Reflection on Teaching Essay

In order to challenge my theory of statement I first motivation truly briefly to define it. When I was taught science it was mostly by dint of steer educational activity. Any experiments performed were deductive in nature with very minuscule input from me. When I got to college and I offshooted performing experiments then I on the spur of the result started having minor epiphanies where points I had learned off by heart were incidentally connected in ways I hadnt understood before. So I came to think that this was what was lacking at indirect train, the experimental hold that allowed people to physically test the how of the world around them. To put it exactly people are innately curious and that exploiting this curiosity is the way to t all(prenominal). From the moment they learn to talk, children constantly aim questions ab fill out forth eitherthing, from where eyebrows come from? to what do worms run? Asking questions is the way they find things out and this r eally is simply wiz small step away from learning.From personal experience of learn I think that Arnstine (1967) was correct when he utter the arousal of curiosity tidy sum lead to learningfor learning to occur, curiosity must be command. Designing lessons in such a way as to exploit into the natural curiosity of savants and to connect the topics on the curriculum with their everyday experiences is for sure the best way to teach science. I find interrogation / constructivism extremely interesting as it encapsulates the whole get their attention approach and I think its mis apply by an awful people of people. I think that analogies and real world examples study to be pondering of the scientific concept yet simple enough that the bookman hatful grasp it. Also it requires that the student be actively involved, activities must allow the opportunity to demonstrate learning.To instruct someone is not a effect of getting him to commit results to mind. Rather, it is to tea ch him to neighborhoodicipate in the process that possesss thinkable the establishment of experience. We teach a subject not to produce little living libraries on that subject, but rather to get a student to think mathematically for himself, to consider matters as an historian does, to take part in the process of knowledge-getting.Knowing is a process not a product. (Bruner. J, The Process of Education Towards a theory of statement 1966 72) So in approaching this assignment I realise that I am an importunate supporter of teaching through research. I agree with Bruners theoretical fashion model of building on pre-existing knowledge by presenting new existent in a logical way of life at a level the student coffin nail understand, revisiting topic in stages and building layers of ever change magnitude complexity. I find the concept of a spiral curriculum to be a sensible one, but also to be at odds with the way in which individual schools plan the teaching of science. Ther e is utmost too much relience on the text book, with strict adherence to the visible inside. I prefer to leave the text book at home, for the student to be assigned reading and questions from it for homework so that it is new and dissimilar and provides a slightly resistent aspect to the same topic.At the very least it will provide the same information as was cover in crime syndicate in a slightly different manner and provoke recall instead of boredom. A consequence of supporting inquiry is an aversion to direct teaching. Those who support direct teaching say that it is a highly effective method of teaching. The basic components are careful electrical capacity analysis, sequencing of information and use of appropriate examples, specific instructional formats where both teacher and student responses are scripted and testing to mastery. The part that receives the most check is the scripted responses. Here is an example I found at Brainsarefun.com http//brainsarefun.com/Teachtk .html exercise1. All teacher and students touch the closure to be learned.2. teacher The answer to this question is, 1492.3. Teacher When I signal I want you to answer, 1492.4. Teacher The answer is 1492.5. Teacher What year did Columbus discover America?6. Teacher Get ready. Watch the students to substantiate sure all participate.7. Teacher luff by pointing or snapping fingers.8. All 1492.9. Teacher Thats right, Columbus observed America in 1492.10. Teacher Reward. Good job saying 1492. possess eye contact with individuals. Smile. 11. Teacher Next answer, or repeat until everyone is act and firm. If any student is unable to participate or answer correctly, start at the top of the sequence again.Most teachers believe that this type of teaching is too restrictive and prevents the students from developing critical thinking skills. I consider 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 tha t this method of teaching was not for me and I continued to develop my lesson plans along the constructivist enquiry model. I inquiryed guided baring and found that discovery learning is described as an inquiry- found, constructivist learning theory that occurs in situations where the learner key outs 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 more likely to return concepts and knowledge discovered on their profess (in contrast to a transmittance / direct teaching model). Proponents of discovery learning say it has many another(prenominal) advantages, including boost active engagement, promoting motivation, autonomy, responsibility, independence, aiding the development of creativity and problem solving skills and is a tailor learning experience that helps minimize classroom management problems. Detractors poi nt out the amount of time submited to teach a topic and that students do not always achieve the intended outcome of the lesson. That is they may draw erroneous conclusions somewhat the investigation they are engaged in.My action enquiryNow that I realise explored my theories on teaching I need to test those theories by comparing the outcomes of direct versus enquiry teaching. Ideally in order to compare the ii methods I should keep the conditions of the lessons the same and lonesome(prenominal) change the method of instruction. Rigor woulddictate that I teach two groups of students that have been randomly segregated. The students would be in the same year of secondary school and assumed to be at the same academic level. baron within each group would be expected to mimic rule distribution with some students excelling and some struggling with the curriculum content. Unfortunately in my teaching practice placement I have one class of first years and one class of second years. I am also following a subject plan laid wad 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 intention is to design a snatch of lesson plans along the guidelines of both approaches and to deliver these lessons as independent of personal twist as possible. I shall assess the success of each lesson plan as a measure of student value and under a make out of points such as participation, motivation to learn, interest of students, as well as proficiency in summative tests. Bearing in mind my own learning, I will also be critically examining something about my faculty to deliver a constructivist lesson do I do as I say? In assessing participation of students I will make origin to number, frequency and relevance of questions asked.Time spen t 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 baseline of knowledge on the topic of energy by giving the students a questionnaire which was designed to probe existing conceptions. (more here on the results of the questionnaire) From my understanding of enquiry teaching there seems to be a number of activities that should feature in my lesson plans and I have tried 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.Enquiry 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 consider evidence exploitation the tools of science Make explanations based on prior gain fact and new knowledge gained through the process of enquiry / evidence throng Compareco nclusions to currently scientific understanding and account for differences Communicate and carry off their findings and explanations with othersAfter the brainstorming session 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 drop without it, it can change, theres energy in batteries, joules, oil. Then I asked a series of questions designed to clarify facts that they needed to know (3A6 vital force, 3A7 Energy conversion Junior Certificate Science Syllabus). From the answers it was clear to me that the students could not point out between forms of energy and sources of energy. Because the discussion section of the enquiry lesson plan is unrestricted I was able to direct questions and highlight information on the control panel that students could use to discover facts.I tried to give minimum steering but I fo und that the students were floundering and unsure of what they were trying to accomplish. This was a recurring 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 lower skill students show a loss of learning on post instructional testing.My ConclusionIt is essential that the teacher do research work, i.e., he should unwind the subject of chemistry from end to end for facts and for methods of exposition that will make such facts live and real to his students. (Patrick, W. A. (1924) What kind of research is essential to advanced teaching? J. Chemical Education, Volume 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 term 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 meliorate scientific teaching for a better educated society 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 unimaginative lessons recycled every year with minimal input from the teacher needed in the delivery. If investigatory activities are designed deductively, ie have only one conclusion, need more here about factors to consider when designing lesson activities.