S00099183



EDFD452 – Assessment Task 1Individual Teaching Philosophy and EssayAngela Stubbs – S00099183 In providing the most effective education for each individual student in the classroom and school there are a number of diverse considerations to be addressed as well as strategies and practices to be carried out constantly and consistently. In this essay four vital factors to educating students will be focused on: social constructivism/sociocultural theory, school involvement with family and the community, inquiry based teaching, and assessment for learning. In discussing learning theories there are many valuable approaches of which (I) deem the sociocultural and inquiry approaches to be of high importance yet I require further learning in this area hence these have been chosen to discuss. School, family and community Bronfenbrenner’s social ecology model identifies school as a one of the closest contextual influences to a student alongside the family and community (Bowes & Grace, 2009). Elements to either of these as well as the relationship between these contexts can have an impact on a student’s development (of certain skills and knowledge) and opportunity to learn. As a school it is important to create positive partnership with the community and a child’s parents. Through developing a good relationship with the community and family it helps to assist the students in seeing purpose to tasks as well as guiding students to be active community members in society (Myers, 2008; McFeeters, 2008). Family is one of the most influential contexts for young children, impacting on how they develop mentally and emotionally, and ultimately the development of values in which aid them in becoming “ethical and law-abiding citizens” (Bowes & Grace, 2009, p.91). Carlisle, Stanley, and Kemple (2005) propose that parental involvement can have a number of benefits such as aiding students to see a connection between home, school and the community, and encouraging students to value school as they see their family value it. In addition it allows the opportunity for the teacher to gain information and insights about the individual student as well as allowing parents to keep informed about their child’s progress, teaching practices and school methodologies (Carlisle, Stanley, & Kemple, 2005). Parental involvement is proven to improve student outcomes, yet in recent years, with Australia’s multicultural society increasing, the family values and participation with a child’s schooling has varied (Bowes & Grace, 2009). Carlisle, Stanley and Kemple (2005) suggest that a number of factors can play a role in preventing parents from participating in their child’s school experience. It may be due to a parent’s negative past experience of education, or possibly their doubt to have an impact due to their level of education (Carlisle, Stanley, & Kemple, 2005). A difference of background or culture between the parents and teachers may also result in the parent feeling their values would not be understood, preventing parents from involving themselves. In another sense, it may be the case that families’ cultural values determine a different level of appropriate parental involvement or simply they may be unsure of what is an acceptable level of participation (Carlisle, Stanley, & Kemple, 2005). Thus catering for diversity through inclusive practices and appreciation of our multi-cultural society/community can then be understood to have far more importance beyond the classroom in as well as within it, rendering it vital to take these previous possibilities into consideration if assuming levels of parental commitment. Merging the school and community through such approaches as project based learning, community service can have a positive impact on students. Myers (2008) informs that “community service education provides experiential learning by attempting to pair classroom concepts with real-world community” (p.1). Such an approach results in improved critical thinking skills, motivation and social skills in terms of group work and collaboration (Myers, 2008). Furthermore communities feel that their needs are being listened to and reflected in education/school curriculum (McFeeters, 2008). Similarly it helps students to care for the community and become active and informed citizens (McFeeters, 2008; Myers, 2008).Social constructivism More progressed and thorough than Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, Lev Vygotsky developed the sociocultural theory. Vygotsky’s theory further defined cognitive learning in terms of the “sociocultural aspect” and “the role of human mediators in children’s learning” (McInerney & McInerney, 2010). Similarly to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, this theory claims that the culture surrounding an individual plays a role in how they develop (Bowes & Grace, 2009; McInerney & McInerney, 2010). Such of the use of “tools, social structures and language” within the context of socialisation and education has much impact on development of cognition (McInerney & McInerney, 2010, p.54). Relative to increasing the inclusive practices between the school, family and community, Vygotsky believed that learning by scientific concepts and learning through everyday concepts are “interconnected and interdependent” (McInerney & McInerney, 2010, p.55). This theory further supports the need to develop a relationship between these contexts if learning is “to be significant, effective and of practical value” (McInerney & McInerney, 2010, p.55). Although Vygotsky’s scaffolded instruction would somewhat call for explicit teaching in some areas, the theory of social constructivism rather tends towards a holistic approach with Vygotsky claiming that learning is counterproductive when material is divided into sub-skills (McInerney & McInerney, 2010). This conflict of approaches then possibly requires a combination of explicit and inquiry teaching in order to produce the best outcome in terms of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory (Archer & Hughes, 2011; Reynolds, 2012). Furthermore Bird (2009) found that a combination of applying Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory and inquiry based learning approach resulted in a constructive learning environment for fostering student self-regulation. Self-regulation can have a significant influence on the educational outcomes of a student. – explain what/how/why (International Encyclopedia of Education) Inquiry Based Approach There are a vast number of learning approaches, theories and strategies proposed in today’s time, many of which work most effectively intertwined with others as previously cited. Inquiry based teaching and learning is a much favoured approach and is becoming more recognised for use in the classroom for substantial reason. Inquiry learning plays a strong role within many other theories and approaches, improving students’ efficiency and higher-order thinking skills (Bird, 2009). Mentioned previously the inquiry approach has much to relate to Vygotsky’s theory of social constructivism, in which students’ development of knowledge is said to benefit from guided and assisted discovery (Arrington, 2008; McInerney, & McInerney, 2010). Likewise, interaction, sharing of experiences and solving problems are imperative features to both Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and inquiry based learning. With this Richardson (2013) states in regards to an inquiry approach that “teachers must be colearners” with students, and “master learners in the classroom” (p.3). Preiss and Sternberg (2010) have further precisely developed an approach stemming from Vygotsky’s theory of social constructivism, similar to the inquiry approach, which they call Accountable Talk. This approach comprises of the teacher posing a question that prompts an elaborate response, then follows further prompting for students to “develop explanations, challenges, counterexamples, and questions” (p.179). Very similar to an inquiry approach however implied to be somewhat more effective, Preiss and Sternberg (2010) suggest that students who learn through accountable talk are socialised into communities of practice in which respectful and grounded discussion is the norm” (p.180). From this research it seems that the inquiry approach may be more beneficial in terms of scope and applying to a greater breadth of areas in the overall curriculum, whereas accountable talk could be utilised as a strategy within an inquiry teaching and learning approach. Although contemporary education is tending towards an Inquiry Based Approach, Asher and Hughes (2011) contend that explicit teaching is perceived in the wrong light, with educators often viewing it as teacher-centred and a rote learning style of teaching. They argue that explicit teaching, can be student-centred and if implemented correctly has in fact the same outcome as inquiry based, student-discovery learning (Asher & Hughes, 2011). Enforcing its importance Reynolds (2012) states that “highly effective teachers use both explicit and inquiry approaches in their teaching” (p.64). Consequently it can be concluded that in some forms students will gain from the explicit learning of discrete skills, whereas in other forms students will benefit most from learning the whole concept rather than discrete components, making it necessary to incorporate both explicit and inquiry methods of teaching into the classroom (Asher and Hughes, 2011; Reynolds, 2012; McInerney & McInerney, 2010).Assessment Assessment in the classroom can be used for a number of purposes, most importantly it should be used to inform teaching and student learning, for progression and the closing of the achievement ‘gap’, where a student is and where they need to be (William & Black, 1996). The past situation with assessment was based upon students’ knowledge gained in a summative form as opposed to skills assessed in a formative manner (Walker & Bass, 2011). William and Black (1996) state that formative and summative are terms given not to describe assessment particularly, rather the “functions they served” (p.537). They continue to describe that formative and summative forms of assessment are ultimately determined by the overall outcome of how the information gathered or content which has been assessed is used. William and Black (1996) further declare that both formative and summative assessment hold purpose. Rather than relying on or restricting assessment to just one form it is crucial that both formative and summative methods are used in conjunction in gathering a balance of information (William & Black, 1996). Teacher-assessment, student self-assessment, and peer-assessment can all assist students in their learning process. Walker and Bass (2011) indicate that self-assessment and peer-assessment are particularly important in personalised learning. William and Black (1996) write that formative assessment can “support individual development and motivate learners” (p.545). Furthermore the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (2007) identify meaningful assessment as advantageous in terms of a personalised, learner-centred approach. Conclusion Each theme discussed within this essay can be seen to have a link to the others. Teaching and learning is not one specific approach or view, rather a combination of many is what will develop the most capable and knowledgeable students we could work for. This essay has moreover expressed the need for personalised learning as opposed to targeting teaching and content towards merely one type of learner or one method. Word count: 1638ReferencesArcher, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching.Bird, L. (2009). Developing Self-Regulated Learning Skills in Young Students. Retreived from A+ Education database. Bowes, J., & Grace, R. (2009). Children, Families & Communities: Contexts and Consequences (3rd ed.). Australia: Oxford University Press.Carlisle, E., Stanley, L., & Kemple, K.M. (2005). Opening Doors: Understanding School & Family Influences on Family Involvement. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33 (3), 155-162. doi: 10.1007/s10643-005-0043-1Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2007). Personalising Education: from research to policy and practice. Retrieved from , B. B. (2008). Civics Education in the Schools. Research Starters Education. Retrieved from McInerney, D., & McInerny, V. (2010). Educational Psychology: Constructing Learning (5th ed.). NSW, Australia: Pearson Australia.Myers, S. (2008). Community Service Education. [EBSCO] Research Starters Education. Retreived from A+ Education database.Preiss, D. D., & Sternberg, R. J. (2010). Innovations in Educational Psychology. Retrieved from ACU database.Reynolds, R. (2012). Teaching History, Geography & SOSE in the Primary School. Australia: Oxford University Press.Richardson, W. (2013). Students first, not staff. Educational Leadership, 70 (6), 10-14. Retreived from Education Research Complete databaseVan De Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2010). Elementary & Middle School Mathematics: Teaching developmentally (7th ed.). U.S.A: Pearson Education, Inc.Walker, K., & Bass, S. (2011). Engagement Matters: Personalised learning for Grades 3-6. Victoria, Australia: ACER PressWilliam, D., & Black, P. (1996). Meanings and Consequences: A basis for distinguishing formative and summative functions of assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 22 (5), 537-548. Retreived from Education Research Complete database. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download