I am forwarding this for Peg Griffin, whose message was swallowed
by the xmca gremlins.
mike
-----------------------------------------------
>From Peg.Griffin@worldnet.att.net Tue Sep 7 11:07:20 2004
Subject: Re: challenge to constructivism in school instruction
Maybe it is useful to examine a few presuppositions (or are they basics) =
in the section from the report (draft? what?) Mike mentioned:=20
1. "the most effective ways to teach specific subjects" and "how the =
balance between didactic and active learning should be struck." =20
Years ago a group of us considered an "integrated" approach to the =
teaching and learning of reading as a result of model systems research =
with middle elementary age students considered to have difficulties =
learning. More recently a different group of us called for =
"integrated" as the word to use, not "balanced," when talking about =
preventing reading difficulties among young children. =20
I understand both of these positions as quite unremarkable given the =
Zo-Ped in a teaching/learning activity system: The whole is in the =
system; there is careful titration of who contributes what aspects of =
the activity and when. The boundaries and transitions (spatial and =
temporal) are the tricky negotiating point -- how to keep it all =
together to achieve the integrated whole. =20
When kids say "It's my life, I'll do what I want," they are telling us a =
lot about education activity: How do we get in enough and back off =
enough so they are our socio-cultural future and we are their =
socio-cultural past? That's what effective education means, I'm =
guessing. =20
I think "most effective ways" research is too hard and possibly =
pointless (but we'll never know because its too hard to do). It is hard =
to locate tasks in education and in talk compared to laboratory work =
scripts. The idea of locating describable tasks and then arranging a =
kind of horse race among "most effective ways" to accomplish integrated =
education activity-- unh unh, the closest we'll ever get will be thought =
experiments made rigorous within empirically falsifiable theories and =
little model systems that we can tinker with. We can't directly address =
the intra-psychological or the cultural, right? -- just the smoke and =
mirrors and shadows and leaks of them in the social inter-psychological? =
(The fMRI's are leaks of the intra and NCLB smoke of the cultural, =
right?)
=20
2. "instruction to go beyond simple didactic drilling on specific facts =
to call attention to higher-level ways of organizing
and understanding those facts and providing active opportunities to use =
knowledge in meaningful activities."
What about germ cells or genetically primary examples, "rising to the =
concrete," and the two interplaying but distinct dimensions: =
specific/general and concrete/abstract. To repeat the above -- or to =
draw it out at any rate -- someone somewhere in the educational activity =
has to have gone beyond the facts just in order to pick them out as =
facts in the domain, right? And sometimes they are dead wrong. But =
even when okay, curriculum and instruction is about issues of titration, =
boundaries, and transitions -- and participants effecting but absent =
from the immediate social interactions so that the boundaries of =
(co-)membership have to be negotiated, too. (Hawkings and Archimedes =
effect any teaching/learning of physics I try to do; the guy who =
preached at the church down the street about creationism is not a =
co-member for biology education activity I'm in.)=20
3. Again on "between didactic and active learning"
It's funny that -- didactic doesn't really work as a descriptor of =
learning, does it? How people learn and how people teach most likely =
do have a relation but, as Janet Emig wrote ages ago about the teaching =
of writing, we have to beware of magical thinking. The relation is =
probably not a simple reciprocal one, right, and the relation within =
types of teaching are probably not simple alternates. A phrase I am =
liking is intentional teaching. It calls for having an analysis of the =
domain and the interactions in the lesson so that goals are identifiable =
and the titrating and negotiation demands can be met. Whether children =
are figuring out about displacement (with pretty active splashes and =
innovative choices of why to try floating) or learning how to keep a =
record of results (which looks didactic to me), the whole thing can be =
sabotaged or at least stalled unless there is intentional teaching. =
(This is not to say that incidental learning and practice in play or =
bonding or work have no place in schools.) =20
Peg G.
PS I think it would be nice to see Wortham's articles from Ethos, too.
----- Original Message -----=20
>From: <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 3:09 PM
Subject: challenge to constructivism in school instruction
> The following passage from a report I am reading is
> written by a person who has spent about 40 years in
> the field of foundation support of educational
> innovation. It is taken out of context, but it seems
> to stand on its own as a challenge to a lot of
> members of XMCA, among whom I include myself, so I
> thought I would send it along to see if collectively
> we could come up with a bibliography of positive
> examples that respond to, in particular, the
> conclusion at the end of the passage. For example,
> Carol Lee's work on teaching highschool english to
> African American students might go in such a
> bibliogrpahy. And.....??
> mike
> (Who is avoiding pressing work while waiting to close
> the voting on the next MCA article to be read at the
> end of this week and wondering how Stanton Wortham's
> articles from Ethos can make it into the hands of
> xmca-o-files.)
> --------------
> It is interesting how little definitive work exists
> concerning the most effective ways to teach specific
> subjects (RAND, 2003 a and b) given the amount of
> paper and breath that have been expended on debating
> such things - on the various "wars." There is a
> general understanding of how people learn based on
> current cognitive science (NRC, 1999) that stresses
> the points that human beings in learning new things
> will be influenced by the prior knowledge that they
> bring to the situation; that learning is active,
> serving the purposes of the learner; that learners
> construct conceptions of areas of knowledge that help
> them organize the specific facts and pieces of
> knowledge in a domain; that experts have conceptual
> structures or schemes of this sort that give them
> much more powerful and flexible control over
> knowledge in a domain and the ability to apply it in
> new situations, compared to novices, though it also
> is true that these conceptual schemes cannot operate
> in a vacuum but are built upon knowledge of facts and
> well practiced skills. Socio-cultural approaches in
> addition have described the ways in which individual
> human knowledge is fundamentally a social product,
> derived from the interactions, tools, artifacts, and
> affordances provided by one's family, peers, and
> cultural milieu. These general insights make it
> clear that it should be important for instruction to
> go beyond simple didactic drilling on specific facts
> to call attention to higher-level ways of organizing
> and understanding those facts and providing active
> opportunities to use knowledge in meaningful
> activities and to have the experience of making sense
> of new knowledge in the light of prior experience and
> current active engagement. That said, however, there
> is much less rigorous help available on how the
> balance between didactic and active learning should
> be struck, and how it might vary, for particular
> students and particular subjects at particular stages
> of learning.
>=20
>
------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C494DC.27248FC0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi, Mike,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I sent this to xmca last night but it =
seems not to=20
have shown up yet. Did I do it wrong or is there a delay like that =
ordinarily? I did do the subscribe and the self description things =
the=20
machine asked me to do as a part of signing up, but maybe I did them=20
wrong? or something else wrong?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Peg</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3DPeg.Griffin@worldnet.att.net=20
href=3D"mailto:Peg.Griffin@worldnet.att.net">Peg Griffin</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=3Dxmca@weber.ucsd.edu=20
href=3D"mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu">xmca@weber.ucsd.edu</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, September 06, 2004 6:00 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: challenge to constructivism in school=20
instruction</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Maybe it is useful to examine a few =
presuppositions=20
(or are they basics) in the section from the report (draft? what?) =
Mike=20
mentioned: <BR>1. "the most effective ways to teach specific =
subjects" and=20
"how the balance between didactic and active learning should be=20
struck." <BR>Years ago a group of us considered =
an=20
"integrated" approach to the teaching and learning of reading as a =
result=20
of model systems research with middle elementary age students =
considered=20
to have difficulties learning. More recently a different =
group of us=20
called for "integrated" as the word to use, not "balanced," when talking =
about=20
preventing reading difficulties among young children. <BR>I=20
understand both of these positions as quite unremarkable given the =
Zo-Ped in a=20
teaching/learning activity system: The whole is in the system; there is =
careful=20
titration of who contributes what aspects of the activity and =
when. The=20
boundaries and transitions (spatial and temporal) are the tricky =
negotiating=20
point -- how to keep it all together to achieve the integrated =
whole. =20
<BR>When kids say "It's my life, I'll do what I want," they are telling =
us a lot=20
about education activity: How do we get in enough and back =
off enough=20
so they are our socio-cultural future and we are their socio-cultural=20
past? That's what effective education means, I'm =
guessing. =20
<BR>I think "most effective ways" research is too hard and possibly =
pointless=20
(but we'll never know because its too hard to do). It is hard to =
locate=20
tasks in education and in talk compared to laboratory work =
scripts. The=20
idea of locating describable tasks and then arranging a kind of horse =
race among=20
"most effective ways" to accomplish integrated education activity-- unh =
unh, the=20
closest we'll ever get will be thought experiments made =
rigorous within=20
empirically falsifiable theories and little model systems that we can =
tinker=20
with. We can't directly address the intra-psychological or the =
cultural,=20
right? -- just the smoke and mirrors and shadows and leaks of them in =
the social=20
inter-psychological? (The fMRI's are leaks of the intra and NCLB =
smoke of=20
the cultural, right?)<BR> <BR>2. "instruction to go beyond simple =
didactic=20
drilling on specific facts to call attention to higher-level ways of=20
organizing<BR>and understanding those facts and providing active =
opportunities=20
to use knowledge in meaningful activities."<BR>What about germ cells or=20
genetically primary examples, "rising to the concrete," and the two =
interplaying=20
but distinct dimensions: specific/general and=20
concrete/abstract. To repeat the above -- or to =
draw it=20
out at any rate -- someone somewhere in the educational activity has to =
have=20
gone beyond the facts just in order to pick them out as facts in the =
domain,=20
right? And sometimes they are dead wrong. But even when =
okay,=20
curriculum and instruction is about issues of titration, boundaries, and =
transitions -- and participants effecting but absent from the immediate =
social=20
interactions so that the boundaries of (co-)membership have to be=20
negotiated, too. (Hawkings and Archimedes effect any =
teaching/learning of=20
physics I try to do; the guy who preached at the church down the street =
about=20
creationism is not a co-member for biology education activity I'm=20
in.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>3. Again on "between didactic and =
active=20
learning"<BR>It's funny that -- didactic doesn't really work as a =
descriptor of=20
learning, does it? How people learn and how people teach =
most likely=20
do have a relation but, as Janet Emig wrote ages ago about the teaching =
of=20
writing, we have to beware of magical thinking. The relation =
is=20
probably not a simple reciprocal one, right, and the =
relation within types=20
of teaching are probably not simple alternates. A phrase I am =
liking is=20
intentional teaching. It calls for having an analysis of =
the=20
domain and the interactions in the lesson so that goals are identifiable =
and the=20
titrating and negotiation demands can be met. Whether children are =
figuring out about displacement (with pretty active splashes and =
innovative=20
choices of why to try floating) or learning how to keep a record of =
results=20
(which looks didactic to me), the whole thing can be sabotaged =
or at=20
least stalled unless there is intentional teaching. </FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>(This is not to say that incidental learning and =
practice in=20
play or bonding or work have no place in =
schools.) </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Peg G.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>PS I think it would be nice to see=20
Wortham's articles from Ethos, too.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>----- Original Message ----- =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>From: <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>mcole@weber.ucsd.edu</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To: <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 3:09=20
PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Subject: challenge to constructivism in =
school=20
instruction</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><BR><FONT size=3D2></FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>> The following passage from a report I am reading =
is<BR>> written=20
by a person who has spent about 40 years in<BR>> the field of =
foundation=20
support of educational<BR>> innovation. It is taken out of context, =
but it=20
seems<BR>> to stand on its own as a challenge to a lot of<BR>> =
members of=20
XMCA, among whom I include myself, so I<BR>> thought I would send it =
along to=20
see if collectively<BR>> we could come up with a bibliography of=20
positive<BR>> examples that respond to, in particular, the<BR>> =
conclusion=20
at the end of the passage. For example,<BR>> Carol Lee's work on =
teaching=20
highschool english to<BR>> African American students might go in such =
a<BR>> bibliogrpahy. And.....??<BR>> mike<BR>> (Who is avoiding =
pressing work while waiting to close<BR>> the voting on the next MCA =
article=20
to be read at the<BR>> end of this week and wondering how Stanton=20
Wortham's<BR>> articles from Ethos can make it into the hands =
of<BR>>=20
xmca-o-files.)<BR>> --------------<BR>> It is interesting how =
little=20
definitive work exists<BR>> concerning the most effective ways to =
teach=20
specific<BR>> subjects (RAND, 2003 a and b) given the amount =
of<BR>> paper=20
and breath that have been expended on debating<BR>> such things - on =
the=20
various "wars." There is a<BR>> general understanding of how =
people=20
learn based on<BR>> current cognitive science (NRC, 1999) that=20
stresses<BR>> the points that human beings in learning new =
things<BR>>=20
will be influenced by the prior knowledge that they<BR>> bring to the =
situation; that learning is active,<BR>> serving the purposes of the =
learner;=20
that learners<BR>> construct conceptions of areas of knowledge that=20
help<BR>> them organize the specific facts and pieces of<BR>> =
knowledge in=20
a domain; that experts have conceptual<BR>> structures or schemes of =
this=20
sort that give them<BR>> much more powerful and flexible control =
over<BR>>=20
knowledge in a domain and the ability to apply it in<BR>> new =
situations,=20
compared to novices, though it also<BR>> is true that these =
conceptual=20
schemes cannot operate<BR>> in a vacuum but are built upon knowledge =
of facts=20
and<BR>> well practiced skills. Socio-cultural approaches =
in<BR>>=20
addition have described the ways in which individual<BR>> human =
knowledge is=20
fundamentally a social product,<BR>> derived from the interactions, =
tools,=20
artifacts, and<BR>> affordances provided by one's family, peers, =
and<BR>>=20
cultural milieu. These general insights make it<BR>> clear that =
it=20
should be important for instruction to<BR>> go beyond simple didactic =
drilling on specific facts<BR>> to call attention to higher-level =
ways of=20
organizing<BR>> and understanding those facts and providing =
active<BR>>=20
opportunities to use knowledge in meaningful<BR>> activities and to =
have the=20
experience of making sense<BR>> of new knowledge in the light of =
prior=20
experience and<BR>> current active engagement. That said, =
however,=20
there<BR>> is much less rigorous help available on how the<BR>> =
balance=20
between didactic and active learning should<BR>> be struck, and how =
it might=20
vary, for particular<BR>> students and particular subjects at =
particular=20
stages<BR>> of learning.<BR>> <BR>> </FONT></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C494DC.27248FC0--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:43:03 PST