|
|
|
|
Social Studies Resources (Kajian Tempatan)
MasteryA fundamental change in thinking about the nature of instruction was initiated in 1963 when John B. Carroll argued for the idea of mastery learning. Mastery learning suggests that the focus of instruction should be the time required for different students to learn the same material. This contrasts with the classic model (based upon theories of intelligence ) in which all students are given the same amount of time to learn and the focus is on differences in ability. The idea of mastery learning amounts to a radical shift in responsibility for teachers; the blame for a student's failure rests with the instruction not a lack of ability on the part of the student. In a mastery learning environment, the challenge becomes providing enough time and employing instructional strategies so that all students can achieve the same level of learning (Levine, 1985; Bloom, 1981). The key elements in matery learning are: (1) clearly specifying what is to be learned and how it will be evaluated, (2) allowing students to learn at their own pace, (3) assessing student progress and providing appropriate feedback or remediation, and (4) testing that final learning critierion has been achieved. Mastery learning has been widely applied in schools and training settings, and research shows that it can improve instructional effectiveness (e.g., Block, Efthim & Burns, 1989; Slavin, 1987). On the other hand, there are some theoretical and practical weaknesses including the fact that people do differ in ability and tend to reach different levels of achievement (see Cox & Dunn, 1979). Furthermore, mastery learning programs tend to require considerable amounts of time and effort to implement which most teachers and schools are not prepared to expend. The mastery learning model is closely aligned with the use of instructional objectives and the systematic design of instructional programs (see Gagne , Merrill ). The Criterion Referenced Instruction (CRI) model of Mager is an attempt to implement the mastery learning model. In addition, the theoretical framework of Skinner with its emphasis on individualized learning and the importance of feedback (i.e., reinforcement) is also relevant to mastery learning. References: Block, J. H. (1971). Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Block, J. H., Efthim, H. E., & Burns, R.B. (1989). Building Effective Mastery Learning Schools. New York: Longman. Bloom, B.S. (1981). All Our Children Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64, 723-733. Cox, W.F. & Dunn, T. G. (1979). Mastery learning: A psychological trap? Educational Pyschologist, 14, 24-29. Levine, D. (1985). Improving Student Achievement Through Mastery Learning Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Slavin, R.E. (1987). Mastery learning reconsidered. Review of Educational Research, 57(2), 175-214.
collaborative learning, peer-based learning, team-based learning, group learning, project based learning, management education Abstract Collaborative Learning (CL) has become a well established management education methodology. It emphasises the cooperative efforts between students and the generation, rather than transmission, of knowledge. However, despite significant research which identifies the value of this approach, it is treated with ambivalence by many business educators. Terms and concepts Collaborative learning has been established in many different ways for many years in a number of different fields of education. Therefore it is necessary to review terminology and concepts. According to Whipple (1986): Collaborative education is a pedagogical style which emphasizes co-operative efforts among students, faculty and administrators. It stresses common inquiry as the basic learning process. Bruffee (1981) stated that: Collaborative learning personalises knowledge by socializing it, providing students with a social context of learning peers with whom they are engaged on conceptual issues. Sheridan et al. (1989) noted that: The focus shifts from the transmission of knowledge to the generation of it Common features which have been identified in the literature are: * learning being centred on student based activities rather than being teacher focused, * an emphasis on students assisting each other to find answers to areas of common inquiry rather than seeking answers from teachers * learning being based on the solving of problems by data gathering, analysis and discussion by student groups. Themes and subsets Although most group learning approaches share a common theme, differentiation is developing. Cooper et al (1991, p. 239) define co-operative learning as: a structured systematic instructional strategy in which small groups work towards a common goal. He and a number of colleagues distinguish it from other group learning by: its emphasis on highly structured techniques for ensuring positive interdependence within groups and its insistence on individual accountability. Slavin (1988) states: in order to have an impact on achievement small group teaching procedures must include positive interdependence and individual accountability. Problem Based Learning or Integrated Contextual Learning (Stinson 1991) are related methodologies which concentrate on real life or simulated case study problem solving. Much of the research on its effectiveness comes from medical schools. Whilst such approaches can be undertaken individually, group work is often a major focus. In 'real life', solutions to problems are rarely discovered without assistance from other members of an organisation. Consequently some of the literature on Problem Based Learning has been incorporated in this paper. Collier and Clarke (1986) identified two styles of syndicate based learning. The Unstructured (U) Model took place when groups of four to six students work on assignments and present their findings to a larger group. The group work is the focus of learning and is not closely directed by academic staff. There is an expectation that 'debate within syndicates' clarifies and synthesizes student learning. The second Formal (F) Model is more tightly managed with tutors being assigned to work groups who are guided through a series of 'problem boxes'. Weekly meetings are time tabled with tutors who act as 'process-advisors' and are not necessarily full-time academic staff. Collier's (1983) study of Management of Peer Learning found the 'U Model'was more commonly adopted in Literature, Sociology of Education and Study of Values. It is a technique often used in undergraduate and MBA programs. The 'F model' has been adopted in Medical and Engineering Schools and is used at RMIT in postgraduate management programs. Other terms which have been applied to this field are Peer Based Learning, Problem Centred Learning, Small Group Learning, Syndicate Based Learning, Collaborative Learning, Self Directed Work Teams, Management Learning Teams, Professional Development Teams. Whilst it is appropriate to distinguish between styles and approaches, there is a significant breadth and diversity of methodologies which fit under the general banner of small group learning. Terminology which has established definitions in one country, field or level of study may be interpreted differently elsewhere. Consequently this paper will not emphasise different themes or subsets of collaborative learning. It will concentrate on applications in Higher Education, but will touch on as many of the aspects identified by research in the field as possible. The terms Small Group Learning (SGL) and Collaborative Learning (CL) will be used synonymously as the common broad generic terms. Research outcomes relating to Co-operative Learning. Much research has been undertaken to determine the effect of peer based learning. Positive outcomes predominate, which is not surprising as most studies have been carried out by its proponents. The following summary aims to list the most supported research findings. 1. Increased cognitive analysis and problem solving skills. Bligh's (1972) review of 100 studies on group work indicated that students who actively participated in discussion synthesized integrated concepts more effectively than students who passively listened to lectures. Kulik and Kulik's (1979) review of research on teaching strategies found discussion groups promoted students' problem solving abilities. McKeachie's (1987, 1988) and Smith's (1977, 1980) research on college classes and college teaching methods found student interaction was positively related to critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive learning strategies. Bloom (1976) suggests that group learning can develop higher level skills of analysing, synthesising, evaluating, and conceptualising. These findings were supported by Cooper, Sanches, Prescott and Lawrence (1988), Whipple (1986), Gabbert, Johnston and Johnston (1986), Johnston and Johnston (1981)and Skon, Johnston and Johnston (1981/80). Schmidt (1983) identified three conditions that link theory to subsequent retrieval and appropriate use of new information. They are activation of prior knowledge, similarity of context, and opportunity to elaborate on initial knowledge. Bridges suggests that these conditions are most likely to apply when problem based learning, incorporating SGL, is used. These principles are validated by Godden and Baddeley's research which suggests that: knowledge is much more likely to be remembered or recalled in the context in which it was originally learned (Bridges 1992, p.9) Bridges suggests PBL methodologies encourage students to adopt a 'meaning orientation' rather than a 'reproducing orientation' (1992, p.16); they are interested in the subject matter rather than in simply reproducing factual information (Coles, 1985; de Volder and de Grave 1989; Schmidt, Dauphinee and Patel 1987). Brashford et al. (1989) suggest PBL students are more likely spontaneously to apply their learning to solve new problems than students who were taught in more traditional fact-oriented learning conditions. Johnston et al. (1991) believe that challenge and controversy emerging from SGL can be a positive element in improving understanding. They stated that: controversy promotes uncertainty about the correctness of one's views, an active search for more information, a reconceptualisation of one's knowledge and conclusions and consequently greater mastery and retention of the material being discussed. 2. Team Building Johnston (1984) noted that co-operative learning involves positive interdependence among students and development of small group skills. Beckman (1990) reinforces the view that CL strengthens skills needed for teamwork. She notes the growth of team oriented management planning in American companies and suggests CL in management schools effectively prepares students for the 'latest techniques of capitalism' (p. 32). However she believes the maintenance of power in the teacher and the university (grading) ensures that CL approaches do not really challenge the hegemony of authority and thus develop democratisation in the workplace. In fact it helps increase awareness that lower level collaboration reinforces upper level power bases. 3. Improved results Cooper's literature survey (quoting Johnston et al 1981; Slavin et al 1985 and Danserau, 1983) led him to state: Collaborative Learning procedures are more effective for promoting student learning and achievement than traditional instructional methods which involve private, individual, and/or competitive procedures Borresen's (1990) study on small group work in statistics classes indicated significantly better results occurred when students were assigned to work groups or formed voluntary groups, when compared with individual methods of study. Johnston et al (1991) believe peer feedback is an important factor for both motivation and the development of knowledge. Knowledge retention is more likely when frequent and immediate feedback occurs, a core aspect of SGL. Studies on the effectiveness of teaching approaches favour CL techniques. Johnston and Johnston (1989) reviewed over 375 studies and fount that: the average student cooperating performed about two-thirds a standard deviation above the average student learning within competitive or an individualistic situations. 4. Increased Student Retention Cooper's review of retention research findings indicated that student involvement with academic and/or social activities within a university is an important element in preventing attrition and increasing persistent achievement. Passive students, especially those from disadvantaged minorities, were 'withdrawal prone'. (Tinto 1975, 1987, Astin et al. 1972,1985, Wales and Sager, 1978, Treisman, 1985, de Vries, Schmidt and Graff (1989). 5. Enhancing Student Satisfaction and Promoting Positive Attitudes Bligh (1972) and Kulik and Kulik (1979) research reviews indicated higher levels of student satisfaction and positive attitudes towards learning experiences when interaction and discussion are key elements in the process. Good and Brophy's (1991) theory of motivation suggests that motivation increases with expectations of success and higher valuation of rewards.Bridges (1992, p. 11) believes PBL can emphasise these strategies by containing elements which increase student enjoyment and encourage intrinsic rewards. Such elements are opportunities for active response, use of simulations, emphasis on immediate feedback, interaction with peers, creation of finished products, and practical use of project outcomes. 6. Improved Verbal Skills Neer (1987) found public speaking anxiety was significantly reduced if students were able to express their ideas initially in small group settings. 7. Improved Social Skills Cooper (1990) suggests CL develops human relations skills such as active listening, consensus building, leadership, conflict management and empathy. Whipple (1986) found that a less hierarchical mode of thinking, greater tolerance of diversity and revitalisation in areas beyond the classroom were likely to come from CL activities. Interpersonal relationships are developed and improved through CL. Johnston et al (1991) state: students who studied cooperatively develop commitment and caring for each other, no matter what their initial impressions of and attitudes toward each other. They suggest a positive emotional climate will increase social skills which relate to social support and interpersonal responsibility. 8. Promoting Self Esteem Research by Johnston and Johnston (1987) and Slavin (1987) indicated that CL positively impacts on student self esteem. Andrews (1992) work with Learning Teams in Language Arts programs confirms the view that SGL increases self confidence and supports the learning process. 9. Improving Cross Cultural Understanding Slavin(1980) and Forehand et al (1976) found that CL techniques 'have strong and consistent effects on relationships between black, white, and Mexican-American students'. 10. Replication of areas of study in the Classroom Cohen et al (1976) developed the notion of the 'Classroom as an Organisation'. Pfeiffer and Jones (1972-1980), Porter (1978) and Van Steenburgh and Gillette (1985) developed the principles of 'group on group'learning approaches to enable students to experiment 'with applying theory to actual situations'. Wagenheim developed the TEAM Exercise for Action Management Skills (a semester long management simulation) which exposed students to role plays, structured exercises, triads, process consultation, case studies and journal writing. His approach epitomises the 'study = practice' approach to the development of management skills and awareness of group behaviour. Problems with Collaborative Learning Sheridan et al (1989) identified a number of concerns in their URI survey. * CL requires staff to be able to provide a more individualised reaction to students. Lecturing 'en masse' is a more 'efficient' way of dealing with large numbers. This riticism overlooks one of the key concerns with lecturing - that ideas, principles and concepts presented in lectures are effectively synthesised and understood by all, or even the majority of, students. * CL best suits gregarious, extroverted students who have well developed social skills. Introverted students, who are uncomfortable with a socially oriented learning environment, find CL methodologies threatening or frightening. * A slow transition from traditional to collaborative mode may be necessary when students are unused to the approach. Students who are used to passive, content based learning are likely to resist a quick and rapid immersion into group based learning which de-emphasises prescribed or predetermined solutions. Overly ambitious projects with unsuitable students are likely to fail. * Staff involved with content driven fields of study dominated by a need to cover set 'base levels of knowledge' (mathematics, languages, some fields of medicine and business) which are required as foundations for subsequent areas of study resist CL as it interferes with the delivery of defined syllabi. Collier and Clarke(1986) and others (Owen 1983, Abercrombie 1978) recognised that the tutor's role is one which cancause difficulties. In SGL tutors are required to minimise a dominant influence over the direction of students' endeavors. However, especially in unstructured group work, tutors can become concerned that the cover of material is insufficient or moving off the 'right'areas of study. The ambiguity of being a mentor rather than a didactic influence can cause insecurity for both staff and students. * A corollary of the content and knowledge issue relates to evaluation and assessment. This is discussed in more detail below. Weiner (1989, p.59) suggests CL should be acknowledged as 'a means to generate knowledge as a social construct and not simply as the use of a new configuration of students in the classroom'. Until this is understood CL faces resistance from academics who place high value on traditional, empirically based (i.e. independent and supposedly objective) means of assessment or evaluation. G.Pius/Dept. of Languages/KTTC/060798 Using Microcomputers To Implement Mastery Learning with High-Risk and Minority Adolescents.Christie, Nancy; Sabers, Darrell L. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Francisco, CA, March 30-April 2, 1989). The setting for this study was a basic education component of a summer youth program designed to increase chances of high risk adolescents, mostly minorities, whose ages ranged from 14-18, to experience more positive academic and employment outcomes. The instructional program used in both experimental and control classrooms emphasized mastery learning of a selected set of mathematics and reading/language arts objectives. Pretests and posttests based on the objectives were developed using the Academic Instructional Measurement System. Of the four sites used, only one was the experimental site where the mastery learning program was implemented using the microcomputer. Quantitative assessment of the experimental program was provided by comparing the effect sizes of the experimental group with the effect sizes of the remaining three sites. Observations were made of the instruction given in the experimental classroom as well as one of the other program sites. The results provide additional evidence of the effectiveness of mastery learning techniques with high risk and minority students. Students at each location made sizeable gains in both mathematics and reading/language arts during a fairly short time period. Although the quantitative results did not show the computer setting to be more effective than the non-computer setting, the qualitative analyses of these two settings revealed educational benefits for high risk students in the computer environment that may not be reflected in a measure of academic achievement. These students demonstrated an increased sense of social integration and bonding, factors that may help to reduce dropout. (16 references)
Mastery Learning
First Developed: March, 1996
Return to | Overview of Instruction | Educational Psychology Interactive |
Basic Principles:
 Appropriate instruction means: |
Grades may be determined by: |
Students can work at own pace if course is so structured, but mastery learning can be
accomplished with group instruction. |
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
| Internet Resources | Electronic Files | Additional articles | Additional books |
Return to:
A Postmodern, Constructivist and Cooperative Pedagogy For Teaching Educational Psychology, Assisted by Computer Mediated CommunicationsLawrence W. Sherman
Department of Educational PsychologyMiami University, Oxford, OhioAbstract Student reactions/evaluations were associated with diverse pedagogical structures including Cooperative Learning (CL), Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) which were all used to deliver graduate instruction in Educational Psychology courses. The approach was predicated on the assumption that students authentically construct knowledge from their experiences within a social context of peer influence. Reflective writing in the context of a public forum in which students were required to react to each other's writing engaged students in a process of critical thinking. They were required to maintain an electronic journal which consisted of weekly narratives (postings to a "netnews group") which consisted of reflections on classroom activities and related readings. Classroom activities included the use of a writing activity described as a Dyadic Essay Confrontation (DEC). Students were required to react to a randomly determined partner's reflections within one week after the initial reflection. A final narrative reflection was required to be submitted to the newsgroup detailing a summary analysis of the constructed knowledge they had determined was brought about through this process. Their reflections and reactions and summary/conclusions comprised a major product for inclusion in an electronic portfolio which was submitted at the end of the class. The techniques, as well as how this complex structure was implemented, and, how students responded to the electronic medium are discussed. Using a rationale derived from the WAC community that stresses integration of the writing process across the curriculum, the conclusions focus on using CMC as an integral part of classroom instruction. A Postmodern and Constructivist theoretical orientation is used to explain the positive student responses to this complex of authentic instruction.
Keywords -- Cooperative Learning, Writing, Computer Mediated Communication.
1. Introduction Lewinian-oriented psychologists subscribe to the theory that human behavior is a result of the interaction of persons with their environments. This has lead to many speculations on "ACTION THEORY." An action theory examines the actions needed to achieve a desired consequence in a given situation. Johnson & Johnson (1987) have stated that "when you generate an action theory from your own experiences and then continually modify it to improve its effectiveness, you are learning experientially (p. 16-17). Experiential learning has three effects: 1) cognitive structures are altered, 2) attitudes are modified and 3) behavioral skills are expanded, and this is a cyclical process. The Johnsons (1987) have presented 12 principles of experiential learning , of which the last four focus on the influence of environments on individuals, especially within the context of a social group. Membership in a group which is supportive and accepting will free a person to experiment with new behaviors, attitudes, and action theories. One such group might be a cooperative classroom structured for learning. The Johnsons (1979) have differentiated three types of classroom goal structures including 1) cooperative, 2) individually competitive, and 3) individualistic. These goal structures are primarily based on the notion of the presence or absence of positive interdependence among classroom members. One form of cooperative learning has been labeled "Collaborative Learning" and has been used extensively in the teaching of writing at the post-secondary level of education (Bruffee, 1993). Cooperative goal structures are in operation when two or more individuals are in a situation where the task-related efforts of individuals help others to be rewarded (positive interdependence). Group members behave in a positively interdependent fashion and are rewarded on the basis of the quality or quantity of the group product according to a fixed set of standards. Sherman's (1990; Millis, Sherman & Cottell, 1993) Dyadic Essay Confrontations (DEC) is considered to be an example of a cooperative technique. Giroux (1990, p. 35) has stated that "...critical educators need to provide a sense of how the most critical elements of modernism, postmodernism, ... might be taken up by teachers and educators so as to create a postmodern pedagogical practice." The present author has tried to adapt and apply relativistic and constructionist viewpoints by introducing conceptual conflict (disequilibrium) into teaching. An additional concern has been to challenge and foster higher level cognitive processes by encouraging critical integration, synthesis, evaluation and analysis of knowledge. The pedagogical practices described below uses the medium of writing and cooperative discourse associated with computer mediated communication. In the spirit of "authentic instruction," (Newmann & Wehlage, 1993), outcomes of this pedagogical strategy are believed to be: 1) increased higher-order thinking; 2) greater depth of knowledge; 3) more connectedness to the world beyond the classroom; 4) substantive conversation; and 5) greater social support for student achievement.
2. Method 2.1. Sample The students who have experienced the strategies described below were graduate education majors pursuing Master's and Specialist's degrees in Elementary and Secondary Teacher Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, Educational Leadership, and Educational and School Psychology. The two 3 credit hour classes examined in this report were taught one evening per week throughout a 15 week semester. Classes varied in size from 20 to 21 students.
2.2. Procedures The DEC technique was used in ten short essay writing experiences which were assigned throughout the semester. For further details and earlier reports on DEC see Sherman (1988 & 1990) as well as Millis, Sherman & Cottell (1993). Bolling (1994) has discussed maintaining group journals as a means by which students may effectively "collaborate." Individual journals are difficult to share among one's classroom peers. Group journals are at least shared among a small group. My approach has been one of extending the notion of a group journal, to a series of journal entries which are constantly available to all class members (Narrative CMC Journals). In this sense the entire class of students become resources for each other. This has been accomplished by utilizing CMC in the form of a "netnews group". Within the context of Miami University's computing environment we maintain an entity called "NETNEWS." This is a "USENET-like" environment where I established a newsgroup for each of my classes. Students are required to make weekly postings, called "reflections," after each class meeting. Within one week after they have posted a "reflection" they are required to "react" to other classmates' reflections. Throughout a 15 week semester, each student posts 12 reflections and 12 reactions. Reflections are made to several aspects of each weekly meeting including simulations, video tapes, whole class discussions, lectures, and the DEC's. They have assigned readings from textbook chapters as well as primary author articles. The DEC activity usually involves two other students, each of which is writing an answer to some one ease's prepared questions, or reacting to someone else's answer to their own question. The three DEC members are randomly determined each week. This determines the people whom they must "react" to in the following weeks netposting. Throughout a typical semester, then, each student reacts to many different people in the class. And, their reflections and reactions are available to all other class members.
3. Results and Analysis. 3.1. Dependent measures and analysis Newmann & Wahlege (1993) have developed a survey instrument consisting of five items designed to tap students' perceptions about authentic instruction. These five items request students to rate on a five-point (1 to 5) Likert scale their perceived class experiences. Perceptions with regard to 1) higher-order thinking [THK], 2) depth of knowledge [KNW], 3) Connectedness to the world beyond the classroom [CON], 4) conversation [COV], and 5) social support for student achievement [SSA] are the primary focus of this survey. It was anonymously filled out on the last day of the class. Descriptive and comparative statistics are used to describe these results presently based upon 41 graduate students from two classes: 21 respondents from a Fall, 1994 advanced Educational Psychology class, and 20 students from a Spring, 1995 class dealing with group dynamics in the classroom.
3.2. Survey Results 1. DOES THIS CLASS ENCOURAGE HIGHER ORDER THINKING?: (low-order thinking 1 to 5 high-order thinking)
2. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE OBTAINED IN THIS CLASS?: (knowledge is shallow 1 to 5 knowledge is deep)
3. IN THIS CLASS WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF CONNECTEDNESS TO THE WORLD BEYOND THE CLASSROOM: (no connection 1 to 5 highly connected)
4. IS THERE SUBSTANTIVE CONVERSATION IN THIS CLASS?: (no conversation 1 to 5 high-level substantive conversation)
5. IS THERE SOCIAL SUPPORT FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN THIS CLASS?: (negative social support 1 to 5 positive social support)
4. Conclusion DEC is based on postmodern thought including the concepts associated with transactional theories of rhetoric, cognitive elaboration and arousal, paradox, divergence and plural realities. DEC, is a continuation of the author's earlier and continuing concerns for promoting learning through small group discussions (Sherman, 1986; Millis, Sherman & Cottell, 1993). The addition of the narrative reflection/reaction component, as facilitated by the NETNEWS group, made possible a continuing dialogue outside of class time. The classes receiving this type of strategy generally felt that it was highly beneficial to their learning of both the content of the class and about each other's perceptions of that content. While the strategies described in this essay obviously take up more instructor time in reading, responding and evaluating, it is believed that the gains in student writing abilities and critical thinking (rhetoric), and the motivating stimulation of the class discussions are worth the efforts. The special issue of Teaching of Psychology (Nodine, 1990) which is devoted entirely to "Psychologists Teach Writing," has several articles expressing similar sentiments. However, it should be noted that virtually all of the articles contained in that issue focus on individual student writing projects, rather than cooperative or collaborative classroom pedagogical strategies. The only article weakly linking a peer-tutor cooperative strategy was Levine's (1990). While some of the authors acknowledge the dialogue which takes place between instructor and student, none of the articles recognize the peer interactive models available in cooperative learning. Five years later in the February, 1995 special issue of Teaching of Psychology (Volume 22, Number 1) devoted to "Psychologists Teach Critical Thinking," nearly 60% of the articles mention some form of cooperative learning, however, only one of the articles utilizes computer based technologies (Wolfe, 1995). Thus, increasing use of writing appears to be happening, but inclusion of computer-based technologies, especially in the form of CMC, does not seem to be as prevalent. Lastly, while the rich variety of psychology theories associated with the field of educational psychology is eminently suited to this technique, it is believed that many other disciplines which likewise abound in diverse theory could benefit from this approach. Acknowledgments Support for this paper came from the Center for Human Development, Learning and Teaching, the Institute for Educational Renewal, Miami University Computing and Information Services, and the Graduate School , all of Miami University, Oxford, OH. A complete version of this paper is available at the following WWW address: URL=http://MIAVX1.MUOHIO.EDU/~LWSHERMAN/CSCL95.HTML/ .
References Bolling, A. L. (1994). Using group journals to improve writing and comprehension. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 5(1), 47-55. Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative Learning: Higher Education, Interdependence, and the Authority of Knowledge. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Giroux, H. A. (1990). Rethinking the boundaries of educational discourse: Modernism, Postmodernism, and Feminism. College Literature, 17(2). Johnson, D. W. (1979). Educational Psychology. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice Hall. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1987). Creative conflict. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Millis, B. J., Sherman, L. W., & Cottell, P. G. (1993). Stacking the deck to promote critical thinking. Cooperative Learning and College Journal, 3(1), pp. 12-14. Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 8-12. Nodine, B. (guest editor). (1990). Special issue: Psychologists teach writing. Teaching of Psychology, 17, 1, pp. 1-61. Sherman, L. W. (1986). Cooperative vs. competitive educational psychology classrooms: A comparative study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2, 4, 283- 295. Sherman, L. W. (1990). A pedagogical strategy for teaching developmental theories through writing: Dyadic confrontations. A paper presentation to the 5th International Convention on Cooperative Learning, 6-10 July, 1990. Baltimore Maryland. ERIC DOCUMENT 321-721. Wolfe, C. R. (1995). Homespun hypertext: Student-constructed hypertext as a tool for teaching critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 2(1), 29-32.
Author's Address Lawrence W. Sherman: Department of Educational Psychology, School of Education, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio 45056. e-mail: [email protected].
LEARNING STYLES AND STRATEGIES Richard M. Felder
ACTIVE AND REFLECTIVE LEARNERS
Everybody is active sometimes and reflective sometimes. Your preference for one category or the other may be strong, moderate, or mild. A balance of the two is desirable. If you always act before reflecting you can jump into things prematurely and get into trouble, while if you spend too much time reflecting you may never get anything done.
How can active learners help themselves? If you are an active learner in a class that allows little or no class time for discussion or problem-solving activities, you should try to compensate for these lacks when you study. Study in a group in which the members take turns explaining different topics to each other. Work with others to guess what you will be asked on the next test and figure out how you will answer. You will always retain information better if you find ways to do something with it.
How can reflective learners help themselves? If you are a reflective learner in a class that allows little or not class time for thinking about new information, you should try to compensate for this lack when you study. Don't simply read or memorize the material; stop periodically to review what you have read and to think of possible questions or applications. You might find it helpful to write short summaries of readings or class notes in your own words. Doing so may take extra time but will enable you to retain the material more effectively.
SENSING AND INTUITIVE LEARNERS
Everybody is sensing sometimes and intuitive sometimes. Your preference for one or the other may be strong, moderate, or mild. To be effective as a learner and problem solver, you need to be able to function both ways. If you overemphasize intuition, you may miss important details or make careless mistakes in calculations or hands-on work; if you overemphasize sensing, you may rely too much on memorization and familiar methods and not concentrate enough on understanding and innovative thinking.
How can sensing learners help themselves? Sensors remember and understand information best if they can see how it connects to the real world. If you are in a class where most of the material is abstract and theoretical, you may have difficulty. Ask your instructor for specific examples of concepts and procedures, and find out how the concepts apply in practice. If the teacher does not provide enough specifics, try to find some in your course text or other references or by brainstorming with friends or classmates.
How can intuitive learners help themselves? Many college lecture classes are aimed at intuitors. However, if you are an intuitor and you happen to be in a class that deals primarily with memorization and rote substitution in formulas, you may have trouble with boredom. Ask your instructor for interpretations or theories that link the facts, or try to find the connections yourself. You may also be prone to careless mistakes on test because you are impatient with details and don't like repetition (as in checking your completed solutions). Take time to read the entire question before you start answering and be sure to check your results
VISUAL AND VERBAL LEARNERS Visual learners remember best what they see--pictures, diagrams, flow charts, time lines, films, and demonstrations. Verbal learners get more out of words--written and spoken explanations. Everyone learns more when information is presented both visually and verbally. In most college classes very little visual information is presented: students mainly listen to lectures and read material written on chalkboards and in textbooks and handouts. Unfortunately, most people are visual learners, which means that most students do not get nearly as much as they would if more visual presentation were used in class. Good learners are capable of processing information presented either visually or verbally.
How can visual learners help themselves? If you are a visual learner, try to find diagrams, sketches, schematics, photographs, flow charts, or any other visual representation of course material that is predominantly verbal. Ask your instructor, consult reference books, and see if any videotapes or CD-ROM displays of the course material are available. Prepare a concept map by listing key points, enclosing them in boxes or circles, and drawing lines with arrows between concepts to show connections. Color-code your notes with a highlighter so that everything relating to one topic is the same color.
How can verbal learners help themselves? Write summaries or outlines of course material in your own words. Working in groups can be particularly effective: you gain understanding of material by hearing classmates' explanations and you learn even more when you do the explaining.
SEQUENTIAL AND GLOBAL LEARNERS
Many people who read this description may conclude incorrectly that they are global, since everyone has experienced bewilderment followed by a sudden flash of understanding. What makes you global or not is what happens before the light bulb goes on. Sequential learners may not fully understand the material but they can nevertheless do something with it (like solve the homework problems or pass the test) since the pieces they have absorbed are logically connected. Strongly global learners who lack good sequential thinking abilities, on the other hand, may have serious difficulties until they have the big picture. Even after they have it, they may be fuzzy about the details of the subject, while sequential learners may know a lot about specific aspects of a subject but may have trouble relating them to different aspects of the same subject or to different subjects.
How can sequential learners help themselves? Most college courses are taught in a sequential manner. However, if you are a sequential learner and you have an instructor who jumps around from topic to topic or skips steps, you may have difficulty following and remembering. Ask the instructor to fill in the skipped steps, or fill them in yourself by consulting references. When you are studying, take the time to outline the lecture material for yourself in logical order. In the long run doing so will save you time. You might also try to strengthen your global thinking skills by relating each new topic you study to things you already know. The more you can do so, the deeper your understanding of the topic is likely to be.
How can global learners help themselves? If you are a global learner, just recognizing that you aren't slow or stupid but simply
function differently from most of your classmates can help a great deal.4 However,
there are some steps you can take that may help you get the big picture more quickly.
Before you begin to study the first section of a chapter in a text, skim through the
entire chapter to get an overview. Doing so may be time-consuming initially but it may
save you from going over and over individual parts later. Instead of spending a short time
on every subject every night, you might find it more productive to immerse yourself in
individual subjects for large blocks. Try to relate the subject to things you already
know, either by asking the instructor to help you see connections or by consulting
references. Above all, don't lose faith in yourself; you will eventually understand the
new material, and once you do your understanding of how it connects to other topics and
disciplines may enable you to apply it in ways that most sequential thinkers would never
dream of.
Social Inquiry: A Social Studies Inquiry Model Byron Massialas and Benjamin Cox (Byron Massialas and Benjamin Cox, Inquiry in Social Studies), New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966] represent the social inquiry approach as it applies to social studies.
General Condition of Inquiry Three essential characteristics:
Overview of the teaching Strategy (Inquiry Model)
(a). Orientation is simply the sensitization of the teachers and students to problem in the social domain. (b). It may arise from a real-life contemporary situation, from reflection on reading, or from any number of other sources. ©. The important criterion is that all concerned consider it a problem, and it can be summarized as a genuine problem. (d). Students must be able to develop a general statement of the problem that defines its elements and can be accepted by all a starting point for inquiry. (a). the development of an hypothesis that expresses as clearly as possible the antecedents and consequent of the proposed explanation, or solution to the phenomenon. (b). The hypothesis will serve as a guide to the inquiry that follows, where students attempts to verify the elements of the problem, to see whether those elements do indeed relate to the proposed solution. ©. Hypothesis will serve as a guide to the inquiry that follows, where students attempts to verify the elements of the problem, to see whether those elements do indeed relate to the proposed solution. (d). Hypothesis is tested by the teacher/class in terms of: (i). Its validity (ii). Compatibility with previous devised generalizations and experiences of the pupils and teachers. (iii). The existence of other historical facts and evidence which are relevant to its proof or disproof.
(a). Terms of hypothesis clarified and defined until all members of the group are able to communicate about the problem situation. (a). hypothesis is extended in terms of its implications, its assumption, and the deductions that can be made from it. (b). It is qualified and limited, and examined for logical validity and internal consistency. (a). In this stage, facts and evidence needed to support the hypothesis are gathered in terms of the conditions that been hypothesized and defined. (a). The last phase of inquiry is an expression of the solution of the problem. (b). if two or three hypotheses seem equally tenable at the conclusion of an investigation, they should be maintained together, with their alternative advantages and disadvantages identified as carefully as possible. G. Pius, Dept. of Languages KTTC 1 July 1998 / 7:45 a.m.
These collections of lecture notes/Internet resources will be updated from time to time. Last updated on 24 September, 1998. 08:22 P.M. Gordian Pius Unit Bahasa Inggeris Jabatan Bahasa Maktab Perguruan Keningau Sabah, Malaysia. Email: [email protected]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bloom's Levels of Thinking Complexity 
