Monday, February 27, 2012

Tech Grads - Week 4 - Research


Instructional delivery has become vibrant and interesting for learners and instructors (Kirschner, Sweller and Clark, 2006).  Technology has made it possible for instructors to use audio, video, graphics and programming software in the teaching field. Comparison of current technological advancement with the past indicates a leap forward in instructional delivery and its application to the learning process (Jay, 1999).  In this week’s discussion, we were ask to reflect back on our previous multimedia projects and how they can be integrated to fulfill the diverse levels of the learning process.  It was shown by Pam in her Scratch project that students can apply programming to their learning to aid in the memorization rather than remote and drill kill methods of remembering key components of various topics.  On the other hand, Rachel shared her video project which allowed students to transcend to “active learners” as students applied the concepts learned by becoming the author/producer of their own videos.  Stephanie used the podcast to allow students to reflect which in turn led to pre-writing into their description of their culture.

Article
Cherney, I. D. (2008). The effects of active learning on students' memories for course content. Active Learning In Higher Education9(2), 152-171. doi:10.1177/1469787408090841

As a look back at the questions and discussions on the self-test, I cannot help but to wonder, are we as educators “teaching the test”.  Which leads to my first question?

  1. Given the advancements in technology (audio, video, graphics and programming software), Do you think there has been an increase in “discovery learning” vs. “direct instruction”?
  2. Should there be more discovery learning, direction instruction, or a balance between the two methods?

References:
Jay S. B (1999). Educational computing in the schools: technology, communication, and                 literacy. New York: Haworth Press.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006) Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 41 (2) 75-86





4 comments:

  1. 1.Given the advancements in technology (audio, video, graphics and programming software), Do you think there has been an increase in “discovery learning” vs. “direct instruction”?

    I do think that the increased availability of technology has led to an increase in discovery learning. Teachers know that employers want candidates that can work collaboratively, problem solve an engage in self-directed inquiry. Many of today’s technology tools can facilitate discovery learning and offer students the opportunity practice those skills.


    2. Should there be more discovery learning, direction instruction, or a balance between the two methods?

    I think there should definitely be a balance of direct instruction and discovery learning. Students need guidance and corrective feedback. According to Mayer (2004) pure discovery may not promote an important cognitive process, selecting relevant incoming information. Mayer (2004) states for example that “There is nothing magical to insure that simply working on a problem or simply discussing a problem will lead to discovering its solution.” Guided practice can also be used effectively in inquiry based learning.

    Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-19. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14

    ReplyDelete
  2. We as teachers are preparing students for careers that do not even exist today. Therefore, there is a need for we as educators to find ways to adapt teaching and learning so that students become more independent, active learners (McCain, 2000).

    Students engaging in more active forms of learning involving hands-on activities, working in groups, completing projects, being assessed using performance-based assessment, becoming self-reliant, and engaging in self-directed inquiry (Rice & Wilson, 1998). Discovery learning offers these qualities and the technology of today can aid in the integration of discovery learning into the classroom.

    McCain, T. (2000, April). New schools for the new millennium. Concurrent session presented at the Georgia Educational Technology Conference, Macon, Georgia.

    Rice, M. L. & Wilson, E. K. (1999). Says 1998 in text on pg. 19/20 How technology aids constructivism in the social studies classroom. Social Studies. 90(1), 28-33.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes Pam, I do agree, there should be a balance of direct instruction and discovery learning. In my opinion they supplement one another.

    Thanks for your input.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think there definitely need to be a balance of directed and discovery learning. Students need to learn the content first and then explore the topic to help understand the concepts. For instance, I give a mini lesson on the causes of the civil war to give the students knowledge of the timeline of the events. Then, I give the students a web quest where they can explore the causes in great detail, discovering the emotions and way of life leading up to war through research of primary archives and historical writings.

    It is important to make sure there is struggle time when the student is engaged with discovery learning. However, teachers need to "ensure that students develop the skills of independence, self-direction, collaboration, and production that are necessary for success" by giving critical feedback (Tomlinson & Javius 2012).

    Reference:

    Tomlinson, C. A. & Javius, E. L. Teach Up for Excellence. Educational Leadership. 69(5). 28-33.

    ReplyDelete