Glenda E.
Fahey
Written Essays
The thinking of many behaviorists (Wolfgang, chapter 3) would lead you to believe that assertive discipline (after Lee and Marlene Canter, Wolfgang, chapter 5) is a simple and direct extension of Thorndike's Law of Effect. In what ways is assertive discipline a reasonable extension?
But, Mayer (chapter 7) has a different twist on the Law of Effect. If Mayer's modified Law of Effect is reasonable, does assertive discipline still make sense as a "meaningful" way of changing student behavior?
Response:
Thorndike's Law of Effect states, "The law of effect is the idea that if a behavior is followed by a pleasing state of affairs, it is more likely to occur again in the future under the same circumstances, and if a behavior is followed by a displeasing state of affairs, it is less likely to be given again in the future." (Mayer, pg. 243)
Moreover, according to Thorndike, "The greater the satisfaction or discomfort, the greater the strengthening or weakening of the bond." (Thorndike, 1911) While this might sound somewhat robotic in nature, it does seem to be a piece of the foundation of human nature. We do react to stimuli - we cease doing what we are doing if it causes us displeasure, and we continue doing what we are doing if it proves to be enjoyable. As such, I believe that assertive discipline can be considered an extension of the law of effect. The assertive discipline model provides for rewards for appropriate behavior and punishments for inappropriate behavior.
Assertive discipline is a classroom management method that focuses on the rights of the teacher to regulate the behaviors of students. It encourages teachers to set clear, consistent limits and specify consequences for disregarding those limits. It provides for uniform follow-through, and offers rewards for appropriate behavior. "Canter claims that a well-developed and executed plan of positive recognition for students' productive behavior will encourage most students to behavior appropriately, increase their self-esteem, reduce discipline problems, create a positive classroom climate, and create and establish a positive relationship between the teacher and the students." (Wolfgang, pg. 91) Assertive Discipline is an easy-to-follow, prepackaged discipline plan, and one that is probably the conscious or unconscious basis for the disciplinary techniques of most teachers. As a basis for a teacher's classroom discipline plan, I believe that assertive discipline is not the be-all, end-all of techniques. I think that it is lacking in that it represents itself as a one-size-fits-all model, but our children are not one-size-fits-all. According to AD, "a teacher should expect the same standards from all students, and the teacher should expect to succeed." (Wolfgang, pg. 94) I don't think this is realistic today. Our students are accompanied by so many factors that are out of the teacher's control that it is unreasonable to assume that there should be only one way to deal with each child. Don't get me wrong - I strongly believe in the establishment and enforcement of school and classroom rules. I believe that discipline should be consistent and fair. In being fair, however, I really think that a teacher must be human first, and able to acknowledge the issues facing an individual child, thereby what is fair to most may be impossible to an exceptional child on a given day. The baggage children carry around comes to school with them each day, and try as we might to create a safe, nurturing environment, there are times when one of these children exceeds the capacities of his/her limited and immature coping skills, and needs our help, rather than systematic meting of a disciplinary consequence.
Critics of the AD model argue that it creates an antagonistic learning atmosphere and that it focuses too much on punishment. (Gartrell, 1987) According to Alfie Kohn (Wolfgang, pg. 100-101), "a young child in particular may not have a fully developed capacity for rational decision -making or impulse control that is implicit in suggesting he make a choice." This statement supports the idea that one-size-fits-all may not be appropriate. Much criticism of the program revolves around another factor - that students mechanically follow a system without learning to make their own responsible decisions. "Rewards, like punishment can only manipulate someone's actions. They do nothing to help a child become a kind or caring person." (Kohn - Wolfgang, pg. 101) Kohn also tells us that "To help students become ethical people, as opposed to people who merely do what they are told, we cannot merely tell them what to do. We have to help them figure out - for themselves and with each other - how one ought to act." "It's even more crucial that we overcome a preoccupation with getting compliance and instead involve students in devising and justifying ethical principles." (Kohn, 1996)
Mayer's twist on Thorndike's law of effect pits behaviorists theory against cognitive theory in the areas of classroom management, response learning, concept learning, and skill learning. Mayer states, "According to a behaviorist view, classroom management techniques automatically change classroom behaviors. Behaviors that are punished will gradually decrease, and behaviors that are rewarded will gradually increase. According to cognitive theories, classroom management techniques serve as information that the learner interprets and uses for building useful mental representations of the situation. Punishments serve to reduce a behavior when a learner understands the cause-and-effect chain leading to negative consequences and want to avoid a negative consequence. Rewards serve to increase a behavior when a learner understands the cause-and-effect chain leading to positive consequences and wants the positive consequence." (Mayer, pg. 247) Mayer presents research in support of this, and I feel that it is the heart of the difference between the theories. The ability to learn from mistakes and to develop internal controls based on that understanding is crucial to permanent behavior change. Kohn suggests that "even when children are successfully reinforced or consequenced into compliance, they will likely feel no commitment to what they are doing, no deep understanding of the act and its rationale, no sense of themselves as the kind of people who would want to act this way in the future." (Kohn, 1996) These students have been led to concentrate on the consequences of their actions to themselves, and this holds little understanding for their future behaviors.
According to cognitive and behaviorist theories, feedback or reinforcers promotes learning in different ways. "The behaviorist view is that the learner is passively being conditioned by the feedback; that is, feedback serves as reinforcement that automatically stamps in (or stamps out) responses." (Mayer, pg. 271) This is in contrast to the cognitive view "that the learner is actively interpreting the feedback that is given; that is, feedback serves as information that the learner uses in building a learning outcome." (Mayer, pg. 271) In each case, feedback given to the student can direct a change in behavior. Unless a student can use the feedback constructively, however, consistent change in behavior and active learning to internalize meaning may only be temporary.
This is where I see problems in adopting assertive discipline in its entirety. I try to create a classroom atmosphere where students have rules and consequences, but feel secure in the knowledge that I care for them, and have their best interests at heart at all times. I've seen too many cases where standing firm with your script wouldn't have worked because of the extenuating circumstances involved with a particular child. I think it's important to have a broad understanding of various theories and techniques behind your decisions in classroom management, but I believe it is imperative to find the management components that best fit the teacher's personality, the classroom makeup, and the overall needs of your children - one at a time. I've always felt teachers had to be flexible in many areas, and I think that discipline can still be maintained while addressing the disciplinary concerns of your student, often in different ways.
References:
Gartrell, D. "Assertive Discipline: Unhealthy for Children and Other Living Things." Young Children 1987: 10-11.
Kohn, Alfie. "Beyond Discipline." Education Week November 1996.
Mayer, R. E., (2003). Learning and Instruction. Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Wolfgang, Charles H.,(2001). Solving Discipline and Classroom Management Problems. 5th Edition. Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York
Describe some ways that you use punishment to control the actions of students. How are they effective? Are there alternatives that don't require the use of aversive stimulation?
Response:
When thinking about punishment, I decided to consult the dictionary first. According to the dictionary (Webster):
punish: 1. to subject to pain, loss, confinement, or death as a penalty for some offense or fault 2. to inflict such a penalty 3. to handle or treat harshly or roughly; hurt
Well, if that's case, I don't think I've ever punished anyone in my classroom!
To tell you the truth, I don't even like the words punish or punishment. To my mind, they remind me of hickory sticks and rulers on the knuckles. I know - as Dr. Anderson states, "The use of aversive actions is one of those things that almost everybody does - few like to own up to the idea of being a punitive person." (Anderson, 2001) I guess I'm no different! In my classroom, I had rules and consequences that had been established on a school-wide basis to promote consistent behavior in every student location. I also had a few classroom-specific rules of my own that met the needs of my students and myself. For each, the sequential consequences were well-known and understood by the members of my classroom. At the beginning of each year, I asked my students to help me in setting these rules, and somehow, through no direction of mine, of course, they were almost always alike. I believe that because the students helped to set the rules, they had more of a stake in keeping to them, and more importantly, since I trusted them to do the right thing, they knew (at least I hope they did) that I would be fair.
Our school-wide discipline plan was fairly simple. Each classroom teacher had a clipboard with each student's name on it and boxes for each day of one week on each page. There were a variety of categories to specify "offenses" that could be possible, and these were coded at the bottom. The consequences followed a sequence:
1. one check served as a warning2. two checks and there was either a behavior contract or other consequence as determined by the teacher (time out from lunch recess, letter of apology if someone was the brunt of the misdeed, or something else at this level that might better fit the type of offense, ie. cleaning a desk if it was written on, etc.)
3. three checks and a phone call was made to the parent, and the behavior was discussed
4. four checks and the student visited the principal and was usually issued an after-school detention
Students were completely aware of exactly how the clipboard system worked.
This clipboard traveled to specials such as Music and P.E. with the group for the use of that teacher, and since we worked in teams of 3 or 4 teachers, it allowed for easy recording to another teacher's clipboard after a class in a teammate's room.
Each student began each day with a clean slate, and I have to say that we were fortunate in that few students progressed to levels 3 and 4, and that the consequences administered to level 2 were minimal as described above. I can only think of a few cases that progressed to the principal, and those were typically students who repeatedly tested the system.
I realize that in some environments, this would not be the case, and that punishers would have to be much more harsh in order to encourage a student to desist in the poor behavior.
According to Frederic Jones, "99% of the typically encountered discipline problems are made up of such behaviors as pupils talking without permission, daydreaming, wandering around the room, or otherwise not doing what they have been asked to do." (Allen, 1996) For students with persistently "annoying" behaviors such as talking out, being off-task, not following directions, etc., preventative strategies were frequently used such as proximity, periodic direct eye contact, questioning, etc., that would help these students to limit the behaviors that would otherwise cause them to move through the steps of the discipline plan. I think that being proactive not only makes life easier for the teacher; it helps students to regulate their impulses to misbehave, thus avoiding the administration of more serious punitive measures.
References:
Discipline Program - Caroline Bentley School, New Lenox School District 122
Anderson, Tom. "Punishment and Other Uses of Aversive Stimuli" Spring, 2001
Allen, Thomas H., Ph.D. "Developing a Discipline Plan for You" (http://www.humboldt.edu/~tha1/discip-options.html) retrieved from the internet on 3/17/04
Lesson 6: Procedural Knowledge
Discuss some procedural knowledge that you teach. How do you teach it? What are the important IF conditions? Are there some competing IF-THEN bundles that sometimes confuse students, and you have to help them discriminate among them?
Response:
"Procedural knowledge is the knowledge of how to perform some task." (Wikipedia) Procedural knowledge is skill knowledge., as opposed to declarative knowledge, which is "the knowledge about ideas." (Anderson)
In the classroom, procedural knowledge is taught in a multitude of avenues. When we teach spelling, students are taught "rules" that "usually" apply. "I" comes before "E," except after "C," for example, provides an easy way to remember the spelling of words with this pattern. The IF-THEN bundle created in remembering this rule will direct students to the correct spelling of words with ie or ei, based on whether or not they come after the letter "C." Ah, but there is another IF-THEN that also applies - "unless it sounds like 'A,' as in neighbor and weigh." This directs the learner to also apply the sound of the word to the spelling to decide if he should vary from the "rule."
Another example from the classroom might be basic procedures for entering the classroom in the morning. Students are to come in in an orderly fashion, hang up coats, hats, and backpacks, put away sack lunches, and proceed to their desks. At their desk, they carefully take down their chairs, sit down, and organize any materials they have brought back to school from their backpacks, Once their books, folders, and papers are put away, they hand in any notes, late assignments, or library books they may have, and take out their Daily Oral Language notebooks to begin work on the daily lesson projected on the board. It sometimes takes a number of days before students have progressed to the associative stage, and finally to the autonomous stage, "when the procedures appear to be on automatic pilot." (Anderson)
What might cause confusion to this well-oiled procedure? Any diversion from the normal school day might do this - a shortened day when we might have to proceed immediately to another location or task, a substitute teacher who might not have understood the sub notebook and gives students different instructions, a testing day, an assembly first thing in the morning, etc. Students have to attempt to create alternative IF-THEN bundles to handle these types of situations, ie. IF Mrs. Smith is here, THEN, we won't have to be orderly, we won't have to do DOL, we can find creative ways to challenge her, etc.!
In my current position, much of my responsibility involves instructing teachers and, occasionally students, in working with computers. Much of this instruction is procedural in that there are steps to follow in a particular sequence. First of all, teachers and students have to follow a procedure to log in to the file server to save and access their documents. At first, these procedures are definitely "halting and tentative." (Anderson) Because we are dealing with technology, though, it is well known that certain conditions can jeopardize any smooth procedure. What could possibly happen, you might ask, that would preclude the learner from progressing to deeper levels of understanding? Power problems, network connectivity, equipment failure, etc., can all cause a disruption in the procedure. Students and teachers have to learn that if the server isn't available, then, they have to consider a number of causes they will have to attempt to deal with to correct the situation: 1) the server could be down, 2) the computer's cabling may not be intact, 3) the network interface card or its driver could be faulty, 4) the computer's preferences may be corrupt, or 5) THEY WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO SUBMIT A REPAIR REQUEST IF CHECKING THE CABLE CONNECTIONS AND RESTARTING DOESN'T CORRECT THE PROBLEM!
In another example, students follow a simple procedure to print. They have their work approved by their teacher, they check to see if the proper printer is selected (laser or color inkjet), and proceed to Print. Once again, technical issues can cause disruptions in the smooth flow of this seemingly simple procedure. Students and teachers have to learn that If their document doesn't print, Then they have to check to see if there is an error message on their screen. If there is no message, then they have to check the Print Monitor for the status of their print job. If their print job doesn't show up in the Print Monitor, then they have to check to be sure the printer is turned on. If none of these steps is successful, then they have to assume that the print job didn't make it to the printer, and they have to look in the Chooser to see if the selected printer is available - OR to see if any printers are available. If their printer is not available, then they have to request permission to select another printer, and report the problem. If no printers are visible, then the problem most likely lies in the connectivity of the user's computer, and then they will have to restart to see if the connectivity is reestablished. If it still doesn't work, then they have to report the problem.
In working with computers, I think IF-THEN bundles can be somewhat fragile in a way. Logistically speaking, computers are based on IF-THEN's, but there are so many conditions that have to be right for the most basic IF-THEN bundles to work each and every time. If I follow the procedure to print, my document will print - because of the various situations that would cause this to fail, a whole new series of IF-THEN bundles have to be activated, revolving around troubleshooting the failure of the first! I would say this is often most definitely confusing!
References:
Anderson, Tom. Commentary on Lesson 6: Cognitive Psychology: The interaction of memory structures and cognitive strategies
Fahey, Glenda. 5 years of experience as a Technology Facilitator in New Lenox School District 122, New Lenox, Illinois.
Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 31 Mar 2004. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_knowledge>.
Lesson 7: Computers and Building Lessons
In the very last paragraph of chapter 8, Mayer states, "What is new, however, is the growing realization that promoting student exploration is not enough; student exploration must be supplemented with guidance that promotes reflection and helps students to find generalizable rules and principles that can live on in new situations. Crafting such lessons involves the skillful use of many techniques, including those based on concreteness, activity, and familiarity." (p.304)
Assuming Mayer's conclusion is reasonable, and maybe even true, what role might computers play in building lessons that teach meaningful learning using concreteness, activity and familiarity. If you can't find some lessons to illustrate your points, design and explain the rudiments of a computer lesson that is consistent with this type of meaningful learning instruction.
Response:
If students are to learn a concept and truly understand it. it is important that meaningful methods of instruction are used, especially when, as Mayer states, "the goal of instruction is that the child be able to creatively apply learning in new situations." (Mayer, 277) In reviewing the three methods of providing meaningful instruction: concrete, discovery, and inductive, the element of instructional interaction or guidance is key to the effectiveness of each. Mayer states, "What is new, however, is the growing realization that promoting student exploration is not enough; student exploration must be supplemented with guidance that promotes reflection and helps students to find generalizable rules and principles that can live on in new situations," (Mayer, 304) I believe this to be true in working with students of all ages. Though there are those who believe, as Maria Montessori claimed, "that education is not what the teacher gives; education is a natural process spontaneously carried out by the human individual, and is acquired not by listening to words but by experiences upon the environment," (International Montessori Index) one could agree that a carefully prepared environment may be enough to stimulate children to learn, but they might also argue that not all children are capable of such pure discovery. With regard to discovery learning, Mayer also states, in somewhat contrary fashion, "some learners simply may not be able to discover the appropriate concepts and rules without some direction from the teacher." (Mayer, 288)
In thinking of computers and technology in relation to concrete, meaningful learning, I believe that there are a multitude of websites and software applications that provide students with the opportunity to interact and manipulate various elements in a learning activity. One example of computer technology which "allows learners to interact with and think about concrete representations of otherwise abstract ideas" (Mayer, 284) is referred to by Mayer as microworlds. According to Mayer, research on the use of computerized concrete manipulatives shows that "there is encouraging evidence that concretizing an abstract concept or procedure can help students understand and learn in ways that promote transfer.
A particular example of this type of product that springs to mind is a program we have been researching for introduction into our junior high computer curriculum, that of LEGO Mindstorms. While we have not used this product yet, I have observed students who were working with it. LEGO Mindstorms software allow students to assemble robots or other "machines" and program their movements. Students must rely on problem-solving skills and their knowledge of how each piece operates with respect to another in their efforts to create their project. Teacher interaction and introduction is necessary at the beginning and at various stages throughout the process, and students receive much of the feedback on their construction and programming choices from the results of their attempts to operate their robot or machine. If they have made a poor selection of gears or other particular parts, their attempts will not be successful, and they are able to learn from the error to make a different, hopefully more successful decision. A multitude of skills are involved in student planning and construction of this project, and students are able to manipulate each piece in the creation of a unique working product.
References:
"International Montessori Index." 21 4 2004. Dr. Maria Montessori, M.D.. 24 Apr 2004. <http://www.montessori.edu/maria.html>.
"LEGO Mindstorms." LEGO.com . 24 Apr 2004. <http://mindstorms.lego.com/eng/default.asp>.
Mayer, R. E., (2003). Learning and Instruction. Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Locate 2 web sites of suspected differences in quality that purport to teach and inform the audience about some topic or other. Analyze the web sites using the guidelines that you construct from principles discussed by Mayer, e.g., those having to do with the use of questions, signaling, etc. You may need to develop some additional guidelines to analyze a web page, since Mayer's discussion focuses primarily on text and textbooks.
Response:
Mayer says that "meaningful learning from prose - such as textbooks, lectures, or even computer-based presentations - occurs when the learner builds a coherent cognitive structure." (Mayer, 329-330) For the past six years, I have been involved in training teachers to use technology, and in helping them to locate online resources that they can use to help them when using technology equipment and software. I often provide staff development and hands-on workshops where teachers can learn to use software with my instruction and assistance, but frequently, teachers cannot attend these, or require additional assistance at a later date. This is when it is important to provide them with resources that they can refer to on a n as-needed basis. I try to find resources that provide clear, precise directions on a web page that is well-designed, accurate, and up-to-date.
Our primary buildings use Kidspiration software, and I have had to find online tutorials for teachers to reference when they encounter a difficulty with using the program. Toward this goal, I have two web sites that I commonly recommend to teachers. They are:
Atomic Learning - Kidspiration (http://www.atomiclearning.com/freekidsmac.shtml)
and
Kidspiration Quick Start (http://www.inspiration.com/popups/kidstutorial/index.cfm#overview)
I feel both of these resources are excellent in that they meet the basic criteria for a good web page: accuracy, authenticity, currency, ease of navigation, clarity, and reliability. They both make use of signaling, which provides "a conceptual framework for the reader to use in selecting relevant information (ie. the selecting process) and in organizing the information into a coherent representation (ie. the organizing process." (Mayer, 341) Directions are compacted into small, specific pieces, and broken down into precise categories and headings.Though both resources are thorough, the reason I recommend both is that they present the software instruction in different ways which is beneficial to teachers who learn in different ways. Kidspiration Quick Start provides a segmented, well-organized set of instructions in text format with graphic illustrations along the way. Atomic Learning provides a similarly segmented and well-organized set of instructions, also, but each of these segments is presented in QuickTime video format. This technique is more helpful to those teachers who tend to be more uncertain of their actions because they can actually "see" exactly what menu item is viewed, which button is selected, and precisely where to go and "click" on the screen to obtain the desired results. They can listen to instructions rather than reading them. It is a favorite of our audio-visual learners!
References:
Kidspiration (Mac). Atomic Learning. 24 Apr 2004. <http://www.atomiclearning.com/freekidsmac.shtml>.
Kidspiration Quick Start. Inspiration.com. 24 Apr 2004. <http://www.atomiclearning.com/freekidsmac.shtml>.
Mayer, R. E., (2003). Learning and Instruction. Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Explain metacognition. Use what you know about the writing process and about meta-anything, and develop a parallel concept called, metawring, and relate it to the type of writing that your students perform. How did this concept development exercise go? Are there parts of the writing process that did not lend themselves to the meta-notion?
Response:
The prefix, meta, means "changed in position", " beyond", "on a higher level", "transcending," etc., referring to the body of knowledge about a body of knowledge or about a field of study, e.g., metaMATHEMATICS, metaCOMMUNICATION." (Principia Cybernetica Web) "Metacognition refers to higher order thinking which involves active control over the cognitive processes engaged in learning. Activities such as planning how to approach a given learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating progress toward the completion of a task are metacognitive in nature." (Livingston) Metacognitive strategies are:
**Connecting new information to former knowledge.
**Selecting thinking strategies deliberately
**Planning, monitoring, and evaluating
thinking processes
(Dirkes, 1985)
Metacognitive strategies should be modeled by teachers so that students learn the thinking processes behind the solutions to tasks. Metacognitive skills will allow students to successfully cope with new situations.
In the writing process, metacognition also plays a role. "Writing is a very complex process in which numerous cognitive and metacognitive activities take place." (Lee) If we were to refer to "metawriting," we might go one step further, and more specifically suggest it might mean the knowledge and understanding about writing.
The Flowers and Hayes model of writing consists of the following stages:
1. Planning: setting goals,
generating ideas, and organizing ideas
2. Translating: transforming ideas into words on paper
3. Reviewing: evaluating and revising
(Mayer, 115-116)
If we applied the notion of metacognition, or more specifically, metawriting, to the steps of composition, a student might first develop a plan of action where he/she would activate prior knowledge appropriate to the writing task at hand. Direction, organization, and time constraints would be considered during this step. Research to extend the depth of knowledge required for the written task might be undertaken as well. The difficulty of the task would be analyzed as a strategy for writing was developed. During the writing phase, students would monitor the plan of action, analyzing the direction taken, reflecting on whether or not he/she was on the right track, determining if information is missing or required to continue, and taking note of the pacing of the assignment. Once the writing assignment is complete, the writer would review it to determine whether or not it met the initial goal established by the planning phase. The written piece would be evaluated to see if it could have been done differently in any way or if there was anything missing. The writer would also determine whether his/her thinking process was sufficient to accomplish the task satisfactorily. If changes were deemed necessary, the paper would be revised based on this thinking.The thought processes behind the writing in each step would be used to drive further writing.
I think it would be helpful to give further consideration to the notion of metawriting as kind of a metacognition of the writing process. If teachers were to model the thought processes behind the steps of the writing process, it might enlighten students to higher level thinking about their own writing, hence raising their cognition about writing. I think the idea of metawriting has a connection to the writing process, but the one thing I think is lacking is the aspect of flair and creativity of expression. They are personal in nature to each individual, and don't necessarily seem to go hand in hand with the more mechanized steps of writing, Unless the student has a well-developed inner sense of style or expression that he/she can draw out through the thought processes behind his/her writing, that attribute of writing might lack attention. Overall, though, I think the concept of metawriting could be an effective means of enhancing the writing experience for students.
References:
Dirkes, M. Ann. (1985, November). "Metacognition: Students in charge of their thinking." Roeper Review, 8(2), 96-100. EJ 329 760.
Lee, Kam Hung. 3 Sept. 1993. Metacognition in Writing: The Effect of Self-regulation Training on Revision. 02 May 2004. <http://www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/ceric/cuma/93khlee/conclusion.htm>.
Livingston, Jennifer A. 1997. Metacognition: An Overview. 02 May 2004. <http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/Metacog.htm>.
Metacognition. NCREL - Pathways. 02 May 2004. <http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr1metn.htm>.
"Principia Cybernetica Web." META -. 02 May 2004. <http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/META-.html>.
The processes of learning and teaching science often involve analyzing "misconceptions." what are some misconceptions in the content areas (include teaching students about computers) that you teach which must be analyzed in order to provide a more effective instructional plan? How can misconceptions be overcome? Is it easy to do so?
Response:
I found the material in this lesson's readings were interesting, not only as they apply to the teaching of math and science, but as applied to all content areas and in every day life. I am referring to the notion of misconceptions that can be had by anyone about anything. As educators, we are in the "business" of helping students to correct their misconceptions, and, in effect, affect conceptual-change theory. "The conceptual-change view is that learning occurs when one's mental model (or naive conception) is replaced by a new one." (Mayer, 194) Conceptual change occurs when earners pass through the steps of recognizing an anomaly, constructing a new model, and using a new model.
Many of our misconceptions are based on early misunderstandings, experiences, or inaccurate information that we have assimilated into generalizations that often turn out to be completely incorrect. They're based on what we believe to be true. As Roschelle states, "Learning proceeds primarily from prior knowledge, and only secondarily from the presented materials. Prior knowledge can be at odds with the presented material, and consequently, learners will distort presented material." (Roschelle) In working with teachers and computers, I have come across misconceptions galore. These misconceptions are usually based on lack of information, lack of experience, belief in "what somebody else told me," and the notion that teachers feel they have to know everything so they sometimes "fill in the blanks" when they don't know something so it appears they do.
Some misconceptions fall under teacher use, both personal and in the classroom.:
A teacher doesn't need to make any personal change when learning computing.
A teacher doesn't need to use computers in personal life.
A teacher can be a part-time user and still meet professional needs.
Teaching with technology can be done by non-computer-using teachers.
According to Galloway, "A more personally-involved use is necessary, like a critical mass required for nuclear fission, in order to facilitate technology integration into the classroom...Teachers must integrate technology into both their personal and professional lives." (Galloway, 2003) Many of our teachers remain either opposed to using technology at all, or will use it only minimally. These teachers don't or won't recognize a value in the use of technology in their personal or professional lives, and this translates to insufficient classroom use. They believe that the way they have been teaching for many years is sufficient, and they don't see the need to make that fundamental personal change that is necessary for them to effectively use technology in the classroom. Student use is often limited to "playing" with basic drill and practice programs with no focus on specific skills, blowing up pictures in Kid Pix, or haphazardly "surfing" the internet. Often teachers believe they are doing "their part" in having their students use the computers in this way, but without the personal commitment to computer use as part of their own daily lives, they cannot affect a change in their classroom use. Through training, modeling, and demonstration, we are working with teachers to help them realize the potential value of technology in their lives.
Another pair of common misconceptions that I frequently encounter is "the computer is broken," or "the network is down," any time something doesn't work just as the person wanted it to. Lack of skills and basic knowledge of how to use a computer and the very basics of how a network works is usually the reason behind this. Often, as I mentioned earlier, people tend to use these responses to label any problem they encounter because it's all they know. They don't realize that the source of the problem could be anything else but the computer, and certainly not them! Of course, there are any number of reasons that a user might have a computer problem - hardware or software, or a network problem - printing, server access, internet access, etc., but the cause of the problem is often the user. We try to work with teachers to learn to use the equipment more effectively, and they begin to realize that the computer "breaks" less frequently, and the network hardly ever "goes down!"
Misconceptions are also apparent where computer ethics are concerned, most specifically, copyright. Everyone has at least a fundamental knowledge of what copyright is, but not always in regard to technology. Teachers often believe that all software can be installed anywhere and everywhere, including at home. They believe that if something is found on the internet, it can be downloaded and used, printed and distributed, or copied and pasted into something they or their students are creating. They tend to think they can freely use video and music in multimedia projects and web pages. These are just a few examples of the misconceptions that we are trying to work to change. Through inservice, workshops, faculty meetings, etc., we explain how copyright and fair use apply to technology in order to minimize copyright violations.
References:
Galloway, Jerry. 1 9 2003. Fifteen Computing Misconceptions. Tech Learning. 25 Apr 2004. <http://www.techlearning.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=13100792>.
Hite, Lee. "Third Ring.net." Common Personal Computer Myths. 25 Apr 2004. <http://www.thirdring.net/tips/pcmyths.htm>.
Roschelle, Jeremy. "Institute for Inquiry." Learning in Interactive Environments: Prior Knowledge and New Experience. The Exploratorium. 25 Apr 2004. <http://www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/museumeducation/priorknowledge.html>.
Rutter, Daniel. "Dan's Data." The Top Eight Computer Myths!. 25 Apr 2004. <http://www.dansdata.com/sbs22.htm>.
Glasser is a big proponent of the class meeting and was one of the first model builders to discuss its use in detail (Glasser, The Quality School, 1990). Describe the class meeting. Do you, or someone you know, use the class meeting as part of your classroom procedures, perhaps? How does it work? Do te asynchronous properties of networked computers offer students and teachers a way to use "cyber" class meetings in some creative ways?
Response:
"The practice of holding regular meetings provides a structure both for dealing with an individual student's problems and for revising the overall organization and curriculum of the class." (Wolfgang, 158) Glasser designed the class meeting as an extention of his reality therapy, and it is based on his basic assumptions on motivation:
The student is a rational person who deserves to be appealed to in such a manner.
The student has the capabilities to be responsible but needs to learn moral or acceptable boundaries of living.
The student must live in a society with others and must satisfy his own needs in such a manner that it does not infringe upon others.
Each person has basic needs of belonging, freedom, power, and fun.
The student needs to acknowledge his own behavior then commit himself to more logical and productive forms of behavior.
(Wolfgang, 145)
Glasser proposed three different types of class meetings; open-ended, educational/diagnostic, and problem solving. Meetings should be held regularly - daily for elementary and 2-3 times per week for high school. Meetings last up to 45 minutes, and students sit in a tight circle during this time.
At open-ended meetings, students can discuss topics of their choice.
At educational/diagnostic meetings, curricular topics are discussed in order for the teacher to determine students' prior knowledge, and identify the direction for the curricular topic being discussed.
At problem-solving meetings, the class discusses a problem that affects them. "They clarify the problem, add information, propose alternative solutions, and finally commit themselves to a plan of action." (Wolfgang, 159) At these meetings, "the teacher is encouraged to not be judgmental toward the topics and responses of the students, but to always direct the focus of the interactions toward problem-solving." The teacher should encourage students' responses and solutions, but should recognize that a solution may not result, and that solutions should not include punishment or fault finding.
I have never used the type of regular class meeting described by Glasser, nor do I know anyone who uses this type of meeting on a regular basis. The closest I can get is that of team meetings that our fifth grade team used to hold periodically. Our team consisted of three classrooms, and we occasionally held meetings to discuss problems such as homework completion or behavior; upcoming team events such as Geography Day, Young Authors, or Invention Convention; or other miscellaneous issues such as particular procedures, supplies, dress code, changes in routine, field trips, etc. We did not hold these meetings daily, nor on any regular basis. They took place as we felt the need to address the group. While students were asked for input about preferences and solutions to problems, it was not always the main goal of the meeting to problem-solve or discuss topics of choice. They tended to be more in the realm of informational in purpose.
Another example I can compare would be that of school meetings. One of the schools in my district holds whole school meetings once a week where a variety of issues are presented. Students are recognized for citizenship, spelling, etc. at these meetings. School rules might be reviewed, and problems that teachers have noticed with student compliance with rules might be discussed. Procedural issues are brought up, as are upcoming events that students can expect to take part in. Student performances and presentations are often highlighted, as are teacher accomplishments. The primary purpose of these meetings is to create a more intimate climate in a building that is experiencing overcrowding, and to demonstrate to students that the school is a nurturing and caring environment for them.
Finally, I have actually held family meetings with my children. These meetings are not scheduled on a regular basis, rather they are intended to inform each other of what's happening in our lives, and to discuss issues and problems that someone may be experiencing. My husband passed away last year, and I've been worried that we will begin to drift as a family as my children are getting older. I was also concerned about how they were all dealing with everything, so I decided to try the meeting. I think we have all been enjoying sitting down together - it gets harder and harder to do that with each of us having very busy schedules - and I think the kids appreciate my asking them for their opinions and input about decisions I might have to make. I know I feel I can get a handle on what is going on with each of them, too, especially my son who is away at college most of the time, and I find the opportunity to hear about them invaluable. At this point, the meetings are irregularly held, but I would really like to come up with some kind of schedule that we could try to hold ourselves to.
As far as "cyber" class meetings go, I don't see where they would be useful in any of the situations I have discussed, but we've obviously had meetings of various types in our CTER classes - asynchronous in Webboard and Blackboard, and synchronous in Tapped In. For our distance learning purposes, these types of communications are quite appropriate and beneficial to participants. The beauty of networked computers allow those of us who wished to select a masters' degree program from the University of Illinois from a distance to be able to do so, without the impossible commute. Our online discussions are often vigorous and it is actually possible to get to know our classmates without regularly meeting face-to-face. I know I have found it to be quite exceptional!
References:
Fahey, Glenda - teaching experience at the 5th grade level, Caroline Bentley School, New Lenox, IL
Nelson Prairie School, New Lenox, IL - school meetings
Wolfgang, Charles H.,(2001). Solving Discipline and Classroom Management Problems. 5th Edition. Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York
Lesson 15: Cognitive Apprenticeship
Design/Create and explain an instructional program based on an apprenticeship model of instruction. Include the use of computers, networks, and distance learning. Under what conditions can technology work well in this type of instruction or is it just a pipe dream to think that it can?
Response:
Cognitive apprenticeship is defined as "a method of teaching aimed primarily at teaching the processes that experts use to handle complex tasks." (Conway) The three methods in cognitive apprenticeship are modeling, coaching, and scaffolding. "Modeling occurs when a teacher describes her or his cognitive processing in the course of carrying out a task." (Mayer, 440) "Coaching occurs when a teacher offers hints, comments, and critiques to a student who is carrying out a task." (Mayer, 440) "Scaffolding is needed when a student is working on a task but is not yet able to successfully manage each part without some kind of support." (Mayer, 440) Cognitive apprenticeship works off of the theory of the Zone of Proximal Development, a work of Vygotsky, a social psychologist, who believes "that learning occurs in a social context and that learning occurs within a child's zone of proximal development." (Mayer, 432)The ZPD refers to the zone of development that is located in between what a student can successfully do on her or his own and what this same student can do in the future. "With the guidance of an adult, the student may be able to move on to the next stage of learning. Through interaction, the model allows the student to be successful at a skill or task that may be too complex for them to handle alone and expands his/her cognitive abilities." (Cog. App.) The role of the teacher is to simplify tasks so that the student can manage them. This scaffolding is usually necessary only initially, and then it begins to fade as the child begins to learn a skill. The cognitive apprenticeship places learning in the control of the student and improves his or her development of cognitive skills such as goal setting, strategic planning, monitoring, evaluating, and revising. The student is an active learner rather than a passive learner.
Technology can play an enormous role in cognitive apprenticeship. Computer networks, the internet, and distance learning are all powerful means of communication that can open up amazing new possibilities for students to interact with experts of all kinds. One such program is the Electronic Emissary, created and directed by Dr. Judi Harris in 1993, at the University of Texas, Austin. "The Emissary is a web-based telementoring service and resource center that helps kindergarten through grade 12 teachers and students with internet access locate mentors who are experts in various disciplines, for purposes of setting up curriculum-based electronic exchanges among the teachers, their students, and the mentors. In this way, the interaction that occurs among teachers and students face-t-face in the classroom is supplemented and extended by electronic mail, web forum, chat, and teleconferencing exchanges that occur among teachers, students, and volunteer mentors. These project-based online conversations typically range in length from 6 weeks to a full academic year, as students' needs and interests dictate." (Emissary)
When considering the Electronic Emissary program, teachers should visit the site and review past projects, the expert database, and general information about working with the program. If a teacher decides to involve her/his students in a project with the assistance and participation of an expert, he/she can register with the Electronic Emissary. There is a procedure to follow whereby the teacher enters into an agreement to follow some guidelines. A project proposal is then submitted and a mentor is sought through the emissary. The expert also has some commitment guidelines to agree to upon volunteering, and once the connection is arranged, a facilitator assists the teacher and expert in fine-tuning the project, and clarifies expectations of the program further. Then, teacher, students, and expert are on their way. The facilitator remains involved with the project all along the way, and provides assistance whenever needed. At the conclusion of the project, teachers and experts complete questionnaires descriptive of the experience.
The Electronic Emissary looks really rather extraordinary. Volunteer experts include university professors, NASA scientists, mathematicians, musicians, engineers, and many, many others. The variety of projects is expansive.The length and depth of involvement between teachers, students, and subject matter experts is what really distinguishes this program from other online sources of expert information. "We have learned that students and teachers exploring real world, many-faceted, curriculum-based topics need to actively build deep and sophisticated understanding. One of the most effective ways to do this is by engaging in ongoing dialogue with knowledgeable others, as the students form, refine, and expand their comprehension." (Emissary) Through the Electronic Emissary program, the cognitive apprenticeship model is exemplified.
References:
Cognitive Apprenticeship. 29 Apr 2004. <http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/step/ep301/Fall2000/tochonites/cogap.html>.
Conway, Judith. "Educational Technology's Effect on Models of Instruction." May 1997. 29 Apr 2004. <http://copland.udel.edu/~jconway/EDST666.htm>.
Electronic Emissary. 29 Apr 2004. <http://emissary.wm.edu/>.
Mayer, R. E., (2003). Learning and Instruction. Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Lesson 15: Priming Student Motivation
On pgs. 481-482, Mayer lists 3 strategies for motivating students. 1. Create situations that mesh with the interest of the studens so they can see some personal value in learning the material. 2. Create situations in which students can observe their peers succeeding and also experience success themselves, and 3. Create situations in which students can learn that their academic successes and failures depend on their effort rather than solely on their ability. How can the use of computers in the instructional classroom facilitate motivation, as described by Mayer? Select a content area, perhaps one that you teach, and illustrate your responses within that context.
Response:
According to Mayer, "Teachers should create situations that mesh with the interests of the students so that students can see some personal value in learning the material. Teachers should create situations in which students can observe their peers succeeding and also experience success themselves. Teachers should create situations in which students can learn that their academic successes and failures depend on their effort rather than solely on their ability." (Mayer, 481-482) He also discusses intrinsic motivation, where students are motivated by internal or personal reasons, versus extrinsic motivation, where students are motivated by external factors which are imposed on the student. (Mayer, 439) When a student is motivated from within, he is more likely to achieve long-term, meaningful understanding.
As an instructor to adult educators in the area of technology, I can see parallels in their motivations as well. As we have teachers in the district with a variety of abilities and attitudes toward the use of technology in education, I find it is challenging to find ways to motivate our teachers. In our district, there are no "mandates" to teacher use of technology. There are no incentives nor is it a part of teacher evaluation. As a result, it can be a challenge to get teachers to participate in voluntary training. Typically, those who attend these sessions are intrinsically motivated. They have a comfort level with technology, they usually use it personally, they recognize the value in teaching with technology, and they implement what they have learned with their students. These are our trailblazers, risk-takers, and leaders in technology integration. On the opposite end of our teacher spectrum, however, are the teachers who are not intrinsically motivated to learn to use technology. They might use it on a very basic personal level, but do not value its importance beyond that, and therefore, do not choose to attend voluntary training.
Our district has recently made the decision to offer a variety of workshops to district staff, including a number of technology-related topics. Participants may select to receive CPDU's or a stipend for completion of these workshops, and as extrinsic motivation, this attracts people from all points of our spectrum, including the limited users who wish to take advantage of the stipend, not necessarily intending to ever use what they learn. The challenge here is to find a way to reach this group of teachers, and try to affect a change in their mindset.
There are many different models that describe teacher adoption of technology. While they use different names for each stage, they agree that there are different stages that teachers go through when learning to integrate technology. Research also suggests that teachers won't use technology in the classroom until they use it and recognize its value in their personal lives. Toward this end, we try to show teachers how using basic tools such as word processing and email communication can make a difference to them. Once teachers have the understanding that technology can be useful to them on a personal level, we try to show them how technology can help them professionally. We work with them to demonstrate how a variety of tools such as an electronic gradebook, testing software, lesson plan resources on the internet, word processor for worksheets, newsletters, etc., and email can be used to assist them in their teaching tasks. Once we have established this level of technology use, the next step is to promote a buy-in on the part of teachers - in other words, help them to realize the many ways technology can be used to improve their teaching, and student learning. "Many teachers are not motivated by the idea of placing technology in their classrooms. But they are motivated by the vision of helping their students to learn more and take more control of their learning." (Grant) We feel that most teachers want their students to be successful, and the challenge now is to let them know how technology can be integrated into their present curriculum, as a tool that will help their students, and not as an add-on that they fail to find any relevance in.
While we have several levels of technology assistance available to teachers, including small group meetings, co-teaching, team planning, and one-on-one help, the workshops we have prepared represent an attempt to reach teachers at all levels. "As teachers begin to regard technology as a tool to accomplish instructional goals, they will learn best when engaged in meaningful projects that relate to their own classrooms." (David, 1996 ) In an effort to affect this change, we try to help teachers make the connection to technology on both a personal and professional level, not only through the workshops, but via teacher mentors who can demonstrate the use of technology as a tool for teaching and learning. Teacher motivation is enhanced by observing its successful implementation in the classrooms of others. Every workshop we plan is developed to include not only instruction, but also curriculum connections. Teachers view the work of others, create lesson plans, multimedia presentations, videos, and many other products that incorporate their own curriculum with technological tools, both for teacher and student use. These ideas and projects are shared with each other so that they can come away from a workshop with ideas and materials created by their peers as well as their own work. Follow up is available to teachers after any workshop, so that they can continue to implement the skills, techniques, and ideas in their classrooms on an ongoing basis. We "recognize that the important understandings about technology's role in supporting student learning are equally critical to understanding its role in enhancing teachers' learning." (Grant) According to James Tenbusch, "Having learned the basics, teachers need roughly six months or more to practice their skills and, more important, to learn problem-solving strategies for those frustrating moments when the computer doesn't do what they want it to do. At this state, many teachers become tempted to throw in the towel, convinced they'll never truly master that 'dang' machine." (Tenbusch) It is for this reason we try to maintain contact with teachers we have worked with. Admittedly, it is not always successful, as we still have teachers who are resistant, and do not wish to follow through once the workshop is over. Again, since there is no technology requirement for teachers, if we don't reach teachers on an intrinsic level, there are those who we fail to "convert."
References:
David, J.L. (1996). Developing and spreading accomplished teaching: Policy lessons from a unique partnership. In C. Fisher, D.C. Dwyer, & K. Yocam (Eds.), Education and technology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fahey, Glenda - experience as a Technology Facilitator, New Lenox School District, New Lenox, IL.
Fahey, Glenda - experience as Instructional Technology Coordinator, New Lenox School District, New Lenox, IL.
Grant, Cathy M. Professional Development in a Technological Age: New Definitions, Old Challenges, New Resources. 02 May 2004. <http://ra.terc.edu/publications/TERC_pubs/tech-infusion/prof_dev/prof_dev_frame.html>.
Tenbusch, James P. "Staff Development that Works." Electronic School (1998). 02 May 2004 <http://www.electronic-school.com/0398f1.html>.