-Isms
I concur with Bill Kerr's take on -isms. I know that my process of creating lessons is one where I just forge ahead in a creative spiral and then reflect, analyze and synthesis the learning afterward. I believe that Kerr and I would see eye to eye on this method. I think all -isms are important and play heavy roles in educating our learners but no one method should be used solely and teaching should not all be conformed to methods and theories. Theories are explanations for what we are already doing, that is not to say that if a certain theory works well with a group of students that a teacher shouldn't actively seek out more with that theory and integrate it into their classroom. A well-balanced classroom environment is one that allows learners to seek out multiple theories by which to consume their education.
Kerr asks:
Should we stick to -isms or should we be more pragmatic and just cherry pick different useful ideas out of the various theories?
I think that we should cherry pick...if we agree that there are a myriad of learners that are trying to engage in our classrooms, why wouldn't we want to give them a selection of techniques to grasp information.
Hi Kat...
ReplyDeleteI think that your last statement really hit the nail on the head: "...why wouldn't we want to give them a selection of techniques to grasp information."
I think that one of the ironic aspects of the education profession is the tendency for us to forget about what we know about learning and teaching when it comes to time train future teachers, to provide PD for existing teachers, or to reflect on learning from a scholarly/academic point of view. I think that (as a field) we know that students learn in many differenc ways. It seems to make logical sense that a variety of different learning theories would help to provide the greatest insight into what types of learning strategies would work best in a given situation. Do we really need to choose one theory as superior over another especially since none of theories are flawless when attempting to explain human learning?
What do you think? Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic!
Mike :)
Kat-I hadn't related offering students various options as "cherry picking" but now that you mention it this way it makes perfect sense. I also agree with you. If those options exist in order to better meet the needs of our students, then why not offer it to them. It will only make it easier for us and them in the long run.
ReplyDeleteThanks-Brandy
Kapp encourages us to take a bit of each learning theory, Kerr encourages cherry-picking, and Stephen rejects behaviorism altogether. I wonder how George Siemens would approach this issue?
ReplyDeleteI think Kerr put into words what teachers do instinctively. Given that there all types of learners it is natural to change the way one instructs in an attempt to reach everyone at some level. What succeeds the most if often repeated.
ReplyDeleteNo - I do not think one learning theory is more superior than another - but I do believe that usually one theory is better than another in a specific situation. It is having the knowledge and ability to switch gears to meet the needs of the students that make the difference in the classroom.