After you have completed your theorists matrix, discuss how you can use these theorists' philosophies to provide a theoretical basis for your teaching strategies. Is it necessary to reflect on psychological underpinnings when you develop a lesson? Why or why not?
Be sure to return to this site and respond to at least one classmate's blog.
As I looked at these 4 theorists and all they had to say it surprised me at how much of one I see by one teacher and another teacher uses a different one. I believe it is important to use what they have to say and some of it just comes as, hopefully, common sense. For instance I hope that as future educators we will use hands on teaching, be patient with our students and encourage our students. I think that we need to use what is taught from these theorists, but we also need to be able to mold it to fit our classroom of students and not expect them to mold into what the theorists say we should be doing or seeing. An example would be in Kohlberg's Moral Reasoning Theory. We need to be aware of each child's circumstances and how things affect them as to how, why and where they are reasponding the way they are to a situation and not just allow it to be explained by their moral values, but possibly of the values they are being raised with. In a nut shell we need to look beyond the child we see and look at what we may not see. In the town I lived in there was a girl in the 3rd grade that would not play with an African American child at recess. She told the little girl it was because she was black and they turned the girl into the office for a racist comment. She was in in-school suspension for the next day. Well come to find out a person in her family was hurt by a man of color and they had not seeked counseling. So this girl was acting on an issue that had nothing to do with that girl and was being punished for something outside her ability of reasoning. She needed counseling to help her understand that it was not the color of the mans skin, but the choices he made. So this childs moral character was not intending to be hurtful, but outside circumstances had allowed her reaction to come off that way. I liked Kohlberg and Erickson the most and I understood where Vygotsky was coming from because I have a child that could have used more of this with his language skills when he was younger. Piaget was good, but maybe thats because I have 3 kids and I thought that of course we as adults think differently then children. I have seen their growth and watched it enhance with the more they were allowed to explore.
After completing the matrix and reflecting upon the readings, I have found that there are different aspects of each of the theories that I feel the strongest about using in my future classroom. I think that it is important to consider the age level that you are teaching and to be aware of which stage/phase the students are at in each development area (cognitive, language, psychosocial, and moral). Along with each stage comes many terms and processes that we must be familiar with in order to better understand our students and where they are as far as development is concerned. I also think it is imperative to understand that not all of the students will fit under that same stage/phase. The ages listed by the theorists are merely guidelines and do not guarantee that every 8 year olds is at the concrete operational stage, for example. Our students do not fit into a mold, they are diverse and we must embrace and respect that. Some of the teaching implications that I found most helpful were using differentiated instruction, ensuring that students interact with peers and teachers, using scaffolding, giving realistic and timely feedback, and establish a learning community with mutual respect.
I do believe that it will be necessary to take into account different theorists and their theories when developing my curriculum. I need to use the findings of theorists in conjunction with my own experiences, beliefs and observations in order to fully understand where my students fall in the developmental process. I will need to be aware of the cultural backgrounds of each student as well as their home life in order to understand and adapt to each child’s abilities. As mentioned by Vygotsky, culture affects social development as well as language. It will be necessary to re-evaluate the stages throughout the year as the students grow in each of the four areas in the matrix.
There are many different opportunities to use all of these theorists’ philosophies within my future classroom. Having a theorists’ philosophy as a basis of your teaching strategy will help out with not only how each individual learns but it may help with classroom management. By taking the information of these four theorists, we now have an idea of where in life people need to be with their cognitive, language, psychosocial and moral standings. From there, we can observe and place them into their own categories. The reason of placing them into their own categories is so we can teach each individual the same lesson but within their own comprehension level. For instance, a teacher won’t give an infant an assignment to create an experiment; the infant is only in sensorimotor stage and it is not in the formal operational stage of life. Even though that example was extreme, the point was made that there are certain stages in life that we do as we grow older. For teachers, most of them don’t even have to look at the theorists anymore. They know what the theorists taught and apply the implications within their lessons. Implications such as but are not limited to: playing house, field trips, group discussions, student choice activities, guest speakers and many more. As for the older teachers, they think their activities within their lesson plans are from their own philosophy. I hope that in the future when I teach and become an old teacher that I too will mix up theorists’ philosophies with my own philosophy. I don’t think it is necessary to reflect on psychological underpinnings when you develop a lesson but I do believe that when a teacher does base their lessons off of a philosophy than the lesson is built stronger. There are many different philosophies in the world that deals with teaching strategies. All I know is that within my lessons I want to make sure to challenge each kid and accept them for who they are. Hopefully, within this class I can add onto my philosophy that I take within my own classroom.
All four theorists can be incorporated into the style an educator teaches their students. Even though language development usually occurs in early to middle childhood, you can still teach a student pragmatics, with livestock or land judging. I have personal experience with both these competitions from FFA in high school. The vocabulary a student uses for giving reasons in livestock judging is in its own ball park. It can be hard for students to become fluent and be convincing with the judges. I can use Vygotsky's theory to help me accomplish with with my students.
Erikson's theory will also be helpful to develop a trust or identity if the student is having trouble. The teacher can use the guidelines to help with this role as an educator. Also, all the stages of Kohlberg can be utilized by the educator. The educator has to analyze the situation and then decide the proper theory/theories that are needed.
I believe that you should reflect on your lessons to help insure that it is being taught the right way and that the lesson is as strong as it can be for the students. Give them a challenge and also guidance.
I agree with Amanda S. that the lesson we teach should be challenging to the students, but also be accepting for each student. I also agree that you should take age into consideration when assigning projects, etc. I also agree that you should take into consideration your own philosophies when teaching or forming lesson plans. This will help to make you a better teacher and you can still use the theorists as a guideline.
As I read the philosophies of the four theorists presented, I concluded the theories give a process of development that students will endure, and it is my responsibility that I am sensitive to each and every child's needs. It is important to understand the developmental theories so that I can understand the crisis or reasoning behind the situation. As jhrozean posted in his/her comment about the girl who would not play with the African American student, if the teachers did not reflect on the theories of moral reasoning, the white child would not have received the help she needed. Chances are the student would have been punished for the behavior if the teacher would not have studied Kohlberg.
While reading on Erickson's psychosocial theory, I reflected on my personal situation with my adopted son, Jamie. You see, Jamie came from a home where he was physically neglected. When Jamie came to our house at the age of 2 years 10 months, he was unable to feed himself, dress himself, wash himself, and unable to form sentences. According to Erickson, Jamie never developed a sense of trust when he was an infant, so he also never developed a sense of autonomy. This is why incorporating the theorist’s beliefs is so important. You see, if my husband and I didn't meet Jamie's basic needs and develop a trusting relationship, he would not be able to complete sentences, dress, wash, and eat by himself seven short months later. My husband and I could have been ignorant by pushing Jamie to eat with a fork and spoon; rather, we developed a trust relationship by communicating with him the advantages of the tools.
The situation with Jamie is just an example of why as teachers and parents we recognize that every child learns and reacts in different ways. One criticism about the theories is culture is not taken into consideration. As our country continues to become one big salad bowl, it is important to help the student develop a sense of belonging while keeping his/her identity.
In lesson plans, I believe it is important to reflect on the theorist beliefs. Lesson plans can be laid out so that students have the opportunity to use creative vocabulary while developing an identity. I liked the suggestion in the text that said to have students debate sides of a situation and then critically analyze the other side. This supports Piaget's cognitive theories and how teachers can help develop a student's cognition.
Great teachers aid in the transition of students becoming productive young adults. If the teacher understands the theories, understands that all students and situations are different, and then reacts upon what is theoretically and developmentally appropriate, than that teacher's students will succeed in and out of the classroom.
Kirby, I am so glad you mentioned that we should respect that any child may not fit in the mold the theorists have presented. Kudos to you!! It should be thought as an opportunity when our children are a diverse group because that is when language, cognition, morals, and psycosocial skills improve most. If every child fit into the molds, we would have boring classrooms with sub-par students in a black and white world.
You also pointed out that we as teachers should continually reflect on our styles and curriculum. Our students will develop throughout the school year, and we should refelct on the theorists to act upon the situation.
After learning about the four theorists, I learned that each of them introduced different ideas and perspectives on how children learn. In the classroom, every student is unique and they all learn differently. Some may be able to grasp concepts quickly whereas others may need additional time and/or assistance. Therefore, by learning about various theorists' philosophies, a teacher can become more knowledgeable in planning his/her teaching strategies to facilitate effective learning in the classroom. For example, according to Piaget, principles of instruction for the class must be developed based on the needs of the students before applying them. Hence, teachers could use various resources to provide concrete experiences to help students learn. Then based on Vygotsky’s perspectives, teachers could provide a theoretical basis on how to introduce learning activities in a context that is culturally authentic, with emphasis on promoting the use of social interaction and language.
I believe teachers should reflect on psychological underpinnings when developing a lesson. By doing so, a teacher could plan a lesson based on authentic tasks and real world data to accommodate all learners.
Hi Amanda, great response! I like the fact that you believe that there are many different philosophies in the world that deals with teaching strategies. I agree, but I believe it is necessary to think about the psychological underpinnings of how these philosophies would help foster student’s learning. Remember, as teachers, it is our job to not only teach academics but to build our student's social and behavioral skills in the process. Therefore, with this in mind, we have to look at each area and come up with specific goals and objectives to accomplish this in our lesson.
When completing the matrix assignment, I identified with many of the theorists and noticed that I have been including a mixture of theories when planning lessons. I believe that it would be a tragic mistake on the part of the educator if he or she did not consider the different aspects of development when planning lessons. The text gave the example of the question presented to early elementary students, "If I were a (blank) I would...". For many students at Piaget's preoperational stage, this question would be nonsense because the child cannot yet look at something or someone from a different perspective other than their own. They are not a butterfly, so why would they even consider such a question. It is incomprehnsible for them. Educators must have a general awareness of developmentally appropriate practice. I have experienced this during my childrens sermans that I give at church as well as in discourse with my seven year old. They are very literal thinkers at this age. They do not understand the abstract. Vygotsky's ZPD also comes to mind when trying to design lessons that teach students in their "magic middle". If material is developmentally inappropriate, then locating their magic middle will never occur. Material must also be presented in a way that is culturally and socially relevent to the student. This requires scaffolding. And finally, it would be nieve to think that a child's life away from school does not affect the way they learn in school. Providing opportunities to learn that are familiar to them and not based strictly upon white, middle class values and experiences allows for real learning to take place.
Kirby, I really liked your post and agree with what you said. I too found many aspects from each that I lean towards. I agree that it is important to remember that just because a child fits the stage according to age, does not mean that is exactly where the student is at developmentally. The stages are rather a general tool to keep in mind. And I think you were right on target when you mentioned that we need to be mindful and respectful of the diversity in our classrooms. Great post!
jhrozean, I think that your story about the little girl in your town is a very good example of the need to understand moral reasoning. Too often, the public is quick to judge people and their families based on a comment made by a student. We need to take the time to stop and consider if maybe the child had misunderstood something that was said or has had a negative experience, such as the one you mentioned, and does not know how to react properly. Rather than choosing to suspend the girl right away and write her off as a child from a racist family, the school should have called in her parents and had a meeting with the child and parents first. The child (and parents) could have received proper counseling. I believe that the truth here is that the girl had a great moral character. She obviously feels strongly about her family connections and feels the need to protect her family and herself from ever experiencing such pain again. It is great that this child had the chance to learn a lesson about personal morals and that her intentions were good where the man that hurt her loved one had poor morals.
Kirby, Thanks and I agreed with your post about not trying to mold the students to fit what the theorists say they should be, but allow them to be diverse and become who they are based on their culture and embracing it. Sarah R., I also liked your post when you said it would be nieve of us to not consider outside circumstances with our students. Their education continues out of our classrooms and we need to open up to familys to help educate the student as a whole, not just what we see.
LaceyK I think that it is great that you have adopted a child with special needs. That takes a special person! I thought it was a great example when you said that your son was not able to develop a sense of trust which is one of Erickson's stages. I think that it is a huge stage for infants to feel safe and have that trust. Darcy Couse
The various developmental theories are so fascinating to me. I plan on teaching Elementary Special Education in a Resource Room so I will be dealing with children from first to sixth grade that have a variety of developmental levels on all fronts. Having the knowledge of learning and developmental theory in my kit will certainly help me tailor my teaching strategies to the various students I will work with.
I found all the theories had implications for my Resource Room teaching and interactions with my students. Every teacher needs to understand the “psychological underpinnings” to be a successful educator.
First, I have always believed Piaget’s concept that children learn from the social transmission. I can peg immediately the children who have parents that interact with them on a consistent and intelligent level. As Piaget noted, it is the INTERACTION part that makes the difference in a child’s developmental rate. Students whose parents have been reading to them and with them from an early age tend to be more advanced learners than children whose parents are self-absorbed, regardless of physical/biological development of the child. This also tags in Vygotsky and his theory that language and culture cannot be separated. The more parents interact (NOTE: interact – not yell at or command) verbally with their children the more the children advance developmentally, both cognitively and emotionally. This is especially effective when the parents are well educated people “capable of advanced thinking” as the section in our text on Vygotsky’s theories states, but the interaction on a positive level between all parents and children advances development. As a teacher I can build upon this social transmission within my classroom by developing group learning situations and providing mentoring from older students. Additionally, I will be fortunate to have para-professionals who can also provide the interaction in learning that will aid my students in their development.
I think these chapters have reminded me that you must observe your students carefully if you are to teach them well. The “stages” that are laid out by our theorists are so flexible. I know fifth graders who already regularly engage in Piaget’s Formal Operational thinking, always challenging me with “what if” concepts and constructs that are beyond the ken of the other children in the classroom, and these students will need advanced material to maintain their interest and motivation. I also have experienced children who are still fighting their way out of the Initiative versus Guilt stage of Erikson’s in third grade, which creates social issues for these students that require careful intervention on the part of the teacher. So I am faced with creating Individualized Education Plans that not only address a wide range of emotional, cognitive, and social development levels, but also physical and psychological development irregularities. I definitely feel a working knowledge of all the developmental theories will be invaluable to me as I develop lesson plans for my students.
This said, as a Resource Room teacher (I substitute regularly in a Resource Room so I know whereof I speak), the students that I will teach will tend to come from families where the interaction has been minimal, whether due to illness or poverty, or simply lack of parenting. There will be various emotional and social difficulties my students will need me to address both in lesson plans and in classroom environment/interactions. Some students will only be in the Resource Room due to cultural differences in education they have experienced before coming to the school I will teach at. It will therefore be especially important for me to build a Resource Room environment of authoritative mentoring with my students that can respect these differences. High standards and expectations delivered with genuine caring and compassion with attention to individual levels of development on cognitive, social, and emotional aspects is the policy I will strive for.
I do believe you have hit the top three areas for consideration in today's classroom. Be aware of your students cognitive levels and zone of proximal development when developing lessons, be certain the material is culturally and socially relevant, and never forgetting that the child's life outside of school is important to being able to develop lessons that are familiar and meaningful to the child.
Most of all, I like the way your passion for teaching comes across in your posts. You are firm in what you believe and not afraid to stand behind it. I think that is important to being a good teacher too.
Goodness but you certainly make a case for social development theory. The interaction you and your husband have with Jamie will not only make up for his neglect, but I am certain it will help him to excel through out school.
I think it is because Kansas tends to be considered "white bread, bible belt, middle America" that more attention isn't paid in the schools to cultural diversity. In the big cities there are so many obvious cultures other than white European the mix is obvious, and therefore addressed. Here in Kansas that kind of high level of ethnic groups is more hit and miss in the various areas, and as such, the importance is overlooked.
Can a child be adequately trained to be a productive member of society if we educators do not take the time to address cultural diversity? Can we be sure that the children we teach will remain in our own little microcosm? I agree with you that teaching our students about cultural diversity is important, for we are raising citizens of the world, not just citizens of Kansas.
As usual Kirby, you have tossed a real meaty bone out in this discussion. Thank you.
Your point about reassessing student development levels throughout the year is something I think gets forgotten far too often. Some teachers prepare the entire year's lessons at the beginning of the year, complete down to sub plans. Now, how can that type of pre-planning anticipate the growth and development level change of the students? Reflection on student growth and revisiting of future lesson planning is indeed an important consideration.
I also looked at the four theorists that were mentioned; I thought they were very much different. Most of the things that I read are common sense. I think that most of all you have to have patience and stay calm with special needs students especially. By doing this it makes the classroom go a great deal soother and also things will work smooth with you as well. We need to keep in mind that all of the theorists: Piaget, Kolberg, Erickson, Vgostsky but do not expect our student to be like each one. Look at your students one by one and see what theorists you can fit to describe them or try to figure out what they are like. I also think that you should use your common sense as well and that will take you farther. I think that we should keep in mind the following things: (cognitive, language, psychosocial and moral). Remember that the ages are just guidelines for when they should, not all students make it at this time. I would definitely in my lesson use the scaffolding, feedback, and also establish a class with mutual respect as well. When dealing with the use of the curriculum you need to take into effect the and also use my experience and observations that I have had to take into the developmental process. All of these theorists bring something to the scheme of things and play a role in the developmental process of a child.
Jacquereplies to LynB I agree with you Lyn, you have to look at the psychological underpinnings in order to understand the students. I also agree that you have to observe your students to observe your students carefully. If you don’t do this then how do you ever get on the student’s level and figure out if he is behind or ahead of anything. There are certain concepts you need to take it to affect the social and emotional needs as well. I feel that you need to make sure that you know each day what is going on with the student so that you can better tune into them for there learning during the day.
Looking through all of these Theroists and putting it together in a Matrix has helped me to realize that I am going to have to personally take a small piece of each one of those great people in order to be a fantastic teacher. It is hard to believe though that subconciously we have been being taught how to do these things with out actually doing it. I think that is it important to insure that as a teacher I work with each and every student on a level that they can react with. When putting together a lesson plan it is important to refelct upon theorist underpinning in order to make a lesson affective. As a teacher not all children learn in a psychosocial where as others will not learn in a moral classroom. It is important to evolve all areas to make sure that the students learn
RE: JHROZENA- It is amazing that as we look at the four theorist I seem to look at the teachers I have had in the past as well as the teachers that I have done my internships with and have had to realize they all use and reflect on some theorists.
Reading about the theorists and listing their main ideas and terms in the matrix was a helpful way to separate the information and theories we read about. There are aspects of each theory that will be helpful, and while I enjoyed reading about all of them I probably liked Vygotsky’s theory the best. I’ve taken many psych classes and have heard about Piaget and Erikson a lot, and Kohlberg some too. I was surprised that I hadn’t heard about Vygotsky until I started taking education classes, and now it seems like he’s everywhere. Part of why his theory is so important is the emphasis he places on social interaction, showing that teachers (as well as other adults and peers) can effect the child’s development. The other theorists’ stages are helpful as well because sometimes it can be very difficult to understand how other age groups think and what you can do to help them. For example, Erikson’s second stage helps a parent or caregiver understand the importance of letting children do things on their own, even if it may take a little longer or risk making a mess. I had the hardest time with Kohlbert’s moral development stages, although it is still helpful to understand that individuals move from obeying because of rules but gradually move to a place where they take many abstract aspects into consideration before determining what is right and wrong. It’s also important to remember that not all individuals fit into the stages as outlined by any of the theorists, and some may skip around or even be in more than one stage at a time; however it can still help you know what to look for and give you a general idea of how to handle particular situations that can be adapted and applied to your individual style, the situation, and the other individuals involved. I think the psychological aspect is very important to consider when teaching because it is as much or more a part of the students than any other aspect.
In response to jhrozean: I enjoyed reading your post and agree that it’s important not to get too caught up in what’s ‘supposed’ to happen and to strive to really see and understand each child. I also really liked your story. It’s important to remember even in situations like this, where it doesn’t seem possible to think of a ‘good’ excuse for the child’s behavior, there is still more to the story. The information you found out later could go forever without being released, so this is a great story to keep in mind. Even though we may never know the whole story or reasons behind actions, we still need to be sensitive and caring toward all individuals, even when it seems they are just being rude or unkind.
These four theorists have different categories that are meant to be used at different stages in different peoples lives. The way one person behaves at a certain age does not mean that the rest of the people in that group will act in the same manner. By taking the information from all four theorists, and applying a little information from each theorist, we can help the student through the educational and life process.
RE: Jacque- I agree. I have always thought that teaching involves a great deal of common sense. Sadly I have seen a lot of teachers who do not possess it. Each student is an individual and should be treated as such. There is no way we can assign one theorists ideas to one student. It wouldn't be practical and the student would suffer.
In Response to Lacy K. "Great teachers aid in the transition of students becoming productive young adults. If the teacher understands the theories, understands that all students and situations are different, and then reacts upon what is theoretically and developmentally appropriate, than that teacher's students will succeed in and out of the classroom."
This is a very powerful statement that summarizes how I feel about the importance of learning these theories. I truly believe that we are not meant to teach our subject matter, but to teach students. While my students are in my room, I hope that I can instill in them the qualities that they need to be successful adults as well as my subject matter.
Knowing the theoretical background of different philosophies can help create more effective classroom management techniques. I believe that it is important to know and understand many different theories and philosophies. I am currently teaching high school and I have referred back to Erickson’s stage of identity vs. role confusion many times. This has helped me be a better teacher, by understanding what my students are going through and how difficult it can be. I have tried to focus on building a “family” with my classes, or at the very least a safe environment in which students feel safe to take risks (like presenting a PowerPoint slideshow).
Knowing and being familiar with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory is important in my district. My school is considered very diverse, as are many of the districts in Southwest Kansas. By realizing the importance that culture plays on development and learning, I can understand what issues or problems my students may be experiencing or how to build on background knowledge.
I believe that understanding the psychological or psychosocial aspects of a lesson is an important part of planning. Lesson plans need to incorporate a variety of techniques, and allow for differentiated instruction, scaffolding techniques, modeling, manipulatives, and a variety of other teaching methods that are directly related to the theories that we have explored.
Being a good teacher is more than knowing your subject, or content area. We must be able to relate to our students and by knowing where they are on a day to day basis, or building a connection with them we are able to do just that.
As a future teacher, it will be my responsibility to decide what to teach, how to teach, and how to develop my classroom management style. This is a complex job with many decisions to be made daily. My effectiveness as a teacher will be influenced by these decisions, as well as the skills and knowledge that I possess. The students I teach will be varied in their abilities, needs, and learning styles. Thus, no single learning theory or style of teaching will work for every situation. This is when the importance of knowing and becoming familiar with the four philosophies studied in the text will come into play. Whether it is applying Kohlberg’s moral theory to a child who is experiencing behavior issues in the classroom or using Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development to bridge the gap in a student’s knowledge base through scaffolding, the various theories will produce many different ways of understanding (and assisting) situations that arise. This will be especially helpful for me, as I will be a first year teacher and will not have the years of experience and knowledge that other teachers will possess. Thus, these theories will form a theoretical foundation for me to draw upon and give me some direction as I start my teaching career. It will be important for me, after utilizing the theories, to reflect on whether or not they were successful. Was the lesson motivating and effective? If not, what can be done? What experiences have my students had that will affect how and what they learn? This reflection will need to include a personal look at my students, their cultures, their previous academic experiences, and their home life. It will be important for me to keep in mind that although I can apply a specific theory to a situation, it is merely a guideline for me to use. Not always will a child fall into a certain stage of the theory or there might be other issues at hand. However, it will be important for me to incorporate these theories into my lesson plans – as they can assist with the learning that takes place, as well as adaptations that need to occur due to student needs. I especially enjoyed the text’s discussion of differentiated instruction and scaffolding and see myself utilizing these in my own classroom.
Lacey, I appreciated your post and the statement you made that as a teacher we should be “sensitive to each and every child’s needs”. This is so important and appears to be so simple, yet it seems to get lost in the pressure for teachers to get their students ready for standardized tests and the larger class sizes. I have to admit that this is my goal as a future teacher, and yet I too am nervous at this huge responsibility and if I can be successful at it. This has been an issue that is of great importance to me, as my own children have been blessed with intelligence and have struggled to be challenged in the classroom. My daughter is a great reader who read small chapter books in kindergarten. When she got to first grade and had to read the “Pat the Cat” books with the rest of the class, she was bored and would cry at home if we asked her to read it for homework. We visited with the teacher about other alternatives to keep our daughter challenged, but to no avail. Long story short, the school recommended to advance our daughter a grade and the teacher admitted to us afterwards that she was “relieved” to not have to worry about our daughter. I understood what she meant, and yet I found myself disappointed in the teacher and hoping that I can do a better job in my teaching career of using a theoretical approach to find out where my students strengths and abilities lie and build upon that for the future.
After doing the theorist matrix I learned that I think about all of these theorists when I am preparing for a lesson. It is amazing how you do this without even realizing it. The main one that I think that I use the most would be Piaget. I really agree with his thinking and always keep in mind that all students do not reach each cognitive level at the same time. I also enjoyed reading about Kohlberg's theory. I never really thought about that, but his theory is definitely something that we should all keep in mind. There are many students out there with behavioral issues and learning about Kolhberg will help us all to try and combat some of these issues. Vygotsky's ideas on scaffolding are great and I use them quite frequently without even noticing. Any thing you can do to help students is a plus and Vygotsky has some great ideas. This will all help me to become a better teacher because I will know how students develop and what ways to help them whether with behavior or classwork.
It is important to use a theoretical basis when developing a lesson. For example, Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal development when finding a level that will fit the students. If they are beyond the lesson you are planning, the learner will be bored. When they already know the information, don’t teach it. Then, there is the lesson you are planning, and if might be too hard. The learner is not ready to learn that information, nor might they be able to learn it. You should not teach this information either. Finally, when you find the happy medium within the students learning, you have reached the Zone of Proximal Development. This is exciting and challenging for the students, and with the guidance of the teacher, they should be able to learn with limited problems.
It is also important to look at how we teach the children. We would not make a 1st grader read a story by them self, and then write a reflection. Their reading skills are just emerging, and for the majority of them, reading aloud is an important part of understanding, especially in the first part of the school year. When looking at Piaget’s “The Preoperational Stage,” he refers to using symbols, gestures, signs, images and words to help the students learn. I would take this into consideration when planning any lesson at the 1st grade (or lower) levels. For example, I would choose a story with pictures to help the students build a picture in their head that corresponds with the reading. Next, if we were doing a math lesson on subtractions, the worksheet might have a picture of 6 bears, a minus sign, and then 3 bears. This will help the students to get a mental picture of the actual problem. These are just a few examples, but I feel that without using the theorist underpinnings, we would not realize the potential that each student has.
Christine G. I really like what you said about reflecting. I agree with you that it is an important part in our jobs as teacher. If we did not reflect over lessons, units, teaching strategies, then we would not know if they were useful or not. And if they are not useful, and we keep teaching them, then we are leading them down the wrong path.
Also, I agree with you about the differences in our children that we will be teaching. Not one theorist, or one stage will fit all of our students. We may have students with different disabilities, personalities, home lives, ect, and we need to make sure what we are teaching can be molded for each student.
Mallory Lammers We should use theorist when we plan our lesson plans. Education needs to be a precise, calculated and well thought out process. Not slapped together because it sounds “good.” We need to base our instruction on theory, research, and statistics. Not just one but all of these. We need to do this so we can have accountability. We need to understand why a student might be struggling with a concept. What can we do to help this student? By using theory, research, and statistics we can avoid reinventing the wheel. All the research is done for us so we do not have to work so we can say “hey this worked several times for this class. Let’s try it!” The real trick is to not let the theorist define our students. Our book even has sections covering the holes in the theories and why sometimes they just do not work. Does this mean that the theories are wrong? No. It just means that we need to learn when to apply these theories. We need to walk a fine balance and understand that theory, research, and statistics can only go so far. We are the ones who know what is right for a student. We need to use our pedagogical knowledge to accomplish this. Teachers need to keep an eye out for when students are frustrated or bored. We need to know our students and we need to know them well.
I work at a preschool with a teacher who needs to learn how to use theories appropriately. This teacher is new. Before the new teacher started my friend would call the class to order. My friend would say “If you can hear me clap one time.” She would clap once after she said this. Some students would clap once. “If you can hear me clap two times,” my friend would say and then clapping twice. More students would clap twice. This would continue until all the students clapped together. I have watched my friend use this practice and it actually worked well with these students. I would go as far as to say this was the only classroom management I saw in the whole class and the students responded well to it! Then the new teacher began her reign. The new teacher informed my friend that having the students clap was developmentally inappropriate. That these students were too young to understand what she was doing! Last time I worked in this classroom the students were wild. There was no classroom management and if the teacher tried to implement some rules the students ignored her. Lining up in that class is a nightmare! This teacher really needs to learn to listen to the students and not just the theorist!
Mallory Lammers In response to Sarah Rhodes… I have noticed that I also use theorists in my instruction without even knowing it! It seems odd to say this but I now understand a lot of my internships and classes better. I understand why my teachers had me do certain things and why I used certain practices such as read alouds or guided reading. I do think that you should stress more that we should not allow the theorists to DEFINE our students but merely guide us to the best way to teach. The book even pointed out that Piaget and Vygotsky did not cover everything and had holes in their theories.
After I had completed the matrix I realized that there are so many different theories that may take part in the classroom everyday. I can’t say any one teacher just uses one theory because every class is so diverse and every child is on a different level. To me each of the theorists provides stages or phases that can and should be included in our everyday teachings. Some of the phases, however, seem more appropriate for young children while others may need to be introduced at a later age. Every theorist’s has very important stages that every teacher uses every day. Kohlberg’s theory that says that rules need to be obeyed to avoid punishment last all throughout school. Students are always expected to follow the classroom rules to avoid getting into trouble. However, for the most part it is important to incorporate certain stages depending on where each student is individually. Every student might not be at the same developmental level so it would be important for the teacher to recognize where each student is so their teachings can be adjusted or changed accordingly. So I would say when it comes to reflecting on psychological underpinnings when developing a lesson the answer would be that teachers should. It is important that teachers understand the differences in their students and be capable of adapting a lesson to fit everyone’s needs.
I agree with basing our instruction not just on theory, but research and statistics. Every student is different and it is important to understand what each student may be struggling with. I also really liked your friends idea with clapping to gain the student's attention. It was obviously something that worked for the teacher and the student's. If something works so well, you must question why you would change it just because a teacher feels it is developmentally inappropriate. Obviously it probably wasn't or it wouldn't have worked to begin with.
I think one can use all 4 of the theorists ideas in the classroom. At the secondary level that I instruct in I incorporate a little of them all. In my leadership classes, my students are in the Formal Operations stage of Piaget. We use discussion groups each class period. In these times we use deductive reasoning to help us get to the core of why we act and react to situations. In strength training classes, I incorporate Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development with the varying levels of the ability of the students. This allows me to work with students in the range of capabilities. Those who are more advanced can move on to the next level so they do not become bored with the repitition of material (exercises) already learned. I also use the advanced students in a cooperative learning sense to help students below them to advance. As I look at Erickson's psychosocial, I find his to be the most relevant in my teaching and my content area. Teenagers are trying to figure themselves out all the while trying to "fit in" with their society. One area that many teenagers are behind in are in communication skills (texting, face book have not helped). As stated earlier, I incorporate many open discussion groups to get the kids comfortable with themselves, especially around others. These young people are also more apt to open up if their peers are opening about themselves. I use Kohlberg's Moral model when I am setting up my classroom environment. I establish a community of mutual respect especially when opinions are given in a public forum. Given the information I have listed above I do believe that it is essential to use a psychological foundation in developing lesson plans. It allows you to use an effective form of differentiated instruction. This, in turn, assists you in tailoring you lesson plan to give it a more individual feel for each student.
In my opinion you are on the right path to success by incorporating a small piece of each theorist. Incorporating these theories in the lesson plans will be beneficial because it will give you a greater chance to effectively reach a majority of your students. Everyone learns different and the more you are prepared for that, the better off you will be...good luck.
After you have completed your theorists matrix, discuss how you can use these theorists' philosophies to provide a theoretical basis for your teaching strategies. Is it necessary to reflect on psychological underpinnings when you develop a lesson? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteBe sure to return to this site and respond to at least one classmate's blog.
This blog and your response are due September 10.
As I looked at these 4 theorists and all they had to say it surprised me at how much of one I see by one teacher and another teacher uses a different one.
ReplyDeleteI believe it is important to use what they have to say and some of it just comes as, hopefully, common sense. For instance I hope that as future educators we will use hands on teaching, be patient with our students and encourage our students.
I think that we need to use what is taught from these theorists, but we also need to be able to mold it to fit our classroom of students and not expect them to mold into what the theorists say we should be doing or seeing.
An example would be in Kohlberg's Moral Reasoning Theory. We need to be aware of each child's circumstances and how things affect them as to how, why and where they are reasponding the way they are to a situation and not just allow it to be explained by their moral values, but possibly of the values they are being raised with. In a nut shell we need to look beyond the child we see and look at what we may not see.
In the town I lived in there was a girl in the 3rd grade that would not play with an African American child at recess. She told the little girl it was because she was black and they turned the girl into the office for a racist comment. She was in in-school suspension for the next day. Well come to find out a person in her family was hurt by a man of color and they had not seeked counseling. So this girl was acting on an issue that had nothing to do with that girl and was being punished for something outside her ability of reasoning. She needed counseling to help her understand that it was not the color of the mans skin, but the choices he made. So this childs moral character was not intending to be hurtful, but outside circumstances had allowed her reaction to come off that way.
I liked Kohlberg and Erickson the most and I understood where Vygotsky was coming from because I have a child that could have used more of this with his language skills when he was younger. Piaget was good, but maybe thats because I have 3 kids and I thought that of course we as adults think differently then children. I have seen their growth and watched it enhance with the more they were allowed to explore.
After completing the matrix and reflecting upon the readings, I have found that there are different aspects of each of the theories that I feel the strongest about using in my future classroom. I think that it is important to consider the age level that you are teaching and to be aware of which stage/phase the students are at in each development area (cognitive, language, psychosocial, and moral). Along with each stage comes many terms and processes that we must be familiar with in order to better understand our students and where they are as far as development is concerned. I also think it is imperative to understand that not all of the students will fit under that same stage/phase. The ages listed by the theorists are merely guidelines and do not guarantee that every 8 year olds is at the concrete operational stage, for example. Our students do not fit into a mold, they are diverse and we must embrace and respect that. Some of the teaching implications that I found most helpful were using differentiated instruction, ensuring that students interact with peers and teachers, using scaffolding, giving realistic and timely feedback, and establish a learning community with mutual respect.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that it will be necessary to take into account different theorists and their theories when developing my curriculum. I need to use the findings of theorists in conjunction with my own experiences, beliefs and observations in order to fully understand where my students fall in the developmental process. I will need to be aware of the cultural backgrounds of each student as well as their home life in order to understand and adapt to each child’s abilities. As mentioned by Vygotsky, culture affects social development as well as language. It will be necessary to re-evaluate the stages throughout the year as the students grow in each of the four areas in the matrix.
There are many different opportunities to use all of these theorists’ philosophies within my future classroom. Having a theorists’ philosophy as a basis of your teaching strategy will help out with not only how each individual learns but it may help with classroom management. By taking the information of these four theorists, we now have an idea of where in life people need to be with their cognitive, language, psychosocial and moral standings. From there, we can observe and place them into their own categories. The reason of placing them into their own categories is so we can teach each individual the same lesson but within their own comprehension level. For instance, a teacher won’t give an infant an assignment to create an experiment; the infant is only in sensorimotor stage and it is not in the formal operational stage of life. Even though that example was extreme, the point was made that there are certain stages in life that we do as we grow older.
ReplyDeleteFor teachers, most of them don’t even have to look at the theorists anymore. They know what the theorists taught and apply the implications within their lessons. Implications such as but are not limited to: playing house, field trips, group discussions, student choice activities, guest speakers and many more. As for the older teachers, they think their activities within their lesson plans are from their own philosophy. I hope that in the future when I teach and become an old teacher that I too will mix up theorists’ philosophies with my own philosophy.
I don’t think it is necessary to reflect on psychological underpinnings when you develop a lesson but I do believe that when a teacher does base their lessons off of a philosophy than the lesson is built stronger. There are many different philosophies in the world that deals with teaching strategies. All I know is that within my lessons I want to make sure to challenge each kid and accept them for who they are. Hopefully, within this class I can add onto my philosophy that I take within my own classroom.
All four theorists can be incorporated into the style an educator teaches their students. Even though language development usually occurs in early to middle childhood, you can still teach a student pragmatics, with livestock or land judging. I have personal experience with both these competitions from FFA in high school. The vocabulary a student uses for giving reasons in livestock judging is in its own ball park. It can be hard for students to become fluent and be convincing with the judges. I can use Vygotsky's theory to help me accomplish with with my students.
ReplyDeleteErikson's theory will also be helpful to develop a trust or identity if the student is having trouble. The teacher can use the guidelines to help with this role as an educator. Also, all the stages of Kohlberg can be utilized by the educator. The educator has to analyze the situation and then decide the proper theory/theories that are needed.
I believe that you should reflect on your lessons to help insure that it is being taught the right way and that the lesson is as strong as it can be for the students. Give them a challenge and also guidance.
I agree with Amanda S. that the lesson we teach should be challenging to the students, but also be accepting for each student. I also agree that you should take age into consideration when assigning projects, etc. I also agree that you should take into consideration your own philosophies when teaching or forming lesson plans. This will help to make you a better teacher and you can still use the theorists as a guideline.
ReplyDeleteAs I read the philosophies of the four theorists presented, I concluded the theories give a process of development that students will endure, and it is my responsibility that I am sensitive to each and every child's needs. It is important to understand the developmental theories so that I can understand the crisis or reasoning behind the situation. As jhrozean posted in his/her comment about the girl who would not play with the African American student, if the teachers did not reflect on the theories of moral reasoning, the white child would not have received the help she needed. Chances are the student would have been punished for the behavior if the teacher would not have studied Kohlberg.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading on Erickson's psychosocial theory, I reflected on my personal situation with my adopted son, Jamie. You see, Jamie came from a home where he was physically neglected. When Jamie came to our house at the age of 2 years 10 months, he was unable to feed himself, dress himself, wash himself, and unable to form sentences. According to Erickson, Jamie never developed a sense of trust when he was an infant, so he also never developed a sense of autonomy. This is why incorporating the theorist’s beliefs is so important. You see, if my husband and I didn't meet Jamie's basic needs and develop a trusting relationship, he would not be able to complete sentences, dress, wash, and eat by himself seven short months later. My husband and I could have been ignorant by pushing Jamie to eat with a fork and spoon; rather, we developed a trust relationship by communicating with him the advantages of the tools.
The situation with Jamie is just an example of why as teachers and parents we recognize that every child learns and reacts in different ways. One criticism about the theories is culture is not taken into consideration. As our country continues to become one big salad bowl, it is important to help the student develop a sense of belonging while keeping his/her identity.
In lesson plans, I believe it is important to reflect on the theorist beliefs. Lesson plans can be laid out so that students have the opportunity to use creative vocabulary while developing an identity. I liked the suggestion in the text that said to have students debate sides of a situation and then critically analyze the other side. This supports Piaget's cognitive theories and how teachers can help develop a student's cognition.
Great teachers aid in the transition of students becoming productive young adults. If the teacher understands the theories, understands that all students and situations are different, and then reacts upon what is theoretically and developmentally appropriate, than that teacher's students will succeed in and out of the classroom.
Kirby,
ReplyDeleteI am so glad you mentioned that we should respect that any child may not fit in the mold the theorists have presented. Kudos to you!! It should be thought as an opportunity when our children are a diverse group because that is when language, cognition, morals, and psycosocial skills improve most. If every child fit into the molds, we would have boring classrooms with sub-par students in a black and white world.
You also pointed out that we as teachers should continually reflect on our styles and curriculum. Our students will develop throughout the school year, and we should refelct on the theorists to act upon the situation.
After learning about the four theorists, I learned that each of them introduced different ideas and perspectives on how children learn. In the classroom, every student is unique and they all learn differently. Some may be able to grasp concepts quickly whereas others may need additional time and/or assistance. Therefore, by learning about various theorists' philosophies, a teacher can become more knowledgeable in planning his/her teaching strategies to facilitate effective learning in the classroom. For example, according to Piaget, principles of instruction for the class must be developed based on the needs of the students before applying them. Hence, teachers could use various resources to provide concrete experiences to help students learn. Then based on Vygotsky’s perspectives, teachers could provide a theoretical basis on how to introduce learning activities in a context that is culturally authentic, with emphasis on promoting the use of social interaction and language.
ReplyDeleteI believe teachers should reflect on psychological underpinnings when developing a lesson. By doing so, a teacher could plan a lesson based on authentic tasks and real world data to accommodate all learners.
Re: Amanda S.
ReplyDeleteHi Amanda, great response! I like the fact that you believe that there are many different philosophies in the world that deals with teaching strategies. I agree, but I believe it is necessary to think about the psychological underpinnings of how these philosophies would help foster student’s learning. Remember, as teachers, it is our job to not only teach academics but to build our student's social and behavioral skills in the process. Therefore, with this in mind, we have to look at each area and come up with specific goals and objectives to accomplish this in our lesson.
When completing the matrix assignment, I identified with many of the theorists and noticed that I have been including a mixture of theories when planning lessons. I believe that it would be a tragic mistake on the part of the educator if he or she did not consider the different aspects of development when planning lessons. The text gave the example of the question presented to early elementary students, "If I were a (blank) I would...". For many students at Piaget's preoperational stage, this question would be nonsense because the child cannot yet look at something or someone from a different perspective other than their own. They are not a butterfly, so why would they even consider such a question. It is incomprehnsible for them. Educators must have a general awareness of developmentally appropriate practice. I have experienced this during my childrens sermans that I give at church as well as in discourse with my seven year old. They are very literal thinkers at this age. They do not understand the abstract. Vygotsky's ZPD also comes to mind when trying to design lessons that teach students in their "magic middle". If material is developmentally inappropriate, then locating their magic middle will never occur. Material must also be presented in a way that is culturally and socially relevent to the student. This requires scaffolding. And finally, it would be nieve to think that a child's life away from school does not affect the way they learn in school. Providing opportunities to learn that are familiar to them and not based strictly upon white, middle class values and experiences allows for real learning to take place.
ReplyDeleteKirby,
ReplyDeleteI really liked your post and agree with what you said. I too found many aspects from each that I lean towards. I agree that it is important to remember that just because a child fits the stage according to age, does not mean that is exactly where the student is at developmentally. The stages are rather a general tool to keep in mind. And I think you were right on target when you mentioned that we need to be mindful and respectful of the diversity in our classrooms. Great post!
jhrozean,
ReplyDeleteI think that your story about the little girl in your town is a very good example of the need to understand moral reasoning. Too often, the public is quick to judge people and their families based on a comment made by a student. We need to take the time to stop and consider if maybe the child had misunderstood something that was said or has had a negative experience, such as the one you mentioned, and does not know how to react properly. Rather than choosing to suspend the girl right away and write her off as a child from a racist family, the school should have called in her parents and had a meeting with the child and parents first. The child (and parents) could have received proper counseling. I believe that the truth here is that the girl had a great moral character. She obviously feels strongly about her family connections and feels the need to protect her family and herself from ever experiencing such pain again. It is great that this child had the chance to learn a lesson about personal morals and that her intentions were good where the man that hurt her loved one had poor morals.
Kirby, Thanks and I agreed with your post about not trying to mold the students to fit what the theorists say they should be, but allow them to be diverse and become who they are based on their culture and embracing it.
ReplyDeleteSarah R., I also liked your post when you said it would be nieve of us to not consider outside circumstances with our students. Their education continues out of our classrooms and we need to open up to familys to help educate the student as a whole, not just what we see.
LaceyK
ReplyDeleteI think that it is great that you have adopted a child with special needs. That takes a special person! I thought it was a great example when you said that your son was not able to develop a sense of trust which is one of Erickson's stages. I think that it is a huge stage for infants to feel safe and have that trust.
Darcy Couse
The various developmental theories are so fascinating to me. I plan on teaching Elementary Special Education in a Resource Room so I will be dealing with children from first to sixth grade that have a variety of developmental levels on all fronts. Having the knowledge of learning and developmental theory in my kit will certainly help me tailor my teaching strategies to the various students I will work with.
ReplyDeleteI found all the theories had implications for my Resource Room teaching and interactions with my students. Every teacher needs to understand the “psychological underpinnings” to be a successful educator.
First, I have always believed Piaget’s concept that children learn from the social transmission. I can peg immediately the children who have parents that interact with them on a consistent and intelligent level. As Piaget noted, it is the INTERACTION part that makes the difference in a child’s developmental rate. Students whose parents have been reading to them and with them from an early age tend to be more advanced learners than children whose parents are self-absorbed, regardless of physical/biological development of the child. This also tags in Vygotsky and his theory that language and culture cannot be separated. The more parents interact (NOTE: interact – not yell at or command) verbally with their children the more the children advance developmentally, both cognitively and emotionally. This is especially effective when the parents are well educated people “capable of advanced thinking” as the section in our text on Vygotsky’s theories states, but the interaction on a positive level between all parents and children advances development. As a teacher I can build upon this social transmission within my classroom by developing group learning situations and providing mentoring from older students. Additionally, I will be fortunate to have para-professionals who can also provide the interaction in learning that will aid my students in their development.
I think these chapters have reminded me that you must observe your students carefully if you are to teach them well. The “stages” that are laid out by our theorists are so flexible. I know fifth graders who already regularly engage in Piaget’s Formal Operational thinking, always challenging me with “what if” concepts and constructs that are beyond the ken of the other children in the classroom, and these students will need advanced material to maintain their interest and motivation. I also have experienced children who are still fighting their way out of the Initiative versus Guilt stage of Erikson’s in third grade, which creates social issues for these students that require careful intervention on the part of the teacher. So I am faced with creating Individualized Education Plans that not only address a wide range of emotional, cognitive, and social development levels, but also physical and psychological development irregularities. I definitely feel a working knowledge of all the developmental theories will be invaluable to me as I develop lesson plans for my students.
This said, as a Resource Room teacher (I substitute regularly in a Resource Room so I know whereof I speak), the students that I will teach will tend to come from families where the interaction has been minimal, whether due to illness or poverty, or simply lack of parenting. There will be various emotional and social difficulties my students will need me to address both in lesson plans and in classroom environment/interactions. Some students will only be in the Resource Room due to cultural differences in education they have experienced before coming to the school I will teach at. It will therefore be especially important for me to build a Resource Room environment of authoritative mentoring with my students that can respect these differences. High standards and expectations delivered with genuine caring and compassion with attention to individual levels of development on cognitive, social, and emotional aspects is the policy I will strive for.
RE: Sarah R.
ReplyDeleteI do believe you have hit the top three areas for consideration in today's classroom. Be aware of your students cognitive levels and zone of proximal development when developing lessons, be certain the material is culturally and socially relevant, and never forgetting that the child's life outside of school is important to being able to develop lessons that are familiar and meaningful to the child.
Most of all, I like the way your passion for teaching comes across in your posts. You are firm in what you believe and not afraid to stand behind it. I think that is important to being a good teacher too.
Lyn B.
RE: Lacey K.
ReplyDeleteGoodness but you certainly make a case for social development theory. The interaction you and your husband have with Jamie will not only make up for his neglect, but I am certain it will help him to excel through out school.
I think it is because Kansas tends to be considered "white bread, bible belt, middle America" that more attention isn't paid in the schools to cultural diversity. In the big cities there are so many obvious cultures other than white European the mix is obvious, and therefore addressed. Here in Kansas that kind of high level of ethnic groups is more hit and miss in the various areas, and as such, the importance is overlooked.
Can a child be adequately trained to be a productive member of society if we educators do not take the time to address cultural diversity? Can we be sure that the children we teach will remain in our own little microcosm? I agree with you that teaching our students about cultural diversity is important, for we are raising citizens of the world, not just citizens of Kansas.
LynB.
RE: Kirby
ReplyDeleteAs usual Kirby, you have tossed a real meaty bone out in this discussion. Thank you.
Your point about reassessing student development levels throughout the year is something I think gets forgotten far too often. Some teachers prepare the entire year's lessons at the beginning of the year, complete down to sub plans. Now, how can that type of pre-planning anticipate the growth and development level change of the students? Reflection on student growth and revisiting of future lesson planning is indeed an important consideration.
Lyn B.
Jacquesaid
ReplyDeleteI also looked at the four theorists that were mentioned; I thought they were very much different. Most of the things that I read are common sense. I think that most of all you have to have patience and stay calm with special needs students especially. By doing this it makes the classroom go a great deal soother and also things will work smooth with you as well.
We need to keep in mind that all of the theorists: Piaget, Kolberg, Erickson, Vgostsky but do not expect our student to be like each one. Look at your students one by one and see what theorists you can fit to describe them or try to figure out what they are like. I also think that you should use your common sense as well and that will take you farther. I think that we should keep in mind the following things: (cognitive, language, psychosocial and moral). Remember that the ages are just guidelines for when they should, not all students make it at this time. I would definitely in my lesson use the scaffolding, feedback, and also establish a class with mutual respect as well. When dealing with the use of the curriculum you need to take into effect the and also use my experience and observations that I have had to take into the developmental process. All of these theorists bring something to the scheme of things and play a role in the developmental process of a child.
Jacquereplies to LynB
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Lyn, you have to look at the psychological underpinnings in order to understand the students. I also agree that you have to observe your students to observe your students carefully. If you don’t do this then how do you ever get on the student’s level and figure out if he is behind or ahead of anything. There are certain concepts you need to take it to affect the social and emotional needs as well. I feel that you need to make sure that you know each day what is going on with the student so that you can better tune into them for there learning during the day.
Looking through all of these Theroists and putting it together in a Matrix has helped me to realize that I am going to have to personally take a small piece of each one of those great people in order to be a fantastic teacher. It is hard to believe though that subconciously we have been being taught how to do these things with out actually doing it. I think that is it important to insure that as a teacher I work with each and every student on a level that they can react with.
ReplyDeleteWhen putting together a lesson plan it is important to refelct upon theorist underpinning in order to make a lesson affective. As a teacher not all children learn in a psychosocial where as others will not learn in a moral classroom. It is important to evolve all areas to make sure that the students learn
RE: JHROZENA- It is amazing that as we look at the four theorist I seem to look at the teachers I have had in the past as well as the teachers that I have done my internships with and have had to realize they all use and reflect on some theorists.
ReplyDeleteReading about the theorists and listing their main ideas and terms in the matrix was a helpful way to separate the information and theories we read about. There are aspects of each theory that will be helpful, and while I enjoyed reading about all of them I probably liked Vygotsky’s theory the best. I’ve taken many psych classes and have heard about Piaget and Erikson a lot, and Kohlberg some too. I was surprised that I hadn’t heard about Vygotsky until I started taking education classes, and now it seems like he’s everywhere. Part of why his theory is so important is the emphasis he places on social interaction, showing that teachers (as well as other adults and peers) can effect the child’s development. The other theorists’ stages are helpful as well because sometimes it can be very difficult to understand how other age groups think and what you can do to help them. For example, Erikson’s second stage helps a parent or caregiver understand the importance of letting children do things on their own, even if it may take a little longer or risk making a mess. I had the hardest time with Kohlbert’s moral development stages, although it is still helpful to understand that individuals move from obeying because of rules but gradually move to a place where they take many abstract aspects into consideration before determining what is right and wrong. It’s also important to remember that not all individuals fit into the stages as outlined by any of the theorists, and some may skip around or even be in more than one stage at a time; however it can still help you know what to look for and give you a general idea of how to handle particular situations that can be adapted and applied to your individual style, the situation, and the other individuals involved. I think the psychological aspect is very important to consider when teaching because it is as much or more a part of the students than any other aspect.
ReplyDeleteIn response to jhrozean:
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post and agree that it’s important not to get too caught up in what’s ‘supposed’ to happen and to strive to really see and understand each child. I also really liked your story. It’s important to remember even in situations like this, where it doesn’t seem possible to think of a ‘good’ excuse for the child’s behavior, there is still more to the story. The information you found out later could go forever without being released, so this is a great story to keep in mind. Even though we may never know the whole story or reasons behind actions, we still need to be sensitive and caring toward all individuals, even when it seems they are just being rude or unkind.
These four theorists have different categories that are meant to be used at different stages in different peoples lives. The way one person behaves at a certain age does not mean that the rest of the people in that group will act in the same manner. By taking the information from all four theorists, and applying a little information from each theorist, we can help the student through the educational and life process.
ReplyDeleteRE: Jacque- I agree. I have always thought that teaching involves a great deal of common sense. Sadly I have seen a lot of teachers who do not possess it. Each student is an individual and should be treated as such. There is no way we can assign one theorists ideas to one student. It wouldn't be practical and the student would suffer.
ReplyDeleteIn Response to Lacy K.
ReplyDelete"Great teachers aid in the transition of students becoming productive young adults. If the teacher understands the theories, understands that all students and situations are different, and then reacts upon what is theoretically and developmentally appropriate, than that teacher's students will succeed in and out of the classroom."
This is a very powerful statement that summarizes how I feel about the importance of learning these theories. I truly believe that we are not meant to teach our subject matter, but to teach students. While my students are in my room, I hope that I can instill in them the qualities that they need to be successful adults as well as my subject matter.
Knowing the theoretical background of different philosophies can help create more effective classroom management techniques. I believe that it is important to know and understand many different theories and philosophies.
ReplyDeleteI am currently teaching high school and I have referred back to Erickson’s stage of identity vs. role confusion many times. This has helped me be a better teacher, by understanding what my students are going through and how difficult it can be. I have tried to focus on building a “family” with my classes, or at the very least a safe environment in which students feel safe to take risks (like presenting a PowerPoint slideshow).
Knowing and being familiar with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory is important in my district. My school is considered very diverse, as are many of the districts in Southwest Kansas. By realizing the importance that culture plays on development and learning, I can understand what issues or problems my students may be experiencing or how to build on background knowledge.
I believe that understanding the psychological or psychosocial aspects of a lesson is an important part of planning. Lesson plans need to incorporate a variety of techniques, and allow for differentiated instruction, scaffolding techniques, modeling, manipulatives, and a variety of other teaching methods that are directly related to the theories that we have explored.
Being a good teacher is more than knowing your subject, or content area. We must be able to relate to our students and by knowing where they are on a day to day basis, or building a connection with them we are able to do just that.
As a future teacher, it will be my responsibility to decide what to teach, how to teach, and how to develop my classroom management style. This is a complex job with many decisions to be made daily. My effectiveness as a teacher will be influenced by these decisions, as well as the skills and knowledge that I possess. The students I teach will be varied in their abilities, needs, and learning styles. Thus, no single learning theory or style of teaching will work for every situation. This is when the importance of knowing and becoming familiar with the four philosophies studied in the text will come into play. Whether it is applying Kohlberg’s moral theory to a child who is experiencing behavior issues in the classroom or using Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development to bridge the gap in a student’s knowledge base through scaffolding, the various theories will produce many different ways of understanding (and assisting) situations that arise. This will be especially helpful for me, as I will be a first year teacher and will not have the years of experience and knowledge that other teachers will possess. Thus, these theories will form a theoretical foundation for me to draw upon and give me some direction as I start my teaching career.
ReplyDeleteIt will be important for me, after utilizing the theories, to reflect on whether or not they were successful. Was the lesson motivating and effective? If not, what can be done? What experiences have my students had that will affect how and what they learn? This reflection will need to include a personal look at my students, their cultures, their previous academic experiences, and their home life. It will be important for me to keep in mind that although I can apply a specific theory to a situation, it is merely a guideline for me to use. Not always will a child fall into a certain stage of the theory or there might be other issues at hand. However, it will be important for me to incorporate these theories into my lesson plans – as they can assist with the learning that takes place, as well as adaptations that need to occur due to student needs. I especially enjoyed the text’s discussion of differentiated instruction and scaffolding and see myself utilizing these in my own classroom.
Lacey, I appreciated your post and the statement you made that as a teacher we should be “sensitive to each and every child’s needs”. This is so important and appears to be so simple, yet it seems to get lost in the pressure for teachers to get their students ready for standardized tests and the larger class sizes. I have to admit that this is my goal as a future teacher, and yet I too am nervous at this huge responsibility and if I can be successful at it. This has been an issue that is of great importance to me, as my own children have been blessed with intelligence and have struggled to be challenged in the classroom. My daughter is a great reader who read small chapter books in kindergarten. When she got to first grade and had to read the “Pat the Cat” books with the rest of the class, she was bored and would cry at home if we asked her to read it for homework. We visited with the teacher about other alternatives to keep our daughter challenged, but to no avail. Long story short, the school recommended to advance our daughter a grade and the teacher admitted to us afterwards that she was “relieved” to not have to worry about our daughter. I understood what she meant, and yet I found myself disappointed in the teacher and hoping that I can do a better job in my teaching career of using a theoretical approach to find out where my students strengths and abilities lie and build upon that for the future.
ReplyDeleteAfter doing the theorist matrix I learned that I think about all of these theorists when I am preparing for a lesson. It is amazing how you do this without even realizing it. The main one that I think that I use the most would be Piaget. I really agree with his thinking and always keep in mind that all students do not reach each cognitive level at the same time. I also enjoyed reading about Kohlberg's theory. I never really thought about that, but his theory is definitely something that we should all keep in mind. There are many students out there with behavioral issues and learning about Kolhberg will help us all to try and combat some of these issues. Vygotsky's ideas on scaffolding are great and I use them quite frequently without even noticing. Any thing you can do to help students is a plus and Vygotsky has some great ideas. This will all help me to become a better teacher because I will know how students develop and what ways to help them whether with behavior or classwork.
ReplyDeleteIt is important to use a theoretical basis when developing a lesson. For example, Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal development when finding a level that will fit the students. If they are beyond the lesson you are planning, the learner will be bored. When they already know the information, don’t teach it. Then, there is the lesson you are planning, and if might be too hard. The learner is not ready to learn that information, nor might they be able to learn it. You should not teach this information either. Finally, when you find the happy medium within the students learning, you have reached the Zone of Proximal Development. This is exciting and challenging for the students, and with the guidance of the teacher, they should be able to learn with limited problems.
ReplyDeleteIt is also important to look at how we teach the children. We would not make a 1st grader read a story by them self, and then write a reflection. Their reading skills are just emerging, and for the majority of them, reading aloud is an important part of understanding, especially in the first part of the school year. When looking at Piaget’s “The Preoperational Stage,” he refers to using symbols, gestures, signs, images and words to help the students learn. I would take this into consideration when planning any lesson at the 1st grade (or lower) levels. For example, I would choose a story with pictures to help the students build a picture in their head that corresponds with the reading. Next, if we were doing a math lesson on subtractions, the worksheet might have a picture of 6 bears, a minus sign, and then 3 bears. This will help the students to get a mental picture of the actual problem. These are just a few examples, but I feel that without using the theorist underpinnings, we would not realize the potential that each student has.
Christine G. I really like what you said about reflecting. I agree with you that it is an important part in our jobs as teacher. If we did not reflect over lessons, units, teaching strategies, then we would not know if they were useful or not. And if they are not useful, and we keep teaching them, then we are leading them down the wrong path.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I agree with you about the differences in our children that we will be teaching. Not one theorist, or one stage will fit all of our students. We may have students with different disabilities, personalities, home lives, ect, and we need to make sure what we are teaching can be molded for each student.
Mallory Lammers
ReplyDeleteWe should use theorist when we plan our lesson plans. Education needs to be a precise, calculated and well thought out process. Not slapped together because it sounds “good.” We need to base our instruction on theory, research, and statistics. Not just one but all of these. We need to do this so we can have accountability. We need to understand why a student might be struggling with a concept. What can we do to help this student? By using theory, research, and statistics we can avoid reinventing the wheel. All the research is done for us so we do not have to work so we can say “hey this worked several times for this class. Let’s try it!” The real trick is to not let the theorist define our students. Our book even has sections covering the holes in the theories and why sometimes they just do not work. Does this mean that the theories are wrong? No. It just means that we need to learn when to apply these theories. We need to walk a fine balance and understand that theory, research, and statistics can only go so far. We are the ones who know what is right for a student. We need to use our pedagogical knowledge to accomplish this. Teachers need to keep an eye out for when students are frustrated or bored. We need to know our students and we need to know them well.
I work at a preschool with a teacher who needs to learn how to use theories appropriately. This teacher is new. Before the new teacher started my friend would call the class to order. My friend would say “If you can hear me clap one time.” She would clap once after she said this. Some students would clap once. “If you can hear me clap two times,” my friend would say and then clapping twice. More students would clap twice. This would continue until all the students clapped together. I have watched my friend use this practice and it actually worked well with these students. I would go as far as to say this was the only classroom management I saw in the whole class and the students responded well to it! Then the new teacher began her reign. The new teacher informed my friend that having the students clap was developmentally inappropriate. That these students were too young to understand what she was doing! Last time I worked in this classroom the students were wild. There was no classroom management and if the teacher tried to implement some rules the students ignored her. Lining up in that class is a nightmare! This teacher really needs to learn to listen to the students and not just the theorist!
Mallory Lammers
ReplyDeleteIn response to Sarah Rhodes…
I have noticed that I also use theorists in my instruction without even knowing it! It seems odd to say this but I now understand a lot of my internships and classes better. I understand why my teachers had me do certain things and why I used certain practices such as read alouds or guided reading. I do think that you should stress more that we should not allow the theorists to DEFINE our students but merely guide us to the best way to teach. The book even pointed out that Piaget and Vygotsky did not cover everything and had holes in their theories.
After I had completed the matrix I realized that there are so many different theories that may take part in the classroom everyday. I can’t say any one teacher just uses one theory because every class is so diverse and every child is on a different level. To me each of the theorists provides stages or phases that can and should be included in our everyday teachings. Some of the phases, however, seem more appropriate for young children while others may need to be introduced at a later age.
ReplyDeleteEvery theorist’s has very important stages that every teacher uses every day. Kohlberg’s theory that says that rules need to be obeyed to avoid punishment last all throughout school. Students are always expected to follow the classroom rules to avoid getting into trouble. However, for the most part it is important to incorporate certain stages depending on where each student is individually. Every student might not be at the same developmental level so it would be important for the teacher to recognize where each student is so their teachings can be adjusted or changed accordingly. So I would say when it comes to reflecting on psychological underpinnings when developing a lesson the answer would be that teachers should. It is important that teachers understand the differences in their students and be capable of adapting a lesson to fit everyone’s needs.
Mallory,
ReplyDeleteI agree with basing our instruction not just on theory, but research and statistics. Every student is different and it is important to understand what each student may be struggling with. I also really liked your friends idea with clapping to gain the student's attention. It was obviously something that worked for the teacher and the student's. If something works so well, you must question why you would change it just because a teacher feels it is developmentally inappropriate. Obviously it probably wasn't or it wouldn't have worked to begin with.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI think one can use all 4 of the theorists ideas in the classroom. At the secondary level that I instruct in I incorporate a little of them all. In my leadership classes, my students are in the Formal Operations stage of Piaget. We use discussion groups each class period. In these times we use deductive reasoning to help us get to the core of why we act and react to situations. In strength training classes, I incorporate Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development with the varying levels of the ability of the students. This allows me to work with students in the range of capabilities. Those who are more advanced can move on to the next level so they do not become bored with the repitition of material (exercises) already learned. I also use the advanced students in a cooperative learning sense to help students below them to advance. As I look at Erickson's psychosocial, I find his to be the most relevant in my teaching and my content area. Teenagers are trying to figure themselves out all the while trying to "fit in" with their society. One area that many teenagers are behind in are in communication skills (texting, face book have not helped). As stated earlier, I incorporate many open discussion groups to get the kids comfortable with themselves, especially around others. These young people are also more apt to open up if their peers are opening about themselves. I use Kohlberg's Moral model when I am setting up my classroom environment. I establish a community of mutual respect especially when opinions are given in a public forum. Given the information I have listed above I do believe that it is essential to use a psychological foundation in developing lesson plans. It allows you to use an effective form of differentiated instruction. This, in turn, assists you in tailoring you lesson plan to give it a more individual feel for each student.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Crystal:
ReplyDeleteCrystal,
In my opinion you are on the right path to success by incorporating a small piece of each theorist. Incorporating these theories in the lesson plans will be beneficial because it will give you a greater chance to effectively reach a majority of your students. Everyone learns different and the more you are prepared for that, the better off you will be...good luck.