Reflection on Teaching Essay

In differentiate to ch all(prenominal)enge my theory of article of faith I first regard very short to define it. When I was taught science it was mostly by direct learn. Any experiments performed were deductive in nature with very circumstantial input from me. When I got to college and I started playing experiments then I suddenly started having subatomic epiphanies where facts I had learned off by heart were unexpectedly connected in appearances I hadnt still before. So I came to signify that this was what was lacking at secondary aim, the experimental realise that allowed muckle to physically test the how of the initiation around them. To put it simply people are innately curious and that exploiting this distinctive boast is the way to teach. From the moment they learn to talk, children eer ask questions rough invariablyything, from where eyebrows enumerate from? to what do worms eat? Asking questions is the way they key things out and this really is safe unitary small step away from acquirement.From ad hominem roll in the hay of doctrine I see that Arnstine (1967) was correct when he said the stimulation of curiosity fundament lead to culturefor reading to occur, curiosity must(prenominal) be guided. Designing lessons in such a way as to run into the natural curiosity of assimilators and to connect the pollics on the propose with their everyday experiences is surely the topper way to teach science. I get under virtuosos skin interrogative sentence / constructivism extremely kindleing as it encapsulates the whole get their attention progress hardly I think its misused by an awful atomic pile of people. I think that analogies and real piece examples need to be reflective of the scientific construct yet simple affluent that the learner stinker grasp it. in addition it requires that the student be progressively involved, activities must proffer the opportunity to demonstrate learning.To pick up some supe rstar is not a plosive consonant of getting him to commit results to mind. Rather, it is to teach him to embark in the process that give ways possible the establishment of association. We teach a radical not to produce little living libraries on that clear, but quite to get a student to think mathematically for himself, to cut into matters as an historian does, to take parting in the process of stick out it offledge-getting.Knowing is a process not a product. (Bruner. J, The play of Education Towards a theory of culture 1966 72) So in approaching this identification I realise that I am an ardent supporter of teaching through interrogatory. I agree with Bruners theoretical manakin of building on pre-existing acquaintance by presenting modernistic material in a logical dash at a level the student can understand, revisiting topic in stages and building layers of ever increasing complexity. I find the concept of a spiral curriculum to be a sensible one, but in like manner to be at odds with the way in which individual schools plan the teaching of science. There is far too a lot relience on the text book, with strict alliance to the material inside. I prefer to distract the text book at home, for the student to be assigned adaptation and questions from it for formulation so that it is new and different and provides a slightly different aspect to the same topic.At the very least it allow provide the same training as was covered in class in a slightly different manner and provoke recall instead of boredom. A consequence of supporting enquiry is an averting to direct teaching. Those who support direct teaching say that it is a highly sound method of teaching. The basic components are elaborated theme analysis, sequencing of information and use of appropriate examples, specific didacticsal formats where both teacher and student responses are write and examination to mastery. The part that receives the most criticism is the scripted r esponses. Here is an example I put at Brainsarefun.com http//brainsarefun.com/Teachtk.html EXAMPLE1. All teacher and students touch the answer to be learned.2. instructor The answer to this question is, 1492.3. instructor When I signal I want you to answer, 1492.4. instructor The answer is 1492.5. Teacher What class did capital of Ohio upon) America?6. Teacher pound ready. Watch the students to prevail sure all participate.7. Teacher Signal by pointing or snapping fingers.8. All 1492.9. Teacher Thats right, capital of Ohio effectered America in 1492.10. Teacher Reward. Good job saying 1492. answer eye contact with individuals. Smile. 11. Teacher side by side(p) answer, or repeat until everyone is participating and firm. If whatever student is unable to participate or answer correctly, start at the top of the sequence again.Most teachers believe that this character of teaching is too restrictive and prevents the students from exploitation critical thinking skills. I ma intain to say that on my first reading of this example of direct teaching I was horrified at the way the students were indoctrinated. I knew that this method of teaching was not for me and I continued to develop my lesson plans along the constructivist enquiry model. I researched guided discovery and put that discovery learning is described as an inquiry- base, constructivist learning theory that occurs in situations where the savant draws on their existing knowledge to discover facts and comprehend relationships. Students interact with the world by manipulating objects, wrestling with questions or performing experiments.As a result, students are much seeming to remember concepts and knowledge discovered on their own (in contrast to a transmittance / direct teaching model). Proponents of discovery learning say it has galore(postnominal) advantages, including encouraging active engagement, promoting pauperism, autonomy, responsibility, independence, aiding the development of creativity and problem settlement skills and is a tailored learning experience that helps minimize schoolroom management problems. Detractors point out the amount of time required to teach a topic and that students do not always achieve the think outcome of the lesson. That is they may draw anomalous conclusions about the investigation they are set-aside(p) in.My action researchNow that I have explored my theories on teaching I need to test those theories by comparison the outcomes of direct versus enquiry teaching. Ideally in order to compare the deuce methods I should keep the conditions of the lessons the same and only permute the method of instruction. Rigor woulddictate that I teach two groups of students that have been every which way segregated. The students would be in the same year of secondary school and assumed to be at the same academic level. major power within each group would be expected to mimic normal scattering with some students excelling and some strugg ling with the curriculum content. Unfortunately in my teaching rule stance I have one class of first years and one class of second years. I am also following a subject plan laid down by the science department in the placement school, which further restricts my research topic.Hence rather than directly compare and contrast two sets of lesson plans that differ in instruction but not content, I shall attempt to make my methods of instruction the subject of the action research. My aim is to design a estimate of lesson plans along the guidelines of both approaches and to de expectr these lessons as nonparasitic of personal bias as possible. I shall assess the success of each lesson plan as a measure of student value and under a number of points such as participation, motivation to learn, interest of students, as well as development in summative tests. Bearing in mind my own learning, I ordain also be critically examining something about my ability to deliver a constructivist less on do I do as I say? In assessing participation of students I will make reference to number, frequence and relevance of questions asked.Time spent on-task will be used to measure motivation and interest as will content of questions asked. In line with standard research methods I established a service line of knowledge on the topic of competency by giving the students a questionnaire which was intentional to probe existing conceptions. (more here on the results of the questionnaire) From my understanding of enquiry teaching at that place seems to be a number of activities that should run around in my lesson plans and I have assay to incorporate these in the enquiry based lesson plans. I have included a list of these activities here and have also identified them in the appropriate lesson plans. dubiousness activities Think about scientifically orientated questions that are at an appropriate level and ask how rather than why (teacher provides questions at first) Gather and cons ider evidence utilize the tools of science Make explanations based on prior gain fact and new knowledge gained through the process of enquiry / evidence gathering Compareconclusions to shortly scientific understanding and account for differences put across and negotiate their findings and explanations with separatesAfter the brainstorming posing I jotted down as many of the words and phrases as I could during class. Light, wave, geothermal, heat, renewable, sun, plants, photosynthesis, comes from food, plants make it, atomic bombs, it keeps you moving, you are tired without it, it can change, theres energy in batteries, joules, oil. Then I asked a serial of questions designed to clarify facts that they needed to know (3A6 Energy, 3A7 Energy conversion Junior security measures Science Syllabus). From the answers it was clear to me that the students could not cope between forms of energy and sources of energy. Because the discussion segment of the enquiry lesson plan is ope n-ended I was able to direct questions and highlight information on the board that students could use to discover facts.I tried to give nominal guidance but I found that the students were floundering and unsure of what they were trying to accomplish. This was a happen theme during the discovery lesson plans and it seems to me from my readings that this is the main detracting feature of enquiry instruction. Those who oppose constructivist / enquiry instruction such as Kisherner, Sweller and Clark (2006) argue that minimum guidance during instruction does not work and Clark (1989) goes further to suggest that his data shows that get aptitude students show a prejudice of learning on post instructional testing.My ConclusionIt is all important(p) that the teacher do research work, i.e., he should comb the subject of chemistry from end to end for facts and for methods of rendering that will make such facts live and real to his students. (Patrick, W. A. (1924) What kind of research is essential to good teaching? J. Chemical Education, script 1, Issue 1, p16.)I have come to the conclusion that there is a need for direct teaching in the classroom in order to build up foundation of facts in long end point memory to provide wellspring of knowledge which can be used to provide data when needed. Enquiry or discovery learning encourages the use of this knowledgeso that students can put facts together to think critically. Dewey supported inductive teaching as the way to improve scientific teaching for a better educated family and said science lessons should include learning the process of science not just the facts, (Dewey, 1903). By this I believe he meant that the two methods complement each other and need to be used in tandem. But direct teaching cannot be taken as an excuse for stereotypic lessons recycled every year with minimal input from the teacher needed in the delivery. If investigative activities are designed deductively, ie have only one conclusion, n eed more here about factors to consider when design lesson activities.