Why is it so important to integrate theory of instruction into effective pedagogy?
"But a theory of instruction, which must be at the heart of educational psychology, is principally concerned with how to arrange environments to optimize learning according to various criteria" (Bruner, 37)
When applied, this instruction method provides a way for students to focus on skill development in order to increase their readiness. Bruner also stresses the importance of applicable learning, and that without an authentic application, "the information is simply useless" (53).
This idea of effective and connected learning connects directly to the major themes and ideas which Professor Diana at WSU expressed when discussing her place based honors level college course. Her goals for the course challenged students to think critically, come to creative conclusions, and take away a greater sense of confidence and involvement in their ability to make effective change.
Most interesting, however, was Professor Diana's perspective and role in her course. Rather than see herself as an instructor, Diana explained her position as more of a 'writing coach'. Serving as a guide, Diana helped her students write strong, effective papers, which attacked arguments and problems generated by her students. Rather than provide material, Diana led her students towards and through new ideas and skills.
As Bruner would most likely agree, the results were powerful. Students left Diana's class feeling empowered to make change. After an end of semester reflection, students reported to feel as if now, they had the skills and knowledge to become active members of their current and future communities.
During our conversation about students learning in this inquiry model, the idea of anxiety and discomfort arose. Diana reported that some of her students struggled with the lack of structure given in the course; the student's freedom in learning was new and overwhelming.
I couldn't help but think about the clear connection to what I read in Denise Pope's "Doing School". These high school students reported that ""Everybody" does the minimum required to get by and everybody focuses on grades instead of learning the material" (Pope, 28). How much of this anxiety in college is created based on student's lack of opportunity in learning during high school? And, how does this lack of opportunity start to grow in the elementary levels? It seems that, as we get to college, where learning is structured to be so authentic and applicable, we lack the skills necessary to succeed. According to Bruner, these skills are vital; "a curriculum should involve the mastery of skills that, in turn, lead to the mastery of still more powerful ones, the establishment of self-reward sequences" (Bruner, 35). The disconnect of skills and experience, ranging from elementary school to college, shows the impact of neglecting Bruner's 4 essential features, and in this situation especially, effective sequence.
- Where else does this disconnect occur?
- Is there disconnect in the way that the Investigations math program is taught throughout the grade levels?
- What about the connection between a school's mission statement and the math program which they use? Does the mission statement and program goals align?
"Rather, it is to teach him to participate in the process that makes possible the establishment of knowledge. We teach a subject not to produce little living libraries on that subject, but rather to get a student to think mathematically for himself" (Bruner, 72)
