The Way of Learning and Teaching - Assignment Example

Paradigm Positions The way of learning and teaching are changing. Communicative methods and the introduction of digital methods are playing a major role. In the essay, two of the readings are revisited and reconsidered in the light of the learning of the module. 1. How has your understanding of the articles developed since you first encountered them? For example, can you now understand some of the terminology which may have been strange to you at the time? (approx. 180 words) A) Both the articles, “Digital natives: where is the evidence?” By Ellen Johanna Helsper & Rebecca Eynon, University of Oxford, UK and “Communicative-based curriculum innovations between theory and practice: implications for EFL curriculum development and student cognitive and affective change”, by Saad Shawera are well written and thought provoking. The first reading is also good to read and high in quality. Though some of the words or terminologies were unfamiliar. For instance, Digital natives/digital immigrants on the former article and in second article, Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and English as a Foreign Language (EFL). But during the second, reading the ideas of the author came out clearly. Even in the first reading, it appeared that all the researchers Shawer, S. (2010) Helsper, E.J. and Eynon, R. (2010) used both primary and secondary research in a big way to develop their arguments in the write ups. Helsper, E.J. and Eynon, R. emphasized that technology usage makes difference in educational development among students. Shawer found out that a person’s teaching, which was not communicative, did not help his students to improve their abilities to use 2. What is the view of learning and learners taken by the authors of the articles? If you find it difficult to answer this question, explain why. For example, is it because the authors give insufficient detail; or their own position seems confused to you? (approx. 650 words) If the educational research is being done, then the views of students are important. Saad Shawera expressed the views of learning and learners very clearly and elaborately. The paper discussed communication based learning techniques where the feedback of students is very important. In the paper, it is mentioned that “it is based on educational, psychological and linguistic assumptions as well as teaching and learning theories”. The research highlighted that conventional learning methods were not that communicative, compared to current methods. That is why new methods are more effective. Richardson (1997) pointed out that the information acquired from traditional teaching, if acquired at all, is usually not well incorporated with other knowledge held by the students’. Through constructivism, this study’s teachers and students communicate with each other to get ready for their curriculum, where knowledge acquisition is: ‘active and strategic, dependent on many factors, including troubles of understanding, diversity of skills, learning styles and interests, curriculum as bridge between learners and teachers’ (Terwel 1999, 196). In the research paper, six learners completed the questionnaire while two males and two females participated in the group interview for about 85 minutes. Qualitative data were analyzed through explanation-building about each case. Also in the research, many findings of students’ view came out. For instance, one student believed in CLT and said ‘I prefer an interactive communicative model’ which involved several principles. Another opinion was “students should learn how to use appropriate language in different social settings: ‘Communicative for me is taking a language point, giving people a context in which they can use it.” Another student focused on the importance of educating students on how to use correct language: ‘There are techniques of doing things that looking a bit rough and there are ways of doing things that look quite linguistically and culturally acceptable.’ Ellen Johanna Helsper & Rebecca Eynon also highlighted the views of students but empirically. The topic of the research is impact of digital easiness among student. The research focused on the digital natives, the net generation, the Google generation of the millennia. All of these factors are being used to point out the importance of current technologies within the lives of new generation people (Gibbons, 2007). In this case as well, a survey was conducted. The sample surveys of students aged 14 years and older were carried out face-to-face. It took the views of 2350 respondents (a response rate of 77%) of which 1578 were Internet users. Then the views were analyzed numerically. It was found out that self-efficacy was deeply correlated with age, but in the case of experience, it was not true. The finding said that, “The new age students might have expertise, and high levels of self-efficacy but they have not necessarily spent more or fewer years using the Internet.” It is important to differentiate the ‘digital nativeness’ of an individual by comparing people of different age groups with the same number of years of experience. It came out that from the students view, new age people were more prone to be digital natives as these students have facilities at home and were more likely to be users of Internet. An interesting finding is that the major fall in the proportion of Internet users was when users were above 55 years. That means that the majority of teachers and parents of teenagers use the Internet. The research also demonstrates that the new generation can actually be qualified as digital natives because of the amount of Internet have in their daily lives. The (second-generation digital natives), the youngest Internet users, stay in households with Internet is being used. The digital generations are generally multi-taskers and primarily refer to the Internet, as compared to others for information and education for school and work. Moreover, they use it for training (searching for jobs, e-learning, online courses). If a current affair is considered, the differences between age groups are not vivid. As both the research clearly highlighted the views of learning and the learner, the objective of the researches seemed successful. 3. What do you see as the key similarities and differences between the views of learning and learners taken in the two articles? Can you account for these in any way? (approx. 180 words) A) The main similarities between the articles are that both have used survey or questionnaire based primary research as well as reference based secondary research. But dissimilarities are also many. Helsper and Eynon (2010) have done their study using quantitative research but Shawer (2010) has focused on qualitative research rather that quantitative research. So the former write up had a vast numerical representation of the responses calculated for those figures. On the other hand, the latter theoretically analyzed the answers of respondents and drew the findings. Helsper and Eynon (2010) used technology or digitalization as the key variable in the paper, but the generation has not played a big role. The authors themselves wrote that “The paper will show that breadth of use, experience; self-efficacy and education are just as, if not more, important than age in explaining how people become digital natives.” For Shawer (2010), communication technique played the vital role to teach the foreign language and motivate to learn. He found that, “teaching, which was not communicative, did not help his students to improve their abilities to use English or increase their motivation to learn.”    4. In what paradigm positions would you put each of your chosen articles? Explain why you are making your decisions about this – what evidence do you find, explicitly or implicitly, in the articles? If you find this difficult, or are uncertain, explain why. Remember that many research studies are complex and multi-layered, so it is not surprising if a quick answer does not appear. (approx. 650 words) Paradigm is the nature of belief or thinking. In the context of educational research, Thomas Kuhns (1962, 1970) defined paradigm as intellectual structure and underlying assumptions. On the basis of this structure, the inquiry for research and development was is designed. According to Denzin and Lincoln (2001) and Guba (1990), there are three categories of paradigms: Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology. Ontology: it deals with the question with what is real. For instance, what kind of being is the human being? Epistemology: It deals with what is the relationship between the inquirer and the known. It covers the perceived relationship between the knowledge and the person. Methodology: The way human beings know the world. It shows to how does one go about finding out knowledge and carrying out his studies; it a kind of strategic technique rather than data analysis. Quantitative analysis falls under this category. There are different kinds of paradigms considered and these are positivism, post positivism or anti-positivism, critical theory and constructive theory. Positivist paradigm: It explores social reality which came out of the philosophical ideas of August Comte, a French philosopher. He stressed on observation and reason as tools of understanding human behavior.  Anti-positivism: It states that social reality is considered and interpreted by the person himself according to the ideological positions he has. So, it’s the knowledge of what a person already experienced rather than what he learned from or imposed externally.  Critical theory: This approach of search and action is in the domain of social sciences. Critical theory describes the historical forces that restrict human freedom. It also considers the ideological justification of those forces. Positivism Post Positivism Critical Theory Constructivism Ontology Native realism; real but apprehensible Critical realism; real but imperfectly apprehensible Historical realism relativism Epistemology Dualist/objectivist finding true Modifies dualist finding probable true Transactional subjectivist; Transactional subjectivist; Methodology Experimental quantitative method Modified Experimental quantitative method Dialogical Hermeneutical The article “Communicative-based curriculum innovations between theory and practice: implications for EFL curriculum development and student cognitive and affective change” by Saad Shawera falls under Epistemology paradigm and post-positivism paradigm. As it is a qualitative research, it does not fall under methodology it has to be either ontology or epistemology. As the heading of the article suggests; the article deals with communicative based curriculum. It highlights a dual relationship; in this case the relationship is between teachers and students. So the paradigm can be epistemology. The article covered the social reality from the perspective of teachers and students. It counted the responses of each interviewee. In the article, it is mentioned that, “Participant observations revealed the complexities of each case” and “It particularly captured how teachers translated CLT into actual classroom practice. Yin (1989) checked the extent to which the interview responses matched on-site teaching by capturing the events as they occurred. This shows the research does not consider hard core general and unbiased reality, rather case to case perspective. This makes it fall under post positivism. The article Digital natives: where is the evidence? By Ellen Johanna Helsper & Rebecca Eynon, falls under methodology paradigm and positivism paradigm. In this case, the way research was done is quantitative and answered the way human beings know the world. That is why it is under methodology section. It collected empirical evidence to inform the debate. It is written in the article that, “The data upon which this article is based are taken from the 2007 Oxford Internet Survey (OxIS), carried out by the Oxford Internet Institute (University of Oxford), which provides authoritative information on Internet use and non-use in Britain”. As it is Experimental quantitative method and deals with unbiased hard reality, it falls under positivism. It can be said that the research studies are complex and multi-layered. There are overlapping concepts and paradigms are observed. Some researchers can also be found where it is not clear that under which paradigm it fall. But in this case, paradigms are chosen on the basis on biasness of the article towards one paradigm.    5. At this stage of the module, do you find that you align your own practice (or, if you are not a practitioner, view of learners) with any one paradigm position? Give your reasons for your response. (approx. 180 words)  In the case of educational research, it is important to have the idea of paradigm positioning. It considers the similarities and contradictions. It also highlights the connection between quantitative and qualitative studies in the domain of education and social sciences. There are many paradigms where learning can fall under. Being a learner of the educational domain, my practices can be positioned as epistemology when the paradigm. My learning about educational process is qualitative. My studies are dependent both on primary research such as sample survey and interviews and secondary research such as library work. The studies about educational process consider the perceived relationship between the knowledge and the person. If it is explained in a different angle it can fall under post-positivism paradigm. The position says that social realism is taken into account and elaborated by the person himself according to the ideological positions he has. So, knowledge is experienced by a person rather than learned from or introduced from outside.  Though the paradigm concepts are overlapping, but it tends to be an epistemology paradigm. References Denzin Norman K, Lincoln Yvonna S (2001)The Qualitative Inquiry Reader,(available at http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Mg_SRyR425kC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Denzin+and+Lincoln+(2001)&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TGbuUpb8BIr8rAfB_YDQAQ&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Denzin%20and%20Lincoln%20(2001)&f=false [accessed February 02,2014] Dimmitt Carey, John C. Carey, Hatch Trish (2007) Evidence-Based School Counseling: Making a Difference With Data-Driven Practice, (available at http://books.google.co.in/books?id=rHKn7CDOF7UC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Making+evidence+based+practice&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aWXuUr-XFc3MrQel6YCACg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Making%20evidence%20based%20practice&f=false, [accessed February 02,2014] Gibbons, Elizabeth Teaching Dance: The Spectrum of Styles,(available at http://books.google.co.in/books?id=wfyRSt-syjoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=(Gibbons,+2007&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tmfuUtG0DMa8rAfc44GQDQ&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=(Gibbons%2C%202007&f=false, [accessed February 01,2014] Helsper, E.J. and Eynon, R. (2010), Digital natives: where is the evidence? Lee Shulman S (2004), The Wisdom Of Practice: Essays On Teaching, Learning, And Learning To Teach Martyn Hammersley (2007) Educational Research and Evidence-Based Practice(available at http://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=OwWlv3MPnL8C&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=teaching+as+a+research+based+profession&ots=ff2LIq5EnU&sig=d8TIDUGNfteLkoRB1VpAxCdj_64#v=onepage&q=teaching%20as%20a%20research%20based%20profession&f=false, [accessed February 01,2014] Richardson Virginia (1997) Constructivist Teacher Education: Building a World of New Understandings Shawer, S. (2010), Communicative-based curriculum innovations between theory and practice: implications for EFL curriculum development and student cognitive and affective change. Read More