My
first introduction to learning theory was as a graduate instructor of freshman
composition. A research project led me to The
Whole Story: Natural Learning and the Acquisition of Literacy in the Classroom,
by Brian Cambourne (1988). In this book, Cambourne identifies seven principles
of learning that take place when we learn to communicate as children, and then
offers ideas as to how to apply this to learning to write in the classroom. The
seven principles—immersion, demonstration, expectations, responsibility,
approximations, practice, and feedback—offered my first, real pedagogical
foundation on which to build my instruction. As I reflected on the learning
elements and situation that existed to help us learn language as children, I
realized the importance of having a meaningful situation in which to use
knowledge and skill, and of having an expert to model knowledge and skill use
and to provide feedback and guidance on our own attempts. Cambourne’s ideas
resonated with me, and I noticed them occurring in many successful learning
situations. As I applied the theory to practice, I felt I had more engaging,
productive, and meaningful learning experiences in my classroom.
Constructivism
and cognitive apprenticeship helped me better understand why Cambourne’s
principles could lead to successful instruction and learning. At the heart of
constructivism is the notion that our learning is based in experience and is
built off what we already know (Ertmer and Newby, 1993, p. 62-63). In relation
to Cambourne, we learn as we are immersed into a situation where knowledge is
used meaningfully. As a child, we are constantly placed in situations where
there is an authentic need to communicate and need to learn from others and our
own experience to communicate. Without that context, learning loses its meaning
and does not happen as effectively. Further, as the child hears language from
others, and uses language, that child constructs an understanding of the
meaning of words, language structures, and discourse communities.
Cognitive
apprenticeship builds off Vygotsky’s social constructivism, explaining how
others help learners construct knowledge and understanding in an
apprenticeship-like setting (“Cognitive Apprenticeship,” 2011). Expert
knowledge users model or demonstrate to learners how knowledge is used,
providing them with a framework on which to act and construct upon. The expert
allows learners to practice the use of knowledge, and teaches learners to
evaluate their use of knowledge based on expectations. The expert provides
feedback to help the learner develop their own evaluations of how they are
learning. The learner is provided with a lot of structure as they make novice
attempts, which structure is gradually removed as the learner gains competency,
skill, and independence.
One
example of successfully using cognitive apprenticeship principles of modeling,
structuring, practice, and feedback occurred in one of my freshman composition
classes. My students were working on an assignment called the genre project.
Each student was to write an essay where they analyzed three genres in a career
of interest to them. The project involved vocabulary and a type of writing that
was unfamiliar and difficult to many of them. To prepare for class, I made a
detailed assignment description with questions that would guide students in
their writing. I also asked students to bring one of the genres they would
analyze to class.
The day of class,
I projected a genre that I had brought. We explored the features and purpose of
the genre as a class discussion. After the discussion and reviewing the
assignment description, I modeled the thinking I would use to do the written
analysis of the genre. Once they got an idea of the type of thinking and style
of writing needed to complete this assignment, I had students help me continue
preparing and writing a portion of the project on the board. As students
offered comments, I gave appropriate feedback on their attempts. Our class
discussion provided a visual example for what the students could discuss in
their individual genre analysis.
After providing a
model, I gave students time to practice analyzing their own genres, encouraging
them to ask questions as needed. I roamed around the classroom, looking over
the students’ efforts and giving suggestions where appropriate. Several
students asked questions to clarify the assignment description. Many of these
questions showed they were struggling to translate what we had done as a class
to what they would do for their own project. I expected this, for translation
is not an easy task. I found, however, that before I could answer their
questions, they thought out loud and figured it out for themselves. It was an
exciting moment as a teacher to see students capable and engaged in executing
this writing assignment.
After grading
their final product, I was impressed with the results of their analysis.
Students who struggled with interpreting assignment expectations on previous
projects seemed more thoughtful, thorough, and confident in this assignment. I
worried at first that I was taking from their learning experience by being so
explicit on the requirements and by doing a portion of the assignment together
as a class. Rather, I found that our collaborative work provided a pattern that
students could use for their own constructive thinking on a chosen topic. I
feel that this was a major contribution to their success and growth.
As I have
continued to learn more about learning theory, I have realized there is great
worth for instructors to make pedagogical decisions based on a sound
theoretical foundation. Some of these theories will have direct application in
specific class activities. Some will change the way we look at learners and
learning. I hope to continue to learn more effective ways to teach and gain a
greater understanding about how people learn so that I can help my students
make the most out of what I am capable of offering them.
References
Cambourne,
B. (1988). The Whole Story: Natural
Learning and the Acquisition of Literacy in the Classroom. New York: Ashton
Scholastic.
Cognitive Apprenticeship. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.innovativelearning.com/teaching/cognitive_apprenticeship.html
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, Cognitivism,
Constructivism: Comparing
Critical
Features from an Instructional Design Perspective. Performance Improvement
Quarterly, 6(4), 50–72. doi:10.1002/pfi.20102
No comments:
Post a Comment