Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Direct or Constructivist Instruction?
While reading Chapter 2 this week, the topic about learning theories as bases for integration models caught my eye. As I read it, it made me reflect back on my education courses I took at Auburn University. We were always learning about the two different views of teaching styles, directed instruction and constructivist instruction. Directed instruction is based solely on direct instruction of the material to be learned from teacher to child while constructivist instruction is based more on the fact that knowledge is constructed through hands-on activities completed by the children. I am going to have to agree with both instructional methods. First of all, I have used both methods as a means of students’ learning process and seen both succeed. In Auburn, there schools are involved in nothing but a constructivist view of teaching and believe strongly that this is the only way children gain knowledge. When I interned with Kindergarten I was able to put this practice into play. At first, I thought there’s no way these 5 year olds are going to understand about glaciers, the Arctic’s, and sea otters. However, I was proved wrong! We learned about these various creations through reading informational books, looking information up online, and even constructing our very own and hanging them up in the classroom. It was an unforgettable experience for me and I know it was for them as well. Alternatively, this kind of learning normally takes place in different situations than what I am teaching in right now. The socio-economic status of these kids was much higher than what I teach now and the parent’s of each child were thoroughly involved in the education of their child. I do know constructivist teaching can work with my class now, because I have used that teaching method and seen the result, but it’s not as possible to teach in the kind of environment I am in right now on a daily basis like in some other schools such as Auburn. I would love to be able to teach with a constructivist view each day if I had the support that is needed. Lastly, either way of teaching whether it is direct or constructivist, students gain and retain new knowledge especially when you integrate technology in the lesson. So, which view do you use most often or prefer?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi
I was also glad to see the integrated approach the book took to using both methods of teaching. I think your experiences show that both methods can work. I have not had much experience teaching but my “life experience” is that there is no one right way to do most things. Just look at the lists of technology our class groups did. Each group came up with their own unique method of putting the techonologies into categories. Then each list was shared in a different way. I feel that both methods have to be used depending on the subject matter, needs of the children, and logistical limitations. If we use a blended approach then we would be covering all the bases instead of insisting that one way of teaching/learning was correct.
Anna, I understand where you are coming from completely!!!!! I feel that if we had support from administrators to teach 'constructively' then our whole school would throw away all the textbooks and buy us more hands-on materials and informational books like you suggested. We need to speak up!
Post a Comment