When reading this statement, reflect on the Instructivist and Constructivist. Do you see a connection between the two learning outcomes? Illustrate your position by using an instructional experience and an understanding of Bloom’s.
Instructivist theory is the idea that students will learn through direct instruction approaches and constructivist hinges on students learning through discovery. It is important that teachers do not decide to pick one or the other exclusively, but rather approach teaching from the lens of a responsive pendulum. The video in the presentation really challenged teachers to go beyond one vs. the other but to utilize both theories (along with connectivism) to support individual learners where they are and move them forward.
The best teachers are those that model or scaffold through discovery moments when deemed appropriate and only for the students who need that support. This is discovered by the teacher through continually gathering formative feedback. It is important that students participate in constructing their own learning so that they can make connections and create meaning, but the teacher doesn’t have to leave the room for this to happen. The teacher can still play a pivotal role for students who need guidance in this process.
I recently was observing a teacher deliver a whole group mini lesson. She quickly determined through a formative poll that many students were ready to explore or practice on their own. She quickly changed her plan and separated students so that some were working on creating Educreation videos to teach others the concept. Another group took a sentence stem handout to work through the problem, and she invited another 7-10 students to remain on the carpet to continue working through the mini-lesson. Even then students were “released” from the mini lesson at different times as they gained the confidence needed to construct meaning around making tens. This teacher had students working within differing Blooms levels, after realizing every student did not need direct instruction. Did I mention this was a first-grade classroom with 32 students?
Larson and Lockee state “‘Changing workforce needs in the 21st-century demand that instruction and assessments build learner abilities such as expert thinking and complex communications, defined by Willis as ‘recognizing and organizing patterns and relationships and identifying and solving new problems as they arise.'” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement. How should this impact the assessments we create?
I agree with Willis’ (2006) statement as Larson and Lockee point out the changing landscape for learners today. There is so much access to technologies and information learners need to understand how to access in order to solve problems and redefine our understandings. It isn’t enough to simply memorize and regurgitate, as access to information is immediate. I appreciated the comic at the beginning of chapter 7, that suggests people wouldn’t be happy allowing someone to give them a shot if they have never practiced actually doing this before. Getting an A on the test wouldn’t cut it as a learning assessment for this learning outcome. It also was pointed out that a multiple choice exam can highlight if a student can recall or can recognize – and recognition is sometimes the key necessity to follow-up application.
It is important that educators take care to also develop alternative assessments to foster assessment for and assessment as learning. For learners to grow to be capable of supporting and enhancing the 21st-Century workforce they need experiences authentically showcasing their understanding of learning outcomes throughout their educational career. The ability to respond to open-ended questions, produce a concept map or successfully navigate a performance assessment asks a student to exist on a higher level of skills.
Explain a lesson from your class and the levels of interactions within that lesson. Are there some interactions that are more essential or more important than other interactions? Explain what makes the difference. How did these interactions change the instructional strategies you chose? Be sure to discuss learner-to-content/instructor/context/learner/self.
Recently I was working with a 1st-grade class that had to write letters based on books they had read. The letters were written for a kindergarten class to help them learn the lessons from the books that the 1st-grades had learned. The Learner-to-Context interaction had the 1st-grades interpreting the morals of stories and describing them in ways younger learners could then understand them. The Learner-to-Instructor interaction came in the form of the teacher asking probing questions to help the 1st-grade writer determine if they had included enough detail for their future kindergarten audience. The Learner-to-Context interaction was well thought out in this classroom. Students work at small table groups but are encouraged to keep voices down during conferencing to minimize distractions. When peers are conferencing they sometimes go to the reading corner or other areas to allow students who are still writing to continue unphased. The Learner-to-Learner interactions come as discussion and peer conferencing. The Learner-to-Self interaction was highlighted in the form of a self-reflective rubric. Students were asked to make sure that their letter contained certain elements and the rubric was used by students to self-evaluate.
In this example all of the learner interactions were important. That by itself caused the teacher to create procedures and methods for students to write, conference, peer conference and self-evaluate. I have seen this teacher incorporate student friendly rubrics this year in an effort to support learner-to-self interactions as it was determined that some students needed assistance and scaffolding to become more self-aware and reflective.
Different pedagogical approaches use different planning processes to address content and learning experiences. Which of the five strategy frameworks have you used to develop the type of learning outcomes you have identified in one of your lessons or assignments?
Prior to this course, the only strategy framework that was somewhat familiar to me and my work was Gagne’s Nine Events, and even now I have a much better handle on it. However, Keller’s ARCS Motivation Model has really stood out to me as something I want to keep in the forefront when I plan. As a technology instructional coach, I am asked to take data throughout my cycle with a teacher to show student growth over time with relationship to our coaching goal. Many times the goal hinges on student engagement and time on task. The ARCS model alone or even in conjunction with other models fits this goal so well. What better way to increase engagement and time on task than with planned increases in confidence, motivation, relevance and attention-getting strategies.
Case study 06 was about K-12. Case study 08 discussed higher education. Case study 23 focused on the private sector. Which one did you most identify with and why?
I definitely identified most with Case Study 6, due to the K-12 content. Not to say that Case Study 8 wasn’t interesting, I am always facisnated by people who do not work in a school setting all day! Learning about the main character who got a masters in instructional design reminded me that I wasn’t even aware of this position a few short weeks ago, however, I digress.
I found Case 6 interesting as our school is newly rolling out some new technologies due to a Summer renovation. We are adding an additional wing this upcoming fall and we again will be funded for technologies within there buildings thanks to student/teacher success, and my coaching trackers. It it is happy to see that technology and the role of the technology instructional coach is being valued and having a positive affect at my site. If only this could happen everywhere.