Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Miller and Gildea's (1987) work on vocabulary teaching has shown how the assumption that knowing and doing can be separated leads to a teaching method that ignores the way situations structure cognition. Their work has described how children are taught words from dictionary definitions and a few exemplary sentences, and they have compared this method with the way vocabulary is normally learned outside school. People generally learn words in the context of ordinary communication. This process is startlingly fast and successful. Miller and Gildea note that by listening, talking, and reading, the average 17-year-old has learned vocabulary at a rate of 5,000 words per year (13 per day) for over 16 years. By contrast, learning words from abstract definitions and sentences taken out of the context of normal use, the way vocabulary has often been taught, is slow and generally unsuccessful. There is barely enough classroom time to teach more than 100 to 200 words per year. Moreover, much of what is taught turns out to be almost useless in practice. They give the following examples of students' uses of vocabulary acquired this way:

The introduction to this legislation states that "In America, no child should be left behind. Every child should be educated to his or her full potential." Mandating standards and tests in and of itself cannot erase the fact that children from homes where parents have little education and minimal resources have many strikes against them.

Evidence indicates that the "digital divide" gets larger each day. Children in homes with computers have huge advantages over those without such technology. While neurologists have extolled the virtues of high-protein diets for brain growth and development of young children, the economically disadvantaged continue to be plagued with high-carbohydrate diets, even in Head Start and public-school food service programs. Evidence indicates that more time on task helps to advance learning. The few efforts to increase the school year have mainly focused on poorly structured remedial summer programs doomed from their inception with the "punishment brand."

Empirical research does not support the belief that all children can learn the same curriculum, in the same amount of time, and at the same level. The problem with such an unsubstantiated belief is that it may be used to deny differential financial support for those who come to school with environmental disadvantages. Not all children have high-quality nutrition, stimulating homes, and extensive learning opportunities prior to entering school.

Despite the many educational projects and programs now being funded and offered, practically no effort is being made to create and implement a better, more future-oriented education for all our kids.

This distinction is critical because one can change almost everything about the "system" -- the schools, the leaders, the teachers, the number of hours and days of instruction and so forth -- and still not provide an education that interests our students and gets them deeply engaged in their own learning,

, mad

However, I also have learned that we cannot assume that everyone of a certain age is a digital native. Working at a community college, I have students with a large variety of academic and technological experiences. Some students have very limited access to technology.

Here are strategies for providing feedback in the Virtual Classroom

Clearly communicate exactly how participants will be graded.

Set evening hours if most of your students work during the day.

Age problem, an overload of information to the point where in heavy doses it begins to resemble garbage is the problem of our day.

How will I balance these issues? How can you have non-hierarchical education within the confines of traditional educational pedagogy especially in an online environment? I feel like I’m taking a big risk here with this topic.