My Favorite Instructional Approach
By Ilana Johnson
EDI 600 Psychological Foundation of Education
School of Education
Long Island University, C. W. Post
June 9, 2009
Out of the three instructional approaches, I identify most with the Cognitive Approach with a touch of the Humanistic Approach. I will compare these to the Behavioral Approach and list the reasons as to why I'm not fond of this approach.
I like that the Cognitive Approach is student-centered while the teacher acts as a facilitator. I think that this method encourages students to be vocal and limits passivity. The Behavioral Approach, being teacher-centered with the teacher having all of the knowledge shouts of a domineering, dictatorship-like classroom. It immediately reminded me of my second grade teacher, Mrs. Classowitz. She was didn't give us many opportunities to speak, using the classroom as her platform of authoritativeness. Instead of being a motivator, she chose to scream and punish, scaring us on a daily basis. When a student doesn't feel comfortable expressing his/herself, the growth of learning is stunted.
Secondly, I like that the Cognitive Approach encourages sense-making and personal interpretation. The Behavioral Approach decreases the opportunity for a student to figure out why for the answer, if it's concern is to only establish only one correct answer without focusing on the why. This doesn't always help a student who needs to see and understand the steps to problem-solving. I believe learning happens best when a student can make direct correlations to areas of his/her life in order for the material to make sense; and also, when they are given the appropriate amount of time to figure out answers instead of being force-fed the material under the time of a stopwatch.
The Behavioral Approach also doesn't appear to reward, only evaluate. I believe that recognizing achievement and fostering a sense of creativity is crucial for motivation.
Third, I like that the Cognitive Approach provides meaningful context with learnable amounts set to be mastered in realistic time periods. The Behavioral Approach practices small, easy-to-learn steps but are they easy-to-understand? The focus seems to be on instruction, not necessarily comprehension. The Cognitive Approach stresses the act of making connections, enabling students to make the material relevant to prior knowledge and to their own lives. When students are allowed to parallel information between school and life, learning occurs.
The Humanistic Approach has a philosophy that really appeals to me, especially since, as I wrote in my research paper, I have had less-than-nurturing teachers in my lifetime. I like the community building aspect, the addressing of negative feelings, and the method of lesson delivery: exploring problems and developing insight.
I believe that a combination of these two approaches are the best for developing a classroom of healthy, able-minded and motivated students.
Long Island University, C. W. Post
June 9, 2009
Out of the three instructional approaches, I identify most with the Cognitive Approach with a touch of the Humanistic Approach. I will compare these to the Behavioral Approach and list the reasons as to why I'm not fond of this approach.
I like that the Cognitive Approach is student-centered while the teacher acts as a facilitator. I think that this method encourages students to be vocal and limits passivity. The Behavioral Approach, being teacher-centered with the teacher having all of the knowledge shouts of a domineering, dictatorship-like classroom. It immediately reminded me of my second grade teacher, Mrs. Classowitz. She was didn't give us many opportunities to speak, using the classroom as her platform of authoritativeness. Instead of being a motivator, she chose to scream and punish, scaring us on a daily basis. When a student doesn't feel comfortable expressing his/herself, the growth of learning is stunted.
Secondly, I like that the Cognitive Approach encourages sense-making and personal interpretation. The Behavioral Approach decreases the opportunity for a student to figure out why for the answer, if it's concern is to only establish only one correct answer without focusing on the why. This doesn't always help a student who needs to see and understand the steps to problem-solving. I believe learning happens best when a student can make direct correlations to areas of his/her life in order for the material to make sense; and also, when they are given the appropriate amount of time to figure out answers instead of being force-fed the material under the time of a stopwatch.
The Behavioral Approach also doesn't appear to reward, only evaluate. I believe that recognizing achievement and fostering a sense of creativity is crucial for motivation.
Third, I like that the Cognitive Approach provides meaningful context with learnable amounts set to be mastered in realistic time periods. The Behavioral Approach practices small, easy-to-learn steps but are they easy-to-understand? The focus seems to be on instruction, not necessarily comprehension. The Cognitive Approach stresses the act of making connections, enabling students to make the material relevant to prior knowledge and to their own lives. When students are allowed to parallel information between school and life, learning occurs.
The Humanistic Approach has a philosophy that really appeals to me, especially since, as I wrote in my research paper, I have had less-than-nurturing teachers in my lifetime. I like the community building aspect, the addressing of negative feelings, and the method of lesson delivery: exploring problems and developing insight.
I believe that a combination of these two approaches are the best for developing a classroom of healthy, able-minded and motivated students.
0 comments:
Post a Comment