That's the question this article answers. A recent study showed that students benefit from an interactive classroom where they can use "clickers" to respond to questions posed by the instructor. This is similar to the Turning Point resources we have in our buildings; I believe all Math teachers have them.
"The interactive method had almost no lecturing. It involved short, small-group discussions, in-class "clicker" quizzes, demonstrations and question-answer sessions"
How can I use this in my classroom?
1. Organize discussion by objectives. Hold quick discussion, "think alouds" with groups, then an individual clicker response
2. Use the responses to decide on next step: more demonstrations or more talking? Move on to next topic or unpack the previous topic more?
3. Have teams make up question/answers related to topics we discuss and then lead group discussion that way
How could this influence American education?
First, I am concerned by the way it starts out. By saying it doesn't matter "who" is teaching, but "how" it's taught, it backs up the recent arguments by Bill Gates-- that the level of education of teachers is inconsequential. They argue that bonuses or higher salaries for teachers with masters degrees don't pay off in student achievement, so should be phased out from salary ladders. Of course, I believe achievement is one part of the issue. As a professional community there should be incentives for teaches to further their knowledge and improve their skills. Offering higher salaries is an obvious incentive to encourage teachers to get their masters degrees-- but how can we show the link between highly educated teachers and improved student achievement? And if that link isn't there, what is it saying about the teachers-- both the masters degrees they've attained and the types of education classes being offered at graduate levels? Who is behind the times-- teachers in public schools or the higher ed institutions that are training them?
Could this study lead to further arguments that schools should be led by "grad ass't" types and not "highly qualified educators"? Is this a thinly veiled attack on teachers-- their salaries, their efficacy, and their value? Or is this wholly aimed towards the college level? Is it trying to convince higher ed. institutions to get with the times and the actions of their peers in public education? We have been using clickers for over 5 years in my county. I started my teaching using Quia.com, a site where quizzes can be made and taken online, and test items can be broken down by objective.
One thing is for sure-- the way we as humans learn IS changing. Or is it? Is it just the way we teach and tell ourselves that our teaching is working? What would Socrates think of all this???!
No comments:
Post a Comment