Sunday, September 27, 2009

Instructional Design

false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

Instructional Design provides a blank canvas for the teacher. The teacher looks upon the canvas as an opportunity to provide an environment for learning. First they will have to determine what skills the learners possess, what the learner’s prior knowledge is, and what resources are available to them in the classroom. When the teacher identifies these key elements they are able to decide what kind of approach is necessary. Will the teacher choose a Behaviorist approach or use a more Constructivist style. Which theory would better suit the audience? How are the theories the same and how are they different?

If the teacher chooses the behaviorist approach they are likely putting an emphasis on producing observable and measurable outcomes in the students. It is likely the students are introductory learners; students with very little prior knowledge about a skill or content area. A behaviorist approach would provide an environment that was very predictable. The learner is focused on a clear goal and can respond automatically to the cues of the determined goal. Problem with behaviorism is the learner may find themselves in a situation where the stimulus for the correct response does not occur, therefore the learner cannot respond. Because the learner doesn’t have the answer they will have to rely on the teacher to get them on track. This approach is valuable when teaching new skills to introductory learners who need an anchor for learning to occur.

When the teacher has technology to aid in their teaching a behaviorist would be in control of the stimuli for the student. This approach would look like a power point presentation. The teacher would use the technology to introduce the content or ideas and very little interaction would ensue.

The constructivist style of teaching would allow the learner to be teacher and teacher become learner. The learner would construct their own understanding based on their unique experiences. Increasing student responsibility for the learning outcome creates problem solvers. It requires the learner to have high level processing skills and be considered a more advanced learner. The teacher would then create an environment for discovery where the focus is on the process and interaction and not the outcome. The problem with this approach is that sometimes conformity is essential and divergent thinkers can create confusion in a world that requires people to adhere to rules and regulations. In Arizona we are graded on our performance on tests. Are the learners going to learn the content fast enough in a constructivist format so that they can pass that test? This style is good for teaching lifelong learning but when we are pressed for time to teach to the test it limits our creativity.

The constructivist style would require adequate space and resources to implement with technology. Every student with information at their fingertips. The teacher would be hard pressed to teach the discovery method without these manipulatives and this in itself poses a problem in public education.

In an ideal world the teacher would use both theories to meet the needs of all learners. We still need to consider what style would best fit the learner and the available resources. My curriculum is unique because I teach elective physical education. The students come with a variety of backgrounds and experiences and reasons for taking my class. Prior knowledge of all my students is diverse and motivations are different for all my students. It is my job to find middle ground. Implement what I want them to know combined with what they know to reach a common destination. My discipline gives me more freedom to be creative because I am held only to state standards and not standardized testing (Although I make it my goal to teach reading, writing and math to my students as well). As far as technology is concerned it doesn’t exist in my world. The closest thing we have to technology is an electrical impedance device that measures weight and body fat.

Instructional design gives the teacher and the learner options for a more enriched education. I think the key is to know your learners skills and needs and using your resources well to create a masterpiece learning environment. There are pros and cons to both the behaviorist and constructivist approach but like anything else it’s how you use them that count. The canvas is like the anchor for learning. The paint is creating an environment that is open to exploring new ways to stimulate learning and find opportunities to implement a variety of resources to engage the learner. The masterpiece is the final product, a lifelong learner with knowledge and skills to continue learning pursuits beyond the classroom.

1 comment:

  1. I agree, the ideal world has elements of both constructivist and behaviorist approaches.

    ReplyDelete

Philosophy

Susan’s Teaching Philosophy

Times have changed and the face of education has evolved and is trying to keep up with the changing American culture. I began teaching 17 years ago and I have learned that you must monitor and adjust as a teacher. One thing remains the same however, and that is teaching students the ABC’s. I take it a step further and call my teaching philosophy the ABCD’s of success. Without the principles outlined in my philosophy I believe Madeline Hunter's Direct Instruction Model has little or no bearing. In a culture where the student plays a larger role in molding their own education experiences because more one parent homes and working parents are a reality.

My philosophy more indirectly follows Bloom's Taxonomy. A student is more prone to learning if they are first affected by the material and are actively engaged in the possible outcome. Teaching students they are in control of their own Attitude, Behavior, Character, and Discipline empowers them to make positive choices toward a bright future. I make it my daily mission to plant seeds of wisdom in these areas. Attitude is a measurement of what’s happening on the inside of the student. Students are actually graded on what attitude they bring to class. Attitude can drastically infect the environment of a game in physical education. Behavior is directly related to what the student displays on the outside. Will they cooperate, use proper language, act their age the list goes on. When addressing a student about behavior you always state clearly your expectations and give them a chance to make their own. Character education gives the teacher the chance to be a pseudo parent. What life principles are important to have success outside the classroom? Those same principles should be daily implemented and pointed out in the classroom. Lastly discipline, this is not punishment this is an act of compliance to personal expectations. Teaching and implementing goal setting in small ways each day in the classroom.

The key to all of this is ownership. How do you teach the standards and convince them its worth and value in their life? It can almost be as simple as making it the students idea. I’m not sure that this can work in all classroom settings. For physical education however, it truly is the key to success. Students who take control of their attitude, behavior, character and discipline within the structure of the classroom create an atmosphere for learning to take place. Students will begin to make the FITT Principle and understanding the components of physical fitness an essential part of their personal goals and implement them in and out of the classroom. Hence, build in them lifelong learning principles, fitness for life and to be passionate about what they choose to do and the world is their classroom. Passion, that’s a whole different story, perhaps on the next assignment I can elaborate.