Learning Journal 2: Education Foundations

Wayne: Further Observations

Upon further reflection of Wayne’s situation I have noticed that as a developing teacher who is now facing similar student disengagement in one of my particular classrooms, two provocations have unveiled themselves in my analysis of his situation. Whilst previously I read Wayne’s example in a teacher-centric manner, in which I questioned, “will I be allowed to be the teacher I want to be?” It now seems much more beneficial to analyze his classroom quandaries holistically. For example, rather than focusing on Wayne’s methodologies as a teacher and how this affects his classroom conundrum, this time, I would rather encompass the students role in the situation and thus question; 1. Should I teach a student or a subject?, and 2. To what extent is this an intellectual pursuit?

Am I teaching a student or a subject?

The scenario states that, “Wayne really enjoys the subject matter,” and, “he has the depth of content covered.” Evidently Wayne is enthusiastic about teaching and his subject area and is competent with the course material. Wayne is portrayed as a teacher who is more than capable of teaching his subject. However, when he notices that the students either, “don’t engage at a deep level,” or, “are difficult for him to engage,” it demonstrates his inability to adapt the course content to the various learning styles of his classroom, and thus his failure to teach a student. I would define the term, ‘Teaching a student’ as the teachers ability to manipulate subject material to cater to the individual learning requirements of a student. Whilst the transmission of knowledge and information, that is the subject content, is an obvious element of a teachers duty, in certain cases the ability to understand and facilitate a student’s unique learning habits are sometimes more important. The overlap of these two teaching styles has provoked me to question further, are the two even mutually exclusive?

The answer?

Recent academic endeavors suggest that one solution can potentially abolish this dichotomy altogether. The approach of “student-centered learning” (Estes, 2004) is proposed to facilitate a students ability to, “learn how to learn,” (Poore, 2011) and thus the teachers role of transmitting content is redundant.  The role of a teacher in this scenario is one who observes and analyses a students learning patterns and educates them on how they may remember, engage with, discriminate, and create information more efficiently. (Blooms, 1956) Contrary to this, a “course-based” (Pederson, 2003) approach to teaching runs the risk of transmitting  information that would be considered irrelevant to the student, and thus is not engaging or productive. We also need to consider, if a student-centered learning approach dominates an educators style of teaching, what implications does this have on course content, the design of the curriculum and examination of assessments? 

A reflection on my own practices:

Throughout my limited on-the-job practical experience I have encountered a Year 8 music class that has demonstrated a variety of behavioral problems. The majority of the student body comes from a low socio-economic background and often have life stories that, “will just make you cry.” (Wentworth, 2011) I discussed with the teacher, her tactics when it came to controlling this class, to which she responded that there was no hope of carrying out structured lesson plans, “just to have the kids stay within the walls of the classroom is a major breakthrough.” (Wentworth, 2011) This is a prime example where teaching a subject isn’t even an option. Characteristics of a music class such as keyboards, manuscript and videoclips serve as mere distractions to the students. In this scenario what a ‘music teacher’ is ultimately teaching her students is discipline and respect, not music. 

References:

Estes, Cheryl. (2004). Promoting Student-Centred Learning in Experiential Education. Journal of Experiential Education, pp. 141-161.

Wentworth, R. (Personal communication, March 16th 2011)

Poore, M. (Personal communication, March 10th 2011)

Pederson, S. (2003). Motivational orientation in a problem-based learning environment. Journal of interactive learning research. pp. 51-77

Bloom, BS. (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, New York: McKay

ELPC Research Journal

ELPC Research Journal 1: 

ICT in a Professional Context: the Potential Divide 

Submission 1: The Pitfalls of ICT in the education system

The employment of ICT in the education system is an issue that divides the world, popularly termed, ‘the digital divide.’ (Ottawa, 2003) It has been coined this way simply because ICT creates a social and ethical divide, that is between rich and poor nations who are distinct in their internet resources, hardware and software capabilities, and even electricity. As a result, a vast void in e-literacy and e-learning between communities, cities, states, and even countries has the potential to evolve. 

Secondly,  for fluent and comprehensive ICT users, there are new legal issues that they, (and on a grander scale, institutions such as a school), will face. Hence, the education of copyright and innovation law and policy must be progressive and, “an issue that will require clarity.” (Ottawa 2003) if teachers and students are to remain safe and secure. Not only this, educational institutions and curriculums will also have to keep pace with this speedy ICT innovation, but realistically we must question, how feasible is this mission? The expense of time and money which will need to be invested in educating and retraining teachers in this new medium will be substantial, however more so than that, we cannot be assured that there will be an overall acceptance of this integration of ICT amongst the entire educational body.

A potential pitfall of employing ICT in teaching methods that struck me was the possibility that we face a loss of teacher individuality and the importance of the teacher role. This comes as a result of so much information being dispensed from a ‘centralized content vendor.’ (Ottawa 2003) 

Finally, one aspect of the influence of ICT on young and developing minds was the impact of big businesses trying to shape e-education. This can be done by "overrunning major sectors of information websites" (Ottawa, 2003) to push their own agendas, and as a result, this could result in bias information being dispersed and thus ill-informed education ensuing. At the impressionable ages of high-school students we cannot assume they will have the analytical techniques to discriminate against falsified information. 

Submission 2: The use and responsibility of introducing ICT 

As a teacher, the decision to utilize ICT in a classroom environment carries intellectual, ethical and legal responsibilities. The teachers duty when introducing ICT into their classroom is to understand, address and define the relationship between technology and improved learning. We must be aware of evolving ICT literacy, that is the new way in which people read and process information, and how this will affect their learning. Similarly ICT will effect the ways in which we will access and present information and facilitate a lesson as teachers. The medium is beneficial to us, as we may conduct lessons utilising  multimedia, track a students progress online, focus on the process of how a student might be carrying out an assessment task rather than their final product, and identify learning trends based on the nature of ICT.

However, whilst we are "facilitators" (Poore, 2011), we are also discriminators of information. Just as we have issues in literacy with students, we will have challenges with information literacy. Our job is to ensure that understanding, judgement, discrimination and communication are employed by our students. This is what we should be enforcing. It is our duty as teachers to know that, “The legitimacy of what comes across the internet needs to be observed with vigilance” (Ottawa 2003) - A possible global mission statement for teachers, and thus, “Educators must...strengthen choices, particularly on ethical issues, which impact on morality and cultural issues” (Schofield, 1995) as a result of this wider access of information. 

Realistically, some teachers will be unwilling and inflexible in taking on the new technology. In my opinion, this compromises the entire concept of online learning, because as 'facilitators', we are there to support and guide a students journey through sources of information, and we should not be naive in denying this new medium of education. “To ignore .... the staggering rate of innovation in ICT would be to fall behind” (Yelland, 1999) 

Submission 3: Advantages of ICT 

The advantages of ICT as a method of expanding and exploring classroom learning are boundless. It would be foolish to neglect the opportunity of ICT  to transform learning in and beyond the classroom. ICT transcends the limitations of teaching in a specified space and time. We may access vast amounts of information quickly, but can do so at various learning paces. The notion of putting a time-frame on a particular class becomes effectively redundant. Course material can be covered in various languages and teachers and students have the ability to locate the same material regardless of their location. Distance education and discussion are suddenly possible. 

The "Faculty development Plan" discussed by Robert Fox, (Fox, 2003) stipulates that, "unless it is carefully integrated into the curriculum, accompanied by appropriate services, mechanisms, and professional development support," we are unlikely to see these benefits of ICT in student learning. He states that, "flexible learning" is essential in allowing this new medium to be inherited in a classroom environment. (Collis and Moonin, 2001), as cited in the "Faculty development Plan", support this notion of flexible learning. They elaborate to state that at the heart of this  "pedagogical change" is the implementation of technology, and harnessing its power, "enhance teaching and learning." (Fox, 2003)

As previously suggested, in order for these benefits of ICT to be fulfilled, implementing Educator training institutions so that teachers have the appropriate computer skills in order to effectively exploit the technology are essential. As well as this, Legal education must run parallel to ICT education if we are to employ the world wide web as a dominant source of information. 

Submission 4: Teachers opinions and Statistics 

Research demonstrates that teachers are using the internet to learn, share and develop educational strategies and as an opportunity for collaboration. A 2010 Grunwald Associates Survey found that media based instruction with streaming and downloading content is surging (Grunwald, 2010). Teachers believe that digital media helps them to do their job more productively and that digital tools, such as laptops, have great educational potential. This is not exclusively for the students, teachers alike are networking online to collaborate and to share resources. The survey also found that teachers skills at integrating digital media in a professional context are increasing at an equal rate. To further investigate these results, Grunwald Associates are now looking at what financial contribution teachers are making themselves, particularly in schools with limited budgets, in order to support the new use of digital media and to promote their commitment to this method of teaching.

A PBS Survey conducted in January 2010, cited on blog site ‘Education Week’ (Ash, 2010), found that between 2008-2010 teachers using digital resources in k-12 classrooms rose from 69%-75%. Outside of the classroom, 80% of teachers use digital resources at least once a week (Ash, 2010). Concluding the PBS study, over 50% of teachers agreed that digital media is more effective in engaging and motivating students. (Ash, 2010) 

These statistics demonstrate to me an overall integration of ICT in classroom and an acceptance of its positive effects on a learning environment. However I would seek to investigate more studies and statistics as these both came from a narrow and similar demographic and therefore are not entirely legitimate and cannot validate my statements substantially.

Submission 5: Concluding Judgement 

Implementing ICT as a classroom tool has substantial qualities which could help and potentially hinder the learning experience. As a teacher and instructor of classroom activities we must question, “What can we realistically expect computer technology to contribute to the learning process” (Ottawa 2003) Teachers must discover the extent to which we can rely on the internet as a sole provider of 

communication and information. In order to use the technology intelligently, we must not forget the ‘grass roots’ (Poore 2011) from which it has evolved in order to understand why it works in this social, economic and historical context. It is the teachers duty to elevate their students competancy of digital media from, functional literacy to networking literacy and ultimately to critical digital literacy. (Poore 2011) If this growth does not occur, in my opinion as a pre-service teacher, the technology is not being used intellectually. Ideally it would be desirable for every learner to be in the final strand of usage because that would mean we are using the environment at its most intellectual capacity. 

If I may however, I would like to compare this to when I was at school. I could walk into the school library, filled with literary texts, and would expect the same variety of levels of engagement in this environment as well. Some people can locate books, some people read them and some people analyze, reflect on and create them. Essentially it is a very similar concept with the same conundrums. Perhaps those rejecting the medium of ICT are a simple case of being afraid of the unknown. 

As stated previously, “To ignore .... the staggering rate of innovation in ICT would be to fall behind” (Yelland 1999), therefore it is the duty of the teacher, in order to offer the optimum education to their students to, at the very least, be educated in this new field of learning, even if they do not educationally or ethically agree with it. It is unfortunately a fair assumption that ICT will continue to be problematic as we can see "the new technology and old curriculum" (Poore, 2011) are not presently in sync. 

References 

1. Yelland, N. J. 1999. Reconceptualising schooling with technology for the 21st. 

century: images and reflections. Information Technology in 

Childhood Education Annual.(pp 39–59). Virginia: AACE. 

2. Ash, K. 2010. PBS Survey: more teachers using digital media. http://blogs.edweek.org/ 

edweek/DigitalEducation/2010/01/more_teachers_embracing_techno.html, (Retrieved March 

17th 2011) 

3. Schofield, J. 1995. Computers, classroom and change. (pp. 190-228) Computers and 

classroom culture. Cambridge University Press: Melbourne. 

4. Grunwald associates. 2010. Educators, Technology and 21st Century Skills: Dispelling Five 

Myths: A Study on the Connection Between K–12 Technology Use and 21st Century Skills. 

http://grunwald.com/pdfs/Educators-Technology-21stCentury-Skills.pdf, (Retrieved March 18th 

2011)

5. Swan, K. and M. Mitrani. 1993. The changing nature of teaching and learning in 

computer-based classrooms. Journal of Research on Computing in 

Education, 26(1), (pp. 40-54.) 

6. Ottawa Council meeting. 2003. The role of ICT in learning. http://www.icponline.org/ 

index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=86%3Athe-role-of-ict-in- 

learning&catid=27%3Aeducation&Itemid=47&showall=1, (Retrieved March 5th 2011) 

7.. Poore, M. (Personal communication, February 24th 2011) 

8. Clark, R.E. 1983. Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media. Review of Educational 

Research, (pp. 445-459.) University of Southern California

9. Fox R, Yuen A, Evers C, Lau H, & Deng L, (2003), Faculty Perceptions of ICT benefits. http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbook/6258/6258_chap01.pdf, (Retrieved March 5th 2011)

STS Reflections

Reflective journal 1 - 24/2/11

The Conundrum of a Teachers Authority:

A recurring theme that appears in the PPLE tutorials and in fact across all units, is the level of authority that a teacher may, and should, acquire in a classroom. Historically it appears we've evolved from the didactic pedagogy that existed, whereby the teacher is the sole authority of the classroom. This would identify with this new term we've been introduced to, "teacher-centric learning."

Whilst I agree that a conversational atmosphere to a classroom is beneficial and possibly more encouraging for students to interact within, I think it is important to remember that whilst we are (what we are now terming) 'facilitators' of learning, students still come to a teacher as their superior source of knowledge. Not only knowledge on subject matter and course content, but also as a moral educator and a wiser body that may smooth out the general awkwardness of being a high school student.

I feel that there is a general agreement amongst the student body that teachers need to somehow submit this idea of being the main authority where as I believe it is still a vital role for a teacher to maintain. If students and teachers are in the same level of the hierarchy, not only does it not teach aspects of learning such as respect and patience to someone else's knowledge, but it consequently defeats the purpose of the function of the teacher. Perhaps the role of the teacher is becoming obsolete.


Reflective Journal 2 - 6/3/11

My reflection this week is in regards to the "Quality teaching methods" that were introduced to in the STS tutorial on Thursday.

What struck me about this new grading system was how the weighting of the numbers used for critiquing (1-5) were not in any kind of systematic order. The numbers simply reflect a distinction in various aspects of the classroom experience. Superficially, number 5 catagories seem to represent a more proficient and efficient teaching method and outcomes. Deb, however, made a point in acknowledging that whilst some areas of teaching a lesson will warrant a 4 or 5 grade, other catagories will compliment or balance that out, and receive a 1 or 2 grade. For example, a lesson may result in the students demonstrating a high quality of deep understanding and knowledge and engagement with the material, but there therefore may be a low level of oral communication or use of metalanguage. It is not imperative to achieve a high grade across all aspects of the classroom experience.

Deb also pointed out that if we did achieve all 5's across each area being critiqued, it would probably make for a boring lesson. On the same token however, if we maintained 1's across all aspects of this rubric, we may need to reflect on how the lesson was conducted and question if we achieved the most productive outcomes possible.

Reflective Journal 3 - 10/3/11

Knowledge VS Understanding

Although we are now entering week 6 of our diploma, I am still finding the issue of Understanding VS Knowledge a problematic one. I feel like without understanding this quandary I cannot employ theories of “Deep understanding” and “deep knowledge” in the assessment of my students. This is a tantalizing conundrum!

An general statement we referred to in our STS Music tutorial was that knowledge is the accumulation of facts and Understanding was the application of the knowledge to a particular context. For example, I can know how to play a Brahms concerto, but through my knowledge of the concepts of music that combine to create the piece of music, I can understand why the piece was popular in its historical context, or I can understand why it is difficult to play. 

After further research I have found two definitions which I have accepted as my optimum understanding of the terminology, how the two terms compliment each other, and therefore how I will apply it to my assessment procedures.  (Clarke 2001)

• to know about, at a superficial level:

◦ relating to one entity: to be acquainted with a thing, place or person;

◦ relating to more than one entity: to be able to distinguish one from another;

• to know about, at a deeper level:

◦ relating to a single fact: to apprehend with clearness or certainty;

◦ relating to a subject as a whole: to have theoretical or practical or spiritual understanding of that subject;

• to know how:

◦ to understand from experience or attainment, as in to know how to do or to make something

Bibliography:

Clarke R, 2001, Knowledge, Retrieved 10/3/11, http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/Know.html

Reflective Journal 4 - 18/3/11

"Feelings are 55% body language, 38% tone and 7% words" Peter B. Flint

A memorable presentation that was showcased this week in our STS Music workshop covered the use of body language as a means of classroom management. Whilst many of the issues raised have been covered in a lt of our readings there was one phrase I found particularly engaging. This was the notion of, "catching good behavior."

'Matt' demonstrated a number of techniques to subdue problematic students, but also mentioned that we should praise children behaving well. This encouragement motivates the student to continue such an attitude in the classroom and has the potential to filter through to the other students.

Author Merret, F. describes the technique as "motivating responsible behavior", a method of maintaining discipline in a classroom. He also suggests that in praising good behavior, students are provoked to consider the consequences of misbehavior.

Whilst this concept appears simplistic on paper, it is in fact something I rarely thought about until it was brought to my attention in the workshop, and is absolutely something I would seek to implement in my classroom.

Reference:
Merrett, F., & Wheldall, K. (1986). Observing pupils and teachers in classrooms (OPTIC): A behavioural observation schedule for use in schools. Educational Psychology, 6(1), 57-70.






Reflective Journal 5 - 31/3/11


Got Music?


(Lanier & Little 1986) propose that a teachers background, philosophy of teaching and ideas about themselves as teachers are what construct their methods of teaching. One would assume that a subject-matter approach to teaching is one of, “declarative knowledge” (Anderson 1983) This concept suggests that this particular approach to teaching a classroom is founded on a teachers knowledge base of the subject. This means that, “knowledge of facts and subject matter...inform the content of teaching,” as opposed to, “procedural knowledge” (Goodyear 1991) that encourages problem-solving. Whilst both approaches draw on the wealth of knowledge acquired by teachers, I would be more inclined to be more successful in reaching my students by “mapping out subject matter” (Goodyear 1991) and thus facilitating their learning, as opposed to directly instilling subject matter. 


This alludes to our provocation, do we teach a student or a subject?


I would define the term, ‘Teaching a student’ as the teachers ability to manipulate subject material to cater to the individual learning requirements of a student. Whilst the transmission of knowledge and information, that is the subject content, is an obvious element of a teachers duty, in certain cases the ability to understand and facilitate a student’s unique learning habits are sometimes more important. The overlap of these two teaching styles has provoked me to question further, are the two even mutually exclusive? In my experience of teaching, I have come across 3 particularly problematic students. That is, their behavior in the classroom is often beyond my means of control. So whilst I am not necessarily teaching them any valuable musical knowledge or skills, Music is the medium by which I teach them greater learning and life problem-solving techniques. 

Reflections 1: Education Foundations

Suren: 'Stan'

http://surenmendis.blogspot.com/2011/02/my-first-blog.html?showComment=1298936416409#c1481133895435568568

Andy: 'Tracy'

http://andyuni2011.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/a-welcome-note-2/#comment-2

Learning Journal 1: Education Foundations

For the purpose of tracing my own evolving knowledge of “How the history and philosophy of education will allow me to understand my role as a teacher”, I have opted to critically analyze only one scenario for all four blogs. In doing so I believe I may engage in a deeper exploration of the provocations addressed, as well as question my research material more thoughtfully. 

WAYNE;

A wise educator once suggested to me, “When attempting to address an intolerable problem, address  the 5 W’s first. Who am I? Where am I? When is it? What am I trying to achieve? Why am I trying to achieve it?” Whilst this philosophy of problem solving always struck me as nothing more than simplistic, they are questions that contextualize a situation, and thus allow us to inquire into it. 

In applying this home-grown philosophy to Wayne’s scenario, we are able to unpack the quandaries that make his experience as a new teacher problematic. 

Wayne is a teacher in an inner-city public school, who recognizes a divide in his classrooms’ intellectual standards. Neither standard of student engagement is satisfying to Wayne, yet he is stubborn in his willingness to evolve his teaching methods to address such an issue. Whilst analyzing this, we may reflect on two provocations; 1) What kind of teacher do I want to be? and 2) Will I be allowed to be that teacher?

What Kind of teacher do I want to be?

Wayne is teaching in a socio-economic and educational environment that is familiar to him. Thus he is determined in his teaching methods and confident and enthusiastic with his course content. Whilst knowing what kind of teacher he wants to be, he is not aware of what is affecting, determining and challenging this ideal. As a result, Wayne is not manipulating his teaching style to address the conundrum of his classroom, being that regardless of their intellectual abilities, all of the students are disengaged. Thus the kind of teacher he wants to be, is problematic. The statement that, “Wayne really enjoys the subject matter .... ensuring he has the depth of content covered,” suggests that he is focused on transmitting information directly to the students as opposed to facilitating their learning skills in order to discover the information themselves. Whilst we should not judge his teaching style, we may reflect on this approach and question if this is a feasible practice for a  teacher. Could Wayne’s idealistic and content-focused approach to teaching be the reason that his students are not becoming involved in the course material?

A “Subject-matter” approach to learning:

(Lanier & Little 1986) propose that a teachers background, philosophy of teaching and ideas about themselves as teachers are what construct their methods of teaching. Wayne’s subject-matter approach to teaching is one of, “declarative knowledge” (Anderson 1983) This concept suggests that Wayne’s approach to teaching his classroom is founded on his knowledge base of the subject. This means that his, “knowledge of facts and subject matter...inform the content of teaching,” as opposed to, “procedural knowledge” (Goodyear 1991) that encourages problem-solving. Whilst both approaches draw on the wealth of knowledge acquired by teachers, Wayne might be more successful in reaching his students by “mapping out subject matter” (Goodyear 1991) and thus facilitating their learning, as opposed to directly instilling subject matter. 

Will I be allowed to be the teacher I want to be?

As previously suggested, Wayne is not successful in his pursuit of the ideal teacher. What is unique in this situation is the subtle and almost subliminal nature of what is not allowing him to succeed. His classroom shows no apparent signs of disruption, challenge of authority or misconduct. However Wayne is able to recognize that his method of educating his students is not engaging on any level. Still he chooses not to manipulate his style to adapt to his segmented classroom. By not responding to the dynamic of his classroom, he is no closer to engaging them in his course content, no matter how prepared and thorough he may be. 

The duty of the teacher:

Peter Goodyear terms the job of a teacher as, “multidimensional”, in which we face numerous demands and have to, “make decisions which are compromises among various costs and benefits.” (Goodyear 1991) In conjunction with this, it is suggested that the success of a class isn’t the sole responsibility of the teachers approach to a lesson, but rather the students approach to the school curriculum (Resnick 1987). Each student will come from a different background, past experience and thus will absolutely have a unique approach to a task given to them. Consequently it is the duty of the teacher, in order to instruct effectively, to not only be aware of these differences, but be able to adapt their teaching methods to them. It is in this dimension that Wayne is not fulfilling his role as an educator, and is barring himself from identifying on anything but a superficial level with his students. 

References:

Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. (pp 1-61) Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Goodyear, P. (Ed.) (1991). Teaching knowledge and intelligent tutoring. (pp 260-275) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Anderson, J.R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, (pp 320 - 323) MA: Harvard University Press.

Lanier, J., & Little, J. (1986). Research on teacher education, Handbook of research on teaching (pp 168-191) Macmillan. New York

Churchill, R., Ferguson, P., Godinho, S., Johnson, N.F., Keddie, A., Letts, W., Mackay, J., McGill, M., Moss, J., Nagel, M.C., Nicholson, P. & Vick, M. (2011). Teaching: Making a Difference. Milton, Queensland: John Wiley & Sons Pty Ltd.

Walsh, D., & Paul, R. (1988). The goal of critical thinking: From educational ideal to educational reality. (pp 10-16) Washington, D.C.: American Federation of Teachers.