Through the course of our readings it has become abundantly clear to me that while we know a lot about how people learn, we still need to continue to explore new and innovative ways to teach. The ever-changing “climate of the classroom” is a challenge for new and seasoned teachers.
The higher ed. environment may be more in need of exploration of new teaching methods but I have also discovered that there are some real basic ideas that, if practiced more fully, would lead to better teaching and better learning.
So, in the manner of late night TV, I give you my top 5 ways to better learning.
Drum roll please!
#5- People must achieve a threshold of learning that is sufficient to support transfer.
#4- Learning with understanding is more likely to promote transfer.
#3 – Knowledge taught in a variety of contexts is more likely to support flexible transfer.
#2 – Assessment should mirror good instruction.
And the #1 way to better learning . . . . . .
Teachers need expertise in both subject matter content AND teaching!
These five things come straight from “How People Learn”. There are many more ideas that could be on this list but to me, these 5 are paramount. During this semester, they have become my creed and I have proclaimed them on more than one occasion in faculty meetings and in conversation with my colleagues. Some of these things seem to be revelations. My comments have actually affected change in my department. So, as I learn how to be a better teacher and how to help my students learn, I find myself teaching others around me. It is a good thing.
I believe that while we must move forward in all kinds of research in various areas; we need not loose site of the 5 items I have mentioned above which, to me, are the basis for good teaching AND good learning.
A very good friend and colleague of mine, Blaine Greenfield, was always concerned that students would be engaged in the class. He hoped that they would want to come because it was important to them and meant more than just a grade. As a way of making sure he was true to his intentions he would often start class off by saying,
“I promise you will leave class today with something you can use!”
At first I thought that was kind of odd but after all, isn’t that what learning is really all about?
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Addition vs Incorporation
Last Spring I attended a technology conference that primarily addressed and highlighted issues for the K-12 crowd. I went hoping to get some info that would be appropriate for higher ed. What I came away with was a better understanding of what technical expertise incoming college freshman may have.
I address this week’s issue, once again, from the perspective of higher ed. Based on what I have seen at the previously mentioned conference and several others I have attended, I feel that in most cases the inclusion of technology in the K-12 classroom is done with teachers and students in mind. I realize that this may not be the case in every situation but I feel at the very least that there usually is some form of training for teachers and some sense of how these new technologies can expand and assist in the learning process. Once again in higher ed. I feel that this is usually not the case except in specific areas.
I feel that technology in teaching and learning environments can be a most amazing thing so as I look at this week’s reading many things come to mind but two things specifically:
1. My first concern is that not only is technology used to support the teaching and learning that already occurs but that we also take the time to explore new ways of teaching and learning that can be inspired by technology, like many of the examples in chapter 9 of How People Learn. In my experience in higher ed., there are many situations where new methods are overlooked and faculty and staff get hung up on how we continue to do what we are doing, in the same way we have always done it. Technology gets included but nothing really changes and the technology is looked at as an “addition” rather than an “incorporation” into the learning process. My belief is
that the technology should add a new component to learning, perhaps even cause a teacher to rethink a teaching method.
2. My second concern is the inclusion of technology but not using it to its fullest extent. I believe if we are going to include a new technology into our class we should do what is necessary to explore that technology to the fullest. What can it do for our students? How can it facilitate the learning process? What kinds of features does it have and how can they work in this particular class? I have seen folks proclaim to use Blackboard or WebCt, for example, and all they are really doing is using it to email their students when there are so many more things it can do for the student and the teacher. There are so many possibilities that are not even considered.
The inclusion of technology in higher ed. needs to be more fully supported and encouraged. It needs to become a priority to address the needs of these technically savvy students and to open up new ways of learning that will serve students far into their future.
I address this week’s issue, once again, from the perspective of higher ed. Based on what I have seen at the previously mentioned conference and several others I have attended, I feel that in most cases the inclusion of technology in the K-12 classroom is done with teachers and students in mind. I realize that this may not be the case in every situation but I feel at the very least that there usually is some form of training for teachers and some sense of how these new technologies can expand and assist in the learning process. Once again in higher ed. I feel that this is usually not the case except in specific areas.
I feel that technology in teaching and learning environments can be a most amazing thing so as I look at this week’s reading many things come to mind but two things specifically:
1. My first concern is that not only is technology used to support the teaching and learning that already occurs but that we also take the time to explore new ways of teaching and learning that can be inspired by technology, like many of the examples in chapter 9 of How People Learn. In my experience in higher ed., there are many situations where new methods are overlooked and faculty and staff get hung up on how we continue to do what we are doing, in the same way we have always done it. Technology gets included but nothing really changes and the technology is looked at as an “addition” rather than an “incorporation” into the learning process. My belief is
that the technology should add a new component to learning, perhaps even cause a teacher to rethink a teaching method.
2. My second concern is the inclusion of technology but not using it to its fullest extent. I believe if we are going to include a new technology into our class we should do what is necessary to explore that technology to the fullest. What can it do for our students? How can it facilitate the learning process? What kinds of features does it have and how can they work in this particular class? I have seen folks proclaim to use Blackboard or WebCt, for example, and all they are really doing is using it to email their students when there are so many more things it can do for the student and the teacher. There are so many possibilities that are not even considered.
The inclusion of technology in higher ed. needs to be more fully supported and encouraged. It needs to become a priority to address the needs of these technically savvy students and to open up new ways of learning that will serve students far into their future.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
One Small Step . . .
I seem to come at the topics we are assigned to read about with a different perspective since I am teaching in the higher ed. environment. Unlike many of my classmates I do not have a background in education and I have come to learn over the past 19 years that having that knowledge would not only be a great thing for me but for many of my colleagues.
Once again this week I was faced with a situation where my department would have clearly benefited from the discussion we had in last week’s class about assessment. My department is required by the administration to give a comprehensive exam to students that they must pass in order to graduate. My department, which teaches mostly all hands-on type classes, uses an exam that they designed that is made up of 5 short essay questions that almost anyone off the street could answer. I was bewildered at best, to find that this exam had been given for the last 20 plus years. My comment was that perhaps we should assess the students in the manner that they learn, and that we teach. “How about requiring them to prepare a portfolio, much like the art area, that we could review before graduation?” I asked. I was met with glares and silence. This is just an example of teachers who have not made changes in their routine or in their classes in a long time.
Their resistance to change is very reflective of the fact that they are not actively learning to teach. That ceased for them years ago. The notion that teachers continue to learn how to teach is so appropriate to our educational system today. In this week’s reading, I am particularly partial to the community centered environment approach. I work in a department that is very much a community in that we all teach a small group of students and the material they learn in one class builds skills for the next. We have, by the shear nature of our hands-on program, a community centered environment and yet we do not commune effectively. Additionally, the assessment centered environment is a model we need to adopt as trying out new things in the classroom should be discussed in our “community” so that we all benefit from the trial of new methods of teaching.
As I thought about this week’s dilemma over the comprehensive exam, I was reminded of a course that I team taught with two other faculty members from different departments. Without really knowing it at the time, we employed all the methods of teacher learning discussed in the reading. We met outside of class regularly to discuss assignments. Did they worked? What could we change? What did we learn? How could we make it better? We asked each other if we thought the students were learning what we wanted them to learn and then worked together to make changes to improve the learning.
I think this lack of instructors wanting to “learn” at the higher ed. level is due to a variety of reasons, tenure being one of them, but I strongly feel that the lack of a background or coursework in the education area is a big reason. Additionally, I feel that the professional development opportunities and in-service activities are seen as a secondary ed. function and not one of higher ed.
The system has a long way to go to make changes. I feel like bringing things from my coursework to my department may be a small contribution but a needed one. I think my comments regarding the comprehensive exam have caused some chatter. Maybe I have pushed in the right direction . . . .
"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."
Once again this week I was faced with a situation where my department would have clearly benefited from the discussion we had in last week’s class about assessment. My department is required by the administration to give a comprehensive exam to students that they must pass in order to graduate. My department, which teaches mostly all hands-on type classes, uses an exam that they designed that is made up of 5 short essay questions that almost anyone off the street could answer. I was bewildered at best, to find that this exam had been given for the last 20 plus years. My comment was that perhaps we should assess the students in the manner that they learn, and that we teach. “How about requiring them to prepare a portfolio, much like the art area, that we could review before graduation?” I asked. I was met with glares and silence. This is just an example of teachers who have not made changes in their routine or in their classes in a long time.
Their resistance to change is very reflective of the fact that they are not actively learning to teach. That ceased for them years ago. The notion that teachers continue to learn how to teach is so appropriate to our educational system today. In this week’s reading, I am particularly partial to the community centered environment approach. I work in a department that is very much a community in that we all teach a small group of students and the material they learn in one class builds skills for the next. We have, by the shear nature of our hands-on program, a community centered environment and yet we do not commune effectively. Additionally, the assessment centered environment is a model we need to adopt as trying out new things in the classroom should be discussed in our “community” so that we all benefit from the trial of new methods of teaching.
As I thought about this week’s dilemma over the comprehensive exam, I was reminded of a course that I team taught with two other faculty members from different departments. Without really knowing it at the time, we employed all the methods of teacher learning discussed in the reading. We met outside of class regularly to discuss assignments. Did they worked? What could we change? What did we learn? How could we make it better? We asked each other if we thought the students were learning what we wanted them to learn and then worked together to make changes to improve the learning.
I think this lack of instructors wanting to “learn” at the higher ed. level is due to a variety of reasons, tenure being one of them, but I strongly feel that the lack of a background or coursework in the education area is a big reason. Additionally, I feel that the professional development opportunities and in-service activities are seen as a secondary ed. function and not one of higher ed.
The system has a long way to go to make changes. I feel like bringing things from my coursework to my department may be a small contribution but a needed one. I think my comments regarding the comprehensive exam have caused some chatter. Maybe I have pushed in the right direction . . . .
"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
