In pages 150-157 in the Weaver textbook, the author takes an in-depth look at the different approaches in educational philosophy. The author works from two different schools of thought: one being a congnitive approach modeled around mini-lessons, while the other a more pre-determined and set instruction based on behavorist principles.
The author begins by explaining mini-lessons and its correlation to a constructionist approach to education. The concept of mini-lessons and its application was introduced by Lucy Calkins in The Art of Teaching Writing, then expanded with Nancy Atwell's In the Middle: Writing, Reading, and Learning with Adolescents. Their approach focuses on the practice of mini-lessons, which are short and brief explanations of concepts meant to aid students in their learning of a certain topic or technique. Some of the key concepts of this approach include: keeping lessons between five and ten minutes, applying these lessons when the teacher sees a common problem or mistake, and a close analysis of the students needs and readiness for the mini-lessons. Essentially, teachers act through their own discretion, applying mini-lessons when they see fit, not through any set or fixed cirriculumm. Another important aspect is the concept of no follow-up after the mini-lesson; the teacher simply helps when it is apparent that the student needs help and is ready.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, is the more traditional approach towards instruction, which is based in behavioral pyschology. This type of instructional approach can trace its roots back to 1920, when a man named Edward Thorndike devised the "laws of learning." Some of the tenets of this approach involve the Law of Readiness, the Law of Exercise, and the Law of Identical Elements. Thorndike believed that learning should be ordered and efficient, ( Law of Readiness) following a structured regiment of writing skills that students are expected to master. In addition, and in contrast to a constructionist approach, Thorndike prescribes learning based through drills, exercise, and practice ( Law of Exercise). Finally, in the Law of Identical Elements , Thorndike proposes that the learning of a " stimulus-response connection" should be tested in the same conditions that it was learned in. This is based in approach that tests isolated skills through test questions that have a direct relation with practice questions and exercises.
In conclusion, there are many marked contrasts in the differing approaches, cognitive versus behavioral. Where in a behavioral approach the educator looks for a student to master isolated concepts, in a cognitive approach the educator looks for the construction of concepts, not just a quick memorization quickly forgotten after testing. Also, the behavioral approach is grounded in linear, definite practices, exercises, and tests, whereas the cognitive approach is aware of the many different ways people come to learn and understand concepts. A cognitive approach believes learners must construct their own understanding of the concepts in order to fully understand or grasp the subject they are learning. Where the behavioral approach aims to instruct through an ordered and precise regiment, the cognitive approach aspires to educate in a more natural, "hands-off" manner, hopefully helping the student to develop his own construction of the concepts being taught.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
I liked the explication of mini-lessons through a behaviorist lens. The idea of leaving the curriculum more flexible to the teacher’s intuition is an interesting one. What I think would be best to take away from this article is that there are different modes and practices that could be applied to education. Although I do believe in the power of memorization.
I can see where both approaches can be effective ways for instruction. I'm not sure which one I prefer though. I would most likely lean towards behaviorists.
I do not think I could choose one or the other approaches because every class and every student is different, so I think it depends on the class. I like the idea of mini-lessons, but they have to be used carefully because not every student can get a lot from them.
The type of person that I am I would prefer the behaviorist because behavior and the way you go about things are more effective in any situation.
The cognitive approach is likely much more effective than the behavioral approach. Unless someone has a steel-trap for a memory, the behavioral approach will do just what Mr. Lynch said it would - cause the students to cram material for the test and forget it soon after. A cognitive approach teaches students how to think, not just information. Information learning is for high school students. Universities should teach students how to think. The cognitive approach does this very well.
It can be argued that both approaches have their pros and cons. Personally, I believe the cognitive approach is better. Students have to learn information from a myriad of approaches rather than relying on pure imitation. Teaching students ways to look for information and how to think gives students the freedom to make their thoughts flexible and add to existing scholarship.
This text had a lot of useful information. I think I will be more of a cognitive style instructor. I don't want my students to just memorize terms and such that they will forget soon after. I want them to be creative and to use their imagination. I want to see them in their work. I would rather give students a creative writing assignment than a worksheet. I want the students to help teach themselves. Cognitive and behavioral instruction are two very different ways of teaching. I have seen both styles during my years in school.
I would not be able to choose an approach because I think that every student learns differently so can not expect everyone to learn effectively with just one style of teaching.
I have really enjoyed the mine lessons in this class. It's a way to refresh my mind on a topic without having to spend much time on it. i also think mini lessons are a great learning tool for the student who is preparing it.
I understand that both approaches can be effective. I loved that mini lessons were mentioned throughout. But a far as choosing an approach, I would lean more toward the cognitive because it is so important fr stdents to form their own thoughts and not rely on the teacher to tell them what tho think. i believe this method should be taught throught the childs education not just in college.
How about both. The mini lessons are a great idea in that they can introduce a topic and correct a problem. The problem is when that is not enough. Some concepts never come up so they won't get a correction. Both philosophies have value. A rigid system of instruction with tests that does not have to be followed exactly seems best to me. Start with the behaviorist but don't be afraid to stray from the path to correct problems. Even the cognitive approach, while closer, is not exactly hoe we learn.
Bryan Norbut
O agree that the mini lessons are great in idea. They allow the students to learn for themselves, but I think that having the students do them also doesnt allow for complete understanding of the topic. It also does not allow for any follow up which does not re-iterate the topic so nothing is really learned. I bet if you asked our class what the first mini-lesson was about, no one would really know without looking it up. I know I do not remember.
Aw, I was the first mini lesson hahaha I agree that mini lessons are a good idea because it helps when students teach other students because they can maybe relate to them on a better level than the teacher can.
I think it would be nice if a more relaxed method could be used in class such as the cognitive approach to teaching. But I think it might be a little too optimistic. If I were a teacher I would aim for something in the middle of the road or a cross between the behavioral and cognitive teaching styles. This would ensure that the students actually learned but did not feel so stressed out by a strict schedule that they stopped learning.
I agree with Jessica in that different students will need different approaches and teachers should adjust their lessons for a variety of learners. However, I tend to favor the behaviorist approach.
Students teaching other students is definitely helpful because students can relate to their peers better than a teacher can sometimes. Also, the the material gets presented in a little bit of a different way each time, adding a bit of spice. However, the teacher needs to be careful that the correct information is portrayed to the class.
Post a Comment