- Refreshing because their discussion is accessible, well structured, and less academic;
- Comforting because the struggle over the _ism gap is nothing new … we are still talking about it, and likely will be for years. It’s like an MC Escher sketch. From one point of view, the theories are miles apart; from another they support and build upon each other;
- Encouraging because they reinforce my own thoughts about the role of _isms in education.
“What we need to is take the best from each philosophy and use it wisely to create solid educational experiences for our learners.”Now, to answer Bill’s question from the preamble to his post: “What do we do about these _isms?”
- Out and About: Discussion on Educational Schools of Thought
We need them.
Most importantly, as Bill writes and like Kuhn’s (1996) thoughts on scientific paradigm shift, we have to discuss where we are, where we have been, and where we need to go in order to create necessary revolution. To do that efficiently, we must symbolize, label, and define. We must stake our tents, raise our flags, and fling our arrows until the dust clears and a new camp has formed.
As Huett, Moller, Foshay, and Coleman write:
"It is incumbent upon all professionals with a commitment to the potential of technology in education and training, no matter what their theoretical or ideological bent, to think outside the box, to collaborate and to advance the common vision"
References
Kuhn, T. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: The university of Chicago press. (Original work published 1962)
Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. R., & Coleman, C (2008) The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web. TechTrends 52(5), 63-67.
I have seen on several posts the quote from Karl Kapp”
ReplyDelete“What we need to do is take the best from each philosophy and use it wisely to create solid educational experiences for our learners.”
Thinking in the Schema theory, wouldn't we all take different bits and pieces from our own understanding and experience and tie those into the learning of our students? Our successes with one theory in a given situation, a strategy from another theory in another situation, etc. I know one steadfast strategy that has always been successful will eventually find a student that it does not work for. Do we modify that strategy or do we abandon it and completely try a new one? There is so much variability between interpretations and experiences that it is comforting to have set theories to come back to as road markers along the way. Every new teaching experience and strategy learned gives a new dimension to the theory and a clearer understanding. It also can cause us to question them as well. I am grateful that the theories are as varied as our students :)
I am glad that you admitted your novice status. I am right there with you, but will agree that I felt very confident after reading the posts by Bill Kerr and Karl Kapp. I like your take on the need for -isms and the Prius Metaphor. Well written post.
ReplyDeleteBrad, your metaphors were funny and yet very effective. I particularly liked the HOV reference, having grown up in HOV land (Washington DC metro area). Your Huett, Moller, Foshay, and Coleman reference was right on, at least, in my perspective. In our Module 2 discussion I reinforced the same concept of seeing outside the “pan.”
ReplyDeleteShannon, in her reference to Kerr’s post (http://shay1204.blogspot.com/), stated that there is nothing like a healthy discussion to keep the mind going. True indeed. Dr. Moller said sometimes the best way to discard or discredit a perspective is to list all of its benefits first. The point I’m trying to make here (in a very around about way) is: At what point do we all stop arguing or having “healthy discussions.” When do we begin to collaborate toward Huett, et al’s common vision?
Thank you all for your comments. I often try to work humor into my writing. I could be altruistic and say it is for the benefit of other readers ... but it is really for my own benefit! Writing that way keeps me more interested and engaged. My APA writing does not allow for as much stylistic freedom, which is why I tend to let it go in this Blog.
ReplyDelete---
I feel we must be approaching the kind of paradigm shift Kuhn describes as revolutionary. To your point Shannon, I think the new _ism must allow for flexibility in understanding and meeting our students learning needs. As I am learning the official labels for teaching strategies I have used for years, I am also thankful for the variance.
Finally, I would say the time to start collaborating is now. There are already many individuals and groups engaged in this work already. Perhaps we need a symposium or think-tank similar to the ones held by top Physicists as they hammered out Quantum theory. A place and time for individuals from each camp to come together, break it down, and build anew.
Brad
Koh,
ReplyDeleteI think that in a way, we have all already started agreeing. I hear a common voice saying that the theory used depends on the students’ needs and the situation we are in at the moment. I am hearing that there are times and pieces of each theory that are valuable. Just as every teacher's style of teaching and strengths in procedure are different, I think so are our uses of theory. Because we rely on one theory more than another teacher, it does not make one right or one wrong. As teachers I believe we utilize what we are good at and what is most effective for our group of children. The beauty about the "healthy discussions" is that even if we are on one accord, it stretches or redefines our thoughts to make us more effective as teachers and broader in our experiences,thoughts, and understandings of theory.
Yes this statement is on a lot of post and it makes sense.
ReplyDelete“What we need to do is take the best from each philosophy and use it wisely to create solid educational experiences for our learners.”
But it is being said and not done. The everyday teacher with a Bachelor's or Masters' is not being taught these philosophies. They are being taught how to teach their discipline. I feel the ball is being dropped on such a bigger level. At what point are teacher's supposed to learn these things so they can have a balanced, successful classroom? I don't know if I missed something but this is really the first time I am learning in detail about all these theories.
LaToya
I agree LaToya. I spent years in a for-profit higher education system. There, most of the faculty were valued for their industry expertise, and not their merits as an instructor. And, while there was a Faculty Development program, there was not anything like this to provide them with a solid theoretical foundation they could use to strengthen technique.
ReplyDelete