Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

A teacher’s proficiency is manifested by the ability to look at the subject from a learner’s point of view, to foresee the critical junctions in learning, and to design teaching to meet learners’ information acquisition and collection processes (e.g., Zombylas, 2007).

van Manen (1991) claims that as teachers embrace all children, regardless of their characteristics they become real educators, and thus, educators’ pedagogical love becomes the precondition for pedagogical relations to grow (p

Individualistic features, position, nationality, gender, abilities, race, or language do not determine a human being’s value. Those differences based on skills, intelligence, or knowledge are insignificant compared with that basic human presence that is the same for all people: the right and need to be loved, accepted, and cared for as well as the right and need to grow and develop (Bradshaw, 1996; Lanara, 1981; Sprengel & Kelly, 1992).

Learning-style theory begins with Carl Jung (1927), who noted major differences in the way people perceived (sensation versus intuition), the way they made decisions (logical thinking versus imaginative feelings), and how active or reflective they were while interacting (extroversion versus introversion)

Most learning-style theorists have settled on four basic styles. Our own model, for instance, describes the following four styles: The Mastery style learner absorbs information concretely; processes information sequentially, in a step-by-step manner; and judges the value of learning in terms of its clarity and practicality. The Understanding style learner focuses more on ideas and abstractions; learns through a process of questioning, reasoning, and testing; and evaluates learning by standards of logic and the use of evidence. The Self-Expressive style learner looks for images implied in learning; uses feelings and emotions to construct new ideas and products; and judges the learning process according to its originality, aesthetics, and capacity to surprise or delight. The Interpersonal style learner,1  like the Mastery learner, focuses on concrete, palpable information; prefers to learn socially; and judges learning in terms of its potential use in helping others.

Student Choice: Assessment Products by Intelligence and Style

I have observed at least three major phases that many teachers go through, or far too often, fail to go through. Phase I might be described by Harry Wong as "Doing what you have been doing, and getting what you have been getting". In other words, Phase I is simply the pre-reform effort phase. Of course, we as educators hope to move teachers to a new vision and this can result in Phase II.

    In Phase II, teachers are presented with a new teaching strategy, usually in the context of an afternoon or one day workshop. So armed with this new skill, but little else, they venture back to their classroom to try implementation or worse, write off the whole experience and tell colleagues seated near them that they already do that. What is immediately noticeable for those who at least think about possible implementation, is how these teachers internalize this new strategy and attempt to move it into practice.

Phase III is where teachers reflect on 1. what they were doing that worked, and 2. how they might integrate these new ideas into their pre-workshop repertoire of teaching tools.

the grade is secondary to the learning,

every problem became an opportunity,

The focus of this paper is teaching presence, which has been defined as “the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile outcomes” (Garrison et al., 2000).

Instructor teaching presence is hypothesized to be an indicator of online instructional quality.  Empirical research has supported this view with evidence indicating strong correlations between the quality of teaching presence and student satisfaction and learning (Bangert, 2008; Picciano, 2002; Shea, Pickett, & Pelz, 2003)

First, there is a need to revisit two of the original three teaching presence elements.

In the meantime, I've written a book, from which this article is drawn, about all that I've learned from my research. In my book, I focus on what I identify as seven myths, or widely held beliefs, that dominate our educational practice. I start with the myth that teaching facts prevents understanding, because this (along with my second myth, that teacher-led instruction is passive) is the foundation of all the other myths I discuss. These myths have a long pedigree and provide the theoretical justification for so much of what goes on in schools. Taken together, all seven myths actually damage the education of our pupils. But here, let's focus on facts and the role knowledge has in our understanding.

Why Is It a Myth? My aim here is not to criticize true conceptual understanding, genuine appreciation of significance, or higher-order skill development. All of these things are indeed the true aim of education. My argument is that facts and subject content are not opposed to such aims; instead, they are part of it. Rousseau, Dewey, and Freire were wrong to see facts as the enemy of understanding. All the scientific research of the last half-century proves them wrong. The modern bureaucrats and education experts who base policy and practice on their thinking are wrong too, and with less excuse, as they have been alive when evidence that refutes these ideas has been discovered. Rousseau was writing in the 18th century; Dewey at the turn of the 20th; Freire in the 1970s. Research from the second half of the 20th century tells us that their analyses of factual learning are based on fundamentally faulty premises.

If we want pupils to develop the skills of analysis and evaluation, they need to know things. Willingham puts it this way:23 Data from the last thirty years lead to a conclusion that is not scientifically challengeable: thinking well requires knowing facts, and that's true not just because you need something to think about. The very processes that teachers care about most—critical thinking processes such as reasoning and problem solving—are intimately intertwined with factual knowledge that is stored in long-term memory (not just found in the environment).

Without reflection, learning ends "well short of the re-organization of thinking that 'deep' learning requires" (Ewell, 1997, p.9).

at least not without specific provisions to support both teachers and students

Instructors should provide clear guidelines for interaction with students.

Establish policies describing the types of communication that should take place over different channels.

Well-designed discussion assignments facilitate meaningful cooperation among students.

Current research indicates that some gifted students possess better self-regulated learning strategies than their peers, however gifted students may have done very well in school without using good self-regulation strategies because of a combination of their high abilities and/or an unchallenging curriculum. If learning is relatively easy for someone, less effort, organization and other self-regulated activities are expended. Social conditions or personal issues may prevent students from developing self-regulated learning strategies. For some students who already have some of these strategies, social or personal issues may prevent them from using them regularly, and thus, they need to be helped and encouraged to do so. Some gifted and talented students display perfectionism and need to learn to strive for excellence (their personal best) rather than perfection. Some talented students with high potential may find it difficult to learn self-regulation when it is not taught, modeled, or rewarded by the adults in their home and family. Even if students interact regularly with adults who demonstrate self-regulation, they may fail to use these skills themselves due to peer pressure or refuse to use the strategies their parents or teachers regularly employ at home or school. Compared with low achieving students, high achievers set more specific learning goals, use a variety of learning strategies, self-monitor more often, and adapt their efforts more systematically. The quality and quantity of self-regulation processes is crucial. We must recognize that one self-regulation strategy will not work for all students, and that the use of only a few strategies will not work optimally for a person on all tasks or occasions. It is important that students learn to use multiple self-regulatory learning skills rather than single strategies. They must also learn that their goals and their choice of self-regulation strategies have to be continually adjusted.

In January, a series of agreements were announced in which universities pledged not to use Amazon's Kindle or any similar devices "unless the devices are fully accessible to students who are blind and have low vision."

The iPad, by contrast, has technology that can talk a blind person through whatever screen icons their fingers are touching, Mr. Danielsen said. Since the device's debut, several colleges have announced formal campus iPad initiatives.

it helps remove the filter.

Alex mentioned her desire not to allow students to unsubscribe from the posts.