Pedagogy by the Sea....

As I listened to the Director the Shrine and Field Trip Guide, as he described the origin of the shrine and the historical figures responsible for forming it, I began to think about the instructional methods and strategies being implemented to engage this group of 4th grade students as they gained a better understanding of the historic Shrine. I was amazed as I watched him employ a variety of methods with ease and perhaps without even realizing the pedagogical soundness of his choices. I also realized there were several layers of instruction happening and that I needed to further analyze this learning situation.

The first instructional method that I observed was the overarching fact that the class was on a field trip. In Jack's organized review of Instructional Strategies and Methods, field trips fall into the category of Experiential Learning - "learner centered and activity oriented." Sounds right for 4th graders.

Here's what I also found out... The students' teacher had covered during classroom time, several topics related to the content the students would hear about during the day's tour of the shrine. This provided them with a basic foundation for the concepts they'd dig into deeper this morning on their long awaited field trip. In addition, during the weeks that followed their shrine adventure, they would revisit several topics introduced during their shrine tour that again, would allow further understanding of the topics.

A few other methods that I observed included: Storytelling - the Guide was an expert on the topics related to the shrine so he was able to tell stories related to the shrine at the children's level of understanding. Generally as he told a story, he would ask questions to give the children opportunities to share what they knew. His inquiry consistently prompted the children to generalize to other topics and to reach into previous understanding and pull out what they already knew.

Another interesting observation was how the Guide interrelated content from several subject areas to create authentic learning experiences for the students. For example, after we listened to a story about the person who lead the effort to form the mission, the Guide asked the students to look at the rock tiles they were standing upon and tell him what was unique to these tiles compared to other tiles they'd stood upon. As the students studied the tiles, a few began to make the connection that there were imprints looking like sea life on the rocks. Sure enough, the Guide told the group tiles had been brought to the site decades ago and other interesting facts about these unique rocks. There were similar opportunities throughout the tour the Guide took advantage of to present cross-curriculum topics.

At one point the Guide used a Narrative method to describe how on object, a cross, was formed, transported and erected. He also very descriptively talked about related issues encountered and how the issues were resolved. As I observed and listened to comments and questions coming from the students, I could see them making connections.

Overall the experience seemed to be one the students remained engaged in throughout the entire time. I'm curious to check in with the teacher in the coming weeks to learn how presentation of the related topics goes.

To Sea the Ocean Waves...

A classmate's thought has helped me move through something that's been evolving for a while for me. I've often wondered if a sighted person's on line interaction experiences in some way resembles everyday interactions of a blind person. The reason being, so often the lack of visual cues is what students of on line learning say they miss from the traditional face to face classroom experiences. After reading my classmate's post, my brain drifted back to ponder that notion once again.

As I pondered, I recalled time spent with a blind person recently and thought about a few of our conversations. One of the things I found myself doing during our conversations was creating metaphors that referred to past experiences when she was sighted. I knew they would paint a picture for her by describing the current experience using metaphors from past experiences.

Summary: When talking face to face with a non-sighted person, I create metaphors so they can visualize the current experience through past experiences.

On line experience for me (sighted) lacks visual cues because I am accustomed to being able to see the people with whom I interact. And, no one creates metaphors to fill the gaps I'm experiencing during my on line interaction.

On line experiences for a blind person may actually give that person the upper hand in an on line setting. Neither the sighted or the non-sighted person has visual cues in the on line setting, but the blind person is expecting none. While the sighted person is 'feeling' the absence of the visual cues, because of the traditional face to face interactions to which they are accustomed.

Summary: When talking on line, a sighted person is likely to feel the absence of visual cues but will not easily have those gaps filled. A blind person is not expecting visual cues so may feel more comfortable sooner in an on line environment.

This is really meaningful to me as I think about the impact of this notion on creating accessible and usable web resources and on line learning environments. It actually gives me a new way of thinking about how to research how people adjust to on line learning. It also opens up applicable instructional strategies and methods that I could consider applying to on line learning environments.

Steady as she goes....

...is the thought to comes to mind as I reflect on course work that's been completed during the past few years. What is the experience of the instructor as they are faced with facilitating learning amongst a group of experienced professionals in their content area? Although this thought applies to numerous content areas, I have to focus on the area of learning in this blog entry.

Think about it, an instructor for a pedagogy course has to deal with 10 different 'doctors' of pedagogy. From what I've seen through course work experiences, educators tend to come to the classroom as quite 'meta' compared to a programmer or a marketing rep. So as students of learning, these folks have been thinking about learning for years. They've analyzed their own learning styles, those of their students and of others who don't even know them. Now, in the midst of their own academic work on learning, they bring years of cognition to their own classroom of study.

How does the instructor of these experienced students deal with these educator-student expectations? The expectations of these students with regard to instruction is much higher than the pedagogy expectations of a group in a marketing class or a programming course. And the expectations of these same students, I would suspect, is higher when they participate in any coursework they complete because learning is the frame of reference through which they experience their world.

Their expectations however, would differ from those of experienced doctors being taught by a doctor or students of marketing being taught by a marketing guru. In those cases, the students may question the content being presented and have experience to support or disprove the notions being presented, but the delivery of the content will not be analyzed to the extent that the educator-students of pedagogy will reach.

So for me, as I think about the experience and characteristics of an instructor of pedagogy, stability and self-assurance are two that I think are critical to the instructor. Being able to both take and provide feedback is essential, along with the strength of self to lead, what I imagine would be a group of students would have been required to be leaders everyday in their profession. Not an easy role to fill, but fortunately I've seen it done so eloquently.

It's been interesting to both participate in and evaluate learning experiences from a pedagogical perspective. I've realized some of the complexities of learning and been able to be more introspective about my own learning. At the same time, I hope I am developing a keener sense of recognition of indicators students send to trigger changes in the strategies I use to facilitate student learning.

I feel fortunate to have been through several courses related to Pedagogy and experienced the role modeling that I have. Now how long will it take me to develop the skills related to what it takes to mirror what I've learned.

How do they know....

As I read through the countless instructional strategies it's actually a bit overwhelming to me to see so many possibilities. It's incredible when I really think about it. How do I as a teacher know which one to start with for my group? And yes, maybe this is where the notion of backwards design fits in ie. starting with the end in mind. The link below is worth reviewing. As my classmate indicated, it's a 'gem of a source' and presents a wide range of instructional strategies in a 'tidy package.'

http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/DE/PD/instr/index.html

I know as an educator, I need to assess the effectiveness of my instruction both formatively and summatively. I realize that in doing so I'll have some data to adjust the various elements of my instructional strategies. And the content of those assessments is what will draw out the input I'm looking for from each student. I guess what I wonder about is how 'meta' can I expect a student to get? Here's what I mean.....

As I've completed several courses related to Pedagogy, I've had the opportunity to read about, think about and evaluate my learning style. What's working for me, or not, and why. I even feel like I have developed some ideas about strategies that will improve my own learning experiences. The process of gaining a clearer understanding continues to be incredibly valuable to me, but it also continues to raise more questions about learning for me.

Knowing the effort that's been required for me to reach a meta level on the topic, can I expect my students to be able to articulate what instructional strategies are working for them and which ones are not? And even if I am able to provoke that level introspection, will their analysis likely be a valid representation of their real learning experience.

As I think through this question I'm reminded of a conversation we had earlier this trimester, related to student learning during high school and then student reflection on that learning several years later. What I was told by my classmates is that in many cases, students return to high school only to reminisce about how positive their experience was now that they have been away from it for a number of years. So even though while the student was in the learning they may have complained about it, or thought it was lacking, when they return, a bit more mature, they realize how good they had it.

So bringing this back to instructional strategies, two questions come up for me:

How can I get a student to get meta enough to articulate the effectiveness and over all thoughts on their learning experience so I as an educator can adjust it to meet their needs?

How do I find the balance between what the student is experiencing today and make it as positive as possible, without folded to the student's whim and sacrificing the quality of the learning experience that happens for the student?

Comments are welcome.

Telling someone else what you've learned....

is one way to improve the rate at which content is retained by the learner. I've read that the retention rate for learners who tell someone else what they've learned varies by individual but up to 50% improvement in retention, is not uncommon. That's significant. The principle of articulation is one that continues to intrigue me because I can see it's application at some many levels. I mention it again at this point in the semester because articulation is included in many instructional strategies but its form of execution varies by strategy.

A few questions I move forward with are:
How does an instructor respect a learner's need to articulate, particularly a student with a high articulation quota, while monitoring the same learner's tendency to need extra time to discuss topics in face to face situations and not letting them take away time from other students? Balancing the needs or diverse learners.

I wonder if sometimes it may appear to an instructor that a student is dominating the conversation. I'm sure there have been times when I've wondered about that in a classroom situation. But how many times is the student simply trying to verbally sort through the content they're trying to assimilate, in order to formulate the questions they need to ask to understand content being presented. Do students sometimes not ask questions because they haven't been given the opportunity to travel in their mental arena and play with the info being presented?

I also wonder if the need for articulation can be satisfied through self-talk. So if the learner has a need to articulate in order to learn, does the learner gravitate toward talking to themselves to talk through the new content, in the absence of a peer or an instructor? If so, will the student reach a similar level of understanding using either method? Will the level of thinking according to Bloom vary by the opportunity and method of articulation.

What's the impact of on line learning (not hybrid) for students who have a high need to articulate? Will their need be reduced or will their self-talk increase to fill the need. Will they seek out others outside of the course and initiate discussions about the content to fill the need and verbally walk through the content? Will they talk outloud through responses they are posting?

I find the actual learning process so interesting. I love to think, and talk, about topics such as this one in this one. Comments are welcomed.