Reflective Journal Post #8

 Description

            Readings this week in EDAT 6115 discussed another important element of an effective learning environment, assessment. Assessments provide teachers with the information needed about student learning to create effective lessons and meet student needs. By connecting our teaching and learning objectives directly to assessments, we can effectively define and measure student learning.

Analysis

             Effective teachers develop thoughtful instructional plans that map out the journey of student learning. Of the many tasks that are involved with this process, some of the most important include establishing clear learning objectives and creating assessments that measure student learning. These steps provide important data about student progress toward mastery of the learning goals. Teachers begin the process of planning for instruction by unpacking the standards and determining skills and concepts that need to be taught to meet curriculum standards. From there, instructional objectives should be written in a way that focuses on the skill or concept that students should know, the conditions in which it will be used, and how it will be measured (Slavin, 2018). Instructional objectives that are written with these parts in mind provide clear goals for students and provide benchmarks by which teachers can measure students’ proficiency and growth. All assessments incorporated into the instructional unit should be tied to the instructional objectives and allow students to show growth and mastery through varied methods.

            Traditionally students have been assessed using tests or quizzes, multiple-choice questions with right and wrong answers. Research has shown that in many cases, these types of assessments limit the information gained about student learning. Many times, the concepts and skills defined in the instructional objectives are better assessed using alternative forms of assessment like written responses, creative products, or performance-based evaluation (Slavin, 2018). When teaching and performance objectives are created, attention should be paid to the cognitive complexity of the lesson goals and assessment should be designed that reflect the proper level of understanding. Using a tool like Bloom’s Taxonomy can be helpful in determining the types of assessment that match the cognitive level of the learning objectives (Slavin, 2018).  “The primary importance of Bloom’s Taxonomy is in its reminder that we want students to have many levels of skills” (Slavin, 2018, p. 347). Varying assessments in our lessons allow students to show understanding of concepts at each taxonomic level and provides valuable data about the whole student. This allows teachers to make instructional decisions that support the needs of the student based on data and information gathered through targeted assessment. Effective teachers incorporate a large variety of assessment types for both summative and formative evaluation of student learning.

            Benefits of proper assessment exist for all stakeholders in the learning process. Students gain valuable information about their strengths and weaknesses from regular assessment and evaluation (Slavin, 2018). Armed with information about their progress toward mastery of standards, students can make intentional choices and changes to the learning process as needed. Teachers gain valuable information about “the effectiveness of their instruction” allowing them to modify instruction to ensure all students are progressing with content mastery (Slavin, 2018, p. 349). Varying the types of assessment used will provide different types of data (qualitative, quantitative, and observational) that can be used to make instructional decisions. Stakeholders outside of the classroom (such as administrators, district personnel, and parents) also benefit from assessment data as it is used to determine program and curriculum effectiveness, establish school improvement goals, and to monitor accountability and achievement (Slavin, 2018).

            Considering the data from assessment is so valuable, it is important that assessments are designed with validity and reliability in mind. Assessments should have clear connections to the instructional and learning objectives. Using a table of specifications for each instructional unit that includes “the various objectives taught and the different levels of understanding to be assessed” ensures assessments are valid and reliable (Slavin, 2018, p. 356). Once the assessment strategy has been determined, questions and tasks should be written in ways that students understand and adequately show their understanding of concepts of skills.

Reflection

            Over the years, my views on assessment have changed drastically. I began teaching in 2004 when traditional methods of assessment were standard and performance assessments were rare and trendy. Because I was taught using multiple choice tests that evaluated my ability to remember content, I was okay with this type of assessment to begin with. But, in the 17 years since, I have witnessed a significant evolution of assessment and grading practices that I feel better suit the needs of students and their learning process. In my own classroom, I have embraced the use of varied formative assessment, digital assessment, and group and performance assessment. I enjoy incorporating choice for my students in how they show their understanding of content and skill proficiency and find value in the whole picture I can form about a students’ competencies. I appreciate the benefits I see from changes in how standards are written, the development of measurable learning objectives, and the use of assessment data in instructional decision making.

Each of these changes have made instructional goals and student assessment more aligned and more valuable for all stakeholders. I have found that through the use of formative assessment I have a better grasp of where my students are in the learning process and am able to make decisions that support their learning based on data, not just intuition or observation. In addition, my students are better informed about their own progress and can self-regulate their learning. They are empowered to make decisions about extra practice, tutoring, or enrichment opportunities they may need. My professional learning community (PLC) can use data from formative and summative assessments to determine the instructional strategies that are more effective so that we can improve student learning and performance on end of year assessments. My administrators and district personnel have abundant data by which to evaluate program and curriculum efficacy and make changes at levels above the classroom that positivity impact student learning. Many see assessment as a necessary evil, but I am really embracing the power of assessment these days. Instead of working for assessments, I am making my assessments work for me. I am learning how to properly design assessments that provide the information my students and I need to teach and learn.

Reference

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.

Reflective Journal Post #7

 Description

            This week in EDAT 6115, resources exposed us to strategies for creating effective learning environments. The focus was on the factors that contribute to creating a classroom that is managed in a way that promotes learning, positive relationships, and productivity. We were also asked to develop policies and procedures for an effectively managed classroom.

Analysis

For classroom management to be effective, teachers must focus on creating learning environments that are productive, organized, focused on learning, free of distractions, and full of procedures for maximizing learning time and student engagement (Slavin, 2018).  A significant portion of the readings focused on effective use of time in a well-managed classroom. Prioritizing learning and maximizing instructional time has positive impacts on students learning and behavior. This can be accomplished by planning instructional activities that utilize the entire instructional period, minimizing down time and disruptions to flow of instruction, and establishing routines and procedures that make daily tasks have minimal impact on instruction (Slavin, 2018). Keeping students busy and looking forward to the next activity increases engagement and decreases disruptions. If student-centered work is common within a classroom, establishing clear expectations and allowing practice with self-regulation is key to maintaining order and productivity when students are active and collaborating.

            The incorporation of technology can be beneficial in creating an effective learning environment. Classrooms today frequently use technology for teaching, learning, administrative tasks (Slavin, 2018). From a teaching perspective, technology allows teachers to enhance lessons, increase engagement, increase productivity, and improve feedback and communication with students (Slavin, 2018). When used intentionally, technology integration provides great ways to differentiate learning and assessment for students. This contributes to well-managed environments because students can work within their zone of proximal development and remain motivated and invested in the learning process. As a learning tool, students now have access to endless technology resources to assist them in learning. Technology allows students to engage with content in ways that they interact with everything else in their world. Incorporating videos, simulations, animations, interactives, games, and apps are just a few ways that teachers can incorporate technology for learning (Slavin, 2018). To improve the productivity of a classroom, teachers may incorporate technology to aid in administrative tasks. Technology has improved our abilities to provide timely feedback on assessment, communicate more frequently and effectively with parents and students, and track and interpret growth and achievement data (Slavin, 2018).

Reflection

            Throughout my years of teaching I have never really had discipline issues and feel that I run a well-managed classroom. After reading and viewing the resources this week, I was pleased to find that many of my strategies were validated by research provided. I have reflected upon this many times and I have contributed this to three key things that apply to my classroom. Although I am sure these procedures were developed based on mentor suggestions, professional development, or academic coursework I have continued to modify them to meet the needs of my students and classroom over the years.

First, I set the tone for the students in the classroom. My attitude and approach to the day absolutely impacts how students respond to me and others in the classroom, the content, and the activities. I approach each day with positivity, energy, and enthusiasm for what we are learning. The kids start to question me because I always say “this is my favorite thing to teach” with each new concept. They quickly learn that is because I love my content! Everything is my favorite thing to teach them. This helps to reduce the anxiety they have about new content and builds confidence in them that I know what I am doing and how to do it. They also get excited to learn because I am so excited to teach them.

            The second factor that helps my classroom management is my organization. From day one, students are introduced to policies and procedures that make my class run smoothly. My classroom is designed for flexibility (I know better than to expected that everything goes as planned) but is also set up for efficiency. I carefully think through the year and plan for tasks that students will need to complete often and consistently. Then, I develop practices that make those the most efficient they can be. For example, I now have students turn in most assignments into our learning management system, Canvas. Through this platform I can share documents, communicate expectations, grade, and give feedback to students. During the first week of school, students are given a brief homework assignment in which they are asked to view an assignment and its rubric, submit a document, share a link, read and comment on feedback, and view their grade. This is done to ensure all students can successfully complete this task as it will occur numerous times throughout the year. All physical papers have a labeled turn-in location and are returned to individual student folders outside of instructional time. Procedures are in place for daily tasks (such as attendance, bathroom passes, and transitions between activities) that often interfere with instructional time. I have QR codes posted for logging bathroom and water fountain visit, I take attendance via seating chart during intro activities, and use music to help students transition quickly between activities.

            The last, and perhaps most important, factor that contributes to my classroom management is my instructional planning. My students will attest to my bell to bell instruction and they come to expect a busy day in my classroom. My goal is to fill each day with relevant learning activities and waste as little time as possible. This involves planning so that if students move quicker than anticipated through content, I am ready for whatever is next. I have accumulated a treasure chest full of formative assessments, review strategies, and quick practice methods that I can use anytime we have a spare five minutes in the classroom so that learning is always the priority. My lessons are fast-paced and designed to keep student participating in learning, mentally and physically. This discourages disruptions and behavior issues because students generally do not have time to get into trouble. As Slavin (2018) found, “students who are participating in well-structured activities that engage their interests, who are highly motivated to learn, and who are working on tasks that are challenging yet within their capabilities rarely pose any serious management issues” (p. 272).

Reference

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.

Reflective Journal Post #6

 

Description

            Readings in EDAT 6115 this week focused on the elements of effective instruction and improving student achievement using student grouping, differentiated instruction, and integrated technology. As Slavin (2018) stated “from the day they walk into school, students differ in their knowledge, skills, motivations, and predispositions toward what is about to be taught” (p. 216). Being able to identify and accommodate these differences is key for teachers to be effective in today’s classrooms.

 

Analysis

            Much research has been done to define and characterize effective instruction. Based on ideas of John Carroll from the 60’s and 80’s, Slavin created the QAIT model in 1995 that focuses on the “alterable elements” of classroom instruction (Slavin, 2018, p. 214). These elements (quality, appropriateness, incentive, and time) are all within the control of the school or teacher to modify for effective instruction (Slavin, 2018). The QAIT model requires that each of these elements is an equal component in achieving effective instruction.

The focus on quality of instruction requires that educators work to create lessons that students can follow, learn from, and have meaningful engagement with. “When instruction is high quality, the information presented makes sense to students, interests them, and is easy to remember and apply” (Slavin, 2018, p. 215). The focus on appropriate instruction requires that educators create lessons that target learners where they are. Each student has different readiness and ability levels that contribute to lesson efficacy. The use of differentiated instruction allows teachers to adapt and modify instruction for individual needs within the classroom. Varied instructional strategies and tools can be used to accommodate for individual differences or strategic grouping could be used to supplement the learning of specific individuals. Grouping can also be used for high-achieving group to extend or enhance learning. Incentive to learn is another key element that can impact instructional effectiveness. Some students bring a large amount of intrinsic motivation to the classroom; others require extrinsic motivation to learn. Regardless of the source, students must find some incentive to participate and engage in the learning process. The use incentives like “praise, feedback, grades, certificates, stars, prizes, access to fun activities, and other rewards” work to increase motivation (Slavin, 2018, p. 216). Incorporating problem and project-based learning opportunities can also lead to increased incentive to learn because the knowledge gained is valuable and applicable to the product. The last element in effective instruction is time. Creating an environment that is organized, well-managed, free of distractions, and prioritized for learning allows students to maximize time learning and engaging in lessons (Slavin, 2018).

Various strategies for grouping have been used by school systems and classroom teachers to better serve students. Between-class groupings and within-class groupings are both ways in which teachers and schools accommodate for differences in abilities (Slavin, 2018). It is common practice for schools (in particular, high schools) to form homogenous groups of students based on ability levels within content areas creating sections of classes that are designed for on-level, advanced, or remedial instruction. Between-class groupings such as this allow for better quality lessons, more appropriate accommodations, greater incentive, and better use of time to create more effective lessons for more students. Because differences in baseline knowledge and pace of learning are among the most difficult to differentiate for, these homogeneous groups make the process more attainable for teachers within the classroom (Slavin, 2018). If students are already grouped based on ability, then differentiation for specific strengths and weaknesses within the classroom are very effective. If the classes are heterogeneously grouped, effective teachers still have “a variety of ways to informally accommodate the needs of different learners” (Slavin, 2018, p. 222).  Within-class groupings can serve a multitude of purposes including providing opportunities for students to enrich learning, remediate learning, or work on affective skills and collaboration. The use of heterogenous grouping within a classroom can create great learning by creating opportunities for peer learning, exploring differences in perspective, and completing complex problem-solving tasks through collaboration.

The incorporation of one-on-one tutoring or mentoring programs is an option for accommodating some of our most at-risk students. If students show strong academic deficits, social and emotional concerns, or socioeconomic hardships, mentors and tutors are often a great supplement to work being done in the classroom. Compensatory education programs, such as Title I, allot additional funding to support programs for at-risk and high-risk students to close achievement gaps (Slavin, 2018). Outside of school hours, Title I funds are increasingly being used to provide after-school and summer enrichment programs aimed at extending the time for students to be engaged in learning. Research has found “that struggling children can be helped by extending instructional time for them, especially if the additional time is used for targeted instructional activities” (Slavin, 2018, p. 228).

Reflection      

            As a new teacher nearly seventeen years ago, I remember being overwhelmed by the idea of differentiating instruction for every student in my classroom. To be honest, even now this seems like a daunting task as I begin each year with new students, each brining their own individual differences into my classroom. However, I have learned that meeting student needs begins with first understanding what those needs are. I primarily teach highly motivated, intelligent, knowledge-seeking, gifted students that are enrolled in my courses by choice. Although my students share many characteristics, they do not have the same previous knowledge, learning styles or abilities, or emotional characteristics as one another. As an AP teacher, I have very little wiggle room with the ability to differentiate content as they all need to be at the same place prior to a May AP Exam. However, I can regularly differentiate by product and process. This allows me to meet student needs in ways that support their mastery of content.

For me, technology has been a game changer in the differentiation game. Technology allows me to instruct, assess, and differentiate learning for all students more effectively. I have found that technology enhanced instruction is more engaging for my students, providing information in a format they are used to seeing. It is fast-paced, interactive, and visually appealing. My district uses a learning management system (Canvas) that holds our course content, grades, assessments, and collaboration tools. This one-stop-shop is great for organizing and delivering high quality lessons digitally. I also love that students can review content, videos, and lectures as many times as needed to feel confident in what they are learning. This system allows me to provide struggling students with supplemental materials and excelling students with enrichment opportunities easily at the same time. I have also enjoyed using technology to enhance my assessment strategies and abilities. I can quickly and effectively assess student learning through a variety of assessments using technology that provide instant results and feedback for myself and the students. This provides with me the information needed to differentiate to best meet my students’ needs. Slavin (2018) suggested the use of interactive games, simulations, useful apps, and the internet as ways to enhance student learning with technology. I have had great success with the incorporation of these tools in my advanced science courses and honestly, I could not imagine teaching without them. 

 

Reference

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.

Reflective Journal Post #5

 

Description:

            The readings this week in EDAT 6115 drew attention to the benefits, challenges, and impacts of student-centered instructional strategies. Although many teachers and students find this approach of teaching and learning full of challenges, research has shown that student-centered learning promotes increased peer interaction, problem solving skills, and practice with self-regulated learning (Slavin, 2018).

Analysis:

            With its foundation deeply rooted in a constructivist view of learning, student-centered instruction promotes investment by the student in the learning process, requiring them to seek knowledge and build upon previous experiences to create new meanings and connections (Slavin, 2018). Proponents of this approach to teaching and learning assert that the benefits of students working together to solve problems, uncover new information, and apply their knowledge to new situations creates cognitive and social learning opportunities far greater than teacher-centered instruction. With students in control of their own learning, the investment and motivation are greater leading to a need and desire to learn more. As teachers this is what we want! We are all hoping to have students actively engaged in our content, wanting to know more, and using what they have learned to solve problems. With such positive outcomes shown, it is hard to argue that student-centered instructional strategies are not the only way we should be teaching. Student-centered instructional strategies have become quite popular in professional development and best practice discussions and luckily, resources and suggestions for successful integration have been created for teachers. In nearly every content area, resources are being developed that assist teachers in creating effective, student-centered lessons. By using discovery learning, peer interaction, and other cooperative and problem-based instructional strategies, teachers can allow students more autonomy in the learning process (Slavin, 2018).

However, such a large shift in pedagogy comes with a steep learning curve, full of challenges for both students and teachers. One of the biggest challenges for teachers is relinquishing the role of instructional leader and taking on one more of a facilitator of learning. Traditionally, teachers instruct students on what they need to know, how to use the content or skill, and how to apply this new knowledge to novel situations. In a student-centered approach, learning begins “with problems (often proposed by the students themselves) and then helping students figure out how” to do the rest (Slavin, 2018, p. 190). The teacher’s role shifts dramatically in the planning of these lessons as well as their role as students are progressing. Instead of crafting presentations, practice questions, and assessments teachers using this approach will spend more time anticipating student learning struggles, providing resources for knowledge acquisition, and monitoring progress and accommodating as needed.

Students exposed to constructivist instructional strategies show increased engagement, motivation, and investment in learning promoting skills of life-long learners that are beneficial to all. But there is a learning curve for students to be successful using this style of instruction. In the beginning, students may struggle with being able to self-regulate their learning. It is difficult at times for students who have been taught using very teacher-centered methods to be comfortable with less structure and teacher direction in the learning process. Slavin (2018) found, some students may need additional scaffolding to be successful in self-directed tasks. Integration of the constructivist approach in elementary grades is essential so students to begin learning in this manner and allow them to build skills as they progress through grade levels. Slavin (2018) pointed out that “self-regulated learners are motivated by learning itself, not only by grades or others’ approval” (p. 192). This is a challenge in high school as students are keenly aware of the importance of assessment grades, grade point averages, and class rank as they prepare to go to college or apply for scholarships.

 

Reflection:

The readings this week allowed me to reflect on my own beliefs and practices about the constructivist approach to instruction. I am beginning my eighteenth year in education and was glad to have the opportunity to examine the changes I have seen in curriculum and instruction throughout my career. I began teaching when Georgia still taught the QCC standards in a largely teacher-centered manner. Since then, standards have been rewritten becoming more focused on big ideas and application of content instead of rote memorization of facts. With this shift, there has also been a change in instructional strategies needed to teach today’s students. What I teach and the way in which I teach it have changed dramatically since I first began my career. As any educator should, each year I work to better my instructional practices. Over the years, my own thoughts and beliefs have become more inclusive of student-centered instructional practices. I intentionally plan opportunities for problem-based learning, student collaboration, and inquiry- based investigations to uncover new knowledge because I have seen the benefits. But I have struggled to completely embrace a totally student-centered approach. I am not sure if it is the courses I teach (Advanced Placement courses), the “old-school” in me, the lack of proper time and energy to devote to the planning, or the student feedback and performance but I still see value in some teacher-centered instruction.

I prefer a varied instructional approach that incorporates components of both teacher and student-centered instruction. In science, discovery learning is key to keeping students engaged and seeing the real-life application of what we are learning. I also see the tremendous benefits from student collaboration, peer learning opportunities, and self-directed investigations in my classes. Especially because I teach many gifted children, these strategies are a part of my typical differentiation for learning anyway. I struggle with the disconnect between how we instruct and assess in our classrooms versus how students are assessed on EOG/EOC tests, ACT/SAT, AP Exams, and other standardized assessments that are important to my students. If I only use performance-based assessments that are based on growth and effort, I worry that my students will not be prepared adequately for the other assessments they are taking. In AP Biology, for example, students must be prepared for multiple-choice and free response exam questions that are very content and skill specific. If I do not share my knowledge with them about the content expectations, scoring guidelines, test taking strategies, and other insights I worry they will not discover them on their own. I have yet to be able to design student-based investigations that can ensure students cover the depth and breadth of content specifics needed in certain complex content areas and assess them in the way they will eventually be assessed. So, for now, I will continue to incorporate student-centered pedagogy as often as possible and work to improve my ability to create lessons that effectively achieve my teaching and learning goals.

 

References

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.

Reflective Journal Post #4

 

Description:

            The readings in EDAT 6115 this week helped to identify the components of an effective lesson. As stated in the introduction to the chapter, “conducting effective lessons is at the heart of a teacher’s craft” and should be the focus of continuous learning and growth (Slavin, 2018, p. 160).  The analysis and reflection below will address creating and implementing effective lessons in theory and in practice.

Analysis:

            Effective planning and implementation of lessons takes intentional decision making by a teacher to accommodate for the many factors that exist within a classroom. One such decision that must be carefully considered is the instructional methods by which learning will take place. As highlighted in the readings, there are many different instructional strategies to choose from based upon the learning objectives of the lesson. It is the job of the teacher to “be able to use all of them and discern when each is appropriate” (Slavin, 2018, p. 160).  Often the most effective lessons incorporate multiple strategies to accommodate for learning at all levels.

            Direct instruction was highlighted as a method to quickly and efficiently teach content that all students need to learn (Slavin, 2018, p. 160).  This method of instruction can be effective if properly designed and executed. The key to direct instruction is ensuring that is well planned and “flows along a logical path, from arousing student interest to presenting new information to allowing students to practice their new knowledge or skills to assessment (Slavin, 2018, p. 161). Direct instruction should not be used as a stand-alone method of content delivery but has been shown to have an effect size of 0.60 by John Hattie’s meta-analyses which indicates positive effects on teaching (Visible Learning, 2018).

            Another method of instruction highlighted in the readings was the use of small group discussions. In small collaborative groups students are expected to work more independently of the teacher discussing different aspects of new concepts (Slavin, 2018, p. 182).  For small group discussions to be productive and beneficial significant planning must occur to ensure the learning goals and expectations for learning are clear. More differentiation might also be needed for learners with different levels of prior knowledge or those who are progressing at different paces. Often small group discussions are more productive when they are well-organized, involve specific roles for students, and require equal participation among group members (Slavin, 2018, p. 182).

Reflection:

I took away several important reminders from the readings this week. First, direct instruction should always begin with the clearly identifying the objectives and learning goals for the students.  This ensures the message of the lesson is clearly communicated and that the learning goals maintain the focus of the lesson. In my own class, I do this with a weekly announcement using our learning management system Canvas. The post includes lessons and activities planned for the week as well as the standards, learning goals, and any assessments that will be done. All the content and activities are directly linked for students from that announcement giving it value for them to view and keep referencing throughout the week.

Second, I was glad to find that research does support direct instruction for some purposes. I feel as though lately direct instruction has gotten a bad name and is always considered the lazy way to teach. I find it to be the opposite in my own classroom as I am exhausted after lecture days (as are my students). In Advanced Placement Biology, the units are very process heavy (think photosynthesis or mitosis) with students required to know very specific details. When I introduce a new process, I typically give direct instruction through lectures that are highly visual, graphic and animation heavy. As Slavin (2018) stated, “direct instruction can be more efficient than discovery in conceptual development” (p 160).  When I begin direct instruction it typically involves a quick orientation discussion about what the big ideas are and how all the parts will connect. I throw it all at them using new vocabulary and a great deal of new knowledge that they are unfamiliar with.  This allows students to connect previous knowledge they do have with new content.  Although it can be overwhelming at first, my students come to expect it and appreciate it after some practice. The lectures soon become more of a whole-class discussion which is very productive. Previously, I pointed out that direct instruction has an effect size of .60 on Hattie’s Visible Learning scale but classroom discussions have an effect size of .82 (Visible Learning, 2018).  I was happy to find that the data correlates with my own experiences in my classroom showing the same positive impacts I witness daily.

Lastly, I appreciated the section on transfer of learning. All too often, students (and teachers) get caught up in learning concepts and struggle “to transfer their knowledge or skills to real-life situations” (Slavin, 2018, p. 177). I am lucky in my content areas that many times life and content collide without me even trying (this past year in a pandemic for example). However, I appreciated the reminder to make the connections clear and experiential for my students. Using problem-based learning opportunities and current news headlines allows me to show students exactly how they will use the content we are learning in real life. Over the past few years, I have incorporated more online discussion posts for students to participate in that allow me to extend content outside of the classroom. In these posts, students investigate new research, provide opinions or solutions for problems, and work through case studies that are related to content from class. 

 

References

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.

Visible Learning. (2018, March). Hattie effect size list - 256 Influences Related To Achievement. VISIBLE LEARNING. https://visible-learning.org/hattie-ranking-influences-effect-sizes-learning-achievement/.

Reflective Journal Post #3

 Description:

            This week in EDAT 6115 we explored how cognitive theories for learning can be useful in the classroom. We began with a historical perspective on education and the science of learning focusing on the contributions of Dewey, Thorndike, Gagne, and Skinner. We also took part in a video simulation showing how varied instruction and supportive strategies can assist students in forming memories and recall skills. Each of these resources showed the importance of understanding cognitive development and how essential the ability to vary instructional strategies within the classroom is.

Analysis:

            Much research has been done about the human brain, its function, as well as how memories and cognition occur. This information is of course useful to the neurologist for understanding disease and malfunction within the nervous system. However, the information gained about the working of the brain are of particular importance to educators. “It is clear that psychological changes, behavioral changes, and changes in cognition as a consequence of learning are all correlated with changes in the operation of the brain” (Slavin, 2018, p.135).  Our knowledge of how learning occurs is essential to ensure that students are receiving instruction that is cognitively appropriate, stimulating, and varied to fit their abilities. Understanding of the information-processing theory and other cognitive theories allow educators to “relate to processes that go on within the minds of learners, and ways of helping students use their minds more effectively to learn, remember, and use knowledge and skills” (Slavin, 2018, p. 122).

            The most simplistic way to explain how the brain processes information is a three-step process. As new stimuli in the environment are taken in by our senses, we register the information and either 1) get rid of it because it is not useful or 2) if it is useful, the information is moved into a working memory to further process. The “working memory is where the thinking takes place” which is important to note as an educator (Slavin, 2018, p.123). This is where our students take in new information and attempt to connect it to existing knowledge so this is the place where “ah-ha” moments can happen. Once deemed useful, information from the working memory can be connected and transferred to long-term memory. However, learning is complicated by other factors that don’t always allow new stimuli and information to be so easily processed. “At every stage, the learning process is controlled by the learner” (Slavin, 2018, p.123.). So many factors come to school with students each day that impact their ability, desire, motivation, and willingness to learn.

            There are many take-away messages from cognitive learning theories to be applied to education. As Slavin (2018) stated, “learners are, in fact, neural works in progress, altering themselves with every new activity” (p.136).  First, we must remember that physiological brain development does impact cognitive ability. This is important in deciding what content is understandable, what skills we can expect our students to perform, and the types of decisions they make. Attempting to teach students knowledge or skills far outside of their developmental cognitive ability can cause frustration and lack of success. Additionally, “not all learning is equally likely” (Slavin, 2018, p.136).  Certain things are simply harder for humans to learn to do. Understanding this allows educators to anticipate struggle, support growth, and design instruction to best help students learn.  

 Reflection:

As a biologist, I really enjoyed the readings this week. The brain, psychology, and cognitive theory have always been interesting to me. As a teacher of gifted, high schoolers most of the cognitive development has occurred by the time they get to me. My students generally are better critical thinkers than I am and are highly, intrinsically motivated. However, watching the video prompt this week was quite interesting and deserved attention in my reflection.

 I would say that I have above average recall skills typically but was pleased to remember 7/8 terms on Part 1 of the Information Processing test (Brown, 2015). I noticed that I made personal connections to a few of the terms to connect them for easy recall. For example, I created pictures in my mind of an offensive lineman (who I teach) on the field. I built on that by including a ball and our team scoring a touchdown. The word I struggled with was the term left, which was the least connected of the terms in my mind map. I was able to improve my score on Part 2 to 8/8 likely because of the second exposure to the terms and the prompt to help me remember the most unrelated term.  There were noticeable differences between the delivery of information between Part 1 and 2. Part 1 delivered the terms quickly with short transitions between terms and displaying the terms for one second each.  Part 2, however, slowed the transitions and displayed terms for four seconds before changing them. With the addition of the acrostic poem graphic organizer I was able to complete the list more quickly from memory. I also noted that I relied less on my own memory strategies to make connections to the terms and was able to simply recall them using the one letter prompt.

            After completing this activity, I thought of how I teach vocabulary in my own classroom.  As Biology major in college and now as an Advanced Placement Biology teacher, I have a strong dependence on vocabulary and the connections of terms in relation to processes in living systems. I introduce no less than fifty new, content related vocabulary terms to my students every unit. I had to develop strategies for quick, efficient acquisition of new terminology when I was in school and felt a responsibility to teach strategies to my students. I have found if the students do not have a solid vocabulary foundation in my class, they struggle to every get to higher levels of learning and application. I use an immersion type strategy from the very beginning of class. I use the terminology all the time, so the students are exposed to new terms even before they are responsible for them. As terms become relevant to their learning, we specifically define them and create mnemonic devices and memory tricks for them. We work as a class to figure out the Latin roots in the terms, identify where other words with similar stems come from, and make connections to the current topic. I use various strategies (verbal, visual, kinesthetic) dependent on the content and terminology. In certain units, more practice is needed for students to grasp the terminology because of the similarity in terms. In our genetics units, students struggle to remember coupled terminology differences (such as heterozygous and homozygous) as well as the chromosomal structures and classifications (chromosome, chromatid, centrosome, centromere).  For this reason, I include additional vocabulary intensive practice such as speed dating or creating Instagram profiles for a gallery walk to increase their exposure and usage. Using a variety of strategies to help students with the rote memorization and recall of important terminology increases their engagement and retention of knowledge. I also try to incorporate choice in how they approach learning vocabulary when possible.  Students who like flashcards can create them, those that prefer Quizlet have that option, and those that want to create graphic organizers or illustrations are able to as well. The students understand that how they learn best is considered so they are great at communicating their needs to me. I also encourage them to try a different method if they are still struggling with terminology. Some students have found they don’t learn best how they thought they did.  

References

Brown, J. (2015). Information Processing. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfZFMRnM1_Q. 

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.

Reflective Journal Post #2

 

Description:

The focus of this week’s readings examined behavioral theories and their applications in education.  The experiments and findings of Pavlov and Skinner were discussed and used to explain how student behaviors, good or bad, are reinforced within the classroom environment. The role of consequences and their impact on subsequent behaviors were also examined.

 

Analysis:

          Pavlov’s research focused on instinctual behaviors and how instinctual responses to stimuli can be manipulated to provoke desired responses for unrelated stimuli. “Pavlov’s experiments showed that if a previously neutral stimulus is presented at the same time as an unconditioned stimulus, the neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus and gains power to prompt a response similar to that produced by the unconditioned stimulus” (Slavin, 2018, p.99).  In education, these insights should be considered when crafting classroom discipline policies and in handling discipline issues with students.  If we positively reward negative behaviors, then students learn quickly that they can get the attention or reward even when they do not display the encouraged behavior.  Skinner and his colleagues focused less on the instinctual behavioral response and instead designed controlled environments with consequences related to behavioral responses. Skinner’s method of operant conditioning uses “pleasant and unpleasant consequences to change behaviors” (Slavin, 2018, p.99). By rewarding positive behavior, it is encouraged, making the displayed behavior a more favorable option than the negative behavior. Simply put, “pleasurable consequences strengthen behaviors; unpleasant consequences weaken it” (Slavin, 2018, p.101).  It would seem logical when approaching classroom management and discipline, a combination of these theories in practice would be appropriate.

          The additional factor to consider in how students’ behaviors are conditioned is what other influences exist on their behavioral decision making. Children are exposed to television and other media outlets outside of the classroom that influence their decision making inside the classroom.  As shown in the Bandura and Social Learning Theory video, children that are exposed to aggressive acts are more likely to instinctively respond in more aggressive ways (The Curious Classroom, 2013). If students are exposed to verbal or physical aggression in their home life, their conditioned response will be similar. More often students who are exposed to environments or situations with verbal or physical aggression will lack the prosocial skills that are expected within the classroom. This can lead to poor decision making and discipline that further perpetuates bad behaviors. Developing students’ abilities to make positive behavior decisions for themselves and incorporating more positive reinforcements is needed to create productive learning space.

In the classroom, teachers must be intentional in their use of positive and negative reinforcers that influence behavioral decision making by students. Often students receive “praise, grades, or stars” as positive reinforcement for making good decisions (Slavin, 2018, p.101). Conversely, when bad decisions are made, students are often punished with negative reinforcers as “escapes from unpleasant situations” (Slavin, 2018, p.101).  These types of behavioral interventions must be carefully considered though. If a student is causing disruptions in class or behaving inappropriately, the punishment is typically a trip to an administrator or removal from the classroom environment.  If used inappropriately, this type of discipline strategy can positively reinforce those negative behaviors. If this behavior is properly anticipated and accommodated for, other intervention can be in place to better discourage the negative behavior or intervene prior to the disruption.

 

Reflection:

          I was told by a mentor many years ago that you should always catch children being good. As educators, if we can find opportunities to positively reinforce good behaviors when children are naturally doing them, they become more likely to default to these behaviors naturally. Whether these behaviors are driven by positive modeling of prosocial acts, instinct, or conditioning if we can positively reinforce good decision making, children are more likely to display the behaviors we reward. Building positive relationships with students allows teachers to better understand the driving forces behind negative behaviors which in turn allows us to respond more appropriately.

 

 

References

The Curious Classroom. (2013). Bandura and Social Learning Theory. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjTxQy_U3ac.

Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12^th ed.). Pearson.