Last week, I gave a presentation on pedagogy to a group of teachers from engineering colleges. I already wrote about my presentation on e-learning in the previous post. Here I am beginning to write about the highlights of my presentation on pedagogy.
I started with the problem. The issues are of student performance, teacher performance and job satisfaction. It is clearly stated by Richard M. Felder and Linda K. Silverman, in their classic paper titled "Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education", published in the Journal of Engineering Education in 1988. The scenario is not very different even today. To quote Felder and Silverman:
"Mismatches exist between common learning styles of engineering students and traditional teaching styles of engineering professors. In consequence, students become bored and inattentive in class, do poorly on tests, get discouraged about the courses, the curriculum, and themselves, and in some cases change to other curricula or drop out of school. Professors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, know something is not working; they may become overly critical of their students (making things even worse) or begin to wonder if they are in the right profession. Most seriously, society loses potentially excellent engineers."
<< http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS-1988.pdf >>
To address the issues, we need better pedagogy. I think of pedagogy as the algorithm of education. Though there are many algorithms that work, we can increase effectiveness significantly with a better algorithm.
<< class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Andragogy' popularized by Malcolm Knowles is often used to refer specifically to adult learning. >>
The starting point for effective pedagogy is knowing the learner. Knowing the learner is different from merely knowing about the learner. The framework for knowing the learner would involve a few dimensions, such as the following:
I started with the problem. The issues are of student performance, teacher performance and job satisfaction. It is clearly stated by Richard M. Felder and Linda K. Silverman, in their classic paper titled "Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education", published in the Journal of Engineering Education in 1988. The scenario is not very different even today. To quote Felder and Silverman:
"Mismatches exist between common learning styles of engineering students and traditional teaching styles of engineering professors. In consequence, students become bored and inattentive in class, do poorly on tests, get discouraged about the courses, the curriculum, and themselves, and in some cases change to other curricula or drop out of school. Professors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, know something is not working; they may become overly critical of their students (making things even worse) or begin to wonder if they are in the right profession. Most seriously, society loses potentially excellent engineers."
<< http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS-1988.pdf >>
To address the issues, we need better pedagogy. I think of pedagogy as the algorithm of education. Though there are many algorithms that work, we can increase effectiveness significantly with a better algorithm.
<< class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Andragogy' popularized by Malcolm Knowles is often used to refer specifically to adult learning. >>
The starting point for effective pedagogy is knowing the learner. Knowing the learner is different from merely knowing about the learner. The framework for knowing the learner would involve a few dimensions, such as the following:
- Intelligence: Not only logical-mathematical intelligence, but also the other types of intelligences as described by Howard Gardner.
- Learning Style: Use any model, such as Index of Learning Styles (Richard Felder and Linda Silverman) or Learning Style Inventory (David Kolb). If required, expand the profile by including profiles such as Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) or Hermann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI). << http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html >>
- Motivation: Again use any model of motivation. I prefer the model based on David C. McClelland's theories, and look specifically for achievement motivation.
- Goals: Try to get an understanding of the learner's overall life goals and specific career goals for the medium term. I get the participants in my sessions to recollect their experiences of peak performance, and commit themselves to valued career goals for a two year period.
I shall write about other aspects of pedagogy, such as Problem Based (Inductive) Learning, Iteration, Collaboration and Constructivism in other posts in the future.
Signing off for now. -- JJ
No comments:
Post a Comment