Jason’s “How People Learn” Reading Log
Posted onMarch 1, 2010
Filed under Reading logs | Leave a Comment
After reading the introduction, conclusion, and my two assigned chapters from How People learn, I feel that I have in fact learned a lot. Some of the themes from the reading we have already discussed in class, for example, that students bring with them a world view and existing knowledge into the classroom. The introduction gives the great example of thinking that the world is flat and being told that it is round. This leads the new learner to picture a pancake with people standing on it, which is a sort of compromise of the existing belief with the new information. In my personal experience, especially in intro courses, after a few semesters you begin to expect and prepare for common misinterpretations.
The example of the cat learning to pull the string to get out of the cage was also a great example. As educators we don’t just want the cat to be able to pull the string we wont the cat to understand why the string works. We should not be anywhere near satisfied with students that can check the right box. We should be striving to go beyond memorization to deeper understanding.
I personally read chapters 5 and 6 along with the intro and conclusion and I would like to briefly outline those chapters here. First chapter five illustrates how the brain develops through interaction with certain environments. As a sociologist this is not a surprise to me as my discipline has always focused on the importance of nurture in the nature vs. nurture debate. However this chapter illustrates just how unproductive that debate is. The brain requires essential information from the environment to develop. Meaning that your environment effects the physical structures of the brain, or in my understanding, nurture (social environment) effects your nature (biology, genetics).
So if we know exactly how important our environment is to our brain’s development, how do we go about creating the best environment? And how does this affect our understanding of college teaching? The chapter outlines learner centered environments, knowledge centered environments, assessment centered environments, and community centered environments. Classrooms need to be thought of as learning environments where everything fits together. The teacher considers preexisting beliefs, allows students to grapple with new information, provides insightful and useful knowledge to assist that grapple, delivers assessments that fit the course, offers productive feedback, and strives to understand the classroom as part of the larger communities culture.
Carrie Ann’s 2/23 Class Reflection
Posted onMarch 1, 2010
Filed under Reflections | Leave a Comment
Last weeks class gave me new avenues and perspectives on how my research proposal could develop. I agree with my colleagues that the Believer/Doubter game does help you look at your research question/proposal with a fresh perspective. Seeing and hearing others viewpoints and questions on what you are basing your research question is of help. Sometimes you are so close to an idea that you lose sight of areas that can become cloudy and you need someone else to help make ideas a bit more polished and clear. I am now going over my notes from the “game” and changes are being made to my proposal, hopefully now some grey areas aren’t so cloudy now.
I really enjoyed hearing the summaries of my colleagues’ assigned books. Though I do like the book that Teddy presented, I found more of an impetus to read Jason’s and Acaelie’s books. The viewpoints of the students that were interviewed in the books that were reviewed by Jason and Acaelie gave us insight into the student mind, and this is where meaningful academic connections are made. I hope to in the future to read all of the books presented in class since there is so much to learn in the area of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
Teddy’s Reading Log 02.28.2010
Posted onMarch 1, 2010
Filed under Reading logs | 1 Comment
Teddy’s Reading Log 02.28.2010
For class session 03.01.2010
As you can see, our most recent reading is from Chapter 1 of the book: Classroom Research, Implementing the Scholarship of Teaching by Cross & Steadman (1996). This text explains the continual development of Classroom Research & Assessment and lists its relevant characteristics as being learner centered, teacher directed, student/teacher engaged, content specific, scholarly knowledge based, practical and ongoing in research that raises new questions. Teachers are encouraged to engage short-term research projects in their practicum. Observations and experimentation are cardinal in helping teachers understand how students learn, what they learn and why they learn it in the manner they do. The chapter goes on to discuss realms of research and development (referred to as R&D). The valued commodities are spotlighted institutional incentives and tenure for teachers having approved scholarly productions internal/external of the classroom.
According to Cross & Steadman, Classroom Research is probably best understood in the context of its relationship with other efforts to improve education. The application of educational research to practice, faculty development, assessment of student learning and the Carnegie proposals to broaden the definition of scholarship are all moving towards achieving greater insight about the scholarship of teaching and learning. Many feel it we can gain more positive results using old-school standard research methods or scientific pedagogies. However, others believe it can be done using assessment as a product of Classroom Research to obtain the desired outcomes. Regardless, they often end up leaning towards quantitative or qualitative research methods.
Over and over again, Boyer’s 1990 Scholarship Reconsidered is mentioned! This chapter attempts to connect Classroom Research as it relates to assessment, faculty development, educational research and the scholarship of teaching. Cross and Steadman state seven “Good Practices” that perpetuates student-faculty engagement, cooperation among students and colleagues. Also, it promotes active learning, prompt feedback, high expectations and respect for diverse talents and ways of learning. Most of all, it places emphasis on time on task.
My favorite section of this reading assignment is entitled “Relationship to the Scholarship of Teaching. This section discusses the various forms of scholarship recognized by the Carnegie Foundation (Cross & Steadman p.26-27). First, is the scholarship of discovery which contributes to the stock of human knowledge and intellectual climate of a college or university? Second, the scholarship of integration involves making connections across disciplines and making interpretations that fit research into larger intellectual patterns. Third, is the scholarship of application that addresses the question, “How can knowledge be responsibly applied to consequential problems? Lastly, the scholarship of teaching is conveyed as a dynamic endeavor involving all the analogies, metaphors, and images that build bridges between the teacher’s understanding and the students’ learning. I hope that Classroom Research and Assessment continues to be a very gratifying intellectual experience that is meaningful to teachers and learners!
Jason’s Class Reflection 2/23/10
Posted onMarch 1, 2010
Filed under Reflections | Leave a Comment
I really enjoyed our last class session. The Believer doubter game helped me to focus my research question for the semester, and most likely for my dissertation. I came to the conclusion that although my ideal research question would be at a much larger scope, realistically I need to narrow it down. I also got the great feedback of combining my questions to including the independent variable of “teaching to think like a sociologists”. I need to figure out exactly how I am going to build this into my research question, but I think that I am closer after last week’s class.
I also enjoyed hearing the book presentations. Everyone seemed to enjoy their books and did a good job of explaining each. While I tend to focus on how different teaching is between disciplines, activities like this remind me that we all have a lot to learn from the same books.
Aracelie_Reading_2 Mar
Posted onFebruary 28, 2010
Filed under Reading logs | Leave a Comment
Aracelie’s thoughts earlier this week – “So will this be like McKinney’s book? Are they going to give me in depth pointers on how to address my research question? This book is much bigger than McKinney’s…I thought it was a workbook when I bought it, but I don’t see any activity pages. Plus, I don’t think this is that kind of class…So then what’s in here? What will they talk about?” And so those were my initial thoughts beginning Classroom Research: Implementing the Scholarship of Teaching. I must admit each time I open one of these books or one of our articles, I begin to feel a bit overwhelmed by all the vocabulary and concepts and theories. But then I begin to look forward to all the things we will have to discuss when we get to class.
From this particular reading, the defining of Classroom Research in relationship to the other areas (Assessment Movement, Traditional Educational Research, and Faculty Development) is somewhat eye-opening. On page 13, for instance, the authors talk of how “subordination implied in the expert-subject relationship is not completely alleviated by placing teachers and students on “advisory” committees to inform the experts about investigations that would improve practice.” I had an “Oh, now I get it” moment after reading that statement. We have discussed how there is a gap between traditional research and classroom research, but it wasn’t clear in my mind as to why that gap is as big as it seems to be. It seemed like common sense that all we have talked about with respect to SoTL would benefit everyone involved over the long-term. I was not able to clearly see how the implied relationships also at play affect much of how big the gap will remain and how soon a bridge will be built to close that gap.
Schon’s concept of the “topography of professional practice” (i.e., the high ground versus the swampland) is pretty genius. It applies to more than education. It also applies well to many top-down organizations (e.g., government, business). “Relevance over rigor” – If it’s not relevant to real-life, is there really any value added in addressing the question? For those in upper-level management or administrative positions, the answer may be yes. Addressing the “big picture” helps big organizations survive. However, the day-to-day workers who support those managers and administrators are influenced more by the relevance question and cannot necessarily afford to always consider the “big picture”. And so we are back to figuring out how to build that bridge…