isms cause me pause.
Clearly we, as educators, are all part of a practice. This practice is one which deals mainly with the unseen; learning. How can learning be authentically measured in order to prove one learning theory as affective over another?
In viewing the blog postings between Karl Kapp and Stephen Downes, http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html,
I walk away with more questions than answers, which I enjoy!
The analogy which originally came to mind was that of a physician attempting to diagnose an illness which presents itself with certain symptoms. Symptoms were looked at in many ways by differing physicians, through different medical procedures, and therefore, different diagnoses may be assigned. Likewise, the students present themselves with certain behaviors and abilities which demonstrate the assumption of increased knowledge or assimilation of information. However, as educators we must guard against the burden of proof being placed upon our students through anything but authentic demonstration of knowledge. Whichever learning theory is utilized, based upon the situation, task or level of information, as Karl Kapp believes to be the correct formula, the learning theory must address the outcome, the desired knowledge first and work back to the individual learner by design. This design is essential in order to assure that testing of knowledge isn’t based on simple regurgitation of information. Higher order processing must take place in order for there to be an increase in understanding.
So, as we pick and choose which theories apply to which situations and students, we need to keep in mind that the outcome is increased knowledge. Increases in knowledge, however, seem to be more difficult to assess than diagnosis of a patient’s illness. With so many variables, what is a classroom teacher to do? As we assess the human behavior of motivation and learning styles, educators themselves are born of or under a certain learning style themselves which translates into their teaching style of choice. My next question pertains to the role of technology as a mediator within the classroom. Could technology provide students with varying learning styles and levels of knowledge gain the correct prescription for growth?
There appear to be more questions here than answers, and I apologize. I’m a student myself, and will continue to assimilate this information into a knowledge base. More to come…always more!
Kerr, B. (2007) http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html, retrieved on June 19, 2009.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that you have to be prescriptive in your approach to instruction. Thank you for mentioning that. Sometimes I wonder when students are doing little, if nothing, in a learning situation, that the theory or approach for the student ought to change. That would be better than saying, "Well students have a right to choose to fail." I think teaching is a challenging profession and the prescriptive nature of the job is part of the craft and skill of the educational professional. I like how you used the analogy of the doctor, and it reminded me that educational technology can be used to motivate students. I used a discussion board about a literature selection over the long winter holidays and was gratified to see lots of student participation by the 8th graders. Students are very motivated by seeing themselves out in the digital world and are willing to emerge in that environ when they otherwise might not participate.
ReplyDeleteTrue. The visibility in the digital world is gratifying to them, indeed. I also want to add that this is an avenue for giving them a voice which otherwise may not be their choice. What I mean is that the students that answer the questions in class are the ones that everyone else depends upon. When it is each individual students responsibility to answer on their own page, discussion thread, whatever the tool, then each child has their own voice, and the responsibility of learning.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYour question was "Could technology provide students with varying learning styles and levels of knowledge gain the correct prescription for growth?"
ReplyDeleteI am a little unclear as to what you were asking, so I will assume what you meant. I am also looking into this issue. I am wanting to know how much technology can help raise literacy levels and acquisition of a second language, either in English language learners or in students learning Spanish. Technology in and of itself cannot produce gains. I believe it has to be grouped with the students' motivation and the teacher's belief in the technology. Teachers who are resistant to adding technology into their teaching do not present a confidence in the technology and the students sense it. This can greatly impact any progress that could have been made with the technology.