Teaching Styles and Technology Evaluation - Essay Example

Running Head: TEACHING STYLES & TECHNOLOGY Teaching Styles & Technology [The of the appears here] [The of the appears here] Introduction The objective of this paper is to delineate technologies currently available to support objectivist (traditional) and constructivist (non-traditional) methods of learning in order to help guide primary schools in their learning technology investment decisions, to help teachers effectively apply the new classroom technologies and mold their learning styles in accordance with the students' needs (learning styles). The vision to automate is the perception that IT is a means of replacing expensive, unreliable human labor with information technology. In organizations characterized by the vision to automate, the role of IT is to provide operational savings and improve quality by performing structured, routine, operational tasks reliably and efficiently. Because teaching and learning are at best semi-structured activities, neither is conducive to automation. Yet certain aspects of instruction, particularly the delivery of information characteristics or teaching styles are prone to automation. Information classroom technologies facilitate student access to information to improve the availability or reality of learning materials. In contrast to automated classrooms that improve the efficiency of information delivery, the goal here is to make new, qualitatively better information available that would otherwise not be. Learning networks, hypermedia, simulations, and virtual reality are information classroom technologies. While IT infrastructure developments represent attempts to provide technology tools to improve the teaching and/or learning processes, they are often undertaken without a thorough assessment of the learning gains desired or even possible. For instance, high expectations without clear objectives and realistic goals may lead to the development of state-of-the-art facilities, at once impressive yet intimidating, replete with potential yet lacking clear guidelines on how to use the technology to achieve learning improvements. The Objectivist Vs Constructivist Model of Learning Learning models are often classified as being behavioral or cognitive. Objectivism, also referred to as the traditional model of learning, is the behavioral model of learning and represents a traditional view of learning. The primary competing cognitive model is constructivism. The objectivist model of learning is based on Skinner's stimulus-response theory: learning is a change in the behavioral disposition of an organism (Jonassen, 1993) that can be shaped by selective reinforcement. The tenet of the model is that there is an objective reality and that the goal of learning is to understand this reality and modify behavior accordingly (Jonassen, 1993). The goal of teaching is to facilitate the transfer of knowledge from the expert to the learner. Errors in understanding are the result of imperfect or incomplete knowledge transfer. The model makes several pedagogical assumptions regarding learning and instruction. In terms of learning, the first assumption is that there exists a reality that is agreed upon by individuals. Second, this reality can be represented and transferred to a learner. Third, the purpose of the mind is to act as a mirror of reality rather than as an interpreter of reality (Jonassen, 1993). Fourth, all: learners use essentially the same processes for representing and understanding the world. In terms of instruction, the objectivist model assumes that the goal of teaching is to efficiently transmit knowledge from the expert to the learner. Instructors structure reality into abstract or generalized representations that can be transferred and then recalled by students (Yarusso, 1992). The objectivist model may be the most appropriate model in some contexts--for example, in factual or procedural-based learning. However, models challenging objectivism have emerged. The most widely accepted alternate model is constructivism. Constructivism denies the existence of an external reality independent of each individual's mind. Rather than transmitted, knowledge is created, or constructed, by each learner. The mind is not a tool for reproducing the external reality, but rather the mind produces its own; unique conception of events (Jonassen, 1993). Each reality is somewhat different, based on learners' experiences and biases. More moderate constructivists do not preclude the possibility of the existence of an objective world, but assume that each individual constructs his or her own reality of the objective world (Yarusso, 1992). The teacher serves as the creative mediator of the process. Class time might become a project-oriented session where the instructor provides tools for helping learners construct their own views of reality. Learning focuses on discovering conceptual relationships, exploring multiple representations or perspectives on an issue, and/or immersing the learner in the real-world context in which the learning is relevant (Jonassen, 1993). However, in practice, constructivism is often reduced to students' searching for the preordained knowledge that could be more efficiently trans-miffed via the instructor. This tends to happen particularly with fact-based or procedural learning. Critics of constructivism argue that there is little benefit in having learners construct such preordained knowledge; it is only when learners are allowed to construct new meaning, such as in higher-order learning, that the goals of constructivism are truly achieved. However, it can also be argued that greater understanding of factual and procedural material results when learners are forced to discover the knowledge themselves than when they are merely told. The curriculum focus in constructivist settings is often thematic and interdisciplinary. Certain issues are explored in depth, sacrificing broad coverage for the goal of making intellectual issues meaningful and substantively engaging. The curriculum focus is also more self-consciously procedural rather than factual-students may learn about how scientists think, for example, rather than what science says about a particular topic. Other procedural skills that are inherently interdisciplinary are attended to as well: "project management skills, research skills, organization and representation skills, presentation skills, and reflection skills" (Jonassen et al., 1998, p. 29). A teaching style that is associated with constructivist beliefs typically is characterized by a strong emphasis on facilitating student initiative rather than closely scripting student tasks. If understanding cannot be "taught" and must be "constructed" by the learner, students must be given more responsibility and the "space" to develop their understanding. A second element of a constructivist teaching style is having students work in collaborative teams. Having them work in teams makes sense for two reasons: (a) Exposure to other students' thinking is intellectually challenging, and (b) collaboration may be more likely to develop a social expectation supportive of learning that may be absent in many individuals (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). The teacher's modeling of effective learning is another central aspect of a constructivist style. By presenting himself or herself as a learner rather than as the source of most information, the teacher shows students how something previously not understood comes to be successfully negotiated. Finally, apart from student tasks, instructional content, and teaching style, we would also expect to see in constructivist settings different teacher perceptions of what their teaching practice is like and different opinions about the environmental features that facilitate good teaching. The Prerequisites Just because computers may potentially facilitate the ability of teachers to engage in constructivist teaching doesn't mean it necessarily will happen. It is important to understand the conditions under which this pedagogy arises and becomes a normal part of day-to-day practice. The literature on school reform indicates that constructivist-oriented practices such as those suggested here require a number of conditions before they can be successfully implemented (Means & Olson, 1995). Three types of resources may be critical in enabling teachers to institute new practices: opinion supportive of change, social and informational support that provides practical help to those attempting changes, and a sufficient supply of needed resources that can help demonstrate success to a skeptical outside world. It seems reasonable to think that all three of these resources must be present for substantial change in pedagogy to occur. Opinion climate. Like all of us, teachers are affected by the local climate of peer opinion--in their case, opinion about competing instructional priorities, alternative teaching strategies, and the compromises that are necessary in their particular circumstances. Without a local culture favorable to constructivist innovation, it does not seem likely that many teachers would make the heavy investments of time and energy that are required. Information and social support resources. Because constructivist teaching is difficult to do well, its accomplishment with or without computers may depend on being in a network of people trying to accomplish the same kinds of changes and being in a network of information for how to accomplish those changes. Both a local network and a broader network linking a school's teachers to like-minded practitioners in other places might be necessary, or at least would facilitate, teachers' efforts to persist in constructivist innovation. Appropriate educational resources in sufficient quantity. Finally, for the kinds of activities consistent with constructivist models, a diverse array of materials, equipment, and information and communications resources is also critical. These resources, though, must be present in sufficient quantity for teachers to plan activities for an entire classroom of students. Use of Technology and Teaching Teaching styles have received much attention in recent years, and rightly so considering their influence on students' performance in the university. To understand the need of students especially of primary level, it is important to understand the needs and learning styles of the students and according to these the teaching styles should be molded. The discussion which follows takes into account the students' perspective and their learning styles and their corresponding teaching methods. According to Farrington (1999,86) professors across the country are beginning to realize that, indeed, "one size does not fit all" when it comes to teaching today's students. Farrington believes that it is "intuitively illogical" for educators to think that the lecture-recitation is best for all subjects and all students. Despite the fact that re search has shown that individual differences in the classroom affect learning, Farrington writes that "few, if any, classes are ever designed by first asking the question of how students might best learn." Posing such a question can be beneficial especially when deciding to use technology to support course curriculum. It is essential that we become familiar with learning style, one of the most recognized student individual differences that currently exist in the "wired," postsecondary classroom. The various ways the Web can be used to accommodate students with diverse preferences for processing sensory information and visual, auditory, and kinesthetic teaching styles will now be discussed. Visual Many learners prefer processing information primarily through sight, and they can become frustrated easily with a professor who mainly uses the auditory lecture approach to teach course content (Sarasin 1998). When used appropriately, the Web can enhance the visual student's learning experience. Online course animations, hypertext, or clickable diagrams and video clips can clarify concepts that a static textbook image simply cannot. Animated graphs illustrating a marketing principle in economics class or dynamic chemical bonding processes for a chemistry course can help explain concepts not easily clarified by a professor's or a textbook's description. Hypertext diagrams are excellent resources to help increase user interactivity while online. In anatomy class, for example, a full-body image can be programmed so that the learner is able to click on body muscles to see their origin and insertion points. Video clips can elucidate movement patterns in a kinesiology class, or show dramatized, pathological profiles in a psychology course. Learners who have difficulty processing auditory information in a lecture could benefit greatly by having the professor's written lecture notes (or general class themes) online. To aid the visual learner and those who may have missed lectures, the professor may also wish to convert and archive online overheads or slide presentations according to lecture dates. Students can use the resources as study guides to complement in-class notes and review material before examinations. Archived material may be used for future semesters and can help formulate the content of future Internet-delivered courses that the professor may one day teach. Auditory Some learners prefer listening to course material as a way to internalize content. Students who learn best in this way will often refrain from taking notes during lectures, choosing instead to de vote their full attention to the lecturer (Sarasin 1998). Not surprisingly, the auditory learner can also benefit from the Web-supported classrooms. It is becoming commonplace for professors to record their lectures or class discussions and place them online for their students (Ross 1998). Online lectures can be created by wearing a small microphone attached to either a digital-audio tape (DAT) recorder or a less-expensive analogue tape recorder. At a later time, material can be captured on the computer and placed online for students to hear. The more ambitious professor can create and archive sound resources, which may help to illustrate concepts covered in class. For instance, in English class the professor can record difficult-to-read poems or passages, elucidating the themes and helping the student appreciate the author's intentions. In music courses, the teacher can compare and contrast different conductors' interpretations of the same piece of music by splicing together various recordings. Kinesthetic The kinesthetic (or haptic) learner prefers doing something in order to learn the material (Sarasin 1998). These learners can become frustrated by professors who do not allow for opportunity to "put theory into practice." Practicing problems, doing lab experiments, creating solutions, doing physical activities, engaging in manipulative exercises, and brain storming ideas are all ways to involve this learner in the classroom. It can be challenging to involve the kinesthetic learner, as applications must often involve complex programming to reach this learning style. Programming languages such as Java can help involve kinesthetic learners by engaging them in course-related learning activities. For example, Java-programmed jigsaw puzzles can provide a powerful learning and review tool for students in courses such as anthropology, anatomy, and nursing. Body parts can be assembled online complete with anatomical descriptions. Using the mouse as an extension of the hand, students can assemble parts, and in the process, they are able to learn how the pieces relate to each other. Social Some students prefer learning by interacting with their peers; they are called social learners (Grasha and Riechmann 1974). Grasha and Riechmann contend that collaborative learners seek out peer interaction as an important part of the learning process. Attending on-campus lectures, however, does not guarantee that students with a social learning style will have opportunities to work with peers. In fact, traditional classrooms, if improperly structured, can be more isolating than many online environments. For example, there may be limited opportunities for students to learn from cooperative groups in a class of two hundred students with a professor who primarily uses the lecture format, with few breaks for class discussions. A less-intrusive way to encourage course dialogue is by creating a bulletin board or course-related newsgroup. Students and the professor can post comments to the message center where others can see them and respond. The professor can use bulletin board systems to post solutions to complex problems. Students can use the board to formulate study groups that can be monitored at certain times of the week by the teaching assistant or the course instructor. Bulletin board systems may also save the professor time by allowing for the posting of answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs). Instead of answering the same questions individually, the professor can post common questions once for all students to read. Once posted, these FAQs can be used again from year to year and expanded as needed. A more sophisticated way to accommodate the social learner is to provide online textual conferencing (or chat rooms) available on the course Web site. Chat rooms can help inherently social learners make sense of course material by communicating synchronously with others in the class. Independent learners can choose to limit their time collaborating with others, while social learners can choose to spend as much time as necessary on course chat boards, exploring relevant issues and internalizing course material in ways that would not have been possible if it were not for the Web medium. Electronic discussion forums are an excellent tool that can be used by cooperative groups with varying schedules and time commitments. From students' home computers, virtual collaborative meetings can transpire in private course chat rooms that are password accessible only to the designated group. Unlike using the telephone or meeting a friend after class, students using the Web allow for many participants to en gage in discussions. In such an environment, the educator's role changes from content disseminator to facilitator, guiding discussions and answering questions when they arise. Students who may be hesitant to raise their hand in a large classroom may be more willing to discuss issues in the more egalitarian, anonymous environment of the Web. It is clear that the Web can expand opportunities for the social learner and therefore enhance what transpires in the conventional classroom. Cognitive Another facet of learning style research explores cognitive processes. Cognitive learning style can be defined as "distinctive behaviors which serve as indicators of how a person learns from and adapts to the environment" (Gregorc 1979, 234). Furthermore, the construct of cognitive learning style can "give educators clues as to how a student's mind operates" (234). As the definitions illustrate, instead of focusing on preferences in learning through specific sensory modalities, this branch of learning style research deals with how a person interacts with, and responds to, the immediate environment. Summary The premise of this paper is that the effectiveness of information technology in contributing to learning is a function of how well the technology supports a particular model of learning and the appropriateness of the model to a particular learning situation in a primary school. The use of IT in an educational setting will reflect either purposely or inadvertently some model of learning. The paper began with a discussion of the most commonly advocated models of learning. It was then found that Constructivist model had the practicality to assimilate technology in the teaching process. A few of the learning and teaching styles were found to be feasible which catered to diversified requirements of the students. References Brown, J. S., Collins A., & Duguid P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42. Farrington, G. C. (1999). The new technologies and the future of residential undergraduate education. In Dancing with the devil, ed. R. N. Katz and associates. 73-94. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass. Grasha, A. F., and S. W. Riechmann. (1975). Student learning styles questionnaire. Cincinnati, Oh.: University of Cincinati Faculty Center. Gregorc A. F. (1979). Learning/teaching styles: Potent forces behind them. Educational Leadership 36(4): 234-6. Jonassen, D.H. (1993) Thinking Technology, Educational Technology, January 1993, pp. 35-37. Means, B., & Olson, K. (1995). Technology's role in education reform: Findings from a national study of innovating schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Ross, J. L. (1998). On-line but off-course: A wish list for distance educators. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning 2(3). (http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/iejll). Sarasin, L. C. (1998). Learning styles perspectives: Impact in the classroom. Madison, Wis.: Atwood Publishing. Yarusso, L. (1992) Constructivism vs. Objectivism, Performance and Instruction Joumal, April 1992, pp. 7-9. Read More