Week+5

__Week 5 __

This week’s issues were focused around learning styles and educational theorists. Obviously by the numbers of readings for this week this is a popular discussion topic amongst educators. In all honesty I found the sheer quantity and variance in theories to be a little daunting. While understanding many of these theories intellectually I am very curious to see how they are accomplished in the classroom environment. Having started to give thought to my own pedagogy in Technology classes this reading was extremely useful in looking at different approaches. I will be honest that at this point in time I am no closer to answering that question than I was at the start of the year. I am plagued at the moment by seeing the value in all styles while maintaining a healthy (at least I hope it is healthy) cynicism towards their practical application.

Even before I had started this course I was aware of the work that Edward De Bono had done in this area. Likewise I had a better than fair knowledge of Bloom’s taxonomy. Both of these concepts were common in my previous employment in adult education. It was an interesting experience for me to take my prior learning and apply it to the new field of primary education. One of the most practical and useful sites on Edward De Bono’s //Six Thinking Hats// was a site created by the Queensland Government as a resource for teachers and parents ([]). Having conducted Six Thinking Hat exercises within a corporate environment, I noticed that many adults struggle to think in these terms as they had not been trained early enough to approach problems from different angles. The potential to reach children at primary school age and equip them with the skills they need to approach problem solving in a flexible manner is an invaluable skill to be teaching.

Bloom’s Taxonomy has been mentioned already in this course but I have found that the six steps in the revised taxonomy are playing an important role in my early lesson planning. It was not until I sat down with a lesson plan in one hand and Bloom’s Taxonomy in the other that I started to really understand the importance of each component of the taxonomy.

The other part of this week’s readings that I found very interesting was Howard Gardner’s work on multiple intelligences. This is a theory my sister has been espousing since High school where she struggled academically but excelled in non traditional subjects such as sheet metal and woodwork. Gardner identified the following intelligence categories: · Bodily-kinesthetics; · Interpersonal; · Verbal-linguistic; · Logical-mathematical; · Naturalistic; · Intrapersonal; · Visual-spatial; and · Musical. Gardner’s work is crucial in trying to understand the way that students learn but also in understanding why it is important to use a variety of assessment methods. To treat all students in a uniform manner would serve only to curtail the potential of those students who may possess a different form of intelligence. Author: Beth McMullin  'All individuals can learn and succeed but not on the same day and not in the same way' Dr. Sue Teele

The work of Dr. Sue Teele directly correlates to the work of Howard Gardner who as stated above, is the theorist responsible for the development and recognition of the seven multiple Intelligences (MI). Having not originally developed this theory for an educational purpose as such, Gardner now believes that using the seven multiple intelligence theory in education will better meet the needs of the range of learners found within classrooms. In this way, educators will need to attend to the full range of intelligences in the classroom in contrast to the traditional two which are Linguistic and Logical intelligences.

Although this theory in practice would certainly help to control misbehaviour, engage each and every student and aid in classroom management overall, it has not been a readily accepted theory throughout academic psychology. However it has received a positive response from most educators. The most pressing issue for educators would be the implementation of this theory in an actual school setting. Questions posed by Gardner himself include 'It is hard to teach one intelligence; what if there are seven?' and 'It is hard to enough to teach even when anything can be taught; what to do if there are distinct limits and strong constraints on human cognition and learning?'In response to his own questions Gardner responds that seven different intelligences allows for seven different ways of teaching instead of only one and 'and powerful constraints that exist in the mind can be mobilized to introduce a particular concept (or whole system of thinking) in a way that children are most likely to learn it and least likely to distort it' (Smith, 2008)

It would certainly be an interesting concept to introduce Gardner's MI Theory into classrooms internationally and see the affect that such a theory would have on how effectively a child can learn given the right conditions for him/her. However this may only ever be seen in a handful of schools throughout North America so the full effect of such a shift from traditional teaching practice may never be known.

Author: Angela Partridge

This week’s lecture and workshop focused on Models of Teaching and Learning. I really enjoyed Greg’s lecture. It illustrated perfectly that there is no one way to teach, but rather a combination of methods and approaches that should be used to fit the situation. I like this approach as it is flexible. Unlike the approach used in my Father’s day where there was only one way and you were forced to fit in. The section on Belief Systems and the Nine Guiding Principles was very useful and will no doubt aid in developing my own pedagogy.

Dr Peta Heywood’s Creating Learning communities were very interesting. The views of the different theorists have given me much to think about. I am very keen to learn more about Merlin Donald and the Collaborative Mind approach and Robert Keegan’s Ways of Knowing. I also want to learn more about Dr William Glasser’s Choice theory. Dr Glosser states that “95% of all discipline problems are children’s misguided efforts to try and achieve power” I am not qualified to critique Dr Glasser but I can’t agree with him on this particular point I don’t believe we all crave power in the traditional sense. However, I do believe we all need power; power over our own lives and a sense of ownership of our futures.

Howard Gardner’s work on multiple intelligences made me think back to Sir Ken Robinson's Video. They both believe that our schools and society focus most of their attention on the areas of linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligence. Ignoring those with gifts in other areas. I mostly agree with Dr Gardener’s assertions that whilst we should hold people who are highly articulate and logical in esteem that we should also raise up those who are gifted in other areas. However I believe in the ideal not the individual person. After all, you can be a very gifted person and at the same time a terrible human being. Author Nick Power

The lecture this week compared various teaching pedagogies, including viewing the profession as both a science and an art. Greg looked at various belief systems for teaching pedagogies in particular that were interesting to compare. The first belief system ‘Teaching as Content Mastery’ saw the teacher’s role as a ‘Content Expert’, a level of professional competence we all as student teachers would all hope to achieve ourselves one day. A leading belief in this system, however, stated that ‘Teachers are born, not made’, not such a comforting thought. We would hope that we can grow and learn to be teachers, i.e. ‘make’ ourselves into the best possible teachers we can be. However, in saying that I suppose we’d also all like to think that people are ‘born’ to be teachers by having those certain kinds of personalities that are best suited to the job. The second belief system stated ‘Teaching as a Performance Aimed at Making Learning Happen’, which is obviously a goal to be aspired to by all teachers. However, the relationship with the learner in this particular system was designated as ‘Impersonal’, something I believe wouldn’t achieve the best working relationship between teacher and student. The Belief System III was called ‘Teaching as Facilitation of Learning’ and treated the relationship with the learner as an ‘Interaction and Two way communication that was collaborative’ between teacher and student. This seems a more personal working relationship that I believe is very important in the classroom in trying to achieve the best possible learning environment. However, it is the fourth belief system that appealed most to me. It stated teaching as a ‘Relationship Building a Vehicle for Learning’, advocated the ‘need to build an authentic alliance with learners’ and develop a personal and supportive relationship between teacher and pupil built on trust. To me, this seemed the most ideal teaching style of the few examples the lecture provided, because with a good working relationship between teacher and student hopefully the best learning possible will grow from such an environment. The point of the lecture, obviously, was to show all the diverse attitudes towards teaching there are out there, and it certainly proved useful to us to look at different ones and begin to think about our own personal ideas about the profession we are about to begin.  Author: Bianca Alvarez Harris