inquiry classroom. Thelen’s particular (social) inquiry strategy requires that effective group processes and governance exist in the classroom and that: •
teachers have a constructivist (subjective) world view of knowledge and teaching
•
teachers know the discipline of collaborative inquiry to an extent. This approach, says research, nurtures learners in an environment where respect for all is a key value, where social inquiry is seen as a way of life, and where interpersonal warmth is the backdrop for learning (Joyce & Calhoun, 2004).
A collaborative inquiry learner (in a group) must: • • • • • • •
Have self awareness and a desire for personal learning Assume the dual role of participant and observer in learning Interact with other (similarly) inquisitive learners Identify and formulate the problem and pursue its solution Be conscious of method as the data is collected (either scientific or not) Develop a capacity for reflection, so the inquiry strategies can be re-deployed next time without building them anew Be conscious of their experience (be a critical thinker too)
Many teaching scholars agree on the basic tenets of constructivist teaching methods: “Constructivism is a subjective view of teaching and learning, resting on the assumption that knowledge is constructed by learners as they attempt to make sense of their experiences… Yet today, they have no single theory on learning (Driscoll, 2002; p. 375; Phillips, 1995).
This social, group or collaborative teaching strategy has six phases: Phase 1: Phase 2: Phase 3: Phase 4: Phase 5: Phase 6:
Students encounter a puzzling situation (provided by the teacher, or not) Students explore (each others) reactions to the situation Students formulate study task and organize for study (problem definition, assignments, etc). Independent and group study Students analyze progress (in terms of their original puzzle) Recycle activity (a new problem may have grown out of the first, and the process continues)
Scaffolding as a teaching practice – an essential strategy for all Inquiry / Constructivist Teaching: Overall, the teacher in this subjective environment is a facilitator of learning. What does that mean? Many constructivist learning researchers find that the term “scaffolding” works to explain this role. A metaphor allows us the best description for this concept. Imagine that a learner wondered why Monarch butterflies find the same roost each year in Ontario (the inquiry problem), and that this is part of elementary science learning outcomes on animals, instincts, geography and insects. The student is essentially provided with the scaffolding to get to a range of (not all) teacher designed learning outcomes – not by only teacher direction or ‘telling’, not only by resource provision or by indirect instruction… the teacher provides a framework, like you do when you
32 paint an entire building, and the learner does the learning. All the while, the learner is in a somewhat bounded learning environment (design), but has great freedom regarding information chosen, analysis methods, and content.
Scaffolding is an important newer teaching strategy used across inquiry learning environments. This means the following processes assist successful subjective (inquiry) teaching strategies. (Larkin, 2002; Jonassen, 2001; Driscoll, 2001). Some basic guidelines for scaffolding subjective learning (inquiry) environments follow (Larkin, 2002). o o o o o o o
Pre-engagement with the learner and the curriculum (before the learning event) Active and accurate diagnostic of student needs and understandings Providing tailored assistance when the learner requires it Facilitating, not directing, but maintaining the pursuit of the goals of the inquiry, in concert with the range of desired learning outcomes for the inquiry event Giving feedback to the learner Controlling frustration and risk in student directed inquiries/explorations Assisting learner internalization, independence and generalization of the inquiry findings to other contexts
A framework for incorporating scaffolding throughout the lesson urges teachers to first model how to perform a new or difficult task, then work with students to perform the task, then have students work with a partner to complete the task, and finally, have individual students demonstrate their task mastery.
ii. Indirect Instruction Strategies - Learning to think inductively – Forming ideas by collecting and organizing information by designing and using quality Learners like to create concepts and rules to describe our world. Concepts help us manage a vast intake of information, and inductive models help our learners create these concepts for themselves. The advantages of indirect instruction are that the student is more active in the quest for information and concept formation, and that the teacher can move to more of a role of facilitator, or from
The 4 Phases in an Inductive Teaching Strategy:
objective to subjective teaching methodology. This method relies heavily on access to resources. The disadvantages of indirect instruction include the effect on class time of differential learning rates across a diverse classroom, and possible discomfort by students who have been conditioned to learn concepts and sorting by rule or direct instruction.
• • • •
Identifying and enumerating the data Grouping and classifying the data Interpreting the data Converting the data into a hypothesis
33
There are four phases in an inductive teaching strategy and they occur in this order: 1. identifying and enumerating the data that are relevant to a specific problem (and that relate to the learning objective of the lesson designed), 2. grouping these items into categories whose members have common attributes, 3. interpreting the data and developing labels for the categories so that they can be manipulated, 4. converting the categories into skills (with application exercises), or hypotheses. Shaping an inductive learning environment to be inductive via instructional strategies requires three general elements: focus, conceptual control and skill. •
Focus – helping students concentrate on a domain (an area of inquiry) they can master, without constricting them so much that they can’t use their full abilities to create ideas. o
•
Conceptual Control – helping students to set goals to develop mastery in a domain. Students gain a meta control of learning by developing hierarchies or strategies by which they can gain further mastery of the domain (Driscoll, 2000). For some resources about concept mapping techniques, see Saskatchewan Education’s site: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/indirectinstruction/conc eptmapping.htm o
•
For example: Present kindergarten or 1st grade students with cards containing several letters from the alphabet and ask them to examine them closely and describe their attributes. The domain is the alphabet: letters and their names.
For example: Students set a goal to distinguish letters from one another, and to develop categories by grouping letters that have many, if not all attributes in common. Students learn by comparison and contrast of attributes. They can categorize letters by shape and learn the letter names as they choose them. Charts are made with letters and associated with words that contain them. A concept is mastered.
Skill – converting a concept to a useful thing is skill development (learners apply and use the concept). o The environment is designed to develop a shared learning community the creation of data sets learning tasks such as classification, reclassification and development of hypotheses scaffolding (the idea that teachers facilitate learning strategies by setting up learning events, then coaching students toward learning outcomes) teacher observes and scaffolds inquiry by helping them elaborate o
For example: Explore letter-sound relationships and how to use letters in reading and spelling words. Recognition evolves to conscious application in word identification.
o Inductive teaching strategies can create positive effects on learner information acquisition and skill building, creativity, scientific processes and a narrowed gap in performance between genders in language learning (Joyce, Calhoun, Carran, Simser, Rust & Halliburton, 1996). Of great importance to teachers in an
34 induction environment is the classroom atmosphere or the social system. The inductive class learning environment must be cooperative and active, where the teacher often sequences activities carefully (in advance) (one cannot learn words before one learns the alphabet). As students learn inductive strategies, they assume increasing control in their learning process. A support system is important as well, because large amounts of data need to be organized. Teacher aides and computers, as well as technology staff support are helpful for the teacher in these circumstances, as is teamwork with other teachers (Glickman, 2002). The key parts and processes (steps) for using the inductive teaching and thinking methods is listed below as syntax and social system (design) categories: 1. Syntax a. concept formulation b. enumeration and listing/collection of data • Students need access to raw data and information c. categorizing and labeling d. interpretation of the data e. identifying critical relationships f. exploring relationships g. making inferences h. applying principles i. predicting consequences and hypothesizing j. explaining the predictions or hypotheses k. verifying learner predictions 2. Social System a. This is a high to moderate structure strategy, so although it is cooperative the teacher is moderator and controller of the results. As such the model is teacher centered. b. The teacher matches the tasks to the student’s cognitive ability. c. While students learn concepts, we teach them to pay attention to meta learning (metacognitive) processes – they learn the meaning of words and the context for content knowledge as well. Indirect Instruction : A primary instructional strategy for inductive learning environments is indirect instruction. Indirect instruction can occur when several instructional events are designed: a. Case study – Case studies in school settings are stories with a lot of accurate and detailed information. Examples and guidelines can be found at the Saskatchewan Education site: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/indirectinstruction/casestudy .htm By using constructivist (subjective) teaching and learning principles and lesson design, students and teachers can: a. b. c. d. e. f.
evaluate the information for importance and relevance to the learning outcomes identify a problem situation and deconstruct the problem formulate possible solutions to a problem evaluate the possible solutions and pick one create a plan of action for implementing a solution based on the evidence anticipate obstacles to that solution.
35 b. Concept Attainment – Inviting students to identify the key characteristics of a concept allows students to discover information for themselves, using the scaffolding provided by the teacher. There is a six step process to the concept attainment instructional strategy, demonstrated here by an activity where students are to realize the concept that there is a pattern to card decks (the teacher might scaffold this learning by musing that card decks have some sort of order.. but what could that be..?) 1. Identify positive and negative examples of the concept that is the intended learning outcome and place these on cards. 2. Mix the cards then select one to use in the class. Identify it as a positive or negative example. Repeat with a second card. 3. Continue selecting cards but allow the students to attempt to classify them as positive or negative examples. 4. Periodically ask the students if anyone can hazard a guess as to what the unknown concept could be. 5. Continue until the concept is identified correctly. 6. Have the students continue to suggest their own examples. 7. This process could be carried out using pictures or actual items. Excellent resources and examples for teaching via concept attainment strategies are available online at: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/indirectinstruction/c onceptattainment.htm c. Concept Formation – Using the key characteristics of a concept or item by classifying and grouping the characteristics helps students discover how to classify and sort things. This is particularly useful when sorting hard data items for concepts in science and math i.e.: sorting the characteristics of
The Parts of an Indirect Instruction Strategy • • • • •
Case study Concept attainment Concept formation Reading for meaning/guided reading Reflective study
a bog; sorting the characteristics of words. The classroom process for concept formation is: 1. Divide students into small groups. 2. Provide students with a number of items to classify. These items could be real objects, ideas, or words. Students will find it easiest to work with real objects. 3. Ask students to organize the items into groups according to characteristics of their choice. Make it clear to the students that they will have to explain their grouping rationale. (Note: if you want students to group according to certain criteria, identify the criteria for them.) 4. When classification is complete, have each group explain their grouping rationale to the class and show which groups contain which items. 5. In order to have the students evaluate the general usefulness of their grouping rationale, provide them with other items to see if they can be fit into the established groups. Excellent resources and examples for teaching via concept formation strategies are available online at: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/indirectinstruction/c onceptformation.htm
36 d. Reading for meaning/Guided Reading – This indirect instruction strategy requires the learner to read with a plan to understand information and to construct meaning within the context of the text (to make sense of a story, for example) so that the learner can make connections between what is known before and after the reading. This model is teacher centered and somewhat objective, because the teacher controls the timing and the validation of associations the child makes, but the social interaction between students can allow the environment to feel more subjective and self directed. This is an excellent strategy for early year students. The learner interacts with the text (and other students, if guided reading strategies are used so that other student interpretations weave into the learner fabric for the event). This is a very popular strategy in elementary grades today. Excellent resources and examples for teaching the elementary grades via guided reading strategies are available online from the Montgomery County Public School System at: http://www.mcps.k12.md.us/curriculum/english/guided_rdg.html . e. Reflective study – After finding, sorting and forming concepts and ideas, either with other learners or with the teacher, students need to make sense of the process – especially since this instructional strategy (indirect instruction) may take several classes for the student to realize one major learning objective (a concept). Reflective study is part of an effective instructional strategy. The Process: Reflective study may take on a variety of forms depending upon the nature of the course and the objectives of the teacher. It involves reflective writing and reflective talk. Reflective Writing: • response journals: reflection and response to what the student has read, heard, or viewed • writers' notebooks: a student records ideas for future work (e.g. compositions) • dialogue journals: a student and a teacher respond in writing to each other's entries • learning logs: reflection on what has been learned in a class or during an activity. The student may address such issues as what was learned, what was confusing or frustrating and why, what are his or her unanswered questions, and why was the topic or issue covered in class. (source: http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/ela102030/teacher4.html) Reflective Discussion: • structured discussion: reflective discussion of all sides of a topic is guided by the teacher who may offer a question to be addressed by the students.
iii. Teaching Learning from Representation via Advance Organizers Learning from presentations used to have almost as bad a reputation as memorization learning. Ausbel developed a system for creating lectures and presentations that increase learner activity and, subsequently learning. Once a discrete learning strategy, representation is now seen as a key learner activity in inquiry, indirect instruction and social learning teaching strategies and learning environments. Representation has become a big part of provincial curriculum guides today.
37 Ausubel’s work is not new, but it has been reborn in inquiry and social teaching strategies as we can teach students how to teach others by good presentation, and we can brush up ourselves on the process (Ausubel, 1980). When setting strategy for students to learn by the process of presenting their learning, the following phases are recommended (Adapted from Ausubel, 1988 & Joyce & Calhoun, 2004): •
Phase 1: Presentation of an Advance Organizer o o o
•
Phase 2: Presentation of Learning or Task Material o o o
•
Tell students what the learning outcomes will be, and what will be presented. (Do this in brief in inquiry presentations, and be sure to state the inquiry question out loud). Clarify the aims of the lesson/presentation. Present the organizer: Give examples and use illustrations Provide a context for the point of the presentation The Parts of a Representation Instruction Repeat as necessary Strategy Prompt awareness of learner’s relevant knowledge early in the The teacher: presentation (do they know what they need to know to understand • Offers an advance organizer for the the objective). learning event • • •
States the inquiry question Presents a learning task Elicits critical thinking and interaction
Present material. Make logical order of learning material explicit. Link material to the organizer.
Phase 3: Strengthen Cognitive organization o o o
Use principles of integrative reconciliation (relate new ideas to previously learned content). Elicit critical thinking and feedback on the subject matter through interaction Apply ideas actively – test them with the audience.
C. The Social Family of Teaching Models
Learning together works, and the social family of models focus on the creation of democracy in the classroom and in society at large. The creation of learning communities can also enhance student learning. It is here that we see a bit of a breakdown between the clean categories of teaching models presented in the literature, for ‘social teaching models’ are included in Information Processing teaching methods (particularly Inquiry instruction), and in some behavior systems models that depend on learner and teacher interaction. But according to the literature on social teaching methods, those other models do not have a strong focus on
38 democratic principles as fundamental conditions in the social classroom, hence they are not ‘social models’. This is a good point to recall that a teacher’s philosophy or stance toward the entire instructional design process may be more or less interactive or social (subjectivist), depending on his or her stance on teaching. To this author, it seems that the information processing teaching methods family has adopted the best parts of the social family of teaching methods, but the literature does not indicate that inquiry learning explicitly focuses on value based (either social or individual values) or democratic principles just yet. In other words, cooperative learning social learning strategies, while popular and necessary, don’t fit neatly into the teaching strategy categories – social learning strategies span Information Processing and Social teaching methods categories (today). Cooperative or Group Learning Classrooms Classical social teaching models focus on dyads and group
Key assumptions underpinning cooperative learning are:
investigation, and on the study of values and public policy study – the general content area most referenced in this teaching literature is
1.
from the social studies or language arts (all grades). Cooperative
2.
learning communities and cooperative learning models have come
3.
into focus in the last 30 years (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Usually,
4.
cooperative learning strategists organize students into pairs and dyads (twos), and these results in a combination of social support and cognitive complexity caused by social interaction. This has a
5. 6.
Cooperative learning settings generate more learner motivation. Cooperative learners learn from one another. Interaction produces cognitive complexity that increases learning. Cooperation increases positive feelings between learners. Cooperation increases learner self esteem. Students can be taught how to work well together.
mild but rapid effect on content learning skills (Joyce & Calhoun, 2004). There is a conflict between teaching methodologists however – as some feel that students learn better in individualistic learning environments (the personal family of teaching models), particularly scholars who study strategies for teaching gifted students (Tomlinson, 2003). In cooperative learning settings, students can be educated to achieve: •
‘Positive interdependence’: (Kagan, 1990). For example, Kagan developed teaching strategies for From Extrinsic to Intrinsic Learner Motivation teaching students to work together and to ensure that all students participate equally in groups. To teach children Some research says social learning to learn on their own and to work cooperatively, groups increases intrinsic learner motivation of children (say triads) are chosen and each student takes (internal motivation) because learners a number (1, 2, & 3). All children are given the same become less dependent on praise from task in all groups (say to identify two main themes in a teachers (or others) as they feel a sense poem). At regular intervals, the “number twos” may be of accomplishment in their society asked to report on the answer to the problem. In each (Joyce & Calhoun, 2004). group of three, the other two students then check their answers against that given by the reporting student. The procedure is designed to assure that ‘spokespersons’ or reporters and ‘learners’ do not stay in the same role all the time.
39 •
Specialization learning. Students can learn well when taught how to help each other divide labor to get tasks done. A Jigsaw method (Aronson et al., 1983) has been worked out to develop formal organizations or divisions of labor in a class. It is a highly structured and appropriate method as a social learning event to develop formal divisions of labor (Joyce, 2004). In contrast to individualistic classroom organization that allows individuals to exercise their best developed skills, division of labor strategies require students to rotate roles in a lesson, developing their skills in all areas (students may be reporters, writers, role players, timekeepers and on-task coaches all in one lesson).
i. The Democratic Classroom: Understanding learners and teachers in a society interacting democratically, this cornerstone social teaching method is intuitively popular. The democratic (social) teaching and learning strategy is not a new concept. Democratic teaching methods originate from the work of John Dewey in 1910, Judd (1934) and Kilpatrick (1919), and Hullfish & Smith, (1961). A democratic classroom is organized so that groups in class do all or any of the following general tasks:
1. Develop a social system based on democratic procedures. 2. Conduct scientific inquiry into the nature of social life as part of all learning. 3. Use inquiry to solve a social or interpersonal problem 4. Provide an experience-based learning situation.
At this point, you may be asking “I thought Inquiry methods were in the Information Processing family of teaching method research” and you are correct. A short discussion on why these categories of models are not discrete (they overlap and are possibly merging) is necessary here.
We have seen that the teaching model families overlap in this synopsis, and in this section (social families) the inclusion of inquiry may confuse, since it was presented earlier in the Information Processing teaching Model section. Much more research on teaching methodology is needed to understand the blend and indeed
Most models of teaching assume that the teacher does something in particular to get a specific outcome from the learner. Democratic teaching models, by contrast, assume that the outcome of any educational experience is not completely predictable. Somewhere in between, Constructivist (inquiry) teachers accept that a range of learning outcomes is good practice.
convergence of the social teaching method models and the information processing (IP) teaching models, for in constructivist teaching (a cornerstone theory of Inquiry teaching and the IP family today ) learner social interaction is critical. Little research exists indicating that in the constructivist classroom, learners may democratically decide on the content and process of the learning environment.
40 For example, could you see Grade one students selecting government curriculum topics as part of (bona fide) social discourse that is so important to the constructivist or inquiry classroom? The research needs to move ahead to address how much freedom, with respect to teaching method and content, students will have, and how will we create that kind of (inquiry) learning environment? In fact, the idea of creating a purely democratic classroom (an important element in the social family of teaching models) has proven exceedingly difficult to implement (Joyce & Calhoun, 2003). One reason for this is that a democratic classroom requires the teacher to have an exceptionally high level of both interpersonal and instructional skills. Another reason is that it can be cumbersome and slow, and – parents, teachers and administrators fear that it might not be an efficient teaching method. The governance in a classroom might not fit with somewhat less democratic school governance systems. For example, this can occur when rules and policy are not necessarily generated at the classroom level (this can set up a dichotomy for students and teachers who create a completely democratic classroom where processes are directed by social interaction and votes, not necessarily by the curriculum). ii. Challenges for Social Teaching Models – A Greater Need to Integrate with Other Methods Education administration scholars experience the same issues when characterizing leadership in schools as they find it (or design it) along a continuum from objective (hierarchical, bureaucratic) to subjective (relational, transformational, participative or post modern), finding that on any day, considerable overlap exists in real schools between these polarities (Leithwood and Duke, 1999). The same is true of teaching or instructional strategies. Transformational leadership emphasizes the importance of follower’s commitments whereas participative leadership (democratic leadership) concerns itself largely with follower’s roles in decision making. More blending of philosophical approach (subjective and objective) is common in the teaching methodology literature today. Often, one teaching model or strategy focuses on student participation in direct and non direct instruction, while in the same lesson, another strategy can be used that focuses on student roles in social learning processes. Mixed teaching methodology, as in the necessary supporting educational research, may be more beneficial to creating the classroom of the future than will be an exercise in sticking to conventional models and categories (Creswell, 2003).
This synopsis is research –based, and the emerging tensions between subjective and objective leadership at the classroom, school and community levels is a trend in both teaching methodology and school leadership literature. Social families of teaching methods, including democratic strategies, “Reject the normal classroom order that develops around the basic values of politeness and comfort or
41 of keeping the teacher happy…Rather, the classroom group should take seriously the process of developing a social order” (Thelen, 1981).
So we, as teachers, witness once again the tension/overlap in the literature between social and information processing models of teaching (stances on teaching methods). Indeed, classical teaching methods or instructional strategy categories may morph into a new kind of social relational teaching method model (or sets of strategies) where both information and democratic principles form the school governance and teaching methodology. That is likely some time away, so for now, this paper uses the definitions in the teaching praxis canon at large, while openly recognizing new teaching methods that likely fit in several categories. Democratic classrooms are an excellent premise for group and collaborative learning (important to inquiry based strategies), but in practice, democratic environs are difficult to construct and to maintain. Nevertheless, the importance of social discourse in learning with a constructivist focus requires that much more research on socialization in our classrooms must be done. The literature falls short on this methodology work; instead, it appears to be focusing on a multitude of work in the last decade on ‘lessons learned’ or ‘best practice’ We must look ahead, not back and develop social learning methods that are theoretically grounded and modified to handle information, new social cultures, new student needs and new teacher needs by combining teaching method research areas.
D. The Personal Family of Teaching Models
The learner is the focus of instruction and teaching. The learner does the learning! Learners have a history, a personality and they have hopes and dreams that matter to teachers –so we think about how a learner interacts with learning environments. In the larger field of instructional design, there is an emerging literature set on “contextual analysis” or learner. Individual
Nondirective teaching strategies require the teacher to lead without taking responsibility away from the student. Questions for leading are important. • • •
What do you think of that? Can you say more about that? How do you react when that happens?
differences (diversity), learning styles and Moral education literature forms the majority of the personal teaching model family. This section begins with the dominant teaching method used in personal models – nondirective teaching.
Statements for responding to feelings are important. • • •
I think I understand It’s hard to be alone Sort of like it does not matter what you do, it will go on the same way?
i. Non Directive Teaching: This (therapeutic) style of teaching emerged from psychological counseling (Rogers, 1982). The overall concept is that the teacher respects the
42 student’s own life, so teaching strategies here all nurture the learner’s capacity to learn constructively. This method is particularly useful for problem situations: social and relationship problems and academic problems where students explore their competencies and interests.
The teacher: • attempts to see the world as the student sees it • empathizes with the student • mirrors student’s thoughts and feelings • uses reflective feedback to the learner, raises the student’s consciousness of their thoughts and feelings. • serves as a benevolent alter –ego, one who accepts all learner feelings and thoughts • gives up the traditional decision making role, instead becomes a facilitator of student feelings. Nondirective teachers respond to learner feelings by: • simple acceptance • reflection of the feelings • paraphrasing content. Nondirective teachers respond to lead-taking by • structuring the learning environment, not really the lesson interactions • directive questioning • having the student choose and develop a topic (Rogers, 1982) • use of leading questions and open ended questions (without answers) • minimal encouragements for the student to talk.
The Parts of a Non-Directive Instruction Strategy The teacher: • • • • •
Empathizes Serves as a benevolent leader Responds to learner feelings Respond to lead-taking by structuring the lesson Creates responsive, permissive, expressive learning events.
Nondirective factors that ‘set the weather’ in such a learning environment: • Teacher shows warmth and responsiveness, and genuine interest in the student as a person • Teacher Is permissive in regard to the expression of feeling – teacher does not judge or moralize • Teacher guides the learner to express feelings symbolically but can not carry impulses into action • Teacher/student relations are free from coercion or pressure.
ii. Profiling Learners – Learning Styles and the Kinds of Multiple Intelligences: Personal teaching strategies mean that we understand the uniqueness of the learner’s cognitive, social and emotional states. A profile of the learner also means understanding their diversity condition or ‘special’ situation in society too. Joyce and Calhoun (2004) suggest that overall; the most important teaching strategy for specific learners is to check our assumptions about learners. They categorize our key assumptions that affect our teaching methods most as assumptions about learner:
43 •
Enculturation (we usually default to think that the learner is not culturally different than us)
•
Intellectual Capacity (we usually think that the less intelligent learner is not culturally differently from us, that they just need more instruction and practice time)
•
Stigmatization (we can create learning environments where, if the learner does not fit in, he/she becomes stigmatized and marginalized by others in the learning environment)
•
Flexibility (we should understand that learners are flexible and have a potential to engage in a wide variety of learning environments, provided they are not too uncomfortable).
The Kolb learning style inventory can be taken online to characterize or profile your learners – use a Google Search with keywords “Kolb Learning Style” and find or purchase the instrument.
Some teachers find that profiling a child’s learning style helps to decide on instructional strategy, and much literature, some based on empirical research, is available on learning styles. A summary of the three main learning styles (Visual, Auditory, and Tactile) follows (Bogod, 2005):
1. Visual Learners: learn through seeing... These learners need to see the teacher's body language and facial expression to fully understand the content of a lesson. They tend to prefer sitting at the front of the classroom to avoid visual obstructions such as. people's heads. They may think in pictures and learn best from visual displays including diagrams, illustrated text books, overhead transparencies, videos, flipcharts and hand-outs. During a lecture or classroom discussion,
Learner Profiling – One strategy for Personal Instructional teaching. Learner styles include: • • •
Visual learning Auditory learning Tactile/Kinesthetic learning
visual learners often prefer to take detailed notes to absorb the information.
2. Auditory Learners: learn through listening... They learn best through verbal lectures, discussions, talking things through and listening to what others have to say. Auditory learners interpret the underlying meanings of speech through listening to tone of voice, pitch, speed and other nuances. Written information may have little meaning until it is heard. These learners often benefit from reading text aloud and using a tape recorder.
44 3. Tactile/Kinesthetic Learners: learn through moving, doing and touching...
Tactile/Kinesthetic
persons learn best through a hands-on approach, actively exploring the physical world around them. They may find it hard to sit still for long periods and may become distracted by their need for activity and exploration.
There is not a lot of academic literature linking learning style to cognitive theory or to teaching methodology per se, and not a lot of agreement about how to make these links – but these styles offer teachers another way of seeing the learner. A difficulty is that classrooms may be composed of many different learning styles – making differentiated instruction important (Tomlinson, 2000). Despite the favor and enormous amount of literature on learning styles, questions remain regarding the degree to which learning styles can actually be matched to (known) teaching methods with any benefits for learning (Morrisson, Ross & Kemp, 2003, p. 59).
Another way to profile learners is by describing their multiple intelligences. There are many online sources and instruments for profiling your students: Search Google (Keywords: Multiple Intelligence Test). A lot of writing exists on this topic. Howard Gardner (1983, reprinted 1993) developed seven multiple intelligence descriptors for learners, and added three more in 1999 (Gardner, 1999). A good summary of Gardner’s work can be found online at http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm where the following condensed definitions and learner intelligence characteristics are summarized below.
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences •
Linguistic intelligence involves sensitivity to spoken and written language, the ability to learn languages, and the capacity to use language to accomplish certain goals. This intelligence includes the ability to effectively use language to express oneself rhetorically or poetically; and language as a means to remember information. Writers, poets, lawyers and speakers are among those that Howard Gardner sees as having high linguistic intelligence.
•
Logical-mathematical intelligence consists of the capacity to analyze problems logically, carry out mathematical operations, and investigate issues scientifically. In Howard Gardner's words, it entails the ability to detect patterns, reason deductively and think logically. This intelligence is most often associated with scientific and mathematical thinking.
•
Musical intelligence involves skill in performance, composition, and appreciation of musical patterns. It encompasses the capacity to recognize and compose musical pitches, tones, and rhythms. According to Howard Gardner musical intelligence runs in an almost structural parallel to linguistic intelligence.
•
Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence entails the potential of using one's whole body or parts of the body to solve problems. It is the ability to use mental abilities to coordinate bodily movements. Howard Gardner sees mental and physical activity as related.
45
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (continued) •
Spatial intelligence involves the potential to recognize and use the patterns of wide space and more confined areas.
•
Interpersonal intelligence is concerned with the capacity to understand the intentions, motivations and desires of other people. It allows people to work effectively with others. Educators, salespeople, religious and political leaders and counselors all need a well-developed interpersonal intelligence.
•
Intrapersonal intelligence entails the capacity to understand oneself, to appreciate one's feelings, fears and motivations. In Howard Gardner's view it involves having an effective working model of ourselves, and to be able to use such information to regulate our lives.
•
Naturalist Intelligence: Enables human beings to recognize, categorize and draw upon certain features of the environment. It combines a description of the core ability with a characterization of the role that many cultures.
•
Existential Intelligence: a concern with 'ultimate issues', is the next possibility that Howard Gardner considers - and he argues that it 'scores reasonably well on the criteria'. However, empirical evidence is sparse - and although a ninth intelligence might be attractive, Howard Gardner is not disposed to add it to the list. 'I find the phenomenon perplexing enough and the distance from the other intelligences vast enough to dictate prudence - at least for now.'
iii. Differentiated Learning Environments for Elementary Grades – Focus on 4 Elements for Change There is a wide swath of literature indicating that marginalizing learners is a problem that we need to address when we select a teaching methodology (Hunt, 1971; VanScriver, 2005; Tomlinson, 1999). One way to address learner differences such as learning styles, intelligences, cultural and gender differences is to adopt the popular differentiated classroom strategies for teaching listed below (after Tomlinson, 1999).
Teachers can differentiate at least four elements of classroom instruction based on student readiness, interests and learning profile:
•
Content: What the student needs to learn or how the student will get access to the information
Differentiating the Elementary Classroom: Teachers can differentiate learning by changing four elements in classroom instruction based on student readiness, interests and learning profile(s): 1.
Examples of differentiating content at the elementary level
2.
include the following:
3.
1. using reading materials at varying readability levels 2. putting text materials on tape
4.
Content – how students get to material Process – activities to master the content Products – projects that ask the student to represent their learning Learning Environment: the way the class looks and feels
(Tomlinson, 1999)
46 3. using spelling or vocabulary lists at readiness levels of students 4. presenting ideas through both auditory and visual means 5. using reading buddies 6. meeting with small groups to re-teach an idea or skill for struggling learners, or to extend the thinking or skills of advanced learners •
Process: activities in which the student engages in order to make sense of or master the content
Examples of differentiating process or activities at the elementary level include the following: 1. using tiered activities through which all learners work with the same important understandings and skills, but proceed with different levels of support, challenge, or complexity 2. providing interest centers that encourage students to explore subsets of the class topic of particular interest to them 3. developing personal agendas (task lists written by the teacher and containing both in-common work for the whole class and work that addresses individual needs of learners) to be completed either during specified agenda time or as students complete other work early 4. offering manipulatives or other hands-on supports for students who need them; and 5. varying the length of time a student may take to complete a task in order to provide additional support for a struggling learner or to encourage an advanced learner to pursue a topic in greater depth •
Products: Culminating projects that ask the student to rehearse, apply, and extend what he or she has learned in a unit
Examples of differentiating products at the elementary level include the following: 1. giving students options of how to express required learning (e.g., create a puppet show, write a letter, or develop a mural with labels) 2.
using rubrics that match and extend students' varied skills levels
3. allowing students to work on their products alone or in small groups 4. encouraging students to create their own product assignments as long as the assignments contain required elements. •
Learning Environment: The way the classroom works and feels (see the instructional design section (A) for more on learning environments)
47 Examples of differentiating the learning environment at the elementary level include: 1. making sure there are places in the room to work quietly and without distraction, as well as places that invite student collaboration 2. providing materials that reflect a variety of cultures and home settings 3. setting out clear guidelines for independent work that matches individual needs 4. developing routines that allow students to get help when teachers are busy with other students and cannot help them immediately 5. helping students understand that some learners need to move around to learn, while others do better sitting quietly (Tomlinson, 1995, 1999; Winebrenner, 1992, 1996)
Summary In continuously improving schools, effective teaching strategies make a big difference for learner achievement. Keeping up to new trends and research is difficult for busy teachers. While reviewing basic teaching methods, this synopsis presents categories of promising teaching methods shown by the literature to be both more and less prevalent. An important first step to revisiting our teaching methods and classroom strategies is to understand our stance toward teaching (subjective or objective) and realize that stance when choosing strategies for classroom activities. This synopsis also points out that selecting a teaching strategy is not merely a selection – this teacher activity is but one part in an overall instructional design process where the entire learning environment is designed. While there is a trend to blend information processing teaching strategies with social teaching strategies, the constructivist or inquiry based teaching methods dominate popular literature today. In particular, problem based, situated and social teaching methods, particularly in elementary schools, show the most promise for practices that allow teachers, learners and the school to improve together. Although there is much information categorized here for Alberta teachers as a basis and resource for reflective teaching practice and perhaps as a review of what we learned in university, it is important to see that thoughtful teaching methods and fun at school have more to do with learning improvements than structural or policy changes.
The challenge is ours – to ponder new kinds of differentiated classrooms, moral education and educational technologies along with instructional designs and teaching methodologies that we have not tried before, perhaps.
48 This survey of literature indicates that Alberta teachers, in a context of continuous change and improvement, will look more to strategies (looking ahead) and less to best practices (looking back) as they mix and modify teaching methods for exciting new social and inquiry-based classroom environments. Looking ahead, a careful mix of many teaching methods and theory, and research to support our understanding of social, constructivist and integrated technology teaching methods is expected to color the more promising practice in Alberta classrooms of any size – making these fertile ground for the best student learning outcomes possible in the knowledge society (Hargreaves, 2003).
References
Alberta Learning. (2004). Focus on inquiry: a teacher's guide to implementing inquirybased learning. Edmonton, AB: Author. Aldrich, C. (2003). Simulations and the future of learning: An innovative (and perhaps revolutionary) approach to e-learning. New York, NYU: Pfeiffer. Alfasi, M. (1998). Reading for meaning: The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering reading comprehension in high school students in remedial reading classes. American Educational Research Journal, (35), 2, 309-332. Bax, S. (2003). CALL-Past, present and future. System, (31), 1. 13-28. Becker, W. (1977). Teaching reading to the disadvantaged – What we have learned from field research. Harvard Education Review, 47, 518-543. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1998). Beyond Bloom's Taxonomy: Rethinking knowledge for the Knowledge Age. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 675-692). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Betts, J. R., & Shkolnick, J. L. (1999). The behavioral effects of variations in class size: The case of math teachers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21, 193-213. Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery learning. In J. Block (Ed.), Mastery learning; Theory and practice. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Bornsedt, G.W., & Stecher, B. (2002). What we have learned about class size reduction in California. Palo Alto, CA: American Institute for Research. Bogod, L. (2005). Learning Styles – A summary. Retrieved Online June, 2005 at: http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm#Learning%20Styles%20Explained Brown, J. S., & Duiguid, P. (2000). The social life of information. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Bruner, J. S. (1973). The relevance of education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
49 Carroll, J. (1971). Problems of measurement related to the concept of learning for mastery. In J. Block (Ed.), Mastery learning; Theory and practice. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Clifford, P., Friesen, S., & Lock, J. (2004). Coming to teaching in the 21st century. Calgary, AB: GENA. Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S.L. (2001). Beyond certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice. In. A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.) Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters (pp. 45 - 58). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Daniels, H., & Bizar, M. (1998). Methods that matter: Six structures for best practice classrooms. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dewey, J. (1900). Psychology and social practice. Psychology Review, 7, 105-124. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Heath. Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. (2001). The systematic design of instruction (5th Ed.). New York, NY: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc. Drayton, B., & Falk, J. (2001). Tell-tale signs of the inquiry oriented classroom. NAASP Bulletin, (85), 623, 24-34. Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. DU Technology Services. (2005). General MOO Information. Found at http://www.du.org/dumoo/imooinfo.htm Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. New York, NY: Macmillan. DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service. Dustmann, C. (2003). The class size debate and educational mechanisms. The Economic Journal, (113), F1-F2. Edwards-Groves, C.J. (1999). Explicit Teaching: Focusing Teacher Talk on Literacy. PEN 118, PETA, NSW. Friere, P. (1995). Pedagogy of the oppressed. (M. Ramos, trans.). New York, NY: Continuum.
50 th
Freiberg, J. H., & Driscoll, A. (2004). Universal teaching strategies (4 Ed.). Needham Heights, NJ: Allyn & Bacon. Gagne, R.M., Briggs, L.J., & Wager, W.W. (1988). Principles of Instructional Design (3rd Ed). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (2nd Ed). New York, NY: Basic Books. Gardner, Howard (1999) The disciplined mind: Beyond facts And standardized tests, The K-12 education that every child deserves, New York: Simon and Schuster Glass, G., Cahen, L., Smith, M., & Filby, N. (1982). School class size: research and policy. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Good, T. and Brophy, J. (1990). Educational Psychology (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman. Grabowski, B. L. (1996). Generative learning: Past, present and future. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communication technology (pp. 897-918). New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA. Grondlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement. Needham Heights, NJ: Allyn & Bacon. Hanushek, E. (1999). Some findings from an independent investigation of the Tennessee STAR experiment from other investigations of class size effects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 143-163. Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (2000). Mentoring in the new millennium. Theory into Practice, 39. Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. New York: Teachers College Press. Hullfish, H. G., & Smith, P. G. (1961). Reflective thinking: The method of education. New York, NY: Dodd & Mead. Hunt, D. E. (1971). Matching models in education. Toronto, ON: OISI Johnson, D. & Johnson, R. (1995). Creative controversy: Intellectual challenge in the classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Johnson, D. & Johnson, R. (1999). Methods of cooperative learning: What can we prove works? Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Jones, D. C. (1997). Sayings for teachers. Calgary, AB: Deltselig. Jonassen, D. H. (2001). Objectivism vs. Constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? In D. Ely & T. Plomp (Eds.) Classic Writings on Instructional Technology (Volume 2) (pp. 53-71). Englewood Cliffs: Libraries Unlimited.
51 Joyce, B., Calhoun, E., Carran, N., Simser, J., Rust, D., & Halliburton, C. (1996). University town. In B. Joyce & E Calhoun (Eds.), Learning experiences in school renewal (pp. 26-91). Eugene, ORE: ERIC clearinghouse for Educational Management. Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (Eds.). (2004). Models of teaching (7th ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon. Judd, C. H. (1934). Education and social progress. New York: Harcourt Brace. Kagan, S. (1990). Cooperative learning resources for teachers. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers Kelsey, K. (2004). The truth about Science: A curriculum for developing young scientists. Arlingon, VA: National Science Teachers Association. Kessler, G. (2003). Preparing for the future in CALL. Essential Teacher (1), 1. 34-36. Kowch, E. (2005). Updated textbook offers instructors and students a wider range of theoretical, philosophical and tactical approaches for teaching and learning instructional technology design today. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D) (52), 4. 85-90. Kozma, R. B. (2004). ICT and educational change: A global phenomenon. In R. B. Kozma (Ed.), Technology, Innovation, and Educational Change: A Global Perspective. A Report of the Second Information Technology in Education Study Module 2 (pp. 1 - 18). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology Education. Krueger, A. B. (2003). Economic considerations and class size. The Economic Journal, (113), F34– F63. La Grange, A. & Foulkes E. (2004). Emergent framework for ICT integration within faculties of education in Canada. Prepared for Industry Canada on behalf of Canadian Association of Deans of Education (CADE). Laferrière, T., Bracewell, R., & Breuleux, A. (2001). The emerging contribution and tools to K-12 classroom learning and teaching: An Update. Executive Summary. July 10, 2004, from http://www.tact.fse.ulaval.ca/ang/html/summary01.html Larkin, M. (2002). Using scaffolding instruction to optimize learning. ERIC Digest E639. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Leithwood, K. (1999). A century’s quest to understanding school leadership. In J. Murphy and K. Seashore-Louis (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Educational Administration (2nd Ed.), pp. 45-73. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and responsibility. New York: Bantam Books. Lickona, T. (1993). The return of character education. Educational Leadership, 51(3), 6-11. McNeill, J., & Wiles, J. (1990). The essentials of teaching: Decisions, places and methods. New York, NY: MacMillan.
52 th
Morrison, G., Ross, S., & Kemp, J. (2003). Designing effective instruction (4 Ed.). New York, NY: Wiley. New London Group, The. (1996). pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Education Review, 66(1), 60-92. Newman, W., Abell, S., Hubbard, P., McDonald, J., & Otaala, J. (2004). Dilemmas of teaching inquiry in elementary science methods. Journal of Science Teacher Education, (15), 4, 257-259. North Carolina Research Education Laboratory (NCREL) & North Carolina Schools Association (1997). Inquiry based education. Found at: http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/DVE/FusionDVE/html/inquiry_based_education.html Nye, B, Hedges, L., & Konstantopoulos, S. (1999). Do low-achieving students benefit more from small classes? Evidence from the Tennessee class size experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, (24), 3, 201-217. Oster, L. (2001). Using the think-aloud for reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 55, 64-69. Park, M., Chan, S., Ingwale-Verma, Y. (2003). Three success factors for simulation based construction education. Journal of construction of education, (8), 2. 101-114. Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, (24), 5-12. Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E.A., & Kain, J.F. (1998). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. (Working Paper No. 6691). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Rogers, C. (1987). The underlying theory: Drawn from experience with individuals and groups. Counseling and Values, 32(1), 38-46. Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Rogers, C. (1982). Freedom to learn in the eighties. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Saskatchewan Education. (2005). Instructional approaches: A framework for professional practice (1991). Regina, SK: Queens Printer. Found online: http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/policy/approach/ Schwab, J. (1965). Biological sciences curriculum study: Biology teachers’ handbook. New York, NY: Wiley. Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sharan, S., & Shaulov, A. (1990). Cooperative learning, motivation to learn, and academic achievement. In S. Sharan (Ed.), Cooperative learning: Theory and research (pp. 173-202). New York, NY: Praeger. Skinner, B. F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 24, 86-97.
53 Sprott, J. C. (2005). Physics Demonstrations: A sourcebook for teachers of physics. Found online: http://www.du.org/dumoo/imooinfo.htm Statz, C., & Stecher, B. M. (2000). Teaching mathematics and language arts in reduced size and non reduced size classrooms. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(4), 313-329. Suchman, R. .J. (1962). Studies in inquiry training. In R. Riple & V. Bookastle (Eds.), Piaget reconsidered. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Tennant, M. (1997) Psychology and Adult Learning 2e, London, UK: Routledge. Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the internet. London, UK: Sage. Thelen, H. (1981). The classroom society: The construction of education. New York, NY: Halsted Press. Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., & Hertberg, H. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, (27), 2. 119-145. Tomlinson, C. (2000). Differentiation of Instruction in the Elementary Grades. ERIC Digest. EDO-PS00-7. Champaign, IL: Eric Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Curriculum Development ED 429 944. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. Educause Review, (38), 5, 28-38. VanScriver, J. H. (2005). NCLB Fitfully fits differentiated instruction – Phi Delta Kappan – This type of training should be as American as apple pie. The Education Digest, (70), 9. 31-37. Vaughan, A. L. (2005). The self-paced student. Educational Leadership (62), 7. 67-73. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wade, R. C. (1997). Community service learning and social studies curriculum: Challenges to effective practice. The Social Studies, (88), 5, 197-202. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Wilson, B., & Merrill, D. (2005). The future of instructional design and technology (2nd ed.). In R. Resier & J. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall. Zahorik, J. (1999). Reducing class size leads to individualized instruction. Educational Leadership, 57(1), 50-53. Ziegler, S. (1997). Class size, academic achievement and public policy. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.
54
References/Resources from this Paper that are Available Online: Biddle, B. J., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). What research says about small classes and their effects. In pursuit of better schools: What research says. The Learning Link (September, 2005). Online at: http://www.ccl-caa-english/resources/carnet.asp Bogod, L. (2005). Learning Styles – A summary. Retrieved Online June, 2005 at: http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm#Learning%20Styles%20Explained Canadian Council on Learning (2005). Lessons in learning – Making sense of the class size debate. The Learning Link (September 14, 2005). Online at: http://www.ccl-caa-english/resources/carnet.asp Edwards-Groves, C. (2005). Strategies for teaching reading (Explicit Teaching). Online at: http://www.myread.org/explicit.htm. Infed (2005). Multiple Intelligences: Gardner. Online at: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm Montgomery Community Public Schools. (1999). Indirect Instruction; Guided Reading: Online at: http://www.mcps.k12.md.us/curriculum/english/guided_rdg.html Moyers (2005). On Addition. An example of an online demonstration. Public Broadcasting System. Online at: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/closetohome/animation/neuron-main.html Regina Public Schools and Saskatchewan Learning (2003). Inquiry learning: A guide. Online at: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/bestpractice/inquiry/process.html. Saskatchewan Education (2005). Inductive Teaching Strategies: Concept Attainment. Online at: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/indirectinstruction/conceptat tainment.htm Saskatchewan Education (2005). Online Teaching Strategies: Case Study. Online at: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/indirectinstruction/cases tudy.htm Saskatchewan Education. An example of demonstrations. Online at: http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/bestpractice/demo/index.html Saskatoon Public School Division (2004). An example and explanation of Drill and Practice. Online at: http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/DE/PD/instr/strats/drill/index.html The Inquiry Page. (2005). Information on Inquiry teaching. Online at: http://www.inquiry.uiuc.edu/us/inquiry_page.php Vockell, E. (2005). Gagne and the events of instruction. Purdue University. Online at: http://education.calumet.purdue.edu/vockell/edpsybook/Edpsy3/edpsy3_instruction.htm
