Posted by Kara Carter
Boghossian, P. (2006). Behaviorism, constructivism, and socratic pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 38(6). 713-722.
This article explores the similarities and differences in behavorism, constructivism, and most interesting, in my opinion, socratic pedagogy, which may straddle the two, those be different enough to prove more useful. Boghossian acknowledges that a shift to constructivism is consistent in education today, believing that the student will find themany different truths by being an active participant in their education, while there are still behavorists in the mix who believe that students learn the “one truth” by drills and behavior modification and conditioning.
Basically, Boghossian states that constuctivists allow students to conclude and believe in multiple realities, as long as the process is sound, because everyone’s experiences are different, whereas behaviorists expect everyone to come to the same answer based on objective observation and experimentation.
Soctratic pedagogy, however, maintains that there is, for the most part, an identifiable truth that is relevant for all involved (behaviorist), that invested students exploring the process and participating in dialogy will reach truth (constructivist), but through the act of discourse and discussion, any irrelevant or false assumptions will be discounted, using, almost, a collective consciousness methodology.
All in all, I would like to see the socratic pedagogy used more often, though, there are subjects in which I believe “reality” can be different for different learners, based on their experiences, such as criticism and interpretation of literature, poetry and art. However, science and mathematics will tend to have more rigid truths, though, those who are able to bend those absolute rules often come to breakthroughs
Posted by Kara Carter .
Reposted from class Wiki. Original summary by Jonine Bergen 05/05/2011
Oberg, D. (2006, February). Developing the respect and support of school administrators. Retrieved May 7, 2011, from RedOrbit, Inc. website:
Garelick, B. (2010, July 1). Learning by text or context? [Review of the book Integrating Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design by C.A. Tomlinson and J. McTighe]. Educational Horizons, 88(4) p.199-202. P.Retrieved from http://libaccess.sjlibrary.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eft&AN=508174753&site=ehost-live
Summary: Garelick summarizes the main points of text by stating his agreement with Tomlinson and McTighe’s methods regarding Understanding By Design and it’s usefulness in Differentiated Instruction. Using tools such as backward planning, using non-rigid learning structures, and lessening focus on “drill and kill” exercises, students develop critical thinking skills by emphasizing the process rather than the product, making it easier to customize and adjust the tasks at hand to help the students reach the end result and meet common standards.
Effective learning of the material is assessed, not just on being able to achieve the correct answer, but mostly on being able to use the same processes learned in determining the solution in a different context, across fields of study. However, Garelick makes sure to point out that the authors seem to encourage the use of the “sink or swim” method, inundating students with material that may be completely over their heads with the assumption that if they can swim, they can begin learning more difficult tasks, and if they sink, they obviously need remedial training.
Reflection: I typically would not post a book review, but Garelick summarizes the main points of this book very effectively and I believe it is important to note his objection to some of the author’s recommended tactics, though most of his writing is high praise for their newer methods of thinking, focusing on an organic learning experience, rather than a contrived experience.
Having suffered from the “sink or swim” method, myself, as a student, I think it is an excellent example of how differentiated instruction of this type, and learning by design, are definitely more relevant than the archaic systems that have been used for over a century, but they still have a long way to go in meeting the needs of all students without overwhelming, confusing, and frustrating students to the point where distinterest is the least of their problems, and a general hatred of the subject or resentment of the instructor, by proxy, can occur. I believe it is important to learn from this observation to better meet the learning needs of all students.
Posted by Kara Carter
Flipped classrooms making a splash in American schools. (2012, October). Curriculum Review, 52(3), 2-3.
The article discusses the trend toward the flipped classroom in American schools, where teachers have begun sending lectures home with students to watch in the evenings so that they can dedicate class time to practicing what they’ve learned. This leaves more time for answering questions and clarifying anything that the students may be having difficulty with. It also allows students to take more time with the lectures, pausing and replaying sections that they don’t understand.
This actually seems like it would be very effective. Students would spend the same amount of time at home doing schoolwork as they did in the past, but rather than struggling with an assignment only to turn it in incomplete the following day, this way they will have access to the instructor while they’re working on it. It also allows them to work collaboratively with their peers in ways that may not have been possible when working from home.