Module Two
The Models of Teaching text gives a definition of teaching as “the design and creation of environments” (Joyce, Weil and Calhoun, 24). A model of teaching then is a description of learning environments according to the Models of Teaching text (24). In the book, Models of Teaching, Joyce, Weil & Calhoun, grouped the models of teaching into four categories: information-processing, social, personal and behavioral. The information-processing model emphases the way people gain and organize information and finds solutions to problems. The information-processing family includes: inductive thinking, scientific inquiry, mnemonics, synectics and advance organizers. The social learning model focuses on building a learning community and which include partners in learning, group investigation, role playing and jurisprudential inquiry. The personal models of learning emphasize self-discovery and taking responsibility for our education. It includes both nondirective teaching and enhancing self-esteem. The behavioral systems model focuses on models such as mastery learning and programmed instruction, direct instruction, simulation, social learning and programmed schedule.
Many of these models I had been exposed to in my undergraduate social studies method classes, even though I had long forgotten the names of them. I remember how enthused that I was to use these new models in my classroom. However, after reading Models of Teaching chapter five, I remembered facing some of the same obstacles listed there in using more inquiry and problem solving methods in the classroom. MOT states that “In terms of how to teach, all the dimensions of the acculturation process pull the new teacher toward the practice dominated by the Recitation pattern…Teachers are both socialized to use recitation and told that it is based on experience and research. From the ranks of teachers, principals are selected who have been socialized to the same norms” (Joyce, Weil and Calhoun, 76).
I remember the first principal that I had emphasized before I was hired that he wanted lecture only. Besides that, all the other teachers in the department believed that lecture was the only way to go. Since I was very young at the time and this was my first teaching position, I was very hesitant about doing anything different than what I was told. My response would be quite different to these pressures today. Straight lecture for every student, all the time is definitely not the best approach.
According to the Meaningful Learning with Technology text, meaningful learning happens when students engage in meaningful tasks. These tasks need to be active, constructive, intentional, authentic, and cooperative. The text states that “Rather than testing inert knowledge, schools should help students to learn how to recognize and solve problems, comprehend new phenomena, construct mental models of those phenomena, and, given a new situation, set goals and regulate their own learning” (Jonassen, Howland, Marra and Crismond, 2).
I agree with all of the tasks presented as meaningful learning except that it has to be cooperative. I think some students, as well as some adults, work best alone. Some students are naturally a little backward. I’m not arguing that cooperative learning is a bad thing. I just don’t believe that it is a prerequisite for meaningful learning.
January 20th, 2010 at 10:39 pm
Randy,
That is horrible that you had to do what you were told and couldn’t do what your heart was leading you towards. I agree with Jonassen et al. (2009) that meaningful learning happens when students engage in meaningful tasks, not just sit there and do as I say mentality. I believe that the “critical thinking” piece is being left out of many of the curriculum seen in elementary, middle grades, and high school.
Again as I stated in another blog, cooperative learning doesn’t have to exist every time in the learning process; but it will happen no matter no matter what is being taught.
Linda
January 20th, 2010 at 11:40 pm
Hello Randy,
I also disagree with the authors about the fifth characteristics of meaningful learning. I do not consider collaboration as a fundamental requirement for learning to be meaningful. I believe that students still can work individually and at the same time learn effectively. Of course it would be more effective if learners work with each other; however, we cannot say that all individual learning activities are meaningless because there is no collaboration among learners. Inversely, sometimes a learner works individually more preferable than working with group of peers. For example, an instructor cannot know which objectives of the learning activity students have mastered and which have not unless each learner works individually. I believe that most of our classmates would agree with us. At least I know that there are three of us (you, Linda, & me).
Mohammed
January 23rd, 2010 at 8:46 am
Well, I guess someone has to disagree, haha…
I have to say that although I am an individual learner, working in a collaborative environment is something that provided a sort-of optimal mismatch for me at one point in my education, and I think that mismatch made a significant impact on my educational growth—therefore I may be slightly biased. Additionally, my content area absolutely requires the development of collaborative learning and feeling comfortable with it, which may also contribute to my bias on this idea.
While I understand that you all find value in cooperative learning but feel it is not fundamental, I believe that at some point in a student’s education, it has to be fundamental. No, not every single activity a student participates in needs to be intentionally collaborative. And yes, to truly evaluate the student’s mastery of the concept it must be an individual task. But, in the general sense of learning, or use for example all of the learning that takes place in one day of class, it still has to be incorporated somehow so that students have the opportunity to develop that ability. Even if the student is working on an activity individually, I still believe that what they learn from it, at least, is probably used collaboratively at some point down the road, whether it is a discussion after the individual activity, or by applying the concept to a later group project, or anything else that involves the student using that concept they originally learned individually in an activity or interaction with other people. I think there are very few students that will never need to work collaboratively with others throughout their life and that the vast majority of students will need to have that skill and use it on a regular basis. So I think exposing a student to collaborative activities early and often is a fundamental part of both educating students and student learning.
January 23rd, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Randy,
I have to agree 100% with Linda on this one. Were there no other alternatives to teaching? And what if you did not comply with the teaching style? No job? You’re right, engaging students is the root of meaningful learning, I do not see any engaging with straight lecture! How did you do it? I mean, being your first teaching job and all, I don’t think I could have argued either, but that really puts a damper in creative lesson plans!
January 24th, 2010 at 11:42 pm
HI Randy!
I would have to agree with you! I am one of those students who works best in a quiet solitude environment! In fact, I can get a bit cranky with I hear any type of noise while working on an assignment!
I believe I struggle with ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder). I am not productive in a group setting! Since I know this about myself, I usually opt out of group projects.
February 3rd, 2010 at 3:53 pm
Randy – Perhaps it makes sense to consider a broader view of cooperative/collaborative learning than merely group work in a classroom. In a classroom setting, you learn from teachers, textbook authors, and the work products people share on the World Wide Web in addition to class mates. As you sharpen skills for your leisure activities, you often do this with friends, fellow enthusiasts, and team mates.