The largest
theme that stuck out for me in Skinner’s article, outside of reiterating why cognitive
and humanistic psychologists haven’t been able to grasp the essence of effective
teaching, is that teachers need to use their time in class more efficiently. He
gives 4 suggestions which include needing to understand and be clear about what
is being taught, that the bulk of what we teach should focus on the process
(first things first) rather than just being about the end results (tests), also
that each student learns at different paces and through different methods, and
finally that we need to program the subject matter specific to our audience
members (individual/student). I found it very interesting how Skinner talks
about research and other scholar’s views on education from 10-30 years ago, in
1983 when he wrote this particular article, and that 30 years later in 2013 we
still are missing fundamental aspects of what learning and education is really
about. My favorite statement is on page 4 when he says that “It has long been
said that college teaching is the only profession for which there is no professional
training.”
With that being said,
would Skinner be ashamed at American education today? Absolutely! We aren’t
training our teachers to be effective teachers in the college setting. They get
a Masters or PhD in their major field of study and, if they want to teach, go
right into the classroom as if they know how each student will absorb and apply
the information. I know I’ve been guilty of this approach as well.
I think Skinner
would not only embrace the School of One but be one of its biggest advocates.
One of his solutions to the problem with American education was that we need to
“stop making all students advance at the same rate”, which is essentially what
the School of One is all about. It allows students to learn through various
means and methods either by use of technology, hands on experience, or within a
group. At the end of the day, hypothetically speaking, students learn what the
teachers set out for them to learn.
Free will is
said to be more of a thought of fiction, that we must be willed to act based
off of our internal thoughts and feelings. Skinner, and behaviorism, believes
that there are external reasons or causes for the internalized state of
affairs. Once we identify the causes then we can get rid of or “dispose of”
free will and “attribute nothing to it”. I’m beginning to rethink everything I
do now!
Do students learn MORE than what their teachers set out for them to learn? Isn't there often unintended learning? And remember the statement by Alexander et al. last week - such learning may not always be advantageous. With these points in mind, what ought teachers to know/do?
ReplyDelete