Wt5912 unit3 week4

888 views

Published on

Lecture Week 4

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
888
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
33
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Wt5912 unit3 week4

  1. 1. WT5912TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION & WORKSHOP PRACTICE 2: MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTIONUnit 3 – Week 4 Planning: Curriculum, Aims & Objectives<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />Lecturer/Teacher: Mr. Joseph Lyster <br />Academic Year 2011: Spring Semester<br />Technical Support: Mr. Joe Murray & Mr. Richie Hennessy <br />Notes prepared by: Mr. Joseph Lyster<br />
  2. 2. WT5912<br />Why do we need to plan…can’t we just teach?<br /><ul><li>Planning enables teachers to develop the most effective means of engaging students in the learning experience
  3. 3. Subject matter is a given, but the delivery is an Art in itself.
  4. 4. Effective planning will enable the you to develop clear statements of intent through the organisation and preparation of all aspects inherent to the classroom environment
  5. 5. Fail to prepare, then prepare to fail!</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  6. 6. WT5912<br />Understanding Planning:<br />Tyler’ Curriculum Design Process Model<br />Stenhouse’s Four-Processes of Schooling<br />Tyler’s Curriculum Design Objectives Model<br />Bloom’s Taxonomy<br />Surrounding Issues<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  7. 7. WT5912<br />Construction Studies:<br /><ul><li>Construction Studies is one of those subjects that engages students on various levels of cognition
  8. 8. Students are largely autonomous with regard to project work etc…
  9. 9. Students are encouraged to think divergently in order to be creative through processes such as design, which involves practical and theoretical work of various nature such as sketching, designing, wood processing, reporting, experimenting, conceptualizing etc…
  10. 10. In planning for this, we need to be organic in our thinking about how we can provide suitable conditions for growth in terms of quality learning and enjoyment.</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  11. 11. WT5912<br />Construction Studies:<br />How can we plan for all this?<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  12. 12. WT5912<br />Construction Studies Syllabus:<br />Tyler’s Model<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  13. 13. WT5912<br />Curriculum Pedagogy:<br />Pedagogical reasons: allows certain types of learning to take place: active learning, promote student responsibility<br />Ethical reasons: allows all to be treated equality etc…<br />Allows important concepts/principles/procedures from subject to be explored<br />Inducts students into subject matter<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  14. 14. WT5912<br />Four processes of schooling (Stenhouse)<br /><ul><li>Training in new skills e.g. baking a cake, declining irregular French verbs
  15. 15. Instruction– transmission of knowledge e.g. the events of history, the Periodic Table…
  16. 16. Initiation into the culture and values of society – often through the ‘hidden curriculum’.
  17. 17. Induction – into thought processes of the various disciplines e.g. thinking like a scientist, technologist, geographer etc.</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  18. 18. WT5912<br />Curriculum Pedagogy:<br />Lets apply Stenhouse to the Construction Studies Setting… <br /><ul><li>Training in new skills e.g. processing wood using a range of tools/machines, constructing small sections of buildings…
  19. 19. Instruction– transmission of knowledge e.g. evolution of wood practices, building construction etc…
  20. 20. Initiation into the culture and values of society – often through the ‘hidden curriculum’ i.e. What type of work Bob the Builder does…realism.
  21. 21. Induction – into thought processes of the various disciplines e.g. thinking like a technologist, carpenter, construction worker, engineer, architect, etc.</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  22. 22. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br /><ul><li>Statements of goals (Aims) need to indicate both the kind of behaviour to be developed in the pupil and the area of content in which the behaviour is to be applied.
  23. 23. Such closely formulated statements of intent are termed objectives.
  24. 24. Educational theorists and psychologists have largely concluded that there are three main psychological domains to be addressed when formulating statements of intent as follows:</li></ul>Affective<br />Cognitive<br />Psychomotor<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  25. 25. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br />Tyler’s Model<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  26. 26. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br /><ul><li>They distinguish three broad areas or 'domains': </li></ul>the cognitive - concerned with intellectual abilities and operations; <br />the affective - concerned with attitudes, values and appreciations; <br />the psychomotor - which covers the area of motor skills. <br /><ul><li>Within the cognitive domain, six broad levels of understanding (each with subdivisions) are classified, ranging from objectives concerned with simple recall of specific facts to objectives involving the evaluation of complex theories and evidence.
  27. 27. Bloom and his fellow workers have not produced a psychomotor classification, though others have attempted to provide one.
  28. 28. By means of such classifications Bloom hopes to promote greater clarity in thinking about behavioural objectives, a more exact language for communicating about objectives and a more effective means of evaluating objectives so classified.</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  29. 29. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br /><ul><li>A. COGNITIVE DOMAIN (In brief context of Construction Studies)</li></ul>Level 1: KNOWLEDGE<br /><ul><li>'To make pupils conscious of the principles of Constructions Studies'
  30. 30. 'Knowledge of a relatively complete formulation of the evolution of Construction'</li></ul>Level 2: COMPREHENSION<br /><ul><li>'Skill in the art of communication for Construction Studies i.e. reading a drawing'
  31. 31. 'Skill in predicting continuation of trends i.e. Wall design in 10 years time'</li></ul>Level 3: APPLICATION<br /><ul><li>'The ability to apply a range of skills in performing tasks, both practical and theoretical'</li></ul>Level 4: ANALYSIS<br /><ul><li>'Skill in distinguishing facts from hypotheses'</li></ul>Level 5: SYNTHESIS<br /><ul><li>'Ability to incorporate personal experience and interests with a wide range of thoughts and ideas to develop a response to a given task'</li></ul>Level 6: EVALUATION<br /><ul><li>'The comparison of methods used, how it was applied and what could be done more effectively'</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  32. 32. WT5912<br />Bloom’s<br />Krathwohl's<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  33. 33. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br /><ul><li>A. COGNITIVE DOMAIN</li></ul>Create<br />Evaluate<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  34. 34. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br />A revision of Blooms Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Based on Krathwohl’s extension of Bloom’s taxonomy)<br /><ul><li>Knowledge dimension versus Cognitive process dimension
  35. 35. Because emphasis is place on reaching a point of ‘creation’ this it is reasonable to suggest that this taxonomy is closely relation to technological activity.</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  36. 36. WT5912<br />Aims and Objectives:<br />AFFECTIVE DOMAIN<br />Level 1: RECEIVING (ATTENDING.)<br /><ul><li>'Attends carefully when others speak in direct conversation, on the telephone, in audiences'</li></ul>Level 2: RESPONDING<br /><ul><li>‘Finds pleasure in reading for recreation'</li></ul>Level 3: VALUING<br /><ul><li>'Assumes responsibility for drawing reticent members of the group into conversation'</li></ul>Level 4: ORGANIZATION<br /><ul><li>'Forms judgements as to the responsibility of society for conserving human and material resources'</li></ul>Level 5: CHARACTERIZATION BY A VALUE OR VALUE COMPLEX<br /><ul><li>'Readiness to revise judgements and to change behaviour in the light of evidence</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  37. 37. WT5912<br />How the Brain Operates: Kolb<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  38. 38. WT5912<br />A Few Surrounding Issues<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  39. 39. WT5912<br />Motivational Needs:<br />Maslow's Theory of Hierarchical Needs<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  40. 40. WT5912<br />Learning Styles at a Glance:<br /><ul><li>An engineering education paper by Felder and Silverman (1988) identified different dimensions of learning and teaching styles.
  41. 41. The paper highlights aspects significant to engineering education such as the way in which students like to learn and how students can be reached through teaching and learning.
  42. 42. The dimensions of teaching and learning styles shown identify a range of preferred learning styles that can be achieved by a range of corresponding teaching styles. </li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  43. 43. WT5912<br />Learning Styles <br />at a Glance: Kolb<br /><ul><li>David A. Kolb’s (1984) theory on experiential learning suggests that development of learning is based on two dialectic processes, namely conceptualising/experiencing and acting/reflecting (Mainemelis et al, 1999).
  44. 44. The dialectic processes can be identified in the studies of Felder and Silverman (1988) and Prince (2004) along with Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) theory on the zone of proximal development (ZPD).
  45. 45. Kolb’s theory is central to the ideas of balanced learning styles and specialised learning styles.</li></ul>“Individuals with balanced learning profiles on these dimensions are hypothesized to be more sophisticated (adaptively flexible) learners than those with specialized learning styles”<br />(Kolb, 1984)<br /> <br /><ul><li>Kolb’s model of experiential learning addresses the processes involved in experiential learning which is identified as a dominant feature of construction studies pedagogy.
  46. 46. Kolb’s theory is significant in terms of how is pulls together core elements similar to that of collaborative and problem based learning.
  47. 47. Research shows that Kolb’s theory has been adapted to related disciplines such as architecture, design and engineering education.</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  48. 48. WT5912<br />Learning Styles at a Glance:<br />Kolb<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  49. 49. WT5912<br />Active Learning:<br /><ul><li>A study by Prince (2004) addresses the aspect highlighted in the paper by Felder and Silverman (1988). It measured the effect of both active learning and passive learning models.
  50. 50. Itwas found that the new active-engagement methods resulted in a higher percentage understanding among students than with previous and traditional instruction methods of learning.
  51. 51. A study by McCarthy and Anderson (2000) further supports this finding stating that students of active learning methods retained more information than those of traditional methods.</li></ul>Active-engagement vs. traditional instruction (Prince, 2004)<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  52. 52. WT5912<br />Constructivism<br /><ul><li>Research shows that philosophical theories of constructivist learning describe it as a descriptive theory of learning rather than a prescriptive theory of learning.
  53. 53. For example; a descriptive theory of learning reflects knowledge naturally constructed from experience where as a prescriptive theory of learning reflects knowledge constructed in a conditioned learning environment as directed by an instructor (Richardson, 1996).
  54. 54. Constructivist approach to learning involves the mindful and effortful involvement of the learner in the processes of knowledge and skill acquisition interacting with the environment by constructing knowledge through social interaction, negotiation and cooperation (De Corte, 2000).
  55. 55. It is often referred to as an active learning model (Prince, 2004).
  56. 56. Advanced cognitive constructivist theories produced by theorists such as Vygotsky (1978), Piaget (1989), Bruner (1977) and Kolb (1984) outline various approaches to cognitive constructivist learning (see appendix 1.4.1). Vygotsky added that: </li></ul> “As meaning-making is a dialogic and dialectic process mediated through language, individuals construct knowledge when they engage socially in talk and activity about shared problems or tasks.” <br />(Vygotsky, 1978)<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  57. 57. WT5912<br />Constructivism<br /><ul><li>When outlining pedagogical strategies, in particular for practical subjects, constructivist approaches must be considered.
  58. 58. Merrill (1991) sums up constructivist learning in five key points showing that:</li></ul>“knowledge is constructed from experience;<br />learning is a personal interpretation of the world;<br />learning is an active process in which meaning is developed on the basis of experience;<br />conceptual growth comes from the negotiation of meaning, the sharing of multiple perspectives and the changing of our internal representations through collaborative learning;<br />and learning should be situated in realistic settings, testing should be integrated with the task and not a separate activity.” <br />(Merrill, 1991)<br /><ul><li>Two aspects of behavioural learning of interest are stimulus and response (Cunia, 2005).
  59. 59. Stimulus and response can be introduced to the constructivist learning environment provided adequate support structures are in place to develop appropriate use (Dillenbourg, 2002).
  60. 60. Research indicates that teacher facilitation of group learning results in a better use of resources by students.
  61. 61. Collaboration can be influenced anticipatively, by structuringthe collaborative process in order to favour the emergence of productive interactions, or retroactively, by regulatinginteractions, as tutors do.
  62. 62. These two approaches are complementary</li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  63. 63. WT5912<br />Collaborative Learning<br /><ul><li>The constructivist style of teaching and learning, for example student centred learning, promotes a more interactive learning experience which accommodates collaborative group work (Kirschneret al, 2009).
  64. 64. Educational psychologists have long been interested in the potential of collaborative learning activities to produce high-level learning (Voletet al, 2008). However, the nature of group work in schools is a complex phenomenon (Hanham & McCormick, 2008).
  65. 65. In the context of group interactions, high-level cognitive processing can refer to elaborations, speculations, justifications, inferences, drawing relations, asking thought-provoking questions and negotiation; all assumed to contribute to the co-construction of knowledge.
  66. 66. In contrast, low-level cognitive processing can refer to sharing information, exchanging ideas, clarifying understanding, or providing definitions without evidence of transformation or integration with own mental representations (Voletet al, 2008). </li></ul>Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  67. 67. WT5912<br />Collaborative Learning<br /><ul><li>Over the last century, researchers in the psychological tradition, from Baldwin to Vygotsky and including earlier writings of Piaget, have underlined the importance of interaction between social, affective and cognitive states in development and learning and have thus provided a theoretical rationale for the use of groupings in instructional settings (Blatchford et al, 2003).
  68. 68. A recent study for science by Gillies and Khan (2008) reflected the positive impact of collaborative learning commenting that:</li></ul> <br />“Teaching students to engage critically and constructively with each other’s ideas, challenge and counter-challenge proposals, and discuss alternative propositions before reaching agreement are important if students are to talk and reason effectively together and when students were taught to talk and reason together and apply those skills in the study of science they made greater gains in measures of individual reasoning than students who have not had such teaching.”<br />(Gillies & Khan, 2008)<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  69. 69. WT5912<br />Collaborative Learning<br /><ul><li>A study by Gokhale (1995) investigated learning through collaboration. Gokhale concluded that collaborative learning for example group work fosters the development of critical thinking through discussion, clarification of ideas and evaluation of other ideas.
  70. 70. Cooperative learning methods improve problem-solving strategies because students are confronted with different interpretations of the given situation (Bruner, 1985).
  71. 71. Vygotsky (1978) commented that students perform on a higher intellectual level in a collaborative setting. Ghaith (2000) highlighted the assessment of collaborative learning commenting that:</li></ul>“Cooperative activities which use student learning groups to promote students' active involvement in their own learning, "can be used to facilitate alternative assessment given that it provides opportunities for continuous improvement and possibilities for assessing individual and group outcomes in a supportive and stress-reduced environment”<br />(Ghaith, 2002)<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />
  72. 72. WT5912<br />A Suggested Approach to Construction Studies Pedagogy:<br />Influential Factors<br />Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology<br />

×