The two theories I like are: 1) Problem-Based Learning because it allows students the ability to actually work with their hands and apply their knowledge to a problem. 2) Theory of Multimedia Learning because it makes sense that the human brain can only absorb a certain amount of information through different avenues.
Two theories I like are: 1) Operant Conditioning because I believe that positive and negative reinforcers do play a role in how individuals recall specific information. 2) Social Learning Theory because I do believe that individuals learn a great deal from watching others. Small children are always imitating the adults in their lives and learn through observing and imitating.
Operant Conditionaing - It is proven in many ways, specifically in World of Warcraft, the MMORPG that has defined the genre as it is today. This is specifically because of operant conditioning.
Bloom's Taxonomy - Proven questioning skills develop when using this. I have been attempting it for my practicums and I believe it works well.
The two theories I really like are Multiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner)and Erikson’s Stages of Development.
I like the Multiple Intelligence Theory mainly because I feel truly that there are different learning styles, and understanding what the different learning styles are could benefit you as a teacher greatly.
I like Erikson's Stages of Development because I agree that you are currently in a stage of development and understanding what stage your students may be in, could help you understand why they are acting the way they are.
Multiple Intelligences works well one on one, but it does not work well in a large group - Whatever mode you pick will alienate someone.
Regarding Erikson - do you think all your students are the same just because they are similar in age? wouldn't treating them all the same be a mistake. My experience suggests students vary widely in their behaviours.
Multiple Intelligences Theory - I really liked this theory because everyone has their different strengths and weaknesses with different learning styles and when we cater to the different learning styles, we actually create a more dynamic lesson
Experiential Learning - I really believe that we learn best by doing and that lecturing doesn't work. I'm going to try to have most of my lessons activity based and more experimental.
BUT does multiple intelligence theory work for the large group - Think about it. Whatever method you pick will go against "someone's" preferred method of learning.
Regarding experiential learning - how would you learn long division that way?
Regarding self-determination theory, does this mean the teacher has no role in motivating his/her students - If it is all based on personal motivation, you are sort of saying students will be the same way for life? What do you think?
I think a teacher can change how a student thinks thus motivating them. However, at the end of the day, I think it's really up to each individual to decide if they want to complete their homework, assignments or study. Some students are very stubborn and it'll be a challenge to motivate them!
Wow- That's a bold statement - You are saying a teacher can change the way a student thinks and therefore motivate them. Can you think of an example?
It seems to me the motivation comes before change of thought, but perhaps I have it wrong.
And what choice do students really have up until 16 - They can't pick the curriculum, so really is it up to them with respect to motivation - A big part of it is beyond there control and that, in my mind, is a huge issue.
I was thinking along the lines of if a student thinks that attending classes isn't important, a teacher convince the student otherwise (motivate them to come to class).
Although students don't get a say in the curriculum until they're 16, it's still their responsibility as a student to try in class but how hard they try is ultimately up to them!
You're really making me rethink if I like this theory or not!
I'm just trying to encourage you to think a little more deeply and critically about it.
So you are asking students to "try" and maybe even "try hard" even when they have absolutely no interest in what s being taught. How hard would you try now, as an adult, to learn something in a class that you have absolutely no interest in whatsoever?
I wonder if the value of the theory is to encourage and stimulate "intrinsic" as opposed to "extrinsic" interest?
Operant Conditioning - This theory is interesting as people vary on the spectrum of using positive (reward) reinforcements and negative (punishments) reinforcements in the teaching field Multiple Intelligence Theory - People and students learn in multiple ways and forms with some intelligence's being stronger than others which can engage the students
Interesting, but is this an effective way to learn (operant conditioning)
Regrading MI - that means you can never please the whole class - you will be always using a method that does not work for someone or a group of students.
Multiple Intelligence Learning Theory -It is important to address the strengths and interests of each of your students throughout various lessons so they are more engaged
Discovery Learning -When students discover ideas, and relationships for themselves they are more likely to remember them and be more interested in learning more about the topic
Multiple Intelligences: Students can grasp concepts in different ways throughout a lesson. Some will understand better from visuals, some require to get up and move and others may need to work with their hands. Learning different ways like this is directly linked to multiple intelligences. Using these different can benefit the classroom as a whole with differentiated instruction.
Discovery Learning: I am a strong believer in discovery learning. Discovering new ideas by working towards them gives a great sense of accomplishment. Its this process and feeling that allows for the retention of this information. In the classroom with the teacher as a guide discovery learning can be accomplished and be meaningful to students.
What is the fundamental flaw in the Multiple Intelligence theory? And how did you come to believe so strongly in this theory - I mean what evidence/expert did you come across or is this from personal experience. Just curious.
What about discovery learning for imaginary numbers, the area of a circle, how to calculate a derivative? Does it work in situation where students would have no idea before hand that these procedure/concepts existed.
What about discovery learning for students who have ADD or learning disabilities? What do you think?
MI theory is too hard to really test, prove and gather data on. There are too many other factors that play into how well somebody learns. I like this theory so much because people gather information better from other sources than others. Whether it is learned through experience or something that is programed naturally isn't important to me.
Discovery learning, without a doubt, can only be used in certain contexts. In my personal experience however, retention levels are higher when students or people in general work towards learning. There is always a level of guidance required (I mean if there wasn't teacher's could be out of a job)
Multiple intelligences Theory – I like this theory because it is useful to use in the classroom, if we can teach a topic in different ways which would appeal to students with these intelligences then we could reach many of our students. We all have different ways of learning and different interests so this would help to have all students feel excited and interested in learning math.
Discovery Learning Theory – I like this theory because students will be more likely to remember a topic that they have learned about by using manipulateives and performing experiments. Students are more probable to absorb this information that they have discovered on their own.
What is the fundamental flaw in the Multiple Intelligence theory? And how did you come to believe so strongly in this theory - I mean what evidence/expert did you come across or is this from personal experience. Just curious.
What about discovery learning for imaginary numbers, the area of a circle, how to calculate a derivative? Does it work in situation where students would have no idea before hand that these procedure/concepts existed.
What about discovery learning for students who have ADD or learning disabilities? What do you think?
Discovery Learning:I really think that a learner must use his or her own past experience and existing knowledge to discover facts and relationships and new truths to be learned.
Problem based learning: Hands on activities always worked for me and I remember them. I think some students don't like math because of lack of hands on activities.
Experiential Learning (Kolb): Personally I learn by doing and gravitate to this. I love to experiment and try out all the "what if" questions. This will be appropriate for some students but not all. Teaching a class exclusively with Experiential Learning may not be appropriate (depending on the subject matter).
Multiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner): Recognizing that people have different intelligences and learn and absorb material differently is key. It is unlikely I can teach a lesson that will address all multiple intelligences, but if I can address all my students needs over the course of a semester by changing up the lessons I think that would be a win (visual one day, kinesthetic the next, musical the following day etc.)
Is learning by doing really possible in Mathematics? What would that look like on a regular basis?
Regarding MI, does that mean that when you teach with a Musical approach, that some students will learn that concept while other won't. I'm not sure how this would work. You would always be leaving someone out so they would have difficulty with the concept you were teaching.
Self-determination Theory I find this theory particularly interesting and relatable, specifically with regards to learning math and science on a personal level. For whatever reason I never had a problem being intrinsically motivated while working on these two subjects, but it seems like the hardest thing to elicit in students.
Experiential Learning I really like the idea of incorporating experiential learning into the classroom because it would engage most students would be engaged in this type of learning experience. I also like it because combining mathematics with experiential learning would be both challenging and rewarding.
The reason it may be difficult to elicit is that many students have no intrinsic interest in Math - It is rather context free most of the time with made up problems to pretend it is connected with the real world.
Can student really learn Math at in experiential manner - what would that look like?
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs - I like this theory because it makes sense to me and I know from personal experience that if I am tired, hungry or emotionally unstable, I cannot focus or learn as efficiently. This theory is relevant to people of all ages because we are all human. I feel that as a teacher, being aware that some student's needs may not be met is important to understanding their behaviour, or apparent lack of motivation to learn what we are trying to teach. Learning a new math concept isn't going to be at the top of a student's priority list if they haven't eaten in a day!
Social Learning Theory - I like this theory because again, it makes sense to me and I have seen it proven in my past experience. It is natural to watch others and observe what they do. Students do it, teachers do it, everyone does it. We are naturally curious to see what other people are doing. As a student, you may learn from observing your teacher, or your peers. Either way, it is important, not just for cognitive development, but also for behavioural development, for people to watch and learn. When we are younger, we learn social cues and proper conduct from watching our parents or other children. As we get older, we never stop learning from others. Talking, collaborating, interacting and sharing with others is a huge part of everyday life. Every time we socialize, talk to or observe someone else, we have learned something (even if we don't realize it!).
I wonder how far up the hierarchy we can go as teachers - seems like eating is reasonable, but as you go up, it gets a bit risky
I'm not sure social learning theory works for mathematics in the classroom, though. How might that work I wonder? Good for little kids and learning how to behave in social environments
I guess my goal as a teacher isn't necessarily to help my students go all the way to the top of the hierarchy, but more so to use the hierarchy to ensure that their primary needs are met. Once those are met, they won't be preoccupied with being hungry (for example) and they will be more attentive and focused on what I am trying to teach.
I do agree that it would be difficult to teach something like calculus socially, so to speak. However, I think that all these theories tie together and build off each other. In a roundabout way, if a student behaves better in class (something they may have learned from their peers), they may focus more and retain more, leading them to have a better understanding of the concepts being taught.
Also, the two theories I chose were the theories I felt had the most validity and made the most sense to me. They weren't necessarily the two theories I thought would be best to apply to the math classroom haha.
The two learning theories that I agree with is: 1) Distributed Cognition - not only do we learn individually, there are a need for other material, objects, people to attain ideas and knowledge. We can use what we learned to agree or disagree and allow higher thinking from what is available around us. We are now in the technological age that we are helping them narrow the information that is available to be used.
2) Social Learning Theory - as the saying goes "Monkey See, Monkey Do". We follow others by direction (in writing, in listening or in seeing). As teachers, we will show qualities to our students to guide them in learning. We have to grab their attention such as a hook or some kind of interesting information to direct them to the lesson. The learner is interested when something grabs their attention. Eventually, the student will have retained enough from "learning" and they will be able to model or reproduce the information.
I think you may have the wrong theory for #2 - you seem to be describing ARCS - Social learning occurs more outside of school, although there is a school culture that is learned too, mostly for survival ;-)
1. Self Determination Theory – this theory is important to consider when it comes to learning since it has a great impact on the students’ performance within and out of the classroom. Mathematics being one of the complex/frightening courses that a student may ever face when it comes to their education requires a great amount of internal and external motivation to encourage the student to keep going. Also, it is essential that the teacher plays a great role when it comes to the external aspect.
2. Multiple Intelligences Theory – acknowledging and incorporating the various intelligences that you meet in the classroom is important to get your content across to the students. Although it may be difficult to include every intelligence for each lesson/assignment, as teachers it is important that we attempt to incorporate the variety within the classroom whenever possible. Giving the students a broad range of opportunities will definitely encourage them to complete their tasks and perhaps go beyond their own expectations.
1. Multiple Intelligence Theory I like this theory because in my mind it is a pillar of education and learning. Understanding that everyone learns differently influences the type of lesson which a teacher can present. Although it may be very difficult to incorporate a piece of the lesson which appeals to all the different learners in a class, it is important to try and appeal to each students learning style as frequently as possible.
2.Problem Based Learning I like this theory because it pushes students to think for themselves. This type of learning promotes the fact that there is no “right” answer. At the same time it develops students’ critical thinking skills and problem solving skills. These skills can not only be applied in the classroom but to everyday life as well.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 1. Self-actualization – morality, creativity, problem solving, etc. 2. Esteem – includes confidence, self-esteem, achievement, respect, etc. 3. Belongingness – includes love, friendship, intimacy, family, etc. 4. Safety – includes security of environment, employment, resources, health, property, etc. 5. Physiological – includes air, food, water, sex, sleep, other factors towards homeostasis, etc. The reason I like Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, is because it will help me as a teacher to realize, (just mention the ideas that I am about to portray have been borrowed from another class in Teachers College, Ideas that I agree with) Students will not care about learning until first the low level needs are met. Such as eating, or if the Student does not Feel Safe. So let the student have a drink of water, go to the bathroom. Student should not be afraid of you ( the teacher), they should feel some belonging. As a Teacher I can provide atleast this much to help the child once basics needs are met, they go on to problem solving and critical thinking. (results May Vary)
2.Social Learning Theory (Bandura)
Summary: Bandura’s Social Learning Theory posits that people learn from one another, via observation, imitation, and modeling. The theory has often been called a bridge between behaviorist and cognitive learning theories because it encompasses attention, memory, and motivation
People are Copycats, I believe that kids are extremely more observant than we realize. They pick up on everything. So I like this theory, helps realize that I need to set a positive role model for the students, manners, procedure, honesty. Also Students Copy other Students. Students may copy something negative without realizing the gravity of the act. When it comes to Teaching, we need to get the students attention and have them motivated, to help them retain their information.
Operant Conditioning: I very much believe in operant conditioning. For example, at a young age students associate getting good marks as a good thing where they are rewarded. Whether it be with a sticker, praise or a treat. Also students associate bad marks with being a bad thing by getting in trouble from their parents, getting grounded or getting a privilege taken away until their marks increase. I was definitely a student influenced by operate conditioning.
Multiple Intelligences: I am a strong believer of multiple intelligences because I know that I learn differently from most of my peers. Being able to understand these different intelligences helps me to be a better teacher in that I can recognize these different learning styles and try my best to address all of them.
Two problems with operant conditioning - One it encourages students to ignore their own desires and personal motivations - They become dogs that we reward for being good. Might have worked for you, but I bet you lost something in the process. Problem 2 - It doesn't work as well anymore - students are not buying in to what is being sold - e.g. 50% dropout rate in high school in the US in cities.
MI may not work with the whole class - you will always be leaving people out
The two learning theories I like are Multiple intelligences by Gardner and the ARCS model of Motivation by Keller
I feel the Multiple intelligences test is a good theory to use as a teacher because it can really help you focus your lessons based on the specific types of personalities you have in a classroom. While every class will have students with many types of the personalities; knowing the distribution of the class can help you engage as many students as possible. It would be extra work but you could also allow students to pick from a choice of assignments which could all be catered towards the various intelligences in each particular class.
I also like the ARCS method just because of the method used. I had a Science teacher in high school who used parts of this model, and I found him to be an extremely good teacher. On any given day you did not know what to expect from him, and it was one class that I actually looked forward to go to. I believe once you are able to just get the students attention you are on track for success. If the students are paying attention they will most likely learn something even if they don’t want too.
1. Discovery Learning : I intuitively feel that if a student were to discover a principle/theorem/axiom by himself or herself then he or she gets to relive a historic milestone. The adrenaline and rush of can be intoxicating and addicting. I feel it is the teacher's responsibility to stage that moment's discovery for his or her students.
2. Experimental Learning : I believe what is lacking in our current system is the lack of choice for students to learn by means of experimenting with principles/theorems/axioms etc. I personally prefer to experiment to verify the knowledge I have learnt in the classroom. Only then, do I feel that I have a real connection with the material. Needless to say, every learner will have his or her own preference, but having flexibility is key!
I am not sure what the main difference is according to textbooks. However, I believe taht a combination of both of these strategies would be highly effective. I believe if a teacher is able to setup and stage a guided discovery process, which involves learning the material by way of experimentation and problem solving, then the students will have a highly engaging and meaningful learning experience.
1) Multiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner) Gardner says somewhere that seven kinds of intelligence would allow seven ways to teach, rather than one. MIT has led many educators to develop new approaches that might better meet the needs of the range of learners in their classrooms. Knowing the multiple intelligences of my students, I will be able to structure differently my instructions, making them assessable for all types of learners.
2) Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb) "Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Involve me, and I will understand." (a famous dictum of Confucius around 450 BC.) In a science or math class, ELT will help me to share my world view with my students as well as to try to understand their world view (during hands-on activities, games, field trips, etc.)
(1) Erikson’s Stages of Development I like Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development because it considers the impact of external factors, parents and society on personality development from childhood to adulthood. According to Erikson’s theory, every person must pass thought a series of eight interrelated stages (spanning from birth to death) over the entire life cycle. These include: Basic trust vs. mistrust (infancy), Autonomy vs. shame (toddler), Initiative vs. Guilt (preschooler – 3 to 5 years), Industry vs. Inferiority (School age child – 6 to 12 years), Identity vs. Role Confusion (Adolescent – 12 to 18 years), Intimacy and Solidarity vs. Isolation (Young adult – 18 to 35 years), Generativity vs. Self-absorption or stagnation (Middle-aged adult – 35 to 55 or 65 years), Integrity vs. Despair (Late adult – 55 or 65 to death). It’s important to understand how humans develop and to better understand the different psychosocial stages of student’s development.
(2) Constructivism Constructivism states that learning is an active, constructive process. The learner is an information constructor. People actively construct or create their own subjective representations of objective reality. I like this theory because I strongly believe in the constructive approach to learning and teaching which focuses on the use of “hands on” material and learning through interactions with the physical environment and the child’s social environment. The foundation for this belief is the notion that knowledge is gained through individual exploration and active engagement in the learning process rather than receive them “ready made” by someone else. I am very happy to see that schools are now teaching students based on hands on activity and experimentation rather than the traditional teacher lecture and students copy notes scenario.
I like the multiple intelligences theory. It makes teachers aware that different students can learn better threw different ways of learning. By using a large variety of activities to cater to all learning types instead of just a few, more students will be engaged and will learn.
Discovery learning is when students discover knowledge by investigating. I like this because I find it more engaging and fun to learn this way, so students will take more of an active participant role in their own learning.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe two theories I like are:
Delete1) Problem-Based Learning because it allows students the ability to actually work with their hands and apply their knowledge to a problem.
2) Theory of Multimedia Learning because it makes sense that the human brain can only absorb a certain amount of information through different avenues.
Two theories I like are:
ReplyDelete1) Operant Conditioning because I believe that positive and negative reinforcers do play a role in how individuals recall specific information.
2) Social Learning Theory because I do believe that individuals learn a great deal from watching others. Small children are always imitating the adults in their lives and learn through observing and imitating.
It seems to me that positive and negative reinforceres are motivational - How can giving someone a A+ or treat make them remember better - I'm puzzled
DeleteHow much does social learning theory apply to classroom learning? Just curious about what you think
Operant Conditionaing - It is proven in many ways, specifically in World of Warcraft, the MMORPG that has defined the genre as it is today. This is specifically because of operant conditioning.
ReplyDeleteBloom's Taxonomy - Proven questioning skills develop when using this. I have been attempting it for my practicums and I believe it works well.
I wonder if operant conditioning applies in the classroom that well or whether it is strictly for gaming.
DeleteWhere is your evidence to support Bloom's Theory? Where is your proof that it works well - just wondering what data you have collected.
The two theories I really like are
ReplyDeleteMultiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner)and Erikson’s Stages of Development.
I like the Multiple Intelligence Theory mainly because I feel truly that there are different learning styles, and understanding what the different learning styles are could benefit you as a teacher greatly.
I like Erikson's Stages of Development because I agree that you are currently in a stage of development and understanding what stage your students may be in, could help you understand why they are acting the way they are.
Multiple Intelligences works well one on one, but it does not work well in a large group - Whatever mode you pick will alienate someone.
DeleteRegarding Erikson - do you think all your students are the same just because they are similar in age? wouldn't treating them all the same be a mistake. My experience suggests students vary widely in their behaviours.
Multiple Intelligences Theory
ReplyDelete- I really liked this theory because everyone has their different strengths and weaknesses with different learning styles and when we cater to the different learning styles, we actually create a more dynamic lesson
Experiential Learning
- I really believe that we learn best by doing and that lecturing doesn't work. I'm going to try to have most of my lessons activity based and more experimental.
BUT does multiple intelligence theory work for the large group - Think about it. Whatever method you pick will go against "someone's" preferred method of learning.
DeleteRegarding experiential learning - how would you learn long division that way?
Melissa
ReplyDelete1) I like Problem-Based Learning which is hands-on, active learning because many people remember from doing activities.
2) I also like Self-Determination Theory because I think a person's personality and motivation determines how hard they work towards their goals.
Regarding self-determination theory, does this mean the teacher has no role in motivating his/her students - If it is all based on personal motivation, you are sort of saying students will be the same way for life? What do you think?
DeleteI think a teacher can change how a student thinks thus motivating them. However, at the end of the day, I think it's really up to each individual to decide if they want to complete their homework, assignments or study. Some students are very stubborn and it'll be a challenge to motivate them!
DeleteWow- That's a bold statement - You are saying a teacher can change the way a student thinks and therefore motivate them. Can you think of an example?
DeleteIt seems to me the motivation comes before change of thought, but perhaps I have it wrong.
And what choice do students really have up until 16 - They can't pick the curriculum, so really is it up to them with respect to motivation - A big part of it is beyond there control and that, in my mind, is a huge issue.
I was thinking along the lines of if a student thinks that attending classes isn't important, a teacher convince the student otherwise (motivate them to come to class).
DeleteAlthough students don't get a say in the curriculum until they're 16, it's still their responsibility as a student to try in class but how hard they try is ultimately up to them!
You're really making me rethink if I like this theory or not!
I'm just trying to encourage you to think a little more deeply and critically about it.
DeleteSo you are asking students to "try" and maybe even "try hard" even when they have absolutely no interest in what s being taught. How hard would you try now, as an adult, to learn something in a class that you have absolutely no interest in whatsoever?
I wonder if the value of the theory is to encourage and stimulate "intrinsic" as opposed to "extrinsic" interest?
Operant Conditioning
ReplyDelete- This theory is interesting as people vary on the spectrum of using positive (reward) reinforcements and negative (punishments) reinforcements in the teaching field
Multiple Intelligence Theory
- People and students learn in multiple ways and forms with some intelligence's being stronger than others which can engage the students
Interesting, but is this an effective way to learn (operant conditioning)
ReplyDeleteRegrading MI - that means you can never please the whole class - you will be always using a method that does not work for someone or a group of students.
Multiple Intelligence Learning Theory
ReplyDelete-It is important to address the strengths and interests of each of your students throughout various lessons so they are more engaged
Discovery Learning
-When students discover ideas, and relationships for themselves they are more likely to remember them and be more interested in learning more about the topic
Multiple Intelligences:
ReplyDeleteStudents can grasp concepts in different ways throughout a lesson. Some will understand better from visuals, some require to get up and move and others may need to work with their hands. Learning different ways like this is directly linked to multiple intelligences. Using these different can benefit the classroom as a whole with differentiated instruction.
Discovery Learning:
I am a strong believer in discovery learning. Discovering new ideas by working towards them gives a great sense of accomplishment. Its this process and feeling that allows for the retention of this information. In the classroom with the teacher as a guide discovery learning can be accomplished and be meaningful to students.
What is the fundamental flaw in the Multiple Intelligence theory? And how did you come to believe so strongly in this theory - I mean what evidence/expert did you come across or is this from personal experience. Just curious.
DeleteWhat about discovery learning for imaginary numbers, the area of a circle, how to calculate a derivative? Does it work in situation where students would have no idea before hand that these procedure/concepts existed.
What about discovery learning for students who have ADD or learning disabilities? What do you think?
MI theory is too hard to really test, prove and gather data on. There are too many other factors that play into how well somebody learns. I like this theory so much because people gather information better from other sources than others. Whether it is learned through experience or something that is programed naturally isn't important to me.
DeleteDiscovery learning, without a doubt, can only be used in certain contexts. In my personal experience however, retention levels are higher when students or people in general work towards learning. There is always a level of guidance required (I mean if there wasn't teacher's could be out of a job)
Multiple intelligences Theory – I like this theory because it is useful to use in the classroom, if we can teach a topic in different ways which would appeal to students with these intelligences then we could reach many of our students. We all have different ways of learning and different interests so this would help to have all students feel excited and interested in learning math.
ReplyDeleteDiscovery Learning Theory – I like this theory because students will be more likely to remember a topic that they have learned about by using manipulateives and performing experiments. Students are more probable to absorb this information that they have discovered on their own.
What is the fundamental flaw in the Multiple Intelligence theory? And how did you come to believe so strongly in this theory - I mean what evidence/expert did you come across or is this from personal experience. Just curious.
DeleteWhat about discovery learning for imaginary numbers, the area of a circle, how to calculate a derivative? Does it work in situation where students would have no idea before hand that these procedure/concepts existed.
What about discovery learning for students who have ADD or learning disabilities? What do you think?
Discovery Learning:I really think that a learner must use his or her own past experience and existing knowledge to discover facts and relationships and new truths to be learned.
ReplyDeleteProblem based learning: Hands on activities always worked for me and I remember them. I think some students don't like math because of lack of hands on activities.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteExperiential Learning (Kolb): Personally I learn by doing and gravitate to this. I love to experiment and try out all the "what if" questions. This will be appropriate for some students but not all. Teaching a class exclusively with Experiential Learning may not be appropriate (depending on the subject matter).
ReplyDeleteMultiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner): Recognizing that people have different intelligences and learn and absorb material differently is key. It is unlikely I can teach a lesson that will address all multiple intelligences, but if I can address all my students needs over the course of a semester by changing up the lessons I think that would be a win (visual one day, kinesthetic the next, musical the following day etc.)
Is learning by doing really possible in Mathematics? What would that look like on a regular basis?
DeleteRegarding MI, does that mean that when you teach with a Musical approach, that some students will learn that concept while other won't. I'm not sure how this would work. You would always be leaving someone out so they would have difficulty with the concept you were teaching.
Self-determination Theory
ReplyDeleteI find this theory particularly interesting and relatable, specifically with regards to learning math and science on a personal level. For whatever reason I never had a problem being intrinsically motivated while working on these two subjects, but it seems like the hardest thing to elicit in students.
Experiential Learning
I really like the idea of incorporating experiential learning into the classroom because it would engage most students would be engaged in this type of learning experience. I also like it because combining mathematics with experiential learning would be both challenging and rewarding.
The reason it may be difficult to elicit is that many students have no intrinsic interest in Math - It is rather context free most of the time with made up problems to pretend it is connected with the real world.
DeleteCan student really learn Math at in experiential manner - what would that look like?
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
ReplyDelete- I like this theory because it makes sense to me and I know from personal experience that if I am tired, hungry or emotionally unstable, I cannot focus or learn as efficiently. This theory is relevant to people of all ages because we are all human. I feel that as a teacher, being aware that some student's needs may not be met is important to understanding their behaviour, or apparent lack of motivation to learn what we are trying to teach. Learning a new math concept isn't going to be at the top of a student's priority list if they haven't eaten in a day!
Social Learning Theory
- I like this theory because again, it makes sense to me and I have seen it proven in my past experience. It is natural to watch others and observe what they do. Students do it, teachers do it, everyone does it. We are naturally curious to see what other people are doing. As a student, you may learn from observing your teacher, or your peers. Either way, it is important, not just for cognitive development, but also for behavioural development, for people to watch and learn. When we are younger, we learn social cues and proper conduct from watching our parents or other children. As we get older, we never stop learning from others. Talking, collaborating, interacting and sharing with others is a huge part of everyday life. Every time we socialize, talk to or observe someone else, we have learned something (even if we don't realize it!).
I wonder how far up the hierarchy we can go as teachers - seems like eating is reasonable, but as you go up, it gets a bit risky
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure social learning theory works for mathematics in the classroom, though. How might that work I wonder? Good for little kids and learning how to behave in social environments
I guess my goal as a teacher isn't necessarily to help my students go all the way to the top of the hierarchy, but more so to use the hierarchy to ensure that their primary needs are met. Once those are met, they won't be preoccupied with being hungry (for example) and they will be more attentive and focused on what I am trying to teach.
DeleteI do agree that it would be difficult to teach something like calculus socially, so to speak. However, I think that all these theories tie together and build off each other. In a roundabout way, if a student behaves better in class (something they may have learned from their peers), they may focus more and retain more, leading them to have a better understanding of the concepts being taught.
Also, the two theories I chose were the theories I felt had the most validity and made the most sense to me. They weren't necessarily the two theories I thought would be best to apply to the math classroom haha.
The two learning theories that I agree with is:
ReplyDelete1) Distributed Cognition - not only do we learn individually, there are a need for other material, objects, people to attain ideas and knowledge. We can use what we learned to agree or disagree and allow higher thinking from what is available around us. We are now in the technological age that we are helping them narrow the information that is available to be used.
2) Social Learning Theory - as the saying goes "Monkey See, Monkey Do". We follow others by direction (in writing, in listening or in seeing). As teachers, we will show qualities to our students to guide them in learning. We have to grab their attention such as a hook or some kind of interesting information to direct them to the lesson. The learner is interested when something grabs their attention. Eventually, the student will have retained enough from "learning" and they will be able to model or reproduce the information.
I think you may have the wrong theory for #2 - you seem to be describing ARCS - Social learning occurs more outside of school, although there is a school culture that is learned too, mostly for survival ;-)
Delete1. Self Determination Theory – this theory is important to consider when it comes to learning since it has a great impact on the students’ performance within and out of the classroom. Mathematics being one of the complex/frightening courses that a student may ever face when it comes to their education requires a great amount of internal and external motivation to encourage the student to keep going. Also, it is essential that the teacher plays a great role when it comes to the external aspect.
ReplyDelete2. Multiple Intelligences Theory – acknowledging and incorporating the various intelligences that you meet in the classroom is important to get your content across to the students. Although it may be difficult to include every intelligence for each lesson/assignment, as teachers it is important that we attempt to incorporate the variety within the classroom whenever possible. Giving the students a broad range of opportunities will definitely encourage them to complete their tasks and perhaps go beyond their own expectations.
Suganya C
Which is better in your mind - internal or external? How ndo you develop self-determination?
Deletewhat do you think about MI now?
1. Multiple Intelligence Theory
ReplyDeleteI like this theory because in my mind it is a pillar of education and learning. Understanding that everyone learns differently influences the type of lesson which a teacher can present. Although it may be very difficult to incorporate a piece of the lesson which appeals to all the different learners in a class, it is important to try and appeal to each students learning style as frequently as possible.
2.Problem Based Learning
I like this theory because it pushes students to think for themselves. This type of learning promotes the fact that there is no “right” answer. At the same time it develops students’ critical thinking skills and problem solving skills. These skills can not only be applied in the classroom but to everyday life as well.
MI may work better for the individual that the entire class - Why do you think I am saying that?
DeleteMaslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
ReplyDelete1. Self-actualization – morality, creativity, problem solving, etc.
2. Esteem – includes confidence, self-esteem, achievement, respect, etc.
3. Belongingness – includes love, friendship, intimacy, family, etc.
4. Safety – includes security of environment, employment, resources, health, property, etc.
5. Physiological – includes air, food, water, sex, sleep, other factors towards homeostasis, etc.
The reason I like Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, is because it will help me as a teacher to realize, (just mention the ideas that I am about to portray have been borrowed from another class in Teachers College, Ideas that I agree with)
Students will not care about learning until first the low level needs are met. Such as eating, or if the Student does not Feel Safe. So let the student have a drink of water, go to the bathroom. Student should not be afraid of you ( the teacher), they should feel some belonging. As a Teacher I can provide atleast this much to help the child once basics needs are met, they go on to problem solving and critical thinking. (results May Vary)
2.Social Learning Theory (Bandura)
Summary: Bandura’s Social Learning Theory posits that people learn from one another, via observation, imitation, and modeling. The theory has often been called a bridge between behaviorist and cognitive learning theories because it encompasses attention, memory, and motivation
People are Copycats, I believe that kids are extremely more observant than we realize. They pick up on everything. So I like this theory, helps realize that I need to set a positive role model for the students, manners, procedure, honesty. Also Students Copy other Students. Students may copy something negative without realizing the gravity of the act. When it comes to Teaching, we need to get the students attention and have them motivated, to help them retain their information.
Social learning works well out of school - not so much in school - Or am I missing something?
DeleteOperant Conditioning: I very much believe in operant conditioning. For example, at a young age students associate getting good marks as a good thing where they are rewarded. Whether it be with a sticker, praise or a treat. Also students associate bad marks with being a bad thing by getting in trouble from their parents, getting grounded or getting a privilege taken away until their marks increase. I was definitely a student influenced by operate conditioning.
ReplyDeleteMultiple Intelligences: I am a strong believer of multiple intelligences because I know that I learn differently from most of my peers. Being able to understand these different intelligences helps me to be a better teacher in that I can recognize these different learning styles and try my best to address all of them.
Two problems with operant conditioning - One it encourages students to ignore their own desires and personal motivations - They become dogs that we reward for being good. Might have worked for you, but I bet you lost something in the process. Problem 2 - It doesn't work as well anymore - students are not buying in to what is being sold - e.g. 50% dropout rate in high school in the US in cities.
DeleteMI may not work with the whole class - you will always be leaving people out
The two learning theories I like are Multiple intelligences by Gardner and the ARCS model of Motivation by Keller
ReplyDeleteI feel the Multiple intelligences test is a good theory to use as a teacher because it can really help you focus your lessons based on the specific types of personalities you have in a classroom. While every class will have students with many types of the personalities; knowing the distribution of the class can help you engage as many students as possible. It would be extra work but you could also allow students to pick from a choice of assignments which could all be catered towards the various intelligences in each particular class.
I also like the ARCS method just because of the method used. I had a Science teacher in high school who used parts of this model, and I found him to be an extremely good teacher. On any given day you did not know what to expect from him, and it was one class that I actually looked forward to go to. I believe once you are able to just get the students attention you are on track for success. If the students are paying attention they will most likely learn something even if they don’t want too.
But with MI you are always alienating some of many students - Does the theory really work for the entire class or is it more designed for individuals?
DeleteARCS is a favourite of mine too - glad you found it.
Rahim Samji:
ReplyDelete1. Discovery Learning : I intuitively feel that if a student were to discover a principle/theorem/axiom by himself or herself then he or she gets to relive a historic milestone. The adrenaline and rush of can be intoxicating and addicting. I feel it is the teacher's responsibility to stage that moment's discovery for his or her students.
2. Experimental Learning : I believe what is lacking in our current system is the lack of choice for students to learn by means of experimenting with principles/theorems/axioms etc. I personally prefer to experiment to verify the knowledge I have learnt in the classroom. Only then, do I feel that I have a real connection with the material. Needless to say, every learner will have his or her own preference, but having flexibility is key!
What do you think is the difference between these 2 theories?
ReplyDeleteI am not sure what the main difference is according to textbooks. However, I believe taht a combination of both of these strategies would be highly effective. I believe if a teacher is able to setup and stage a guided discovery process, which involves learning the material by way of experimentation and problem solving, then the students will have a highly engaging and meaningful learning experience.
Delete
ReplyDelete1) Multiple Intelligences Theory (Gardner)
Gardner says somewhere that seven kinds of intelligence would allow seven ways to teach, rather than one. MIT has led many educators to develop new approaches that might better meet the needs of the range of learners in their classrooms. Knowing the multiple intelligences of my students, I will be able to structure differently my instructions, making them assessable for all types of learners.
2) Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb)
"Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Involve me, and I will understand."
(a famous dictum of Confucius around 450 BC.) In a science or math class, ELT will help me to share my world view with my students as well as to try to understand their world view (during hands-on activities, games, field trips, etc.)
(1) Erikson’s Stages of Development
ReplyDeleteI like Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development because it considers the impact of external factors, parents and society on personality development from childhood to adulthood. According to Erikson’s theory, every person must pass thought a series of eight interrelated stages (spanning from birth to death) over the entire life cycle. These include: Basic trust vs. mistrust (infancy), Autonomy vs. shame (toddler), Initiative vs. Guilt (preschooler – 3 to 5 years), Industry vs. Inferiority (School age child – 6 to 12 years), Identity vs. Role Confusion (Adolescent – 12 to 18 years), Intimacy and Solidarity vs. Isolation (Young adult – 18 to 35 years), Generativity vs. Self-absorption or stagnation (Middle-aged adult – 35 to 55 or 65 years), Integrity vs. Despair (Late adult – 55 or 65 to death). It’s important to understand how humans develop and to better understand the different psychosocial stages of student’s development.
(2) Constructivism
Constructivism states that learning is an active, constructive process. The learner is an information constructor. People actively construct or create their own subjective representations of objective reality. I like this theory because I strongly believe in the constructive approach to learning and teaching which focuses on the use of “hands on” material and learning through interactions with the physical environment and the child’s social environment. The foundation for this belief is the notion that knowledge is gained through individual exploration and active engagement in the learning process rather than receive them “ready made” by someone else. I am very happy to see that schools are now teaching students based on hands on activity and experimentation rather than the traditional teacher lecture and students copy notes scenario.
I like the multiple intelligences theory. It makes teachers aware that different students can learn better threw different ways of learning. By using a large variety of activities to cater to all learning types instead of just a few, more students will be engaged and will learn.
ReplyDeleteDiscovery learning is when students discover knowledge by investigating. I like this because I find it more engaging and fun to learn this way, so students will take more of an active participant role in their own learning.