Does your preferred way of teaching match any of the theoretical approaches? Share some of the activities you do when teaching that ‘fit’ with this theory? (consider the role of educational technology) Can you think of other possible activities you now could use within this theoretical framework for teaching?
When I think about my teaching practices and the theories we have discussed thus far in class, I have utilized most of them.
From an objectivist perspective, elementary school teachers have a set curriculum to deliver in various core subjects such as Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies. My role as an educator is to present knowledge to be learned which includes facts, vocabulary, principles, and even theories: A student’s role is to comprehend, reproduce and build on the knowledge taught within the learning framework established in class. This is a basic definition of my role, but thankfully, I control how the curriculum is delivered and I have always tried to incorporate an “applied” learning environment that allows students to learn-by-doing.
From a behaviourist perspective, many teachers and administrators are immediate to cite B.F. Skinner as the perennial theorist with his reward system to optimize classroom management, which conjointly leads to student success. I have always administered a behaviourist approach in establishing classroom procedures and protocols, and have always included students in co-creating classroom guidelines, thus not treating students are mere receptacles assessed based on an input/output rationale. I believe this approach to be important because elementary school students are more inclined to follow guidelines when they are the ones to devise them. Having said that, in order for a reward system to be successful, a teacher should first understand the classroom’s “currency.”
Cognitivism has also figured into my teaching pedigree and I often utilize this perspective when assessing different learners in order to deliver the most productive methods of instruction. Good teachers use assessment to drive instruction, and part of assessing is differentiating the subject matter, making accommodations and modifications to curriculum expectations, particularly with students that have Individual Education Plans (IEPs). Scaffolding the subject matter is also pertinent in garnering student success, and a key component in that regard is Bloom’s Taxonomy. This allows a teacher to focus on a student’s cognitive, affective, and psychomotor in order to improve metacognition for future learning.
Finally, constructivism has also been a key component because of its ability for students to “connect” to the subject matter. Making connections is a curriculum expectation and is defined as a student’s ability to connect within and between various contexts (between the text and personal knowledge or experience, other texts, and the world outside the school or between disciplines). I understand constructivism is rooted in how knowledge is subjective in nature and formed from our perceptions, but that methodology is also a part of academia. In Research Methods, we learn the difference between Realism and Relativism and how one reference is subjective and one is objective. Our role, as good scholarship should indicate, is to balance between the two and “connect” how our experiences coincide with theoretical perspectives. Therefore, establishing those skills in elementary school builds the foundation for future learning.
How do you think new digital technologies, such as Web 2.0 (e.g. social media), affect these theories?
The aforementioned theories in my educational practices weave themselves seamlessly when incorporating technology in the classroom. My objectivist approach, which focuses on students reproducing and building on the knowledge taught within the learning framework, can also be applied to teaching elementary school students basic applications such as Google presentation, drawings, and classroom. As for behaviourism, teachers should delve into Albert Bandura and his premise of building classroom self-efficacy. His theories coincide well with giving students an opportunity to build their problem-solving skills with technology because students build personal judgment in how well they can apply critical inquiry required to achieve a goal. Those strategies also lead to effective cognitivism and constructivism because I have witnessed how using technology is a great differentiation tool that affords a productive universal design for learning and also allows students to “connect” to their devices and the subject matter in order to facilitate practical learning – learning that can last a lifetime.
References
Bandura, Albert (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147.
Bates, A.W. (2019). Teaching in a digital age [DX Reader version]. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/teachinginadigitalagev2/
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2006). The Ontario Curriculum: Language. (ISBN: 1-4249-1465-5). http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/language18currb.pdf
Provide Feedback