Sunday, January 10, 2010
2010 EDLD 655 Watch 1, Day 2: Cognitivist/Constructivist
2010: Hear teachers and educational leaders discuss observations of learning theories at work. To post, just click on "Post a Comment" below and a screen will come up for typing. To post, just click on "Post a Comment" below and a screen will come up for typing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In addition to describing your observation, here is a discussion question you can respond to: If you observed a teacher, do you believe the Cognitivist/Constructivist moment you observed was based on a deeply held teaching philosophy for this teacher? OR you can respond to another student's post.
ReplyDeleteToday I had the opportunity to observe and learn about an online, charter school. What we learned is that each student is assessed prior to beginning classes and provides the curriculum at their level. While the schedule is flexible, teachers are available during normal school hours. The teachers interact with students in a variety of modes, but usually it is individual interactions. There are online lessons that students progress through which have assessments embedded along the way to ensure comprehension. If students are not understanding a lesson or have a comment to make about it, they have many options to communicate with their teacher.They can repeat a lesson (to improve comprehension), phone, email, video or audio chat, or instant message. If students are not passing the assessments, teachers follow up with the students to see what help they may need. Students also have assignments that they submit to the teacher, electronically and through the mail. For younger students, teachers use a variety of methods to ensure adequate learning is occurring, especially for reading.
ReplyDeleteTeachers also schedule live lessons. I observed such a lesson. The teacher alternated between two computer screens, the one he was working with to provide the content, then another one that had the student comments on that he was responding to. It was very fascinating to see, and well attended (28 students).
Answering the question- do I believe the cognitivist/constructivist moment I observed was also a deeply held teacher philosophy? Yes-this teacher, is a a science teacher by trade. The teacher was very dynamic and clearly comfortable with this method of teaching.
Seeing constructivist behaviors in the area of mathematics tends to be the easiest for me to spot. Today, I observed these behaviors in two separate math classes; one at the first grade level and one at the fourth grade level. In my fourth grade observation, students were introduced to the speed of light. They were provided with the information that light travels at 186 million miles per hour. Before they could process this information, though, they needed to explore what it meant to travel a distance in a given amount of time (i.e. distance per time). It was decided that in these cases, the “per” meant “in that amount”. So, miles per hour meant number of miles traveled in that amount of time. Once that was settled, students circled back around to the 186 million miles per hour idea. Their text provided that this meant it took eight minutes for sunlight to travel from the sun to the Earth. One student commented that that seemed like a long time. Then, she reconsidered, and thought maybe it wasn’t that long. When the teacher offered that eight minutes was about equal to half of a recess.
ReplyDeleteThese students also touched on this theory in this class when the topic became science and that studying of anything is a science. The examples included studying stars, but quickly students recognized that you can also study animals, plants and even math ideas, making any and all of those topics a science if you are in the act of investigating it. So, in short, I guess I would loosely describe or define constructivist behaviors as those that activate and build on prior knowledge.
In the first grade classroom, students were discussing simple addition and subtraction sentences. They were able to provide what an addition or subtraction sentence would look like and provide their own examples. Then, the teacher assisted them in expanding this idea. They began turning basic subtraction sentences into addition sentences in order to check their work. It took their basic knowledge of what a math sentence was and how the numbers worked together in order to recognize that the same three numbers would appear in both sentences and that the top number in the first problem would be the answer in the second sentence if their answer was correct.
In case number one (the fourth grade group), I felt that the interactions and process of those students getting from point A to point B was quite natural. It was guided by the students’ inquiry, not the teachers, so I really don’t think it was teacher-influenced based on the teacher’s own values or philosophies. I case two, it could go either way. Knowing this teacher, I would lean towards the fact that she is a very linear and systematic thinking and, therefore, probably processes this information (the math fact families and math in general) in this same linear, organized manner and so that is how she presents it. Do I think it is her philosophical roots? It might be; her entire life follows this modality.
My observation begins in a sixth grade classroom exploring the concept of probability. The instructor has her students shooting a ball into three different size trashcans - large, medium and small. The ball and the shooting distance from the trashcan are the same each time. Before each round of shooting, she asks the class to predict the outcome and why. During the last round of shooting, one of the students asks the instructor if they can use a smaller ball. The teacher agrees and they repeat the experiment using the smaller ball. Again the teacher asks for predictions and reasons for their predictions. They would also debrief their outcomes after each round of shooting. At the end of the exercise, the teacher asked the students to self organize into groups of two or three. Their task included designing an experiment to illustrate the same probability parameters that were demonstrated in the day’s activities.
ReplyDeleteDespite some obvious instructional flaws and classroom challenges (i.e. lack of clear objective, ineffective questioning strategies, classroom management issues, etc.), it is a clear example of a constructivist approach. The teacher is attempting to design a set of experiences that will allow students to draw their own conclusions. The final task of the day was an attempt to allow students to create (synthesize) their knowledge. Without a clear objective, I am not sure where the teacher is leading them. However, I assume that she will use the student-created experiments to further clarify their learning.
I have seen this teacher on many occasions. I would not state that she has deep seated beliefs about constructivism as a teaching philosophy. I don’t mean to be critical but I really believe that it was meant to break up the instructional boredom that can accompany a more day-to-day behaviorist philosophy. The kids needed a little “educational fun”. There were just too many instructional flaws (as mentioned in the paragraph above) for this to be a serious attempt at constructivism.
Today's observation was in a third-grade classroom. The topic was the reading comprehension strategy around making inferences. The instruction that the teacher provided was pretty explicit. First she provided a definition of inferencing. Then she modeled through a think aloud what making inferences looks like, and then provided guided practice so that students could practice the strategy and get feedback on their efforts.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that while the instruction was pretty direct, making inferences is highly dependent on making meaning by connecting the new information to existing knowledge. Students had to construct the meaning of the text based on what they already know about the topic. To me, this is a terrific example of constructivist learning.
How interesting that the learning, making meaning from the text, and the instruction, explicit strategy instruction seem to come from two theories.
I guess I keep coming back to the nesting idea. For my personal learning, this is a way for me to reconcile my inability to ascribe to only one theory.
In answer to the question: No, the teacher did not seem grounded in constructivist theory. I wonder if she recognized that her students were demonstrating what constructivist theory looks like as they were applying her instruction.
I observed 5th grade reading instruction today. The class is working on reading technical writing and a science text was utilized for the exercise. The students formed teams and then were assigned a section of the chapter to read and create "Jeopardy" type questions, varying in degree of difficulty to share with the rest of the class. Though it was organized as group work and reflected the sociocultural approach for the majority of the lesson, there were incidents of individual learning which were indicitive of constructionist methodology. With the teacher providing "guided discovery", students were pushed to think deeply. Questions such as "What would happen if..", "How could we change...", and "Which do you think is the most effective method, and why?" very clearly demonstrate an effort to get kids to build on previous knowledge and use higher level thinking skills, the key elements in constructionist theory.
ReplyDeleteI believe my teacher has a strong conviction to using excellent questioning strategies that naturally lend themselves to both the constuctionist and sociocultural schools of thought. She is a gifted educator and draws out the best from her students. Good instruction and fun to watch!
My constructivist observation moment came as I interviewed a student who had gotten into a fight with his best friend over a girl and a series of text messages.
ReplyDeleteHe talked about his frustration and anger over the "betrayal," and how he had seen the messages that proved beyond all doubt that his friend was lying and his girlfriend was virtuous. He paused briefly and smiled at the notion that he might not quite have the whole story, that he couldn't be certain it was a clear-cut as he first might have believed, and that if he were watching it play out in a movie - that it might actually be funny (happening to someone else).
He decided that he may have acted in haste, though he reserved the right to think about it more and maybe try to get to the bottom of it later.
I saw this as constructivism in action - self-actuated by a student not typically considered as being given over to that type of thing.
Malcom
I had the opportunity to observe a fifth grade science lesson today. Students were working cooperatively in small groups and there was a wonderful 'buzz' in the classroom. Students were discussing the possible variables to change and completing an exercise (in anticipation of tomorrow's activity) designed around the prompts:
ReplyDeleteWhat we will measure
What we will count
What we will observe
What we think will happen
Students were making predictions such as, 'We think we will see...'
'We will observe....'
'We think that the more the wire is turned...the stronger it will get.'
They were also connecting their work to prior knowledge.
'I know this because...'
'I have seen this before so I think this will happen..'
The teacher is this classroom was circulating around, asking questions, prompting students, listening to their conversations.
I believe the teacher in this classroom understands constructivist theory and chooses to use it in her science instruction. I also believe she understands excellent instruction (though may not relate it to one particular learning theory) and the teaching and learning that happens in her classroom is more reflective of excellent instruction than one particular learning theory (the nesting idea much like Marianne refers to in her posting). Jennifer
Day two Observation
ReplyDeleteYesterday I participated in beginning day of the 3rd series of a mentor academy offered through the New Teacher Center (NTC), http://www.newteachercenter.org/. The Mentor Academy takes place over the course of a two-year period consisting of eight, three-day sessions. The Academy’s sequenced curriculum focuses on building the knowledge, skills, and understandings critical for new teacher mentors and their coaches.
The training environment is set up with round tables where 3-6 educators sit with other members of their district or ESD team for hands on instruction on a range of program contexts provided by NTC. Each session has a materials packet used by the two staff developers to guide participants through a daily set of learning outcomes. Participants are actively engaged in the learning either through collaborative work with members of their table group or with a one-on-one interaction with quadrant partners they randomly select at the beginning of the first day.
Each day’s activities build on the next so by the end of the three days participants have had a full understanding of the content for that series through facilitated demonstration, role playing, discussion and interaction with their colleagues. This 3rd academy is focusing on analysis of student work.
Each series of staff development is spaced two-three months apart in order to give each mentor the opportunity to take and practice their newly learned skills within the context of mentoring beginning teachers assigned to him/her in September of last year.
Dennis Schultz
If you observed a teacher, do you believe the Cognitivist/Constructivist moment you observed was based on a deeply held teaching philosophy for this teacher?
ReplyDelete-----------
A resounding Yes. The premise for the work developed by the New Teacher Center is based on building a community of learners to network and support each other in their own professional growth as mentors of beginning teachers.
Participants are encouraged to share their good and bad experiences, collaborate with colleagues on best practice in the use of their 'mentor toolbox' and practice their newly acquired coaching skills each day they work with their teachers.
Oops, I posted this on Day 1, so trying this again.. double dipping I suppose.
ReplyDeleteToday, I was looking for an opportunity where the Cognitivist/Constructivist behavior was very visible and I finally found that opportunity this afternoon with my 5th graders in Math. We are preparing for our OAKS testing and I one their practice problems was related to Family Facts. I really thought it was a no brainer and all the kids would get that item correct. Unfortunately that did not happen and I seized the moment to use modeling, prior knowledge, and meaningful learning to help them remember what Family Facts are all about. I used several students for role playing of mother, father, children. When asked what that represented they replied "A family." I then changed the order, several different times of each member of the family and asked, "If it was the same family standing there or a different family?" All of a sudden you could see the light going off and there faces showing signs of understanding exactly what is meant by Family Facts and there was no need to really solve the problem (If 25 x 7 = 175, then what does 175 ./. by 25 equal? a. 175 b. 25 c. 7 or d. 5.) I had seen most students trying to work out the problem when after the demo of family they realized there was no need to do the computation! I believe I do have some of the Cognitivist/Constructivist behaviors, and I feel it is okay. There is a need for different approaches and behaviors, depending on the students you are teaching.
I observed a training session with the University of Oregon football team. I noticed many elements of cognitive/constructivism. The head strength coach gives specific instruction for the workout and then sends the athletes to complete the training on their own. Certain parts of their workouts have choices that each athlete must finish. Little guidance is given from the coach. Athletes choose from different exercises and have control over order and pace. I believe a lot of this type of self-directed exercise is to help athletes when they are on their own in the summer. The coach gives them a basic knowledge of the exercises and then it is up to the athlete how and when to use them. I do believe the constructivist moment I observed was based on a deeply held teaching philosophy. The coach tries to keep each athlete accountable for themselves and treats them like adults. He tries to get each student-athlete to draw his or her own conclusions regarding training. I think all of these moments contribute to being successful after sport training on their own.
ReplyDeleteI observed a first grade classroom doing a "Math Their Way" lesson. The teacher told the students their target was to learn about the number facts of six by adding two numbers that would equal six. One student said he knew that. When asked how, he said because they did 5 beans yesterday. Six students were selected to go behind a table that was on its side. The table was the cave. The 6 students were the bears.
ReplyDeleteThe class turned away from the "cave" while some of the bears disappeared into the cave leaving others standing outside the cave. The students would turn and identify the number in the cave and the number outside of the cave. Then an equation was expressed and written on the board. Various combinations were explored until all combinations were written. Students were using past experience to formulate ideas. For example, at one point when an equation was written with the numbers switched a student burst out with "An inverse!" She was asked to explain what she meant. She said it was like when they were doing patterns and they had inverses and that the numbers were switched.
After doing caves with their bodies, the students worked with bears in a cave represented by bears under a cup on the overhead. Then they looked at how to represent the facts and the equations on a folded card with animals drawn to represent the number in the cave (under the flap) and the number outside the cave (outside the flap) with the equation written on the back.
Questions like, "What is one we haven't done before?" "How did you figure it out?" "How did you know?" "Does it matter which number comes first in the equation?" all helped the students think and discover. There was scaffolding, coaching, guided discovery, prediction, and reflection as they explored.
Do I believe the lesson I observed was based on a deeply held philosophy for that teacher? Absolutely! She is the first one that came to mind when I went looking for a constructivist lesson because this is typical of her. However, I must qualify that by saying, she is also a "nester" in that she uses all three theories in her teaching.
My observation for the constructivist theory in practice was in a 7th & 8th grade science classroom. The students were given the question of "how does temperature affect the density of water?" They were then told to construct a hypothesis with their neighbors. They were then required to come up with their own materials list for what they would need in order to investigate this question. The question served as a prompt for the students to use and then set out to construct their own labs. I really liked this as it wasn't your typical "cookbook" lab. This was only a prelab, so I have yet to see how the students actually carried out their experiments, but most material lists included thermometers, hot and cold water, and objects of different densities to test their floating and sinking properties in water of different temperatures. In this way, students were able to be autonomous in their own learning, helping to turn the teacher into a facilitator, instead of instructor.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that this constructivist approach helps to illustrate this teacher's philosophy of letting the students get active in their education. Instead of talking at the students and giving a lecture on density, the teacher believes in getting the students to use inquiry to figure major scientific principles out for themselves. Through this, their prior misconceptions are "weeded out" and the teacher can take a more observational approach, while the students are able to construct their learning. This approach moves away form the banking method of education where the teacher serves as the depositor of knowledge as the teacher is seen as the only person in the classroom that actually holds knowledge. Thus, through this constructivist approach, the teacher helped to show his philosophy of taking a hands off approach, while the kids take a hands-on approach.
Yesterday I watched a 5th grade science class as they were beginning to learn about the atmosphere and its properties. I missed the beginning of the lesson, but what I saw appeared to be early in the discovery process. While students were looking at an image projected on the document camera about the layers of the atmosphere, a beaker of water was boiling in the back of the class with a balloon over the opening. Kids were engaged and excited. They were labeling a page in their packets with the names of the atmospheric layers while turning around to watch the balloon get bigger. Finally the teacher calmly took the beaker to the front where he was teaching. He continued teaching about the diagram. Then he asked the class what they observed about the balloon. Then he asked the class to think about the lessons from the days before and named a few key points. Next,he started reviewing the worksheet by making simple slow reminder statements about what they had just discussed. The students began calling out, "Oh!", "Wait a minute" and lots of side twittering was going on. Then the teacher had the class write in their science journals their current hypothesis about why the atmoshpere's layers have the properties that they do.
ReplyDeleteThis teacher was a science TOSA for many years. He is a constructivist through and through. It shows up in everything that he teaches and his classroom management is his super engaging lessons.
I was asked to attend an IEP meeting as the administrator for special education and a school psychologist to help interpret assessment results. The parent was concerned that the assessments (standardized achievement and district benchmark) and classroom performance measures (grades and homework) did not accurately reflect what her child “knows” and doesn’t “know.” Her concern was that our measures of performance didn’t reflect her child’s understanding of the content – in this case, she felt that our assessments attributed more understanding (abstract and conceptual knowledge) than her child really knows. She continued by sharing that her child knows factual information and routine strategies, but struggles to solve problems. Further, her child struggles to “process” more complex content and has difficulty understanding and applying information over time. Additionally, she spends hours each night working with her child to complete the homework (which she felt was simple and factual) and that her child’s teacher grades reflected homework and tests that don’t measure what her child doesn’t know.
ReplyDeleteBased on the assessments results and the parent’s observations and concerns, the IEP needed to reconsider instruction (how and what they taught), how the student was processing information that was being presented (connecting new information with prior knowledge) and engaging and actively constructing meaning.
Yesterday I was in a High School math class and they were doing a lesson on trig functions, sine cosine, tangent. They had already previously done some drill and practice but as an extension of the lesson they went outside and in groups of 2 or 3 had to figure out how tall trees, building, flag poles, etc. were by using the trig functions. It was something that allowed them to interact with each other, move around and use their hands, overall they really enjoyed beven the weather was nice. It was a great way to see a practical use for what they were learning in the classroom and also helped some students fully grasp the concept. This is a great for students who generally struggle with the drill and practice way of learning that we often see in math classrooms.
ReplyDeleteFrom knowing and working with this teacher they do not have a deeply held belief in constructivist learning in fact most of their lessons are more behaviorist. But I do know that they are making a concious effort to through in some different things here or there. And that is something we all need to do, make sure that we have at least mix up what we are doing once in a while and not get stuck in one rut because this can really hurt some students in your classroom.
I spoke with this topic with my staff in a meeting and many of them believe that this is a great way to instruct portions of the curriculum, but not the entire curriculum. The exception was our Science teacher, she was very adamant that this was the best way for students to learn. I have observed many times this year and she does practice what she preaches. So, in short to answer the question whether the teacher believes in constructivist theory, yes this particular teacher is definitely on-board.
ReplyDeleteI observed her teaching a lesson on aerodynamics, she gave the students two ideas for the lab, but told the students they could design their own lesson to prove or disprove a list of several facts about the topic. She provided a myriad of supplies and like I stated earlier two ideas for labs. Three of the 5 groups came up with their own experiments to prove or disprove the “facts” that the teacher had listed on the board. And the students created a list of their own to list on the board.
I was very impressed by the way that these students were engaged and interested in creating and learning by creating their own experiments. I believe as does the teacher that they will not only learn the material better, but will also have better retention if they create and prove or disprove the “facts” with their own ideas and thoughts.
My observation took place in a reading class. Kids were reviewing comprehension strategies by clarifying and monitoring.
ReplyDeleteThe first step is to recognize "I don't understand." Next, the students my clarify by:
1. re-reading
2. forward reading
3. look at the pictures
The teacher first had the students read the passage individually. She then had the entire class read together. At the end of the passage, she did a think aloud, modeling what it would look like and sound like to clarify and monitor. She had visuals of the steps so kids can refer to them.
Once she was finished modeling, she had the class read the next passage. At the end of the passage, she had the students turn to their partner and take turns practicing the strategy. First saying "I don't understand..." They then verbalized which skill they would use to understand and why, followed by demonstrating the skill to the partner. During that time, she referred to the visual reminders and monitored students while coaching, if needed.
I wouldn't say this teacher is deeply rooted in the constructivist philosophy because she uses a variety of methods to deliver her instruction throughout the day.
I observed the presentation of a senior project. The student had worked several months to develop his project in which he outlined his research question, synthesized research on his self-selected topic, developed a hypothesis and supported his argument with his findings. He incorporated many skills of problem-solving, higher order thinking, engagement in his own learning and constructing meaning out of a variety of sources and his own background knowledge.
ReplyDeleteI appreciated the comment by equuimix in seeing constructivism in action - outside of the typical classroom academic learning situation.
I observed a student's presentation rather than a teacher. However, the senior project that the student presented was highly representative of the learning environment and project structure of teachers who most definitely hold constructivist philosophical beliefs.
ReplyDeleteWell, we were shorthanded all last week because the other assistant principal was out sick. Kids must have known I was trying to get these observations done, because they created all sorts of discipline issues that kept me hopping. I was able to get into some classes today, just in time to see teachers focused on preparing students for finals. I realized that one teacher took a sociocultural approach and another teacher prepared her students for a constructivist final.
ReplyDeleteIn the constructivist class, Global Studies students were working in groups to review their notes and understandings by going through a packet of review activities which included crossword puzzles and fill in the blanks. Each page focused on a different historical era/event/concept. The teacher instructed the students to start with the packet page they found most challenging. There was choice in how each student approached this exercise and how they worked in groups.
The final exam would be an in-class activity where students will create a chart of what they have learned doing the semester, choosing the big concepts, ten important facts students think people should know about each concept and why this historical information should matter to us in understanding today’s world.
Today’s collaborative activities as well as the final exam seem constructivist in nature. By allowing students the choice to determine the big concepts as well as detailing why events or information should matter in today’s world, the teacher is asking the students to create their own analysis of historical events and to act upon that analysis. In order to place importance on historical events as they relate to the present, students must evaluate the information in relation to what they know about the present world.
Re: the question about this teacher's teaching philosophy. Knowing this teacher and also seeing how she planned to test each student's knowledge and application of course content, I would say she definitely believes in using constructivist approaches in her pedagogy. She really encourages students to construct their own understanding and interpretation of historical events.
ReplyDeleteI observed a integrated science class in my high school, where students where doing a jeopardy activity.
ReplyDeleteThe students had to work in groups and had to use their attention skills, observation, imitation and modeling skills to solve by the entire group the problem and win points for all.
This observation involved a meeting among directors and principals to discuss the concept of orchestra in the district. This meeting was approached in a collaborative way with the goal of focusing on options that the district has in hard financial times but still maintaining an ARTS MATTERS emphasis. Comments and observations were sharing among participants and several key concepts were developed to help problem solve this issue.
ReplyDeleteI will vary a little from the discussion question...I didn't observe in a classroom, but the superintendent's philosophy is very constructivist like. She encourages group processing and seeks group conscious.
. I observed a science teacher teaching earth science. He has strong beliefs rooted in the constructivist camp. After the teacher's instruction (student research, videos and lecture) about earthquakes and structures the student's began applying their knowledge. Students are designing and constructing their own structures that will be tested by the two main seismic wave patterns found in earthquakes. I have dropped into this classroom everyday for the past two weeks and have watched students change their designs by reflecting on the product that was produced. The projects are at the final stages and they have changed during the course of this science project. The learning from their own project and watching others use sophisticated and superior building methods have improved all the ideas and project styles.
ReplyDeleteToday I observed a first year language development class for English Language Learners. The students are from all over the world- Ethiopia, Somalia, Congo, Thailand, China, Tibet, etc. Typically, this is the first year that these students are in a formalized school environment.
ReplyDeleteDuring the lesson, the teacher was preparing to teach a short story that was set in the desert. So to begin, she used a graphic organizer to tap into the students' prior knowledge regarding deserts. The result that students were able to establish a picture in their minds of the story setting.
I thought this was a good example for this learning theory as the teacher helped the students engage in the learning by accessing their past experiences. For example, one student was able to talk about the Sahara and provide a pretty clear picture of that desert setting. The result was that students were prepped for reading the short story and were set up for successfully understanding what they were reading.
With this example, I do believe that the teacher truly believed in this type of instructional strategy since she is trained in GLAD and SIOP skills that promote this type of instruction. These strategies are research based approaches to helping ELLs access a new language and content.
I liked the post about role playing. While it isn't used much in the traditional high school classroom, it can be a great strategy for engaging the students' prior knowledge and allowing for more of an active approach to learning.
ReplyDeleteI observed cognitive/constructivist learning behaviors in an 8th grade art class today. Students were told to cooperatively construct a large marine mural using pastels. The project is one that they have been working on for several days. The art teacher had specific criteria for what she expected (media, size, coverage), which she reviewed, but the content and design was left to the students. This involved collaboration and decision making on the part of the students. There was a table of “sea” items that students could use to look at as they composed their murals. They were shells, starfish, rocks, sand, etc. Each mural looked different. Student used different colored pastels, had different compositions and scenes. They were strikingly different. Lots of conversations occurred where students had to engage with each other and explore materials, colors, and textures. There was a lot on internal mental activity. While the teacher gave clear guidelines, it was up to the students to interpret what that meant. The project was at a good cognitive level that used skills the students processed. It was neither too difficult nor too easy to complete.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the behavior was a deeply held belief for this teacher. I think that art most almost always be taught using the cognitive/constructivist approach. The teacher herself is artist and brings her own love of art and the joy of the process of creating it to the classroom.
Today I observed an algebra 1 class made up of mostly 9th grade students. The teacher was teaching how to simplify radical expressions, the students were using their prior knowledge of factors, multiplication and the commutative property of multiplication to learn a few different strategies to simplify the expressions. Math is most often taught in this way, where each day students must utilize their understanding of prior material and apply it to new material and a new topic.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading many of the posts I began to wonder if teachers of different content areas tended to have one belief or another. Are most math teacher behaviorist? Art teachers constructivist? I guess we won't ever really know, but it seems plausible that different content areas would lend themselves to certain learning theories more easily.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI work in a district that is led by a true constructivist superintendent. One his favorite phrases is, "Knowledge has structure." As a result, our teachers are focused on accessing prior knowledge and "learning by transfer."
ReplyDeleteAs I observed a Health class for this assignment, I witnessed the teacher continually asking students to work in pairs to answer verbal questions (instead of the traditional, "raise your hand if you know...") Using cooperative learning, he supported the constructivist theory of learning. I also noticed that he allowed "learning to control learning" in his classroom as his discussions reflected student answers. It was clearly not a teacher-directed lesson with pre-determined results.
If you observed a teacher, do you believe the Cognitivist/Constructivist moment you observed was based on a deeply held teaching philosophy for this teacher?
ReplyDeleteI believe this teacher's approach was based on his attempt to meet district goals in the area of teaching and learning. He is a fairly new teacher (4th year) and has definitely "grown" within the district constructivist model over the past years. Through our conversations, I do know that this was not the style of teaching he was exposed to through his teacher education program.
This observation is from a visit to OMSI - a virtual (and real time) Mecca for cognitivist and constructivist learning. This observation took place in what is called the Turbine Room. It is an area of the Museum that is set up to accomadate large and/or "messy" exhibits. The behaviors I was observing were happening at an electricity and dam exhibit where students were able to change the amount of electricity that was generated by how they chose to build their damn. Students would begin the task by building a simple damn using materials given to them by the exhibit monitor. They would then build their dam trying to create something that would stay together long enough to actually hold back water. Once they were satisfied with their simple design, they would initiate the flow of water and watch what happened. If the water built up high enough behind the dam, the student could release some to spin a turbine and create electricity. The more control they had over the water (based on the quality of their dam) the longer they could release water and generate electricity.
ReplyDeleteInevitably, the first version of the dam would fail quickly, but the more time the student spent on the activity and the more they applied to what they learned from the failed attempt to the next dam, the sturdier the dam became the more they were able to control the water and subsequent generation of electricity.
This is one example of the many Cognitivist/Constructivist moments I've observed at OMSI that demonstrate the deeply held teaching philosophy of this organization.
The other day, I observed my kindergartener working on his reading skills. It is interesting to consider this in a constructivist manner as I wouldn't necessarily go to that theory first. I do think it fits, however, but perhaps one can find aspects of all three theories in all activities? That is a discussion for a later time . . .
ReplyDeleteHe was working with his learning coach on phonics while reading a HeadSprout book. He would start a long word, stop, go back to the beginning, start again, go through the word, repeat it a few times, and then pull the sounds together. It was amazing to watch--especially since I am a secondary person, so I don't usually see early reading instruction. Watching him decode one fairly large word was truly like watching a building being built (with mistakes and rebuilding along the way).
you observed a teacher, do you believe the Cognitivist/Constructivist moment you observed was based on a deeply held teaching philosophy for this teacher?
ReplyDeleteI'm going to take a slight twist on this question and ask those of you who are elementary teachers--is there really any other approach to teaching reading? Or basic skills for that matter? Constructivism certainly lends itself to the teaching of basic skills and concepts.
It was easy to find examples of this type of learning in my school. An 8th grade social studies teacher is the MASTER of this as he tackles social issues associated with US History. On Friday, he posed the question of whether opponents of immigration in the period from 1900-1920 had legitimate reasons for their position. This question called for a deeper level of analysis of the issue than the usual approach that would paint proponents of immigration as good and the opposition as bad. The students engaged in a lively debate where they identified arguments well and constructed a viewpoint, that for many of them, was far from their own. I liked how opposing viewpoints were considered, even when students vehemently opposed them.
ReplyDeleteFor my second class of observation, i chose my ELL course. This teacher certainly believes in the value of a constructivist approach. In fact, she preaches it since second language learners must rely even moreso on a classroom environment that fosters shared and group work in order to identify common references from their cultural differences.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the 3-hour course, there were several student pairings for hands-on, interactive dialogue with others, group share out and assessment. Allowing students to talk, then talk about their own experiences with and opinions about the topic. We talked about building background knowledge through scaffolding...another technique a constructivist would utilize and promote.
Tenets of Sheltered Instruction (SIOP) are based on interaction and learning strategies...and specific language objectives...thus, the opportunity to engage these goals during the class period is always forefront.
Lastly, there were a number of handouts that when used, will open up the realization of all participants of the differences, AND more importantly, the commonalities between [me and you]. This helps relate to each other...or at least [social] study each other a little closer and fuller.
~lxw~
This week I was able to observe a student in a one-on-one tutor appointment who was trying to grasp a concept in a sociology class. The student was reading an article and began asking many questions as he moved through the article. I was able to guide him through these thoughts and facilitate some questions that made him think about where the article was taking him to get him to a place where he understood the article and was able to then tell me what he thought about it. This was a very simple way of constructivist teaching/learning experience but the response of the student figuring out something he otherwise would not have learned was a powerful experience.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the prompt at the top of the page, this is not a teaching philosophy for this teacher as the teacher was me. I have very limited background in teaching practices so it is important to me to embrace all the advice I can get. I use this method through advice given to me by others in the field. I don't believe I have a teaching philosophy at this point in my career but will soon play out as I improve at what I do.