Today we started the day discussing our weekends in a comprehensive effort to continue getting to know everyone. We got together in groups that also studied the same theorist and used GNA's guideline to formulate our discussion topics. Our group was having trouble forming a cohesive unit of information and GNA entered the equation by trying to guide our group and re-direct the focus. This is especially important in group work to make sure there is not a "negative Zone of Proximity" and social learning stays on track.
It was interesting that each of us had different experiences with the reading seeing as the point of the article was how each learner interprets and incorporates differently according to their pre-determined schema.
Then we divided up into triads to jigsaw and teach each other a bit about each learning theorist. This was useful in pulling out the big ideas and only teaching the important relevant information to connect the theories with the article and what all of us had to say. We were incorporating the information into our schemas (assimilating).
We discussed our experience with group work and how we overcame obstacles as a group to form a cohesive plan on instructing our jigsaw groups about the theorists. Then we took our designed questions (a method to help us think critically about the material) and mixed them up so everyone answered a few of the group's questions. This gave us an idea of how successful the questions are while challenging our minds to answer them (at least one higher order question).
After lunch, we researched six more theorists and got into groups of three to design a presentation about that theorist. The theorist I researched was Erikson who developed 8 stages to span infancy to death/old age, whereas my former theorist, Piaget, only developed stages from infancy through early adulthood. Piaget felt each stage was graduated to get to the next stage and they went from egocentric to abstract. Erikson felt there was an internal conflict that was illustrated by a "stage" but that those stages could be revisited in different ways and were never achieved. In this sense, Piaget had more concrete stages that came about at a specific age while Erikson believed more in a continuum, and the stages be used more as a guide than a definitive outline.
The presentations created also help us develop instruction that outlines the major ideas and then we made three questions keeping Bloom's Taxonomy in mind to assess a student's understanding of Erikson.
Statement: If a student is required to develop questions regarding the subject they are learning, then they will be more successful learners because it requires them to understand the big ideas and be able to articulate them and envision how it serves high order thinking.
Marisa,
ReplyDeleteThis statement is ripe to be transformed into a T2P.
"It was interesting that each of us had different experiences with the reading seeing as the point of the article was how each learner interprets and incorporates differently according to their pre-determined schema."
Strike the "interesting" part, and delve into a critical, theory-based hypothesis.
Keep pressing!
GNA
"It was interesting that each of us had different experiences with the reading seeing as the point of the article was how each learner interprets and incorporates differently according to their pre-determined schema."
ReplyDeleteContext: Within a group,
If: each of us reads the same article/information,
then: each of us is going to have a different experience with it
because: it will be incorporated differently into our previously established schemas.
Evidence: Our experience with figuring out the main points of Piaget
Moral Implication: We must remain open-minded because we have to take into consideration our colleague's previous experience and mental frameworks to understand how they integrated the ideas of the article into those frameworks.