Thursday, February 12, 2009

Erin Bates Journal Entry 1

Much of what I read, particularly chapters 2 and 3 in The Essentials of Instructional Design, reminded me of what I learned in my undergraduate education classes. I remember learning about the ideas of psychologists, such as Pavlov and Skinner, in my educational psychology class and about the philosophies behind learning during my introduction to philosophy course. Then last semester, in ISTC 541, we discussed behaviorism and constructivism. It was a benefit to have this prior knowledge to look back on as I was reading.

Something that I’ve heard in all of my education classes is that the student must be involved in his or her education. This also reminds me of the Confucius quote, “I do and I understand.” Most students remember and can reproduce what they DO in the classroom, not necessarily what they saw or heard.

One of my greatest struggles in the reading was all the vocabulary. I felt as though I had to keep going back to earlier portions of the chapter or of the article to check that I wasn’t mixing up words and definitions. A struggle I’m having with the information is how to apply it in the classroom. We are kept to so tight of a schedule and are told what concepts to study with each story, that there isn’t always time to be creative or to use some of the strategies for varied learning.

In the article, Merrill discussed that students need to be shown how to apply something to the real world in order for it to be more meaningful. In language arts, when we read stories in the anthology, the tests are basically comprehension questions. (“Name three character traits of ______,” “List the events that cause suspense,”) Within the last few stories, I have begun to realize that it would be more meaningful if I taught the strategies using the anthology story, and then tested them on whether or not they could apply the reading strategies. When the students take the MSA and the L.A. midterm, they have a passage that they have never seen before to read and questions to answer. I feel that I am better preparing them for such assessments.

As a teacher, I believe that it is important to understand the different philosophies and to draw from each one depending on what subject and concept is being taught. For example, there is frequently “no right answer” in language arts – stories can be interpreted in different ways – but in math, there is a correct way of applying a formula, but usually different ways to get the same correct answer.

1 comment:

  1. The Confucius quote is very interesting in this context - thinking out loud here, do you think that students remembering what they "do" is the goal of learning? Does understanding naturally come with doing? If not, how to connect the two?

    Re: teaching philosophy, if there's "no right answer" in language arts, would you say that you see yourself as an interpretivist?

    ReplyDelete