Do you agree that effective teaching is like Archimedes' lever? Can effective teaching methods really move the world for yourself or for your students?
Schmoker certainly makes a straightforward pitch for "effective lessons," which (no matter which educational researcher he quotes) seem to involved introducing a single concept and remaining laser-focused on it -- assessing often along the way -- until it is mastered. I agree that there are times for this type of instruction, of course. Then, by the time we're looking at language arts in chapter four he seems to speak against the isolated teaching of skills and sub-skills and instead espouses lots (and I mean lots!) of whole-class reading instruction with plenty of Socratic discussion from a variety of materials (as the kids read, read, read). I think we have to be wise and know when each is warranted.
I think the mode of having clear learning objectives, teaching/modeling, guided practice, and checking for understanding will "move the world". If you don't have clear objectives, you don't know what you are teaching. If you don't explicityly teach/model those leaning objectives, students can't learn what you intended for them to learn. If students aren't given a chance to practice, how can they move up into application, etc. If you don't check for understanding throughout the entire process, how do you know if students are learning it.
Schmoker certainly makes a straightforward pitch for "effective lessons," which (no matter which educational researcher he quotes) seem to involved introducing a single concept and remaining laser-focused on it -- assessing often along the way -- until it is mastered. I agree that there are times for this type of instruction, of course. Then, by the time we're looking at language arts in chapter four he seems to speak against the isolated teaching of skills and sub-skills and instead espouses lots (and I mean lots!) of whole-class reading instruction with plenty of Socratic discussion from a variety of materials (as the kids read, read, read). I think we have to be wise and know when each is warranted.
ReplyDeleteI think the mode of having clear learning objectives, teaching/modeling, guided practice, and checking for understanding will "move the world". If you don't have clear objectives, you don't know what you are teaching. If you don't explicityly teach/model those leaning objectives, students can't learn what you intended for them to learn. If students aren't given a chance to practice, how can they move up into application, etc. If you don't check for understanding throughout the entire process, how do you know if students are learning it.
ReplyDelete