What I found most interesting in working on this project was
that for the first time I realised the importance of the connection between the
methodology of how you teach something and how you assess it. Its pretty obvious really but I have never thought
about it before in a coherent way. At
its core it is a pretty simple sequence:
- What do you want the students to be able to do?
- How are you going to teach it?
- How are you going to assess it?
In a grown up world, all of those things would be planned at
the outset, but we all know that the world doesn’t work that way. I now realise that the course delivery is an
integral part of that process but I haven’t thought of it before.
As regards the different methodologies I now realise that I
have used all of them to greater or lesser effect at various stages, but what I
have never done is to coherently plan to do so, based on what the Learning
Outcomes were. I will definitely try to
do this in future.
For example, although it is controversial, I feel Direct
Instruction definitely has a place in certain aspects. Where you need observable outcomes and a definite
body of knowledge, or dealing with students who are having difficulty mastering
basic concepts, DI has a role. As an
example it strikes me that completion of the bubble sheets on the facesheet of the CEPA exam
would be an ideal thing to teach by DI. The growing popularity of “cultural
literacy” as promoted by ED Hirsch is also promoted by proponents of DI.
I find myself feeling conflicted about Interactive
Teaching. I think it is the teaching
style that I probably feel most at home with (I guess I am not alone in that). However on reading the work of the other group I could
not help but come to the conclusion that the methodology was really just Direct
Instruction that had been jazzed up a bit to make it more interesting for the students. It is claimed that this methodology increases
retention rates. Retention of what? There is still a body of knowledge that we
want the students to know and we want them to be able to do the thing in the
way we want them to do it. I may be
wrong but I was left with the feeling that this methodology was really for the
2nd type of teacher in the videos we watched at the beginning of the
module.
Collaborative learning seems to be not about the content but
about the process. We need to be aware
of the distinction between cooperation and collaboration. I think most of the group projects I have
been involved in as a teacher were really cooperative projects. I also find it interesting that at the time
of writing, the one methodology that has so far not been presented is the group
work on collaboration! J
However, most institutions have Graduate Outcomes as well as Course Learning
Outcomes and in order to truly achieve these, there needs to be an effort to
integrate collaborative methodology into the curriculum
I found Problem Based Learning to be an interesting
methodology. It seems to be great for
development of soft skills. It can also
be used to teach and develop other skills.
I needed to use them to see the work of the group as they had put it in
Softchalk, which required me to download and run some additional software which
my computer did not have. I had a problem
doing this which I still haven’t solved and ended up reading their work in html
format. I solved the problem to the
level I needed to, but probably not to what would have given me a good grade if
I was being assessed on it.
I would also suspect that PBL is very useful to teach and
develop the higher levels of the taxonomy such as synthesize and evaluate. I think it can be particularly effective
where there is no “right answer” that the teacher is looking for. However, using it inappropriately runs great
risks. If the course being delivered is
really about a body of content knowledge then tying PBL into a coherent
assessment strategy is extremely difficult.
How do you grade a student based on the work of another student?
I have written about the methodologies in the order that
they seem to fit within Bloom’s Taxonomy.
- Direct Instruction
- Interactive Teaching
- Collaborative Learning
- Problem Based Learning
However, there is a danger in doing that. The danger is that the perception could be
that lower level courses should be taught by DI with the other methodologies
being used as things get more complex.
But the truth is far more complex – as the “Hole in the Wall” example
shows. Students with very little
knowledge of a subject can be taught aspects of it using various methods. And students also need to be exposed to how
to learn using different methodologies - otherwise how will they be able to function effectively later on?
So, in summary completion of this module has made me realise
that there are a variety of teaching methodologies that can each play a
role. And I think that each of these
methodologies could have been effectively utilised within parts of any course
which I have ever taught.
My job as a teacher is to identify when, where and how to
use them for the benefit of my students.
No comments:
Post a Comment