This week I have Bloom's taxonomy on my mind. It all started with the review of How People Learn, a review by the National Research Council from 2000. Of course its not free so i had to use a review of the review by the National Academic Press talking about "bridging the research into practice". I was reviewing this review to update (yeah, i know, a point is coming) a lecture on becoming an effective peer educator. "How people learn" is one of several concepts along with "teaching behaviors", "professionalism", "starting discussion" etc. that we have the students teach each other. Apparently the classic teaching triangle/pyramid of retention we had been using for decades was found by a colleague to, in fact, not be research-based so i was given the task of replacing it (we have a high-standard of using best practices). I have pasted google images below of what im referring to:
Im sure every teacher has seen some form of this pyramid, and it always played a significant part of my educational philosophy so the idea of not using it was personally difficult. Even worse, the National Research Council findings were a fitting let down; lacking the visual. Their main findings were overlapping too, here's the summary i was providing for students:
There are 3 core learning principles all teachers should prepare:
- to draw on existing knowledge students bring with them (zone of proximal...)
- to use in-depth knowledge to create in-depth examples (student-friendly language..)
- to have students question where the information came from, why it’s important, and what mastery of the knowledge looks like (links to real life and their progress in it)
Classroom environments should:
- Incorporate students’ preconceptions (cultural, etc.)
- provide moderate challenges on an individual level (knowledge, skills, interests)
- help students see their progress and identify problems (where they are and roadblocks ahead)
- provide opportunities for camaraderie (building things together)
- encourage questioning rather than answering (process over product)
How fitting that none of these lead to the test scores we are currently using, i love the cognitive dissonance in our field!
Long story short, all of this led to a conversation with my mentor where i expressed my concern about losing the pyramid to the "original findings that can no longer be found" by the research lab in Maine, yet have been used for over 50 years and in over 1200 teaching and learning publications and schools. She responded that she fears using "antiquated" techniques like activities, discussions and small group projects she's been using for 30 years (that students love and constantly praise). Which leads me to Bloom, social constructivism, and the idea that lacking research and "new" is not always better. I came to the conclusion that the numbers on the pyramid may be arbitrary, but the concepts are right on. She came to the conclusion that she uses things that work and feedback to change all the time. Together we made the decision that students would get the most out of seeing the pyramid and hearing the three main ways people learn: cognitively, affectively, and psychor-motor. See this blog for a good explanation: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/bloomtax.htm
What she has been doing works so well, and yields so much praise because it touches on all three ways that people learn:
1. thinking
2. feeling and
3. doing
Classrooms should be about knowledge, getting emotional, and actually trying stuff out.
No comments:
Post a Comment