Lora Kaisler (lkaisler@imsa.edu)
Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:26:38 -0500
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:26:38 -0500 From: Lora Kaisler <lkaisler@imsa.edu> Subject: Re: IFETS-DISCUSS Digest - 5 Feb 1999 to 6 Feb 1999
Bob Leamnson hit a nerve with his Sat, 6 Feb 1999 09:09:20 -0500 response
to David Merrill's post. I can lurk no longer. As a constructivist,
technological, instructional designer, my job involves melding many
pedagogies and strategies together. Remember something you learned very
well...tying your shoes, riding a bike, etc. Was this learned through
excellently designed instruction? We learn what is important to us at the
time. We learn in the way that seems most appropriate to us at the time.
We may ask our teachers/parents/mentors for advice on the best way to learn
something, but ultimately we determine the learning strategy ourselves.
(Do you cross the laces under or over?) Multi-talented people may simply
have made better choices along the way. I suspect they received more
encouragement in their sense of curiosity and exploration.
Learning styles can be visualized through mind maps. Deficit concept areas
can be reintroduced in a different way. Only then will students truly
grasp the extent of learning available to them. Constantly pushing the
same instructional strategies because they represent the "best"
instructional design for that content has been our mistake for years. Have
we learned nothing from classroom rebellion? Have we examined the
increasing number of students with behavioral disorders? A child must
learn the alphabet--does it matter if s/he uses flash cards, picture books,
tracing, or songs? Does it matter if the child learns alone or with other
children? Gardner advocated all intelligences as valid.
My work advocates the incorporation of all intelligences in real-world
situations through problem-based learning. Students of all ages work
together to discover viable data and construct reasonable solutions to real
problems faced by our society, be they math, science, technology, or
humanity related. All content is competency-driven, inquiry-based,
problem-centered, and integrative. Over and over again I have seen
unmotivated (unengaged learners) become fascinated with a topic they would
never have considered before. I have seen techno-phobic adults use the
Internet to conduct research. I have watched concept maps grow from
simple, first level concepts, to elaborate, five to six level, intricately
connected maps. All of these things happen through the conscious
application of instructional coaching. Perhaps this is what Dr. Merrill
means by teaching; however, it is not the typical definition.
Instructional coaches use questions aimed at developing higher level
thinking skills. They are co-investigators in the problem. You do not
find coaches, well versed in learning styles, giving lectures or sitting on
the side-lines.
Yes, we need to consider content when designing instruction. We also need
to remember that learners are individual people who come to any given
educational setting with individual perspectives. It does not matter how
good the instruction is, students will not all learn the same thing in the
same way in the same time, any more than identical twins will develop
identical personalities. And just as personalities change over time, so do
learning style preferences. We would do well to accept all styles as valid
while encouraging exploration of others.
>Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 09:09:20 -0500
>From: Bob Leamnson <RLEAMNSON@umassd.edu>
>Subject: Learning Styles: Misplaced Mapping
> Finally, I think we should be indebted to David for helping nudge
>us back from one of the extremes that the educational world seems
>always to be gravitating toward. The many articles and books on
>"learner-centered" teaching and "learner-centered" classrooms that
>have occupied our attention for past several years have, I suggest,
>long ago fulfilled their purpose of reminding us that the real and
>obvious goal in any classroom is that students learn. What seems to
>have gotten lost in the enthusiasm, and what writers like David
>Merrill, and I hope others, need to draw attention to, is that the goal
>of learning in the classroom cannot be reached except through the
>means, i.e. through good teaching. "Reclaiming Instructional
>Design" is something we should hear a lot more about.
>-----------------------------------------------<
Lora K. Kaisler, M.S., M.A.
Professional Development and Research Coordinator
the the Center@IMSA
Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy
1500 West Sullivan Road
Aurora IL 60506-1000
(630) 907-5956/5957
FAX (630) 907-5946
lkaisler@imsa.edu
http://www.imsa.edu/team/cpbl/
ListServ Moderator for IMSACPBL-L@imsa.edu
"Technology: opening minds with a new set of keys."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon 08 Feb 1999 - 19:30:38 MET