Actually before having this class I have little knowledge in instructional design theories. I met ADDIE concept in several articles, I new some instructional designers, but in general this world was really closed for me, because I did not have any basics in this field. “Closed” means that actually before this class I had tried to get acquainted myself with instructional design theory by checking out some books or attending some ID sessions in the conferences, but it did not bring much results: I just would glance curiously through the headings and graphs of those books or would attend a nice ID presentation “with many graphs and “passion” put by a presenter, but in general I would leave the presentation with not so much knowledge left in my mind.
So this class “gave” me not only new knowledge, experience and skills but open a new world for me :)
Knowledge:
As I have already written in the discussion forum, I was happy with the book chosen, since it exposed me to many different Instructional Design theories. Using references from our textbook I checked out those most cited instructional design books and randomly read them through the course (thanks for so balanced course load!) when I had a need - to contextualize some not clear theoretical underspinings given in our text book, to have broader view before completing a step of ID project, to satisfy curiosity, etc.
So those books that I had “tried” to read before became familiar to me now as well as those instructional designers’ presentations in AECT 2007 conference - finally were understandable and useful :)
It means that I really got the basics in instructional design and now I can move on my own further.
Skills:
The instructional design project and our professors’ feedbacks (“expert review”) was something what immersed me in the real instructional design practice (world?). Actually my ID project was a real one. And I had to do a real need analysis (doing it I have changed my proposal three times!), be involved in department politics, analyze real learners, interact about my project with my boss, K-state online content specialist, develop demo tutorials that would be customized to ELP teachers needs and even make some formative evaluation: one-to-one evaluation with a learner and consultation with the expert about demo tutorial design. So, I think, the “ID project activity” was the one that contextualized all those theories given in the books, making them alive, interesting, and applicable as well as it really “encalturated” me in this field. The most rewarding understanding was that systemic design of instruction really works! If not systemic approach I would never think about so many variables that I need take in account while designing instruction, I would never consult (tap into knowledge of) other experts who were really nice and helpful to me and would never create such quality training instruction.
Technology:
In this class I was exposed to many new tools (communication, productivity etc) that were greatly integrated into instruction.
Using Google tools was really great to experience their educational functionality: how they, combined with each other and thoughtfully integrated in instruction, can bring so many benefits to the learning process! Some of google tools we (me and my boss) have already implemented in our department and I am looking forward to the workshop for ELP teachers helping them meaningfully to integrate in the instruction.
Also Gliffy drawing tool http://www.gliffy.com/ was really excellent one for drawing flowcharts and making presentations. It helped me to do task analysis in the way that was really effective and I will use this tool for sure in the future.
Also I have never used del.icio.us and http://www.tinyurl.com/ , etc. But as I said before the most important thing for us as learners/instructors is not just tools, but those experience of how those tools appropriately integrated in instruction enhance learning process.
Learning from example:
I am quite reflective learner. I always learn reflecting on the designs of classes that I have taken :)
It was good to reflect on design of our Instructional design class and to recognize here the applications/”exemplifications” of those theories that we have read: the “learner and need analysis” done by our professor in online survey at the beginning of our course; clearly articulated objectives, assessment guidelines, grading rubrics, conditions, assignments etc and how well they are tied together; the use of lots of different kind of instructional activities that enabled as to construct and articulate our knowledge in many different ways making our learning experience more “full”, etc. Also was good to experience the advantage of a really well balanced course. Our course was not overloaded; it did not stress us out (as some courses do) but engaging in different kind of activities and giving time to work on it, brought impressive results. Also it fit to different needs of different learners, those who are really busy with many classes and full time jobs, those who are not in education field and may need more time to get acquainted to this field and those who wants to read more. If someday I will be designing instructions or teaching, I know - all those experiences that I had in good designed classes will arise and will guide in some ways the design of instruction that I will be creating…
How the learning changed you in some way:
This class changed me. I have learned how to apply systemic design of the instruction; I have found out that it works and that I like it :)
It really makes me stronger while working as GRE as well as listening to educators who thinks that we do not need to design instruction - just let freely to decided children what, when and how to learn.
What it means to my future:
I really don’t know my future. It depends on many factors, but after this class I am sure that I really would love to have more studies and practice in instructional design.
Thanks :)
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Learner assessment/criterion based assessment
For me was interesting to understand a difference between norm and criterion-referenced assessments. Smith & Ragan (2005) state that “quite often, scores from criterion-referenced instruments do not represent a normal distribution. They are often skewed by many individuals performing well”(p.111), while scores from norm-referenced assessment often forms "normal curve". Smith & Ragan (2005), refering to Bloom’s ideas, argue that the “normal curve” should not be the expected model of outcomes of the effective instruction.
I just was struck by the Bloom’s idea too that “normal curve” of students’ score occurs when here aren’t any instructional intervention, when students learn material totally on their own; when their aptitude (and perseverance) is the only factors influencing their learning.
So an infrence would be that we do have to seek to design a GOOD instruction and that about ALL studnets can succeed!
From my undergraduate and graduate studies back in Lithuania I remember an opposite situation – professors in Lithuanian universities were some sort of forced to score students works (test, exam, papers, etc.) so that students’ scores will form a normal curve. If most of students would get “A”, it would be assumed that test, scoring method, etc. are not valid or the course is built in a not demanding way.
Also when reflecting back on my studies in Lithuania, I would agree that most of classes did not had deliberately applied instructional designed, they were very theoretical without any good connection to the real life of the field as well as without good examples of future application of those knowledge/skills in students lives. So, students were left on their own to find their way in learning. Assessment in most of cases measured only vast amount of declarative knowledge.
So, all readings and discussions in this class brought me really simple, but good understandings:
1.that students’ scores not supposed to form “normal curve”(most of “A” in the class is okay)
2.Essence of teaching is to design and the effective and efficient instruction, from which most of students can learn very well.
Even if statement seems simple, I think, such understandings would be a big paradigm change for many instructors.
Assessment role in designing such good instruction:
Pretest would show to instructor the current level of learners’ knowledge, skills and attitudes so it would bring data that would enable instructor constructively to alter the instruction (is it also the ongoing formative evaluation of design of instruction?) or in some cases would help to hold some learners, who do not have appropriate skills, from taking the course. Ongoing learners’ formative learners’ evaluation (corrective, reinforcing and explanatory feedback) would bring a real quality to the instruction, summative learners’ evaluation, would give to learners satisfaction of the achievement that they have accomplished and data to instructor of how effective the instruction was (a formative course design evaluation). As I mention in previous posting, the shared role of the assessor by designing peer-assessment and self-assessment would be good, since it would enable learners better to internalize assessment criteria, foster meatcognitive skills and it would deepened learning.
So I would imaging assessment as a transparent net that “goes” through all stages, parts, places of the instruction bringing quality to the instruction and ensuring possibility of a significant change in knowledge, skills and attitudes for learners.
Brown, A.H. & Green, T. D. (2005). The Essentials of Instructional Design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and Practice. USA: Prentice-Hall.
Smith L., P., Ragan T., J. (2005). Instructional design. NewYork: Wiley.
I just was struck by the Bloom’s idea too that “normal curve” of students’ score occurs when here aren’t any instructional intervention, when students learn material totally on their own; when their aptitude (and perseverance) is the only factors influencing their learning.
So an infrence would be that we do have to seek to design a GOOD instruction and that about ALL studnets can succeed!
From my undergraduate and graduate studies back in Lithuania I remember an opposite situation – professors in Lithuanian universities were some sort of forced to score students works (test, exam, papers, etc.) so that students’ scores will form a normal curve. If most of students would get “A”, it would be assumed that test, scoring method, etc. are not valid or the course is built in a not demanding way.
Also when reflecting back on my studies in Lithuania, I would agree that most of classes did not had deliberately applied instructional designed, they were very theoretical without any good connection to the real life of the field as well as without good examples of future application of those knowledge/skills in students lives. So, students were left on their own to find their way in learning. Assessment in most of cases measured only vast amount of declarative knowledge.
So, all readings and discussions in this class brought me really simple, but good understandings:
1.that students’ scores not supposed to form “normal curve”(most of “A” in the class is okay)
2.Essence of teaching is to design and the effective and efficient instruction, from which most of students can learn very well.
Even if statement seems simple, I think, such understandings would be a big paradigm change for many instructors.
Assessment role in designing such good instruction:
Pretest would show to instructor the current level of learners’ knowledge, skills and attitudes so it would bring data that would enable instructor constructively to alter the instruction (is it also the ongoing formative evaluation of design of instruction?) or in some cases would help to hold some learners, who do not have appropriate skills, from taking the course. Ongoing learners’ formative learners’ evaluation (corrective, reinforcing and explanatory feedback) would bring a real quality to the instruction, summative learners’ evaluation, would give to learners satisfaction of the achievement that they have accomplished and data to instructor of how effective the instruction was (a formative course design evaluation). As I mention in previous posting, the shared role of the assessor by designing peer-assessment and self-assessment would be good, since it would enable learners better to internalize assessment criteria, foster meatcognitive skills and it would deepened learning.
So I would imaging assessment as a transparent net that “goes” through all stages, parts, places of the instruction bringing quality to the instruction and ensuring possibility of a significant change in knowledge, skills and attitudes for learners.
Brown, A.H. & Green, T. D. (2005). The Essentials of Instructional Design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and Practice. USA: Prentice-Hall.
Smith L., P., Ragan T., J. (2005). Instructional design. NewYork: Wiley.
learner assessment/authentic assessment
While doing readings about the assessment of the learner several things struck me.
One was about the authenticity of assessment. Actually after reading in our textbook such statement - that assessment becomes authentic when it has direct relationship with the instructional goals – I couldn’t understand what authors mean, since authentic assessment for me was just an inevitably part of authentic learning. But in Smith & Ragan (2005) book I found pretty good explanation that gave me a quite different perspective on authentic assessment. They describe the authentic assessment as one that measures outcome that was originally represented in objective.
Smith & Ragan (2005) argues that it is very common practice when instructional designers create test items that “step back from the level of realism or directness” that was spelled out in objectives. For example, if the outcome of the objective is the application of intellectual knowledge/skills, and a tests items written for that objective test only declarative knowledge: recall of facts (what is quite common practice, since such assessment that uses is quite easy to create) then your assessment looses authenticity.
Actually they agree that it is hard to write authentic assessment for such outcomes as some complex intellectual competences, so they suggest writing a revised objective that reflects "closest intent of original objective that could be assessed" (p.109). It means that instead of assessing performance in real world settings, instructor can assess it using simulation or even using a pencil-paper test, only that outcomes as intellectual skills or performance must be not reduced to test items that measure declarative knowledge.
I am just wondering how to design the authentic assessment for such outcomes essential for XIX century learners as complex cognitive competences (problem solving, critical thinking, making informed judgments, etc.), social competences, metacogntive competences, affective dispositions as self efficacy, independence, internal motivation etc. Is it possible for such kind of outcomes to write measurable objectives and congruent test items?
After getting some basic knowledge in instructional design from our class, I do think that it is possible to keep congruent/authentic assessment for such outcomes – and I even think that keeping systematic design of instruction is the best approach to solve this very complex problem. I do not have a concrete recipe for that, but from readings and reflection on learning experience in my classes I think that the use of thorough designed formative assessment that incorporates many kinds/forms of assessment as well as shared role of the assessor (appropriate use of thoughtfully designed self-assessment, peer-assessment) could help.
Anyway it looks as a dounting task for instructional desinger and insturctor
Brown, A.H. & Green, T. D. (2005). The Essentials of Instructional Design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and Practice. USA: Prentice-Hall.
Smith L., P., Ragan T., J. (2005). Instructional design. NewYork: Wiley.
Van Hattum-Jannsen N, Pimenta, P., C., C.,(2006) Peer and self assessment in Portuguese engineering education. In Tim S. Roberts (editor), Self, peer and group assessment in E-learning. PA: Information Science Publishing
One was about the authenticity of assessment. Actually after reading in our textbook such statement - that assessment becomes authentic when it has direct relationship with the instructional goals – I couldn’t understand what authors mean, since authentic assessment for me was just an inevitably part of authentic learning. But in Smith & Ragan (2005) book I found pretty good explanation that gave me a quite different perspective on authentic assessment. They describe the authentic assessment as one that measures outcome that was originally represented in objective.
Smith & Ragan (2005) argues that it is very common practice when instructional designers create test items that “step back from the level of realism or directness” that was spelled out in objectives. For example, if the outcome of the objective is the application of intellectual knowledge/skills, and a tests items written for that objective test only declarative knowledge: recall of facts (what is quite common practice, since such assessment that uses is quite easy to create) then your assessment looses authenticity.
Actually they agree that it is hard to write authentic assessment for such outcomes as some complex intellectual competences, so they suggest writing a revised objective that reflects "closest intent of original objective that could be assessed" (p.109). It means that instead of assessing performance in real world settings, instructor can assess it using simulation or even using a pencil-paper test, only that outcomes as intellectual skills or performance must be not reduced to test items that measure declarative knowledge.
I am just wondering how to design the authentic assessment for such outcomes essential for XIX century learners as complex cognitive competences (problem solving, critical thinking, making informed judgments, etc.), social competences, metacogntive competences, affective dispositions as self efficacy, independence, internal motivation etc. Is it possible for such kind of outcomes to write measurable objectives and congruent test items?
After getting some basic knowledge in instructional design from our class, I do think that it is possible to keep congruent/authentic assessment for such outcomes – and I even think that keeping systematic design of instruction is the best approach to solve this very complex problem. I do not have a concrete recipe for that, but from readings and reflection on learning experience in my classes I think that the use of thorough designed formative assessment that incorporates many kinds/forms of assessment as well as shared role of the assessor (appropriate use of thoughtfully designed self-assessment, peer-assessment) could help.
Anyway it looks as a dounting task for instructional desinger and insturctor
Brown, A.H. & Green, T. D. (2005). The Essentials of Instructional Design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and Practice. USA: Prentice-Hall.
Smith L., P., Ragan T., J. (2005). Instructional design. NewYork: Wiley.
Van Hattum-Jannsen N, Pimenta, P., C., C.,(2006) Peer and self assessment in Portuguese engineering education. In Tim S. Roberts (editor), Self, peer and group assessment in E-learning. PA: Information Science Publishing
Sunday, November 4, 2007
motivation changes over time
What motivates/motivated me as learner. How it changes over time?
It is a very interesting question. I have never thought about how it have changed over time; and when I tried to reflect on that I realized that yes it was changing all the time and had clear boundaries between those changes :)
Some things will be hard to explain since educational context in which I grew up is really different from the
Actually as elementary school kid I was doing not really well. I was accepted to a really good high achieving children class, but my scores were not so good. I cannot very precisely explain way, since being elementary school kid I did not have good ability to reflect on instruction and my own learning strategies, but I will try to make some guesses :) Our elementary school class had 42 kids and one teacher! Main things that would let you to succeed in class would be: to have a really good discipline, be quite in the class, follow instructions, be thorough in your home works, do well in writing. I think it was not enough for me. I was quite active, curious kid, I did not have this "complex" to be a good girl, what is typical for most of elementary school kids (especially girls), because of that I did not fit in this a really strict learning environment. Reflecting back I feel, that I needed just more engagement of my curiosity, more love and more personalized constructive feedbacks, that would help augmented me as learner. But it was a class of 40 kids!!!!!
In a middle school I did much better. The reason for that could be my as learner maturation, but also the situation that we had many teachers teaching different subjects and those teachers had quite different learning strategies as well as different instructional design build in. Good opportunity to choose from! I think I did well in those classes were instructional design was integrated with motivational design (I guess good teacher do it without any knowledge of it! :) - classes that would catch and hold my attention, that would engage my curiosity, imagination, but also together would had clear requirements as well as plenty of feedbacks and reinforcements to allow success and growth. I do remember that I always had big problems with a Lithuanian grammar. Lithuanian grammar is really difficult one. Some of lucky learners just have sort of talent for it and can write without mistakes, while others (as me) need to learn it as math or algebra. I really thankful my teacher who thoroughly designed this grammar class, so we can learn it in interesting, engaging but also in a very systematic and fruitful way.
In the high school I did best since it really fit into my changing requirement of motivation Elements of this motivation were a challenge, choice, modeling, friendship and independence. Our high school classes gave us lots of challenges, as well as most of our teachers were great personalities who could model a deep inquiry, uniqueness as well as real life application of a particular subject – what was really important for higher school students searching for their own identities :) I think I was already ready for that challenge and independence, since in the middle school I have already formed some good study habits. The example that I would like to present is not the greatest one, since it is more about a book and challenge, then about good teacher/models. Anyway we had a very difficult general biology book that was really bad translated from Russian language (our languages belongs to different groups of languages), was written in very difficult academic language that was really hard for high school students “to break” and didn’t had any good visuals! Unfortunately our biology teacher wasn’t helping us much (she wasn’t a good role model :) with the content and she did not have “a good eye” on me – it means that she could call on me in every biology class asking to show what I have learned. To win such a war I had to break this academic text. The benefits were “several-fold”: I started to like general biology (can you imaging?!), the knowledge that I gain helped me be admitted at University and those learning strategies that I gained “breaking this academic text” helps me even know when I need to cope with a hard text :)
As conclusion, I think to make the instruction effective the motivational design needs to be built in the instruction and good teachers do it from their experience and intuition. Just a question - may teachers need to use/consider different motivational strategies for learners of different age: brining more love, attention and play for elementary school kids, more inquiry and structure for middle school students and more challenges, choices, independence and modeling for high school students. Or may all of those motivational strategies can be presented even to elementary school kids?
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Designing Instruction is Like......
It was really hard for me to come up with an example, I don’t know why, maybe because being so immersed in the concept of Instructional Design as process of development of the effective and efficient instruction I couldn’t find the better example of the Instructional design product as the instruction.
But I had an assignment :) and I have had to come up with the example, even not the best one :) Actually I really like Gabe’s given simile of the instructional design as a medical treatment. I think it is a good one :)
Anyway here is my simile. I will try to show how the instructional design can be similar to a process of tailoring clothes. Maybe going to a tailor to make new clothes is not the very common practice for many people, but in my country it is a quite common practice. People from my country want to have “tailored” clothes for special occasions as weddings, prompts, anniversaries, work etc. Some people get clothes in such way for ever day use since they want to dress more unique (no any chance to meet somebody dressed in the same clothe :) , others (who have friends tailors) even remakes new clothes for old ones :) In comparing the clothes design and tailoring process to ADDIE, I would like to focus on such similar aspects:
1. All phases are layered and aligned to the main goal - translating client’s needs and desires into design that will yield a successful (effective and efficient) product.
2. It is an iterative and self-correcting process, since every step of it is wrapped up in formative evaluation/revision.
3. It is not necessary a linear process.
4. All the time it involves creating a new work.
5. It has time and budget constrains
6. It is a team work and needs good collaboration.
I assume (it is in some cases) that here is a group of people who are “tailoring clothes”: a manager, a clothes designer, several tailors etc.
One of the most important phases in the process of tailoring clothes is Analysis. To understand customer needs, designer needs to be a really good listener. In analyzing needs designer needs to analyze context - for what occasion customers are planning to wear clothes (for a special occasion, for work etc.), what kind of style they prefer, and how much money they can spend, as well as when clothes needs to be done. The designer needs to have really good interpersonal skills and be really creative in helping customers express their ideas because most of people cannot describe precisely clothes they want to have, leaving it up to designer. So designers need to collect all possible data from clients asking them as many questions as possible, showing them examples, helping them to express their desires as well as make up their minds. Actually, to design really “tailored” clothes, the designer needs to make a “customer analysis” (learner analysis) by matching possible designs to the given client’s constitution: hair, eye color, face, body shape etc and, definitely, by measuring all client’s body parameters. The analysis phase also embraces a task analysis. For the next meeting the designer would need to bring many photos or even sketches of possible designs that are congruent with data of the needs and client analysis, and with the help of the client try to draw (choose) a sketch of a final product.
Then design phase comes. In design phase I would put such activities as looking for and buying appropriate material ( texture, color etc.) and accessories as well as developing a “working sketch” for tailors to use (a design sketch with all elements, all client’s body parameters, accessories and other instructions for sewing). Again this phases needs to be aligned to the data of needs, learner and task analysis as well as it needs to be done in close participation with the client: consideration different kind of decorations and fabrics that are available/not available can modify the “final” sketch a lot!
The development phase would be about making clothes, but, again, this phase needs to be very good aligned with all phases done before as well as needs a close involvement of client’s “body” and mind :) Not everything what looked good on the sketch will be good on client’s body. Many changes need to be made while tailoring clothes, some times even a radical change of final design can take a place in the development phase. For example specific texture of fabric can bring unexpected flaws to design or the clothe can look really different on the client’s body then it was on the sketch etc. The client’s satisfaction is the goal of the design process. But again not every client has awareness of what fits to them most, what design would be best for particular occasion etc. Designer, as the professional of this field, needs sensitively “educate” his/her clients, so most effective and efficient product could be designed :)
Implementation phase would embrace such processes as handing in clothes to clients as well as giving instructions how to take care of those clothes or even how to wear them :) Actually, after implementation phase here still can be some revisions and minor changes.
Evaluation phase would be a summative evaluation of overall clients’ satisfaction (what it is important for business matters as well as for all human beings (to be proud of good work done :). Examples of of formative evaluation of the every step and phase are given above.
So designing and tailoring clothes as ADDIE:
2. is iterative and self-correcting process, since every step of it is wrapped up in formative evaluation/revision. In tailoring clothes it is essential that products of every phase will be evaluated and revised according to the client needs. Some changes even can be done in implementation phase. When not satisfied client comes for additional changes :)
3. is not necessary a linear process. Some times a client can bring completed deign, so process will start from design phase or some times client can bring requirements for the clothe to win in a contest, so designer needs to start from an assessment.
6. is a team work - it can be done only in close collaboration between client, designer and tailors. In communication between the clothes designer and the client are important the designer interpersonal skills and ability to gather essential data, while in communication between the clothes designer and tailors the good/informative/workable sketch needs to be drawn (design phase).
Monday, October 15, 2007
"WikiHow:How to Get Your Children to Clean Their Room
Form WikiHow I have chosen topic - “How to Get Your Children to Clean Their Room". It sort of made me laugh. I do not think that such instruction could work for every kid (may only for small once who just learned colors and are enjoying by recognizing them :) as well as I think that this “putting toys away game” may work only several times, because, most of kids can get bored of this game, since in reality it is not a game, but just a way to put toys away :)
Some thoughts on that Task Anlysis “How to Get Your Children to Clean Their Room":
Due to the fact that kids are human beings and that it is hard to predict or “control” them, given steps “How to Get Your Children to Clean Their Room" in wikihow, from ID point of view, seems really scarce. You cannot just tell children "1, 2, 3, go, red toys get put away" and expect that they will put all read toys away. First you need to engage them and, after they will start putting toys away, you need constantly supervise them, remaining children to put toys away and checking if they are doing it :) For example children can choose playing with toys rather then putting them away. Or may they do not know colors properly :) Then, instead of remaining them to put toys away, you need to take different step and teach them colors. And even if they are putting red toys away, you still need "to help" them to find all “red toys” because they will miss some of them for sure :) And what if they are not putting any toys away? What you need to do then?
I draw a simple flow chart on this instruction adding some steps. Actually here are so many steps that can be added. And I haven’t done all steps for all colors, since it would take too much space and work :)
Some thoughts on that Task Anlysis “How to Get Your Children to Clean Their Room":
Due to the fact that kids are human beings and that it is hard to predict or “control” them, given steps “How to Get Your Children to Clean Their Room" in wikihow, from ID point of view, seems really scarce. You cannot just tell children "1, 2, 3, go, red toys get put away" and expect that they will put all read toys away. First you need to engage them and, after they will start putting toys away, you need constantly supervise them, remaining children to put toys away and checking if they are doing it :) For example children can choose playing with toys rather then putting them away. Or may they do not know colors properly :) Then, instead of remaining them to put toys away, you need to take different step and teach them colors. And even if they are putting red toys away, you still need "to help" them to find all “red toys” because they will miss some of them for sure :) And what if they are not putting any toys away? What you need to do then?
I draw a simple flow chart on this instruction adding some steps. Actually here are so many steps that can be added. And I haven’t done all steps for all colors, since it would take too much space and work :)
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
An interesting learner I've known
It was my first interesting experience of understanding how differently younger and older people are learning. This understanding caught me when I, being 30 years old, decided to take one not required and very intensive undergraduate level English language class for beginners.
I was really eager to take the opportunity of those English classes since I was planning to go for PhD and I had zero English knowledge (my second language was German).
Actually nobody from my master program supported my decisions since those English classes in our University were “famous” as really heavily loaded and very intensive. Some people were joking that English classes were sort of the “method” of the university to make some students pay tuition (only the students with “lower average grade” needed to pay tuition), since those intensive English classes had been badly lowering average grade for lots of students. In my class most students were undergraduate freshmen and several masters’ students who as me were much older (30 +), had families and were working and studying together. The professor, who taught this class, was really unpleasant one. She did not have good social and teaching skills to help us to manage our really heavy course load. She was not clear with her explanations, had quite threatening style of teaching (what is not the case in the USA :) as well as constantly gave us tests that encompassed some materials not “covered” in the class and only those students who were lucky to have some English from their high schools were able to get “B” or “A” on the test (what a strategy to teach the beginners in English!).
Most of masters students were frustrated with the teacher and created “a group” that was making bad jokes and severely criticizing the professor. Actually there were many reasons to be not happy and to be “right”, but after getting a really low score (even if I had had studied!) from the first test, I realized that it is not a good way to be just only frustrated and angry and that I needed to do something about it. First I recognized that after 5 years of teaching and not learning anything “totally new” my mind was sort of “rusty”. It needed some time and “exercises” to get its speed :) Then I compared master students who had hard time with this class with the freshmen and I saw a big difference. Not only those freshmen (girls most of) were doing much better on the tests then we, master students, they even looked differently: they were happy and relaxed as well as seemed quite positive toward this “hard” teacher, teaching methods, and workload. They seemed quite open to any learning experience and you cannot see any shadow of fear of failure in their faces :) What a difference! I realized that to survive in this class (it means to get at least B) I need “to choose” to which group I “belong”. And I “chose to be” a younger student. It means together with all my hard work I needed to become more relaxed, enjoyable and open toward the teacher as well as my learning experience :) It is a really hard to be an “older” master student, because your mind is always stressed out since you have so many duties, since you forgot how to learn, and since you have too many opinions -“no I cannot learn that, it is too hard form me”, “no this is not for me”, “ I don’t need that”, “this teacher is just bad one” etc. as well as expectations for everything. You are not so relaxed and open anymore. I think it is what impedes learning process and is part of reason why older people learn much slower than younger ones. To be able to learn fast and good your mind needs to be really relaxed and open to learning experience. Look how children are listening. They “listen” with “all their bodies”. They just really focused and relaxed at the same moment and they don’t afraid to make any mistakes, ask any time questions and be silly.
It reminds me the situation with my son, who first time got exposed to English language when he started to go to preschool. An interesting thing happened with him. Even if he was already talking in full sentences in Lithuanian language, suddenly he started babbling as 7-12 month children do. And it was not Lithuanian babbling, it was English babbling. It could look really strange or my disastrous for outsider’s eye, but it was his right way to learn perfect English. He wasn’t thinking about if he will look silly or inappropriate, he just enjoyed them self and the practice. In a few years he started to speak perfect English, while my English is still sometimes hard to understand for people :)
To learn more efficiently, I think adults need to be not only relaxed, positive and happy, but also need to be sort of childish - means to be capable to fully immerse themselves in the learning process, be relaxed and focused at the same time, open and trustful, enjoyable and silly and as well as insistent and eager to find their best way to learn.
I do not think that adults can have the same capability to learn as children do, but may those understandings of what impedes learning as well as “body memories” of how they successfully went about learning when they were kids can improve adults' learning processes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
