Growth

Before this semester, I feel like my mind went back and forth between two mindsets when I thought about me actually being  a real-life teacher: 1) how hard can it be? Its teaching! and 2) overwhelmed. Where to start? I think this class has started to bridge that gap and teaching is starting to feel tangible, manageable, REAL.

Especially in regards to the learning theories (which I really have enjoyed learning about because they relate a lot to my psych class from my freshman year that I loved) it touches on the importance of intention. All teaching should be intentional. Every aspect of a lesson plan should be intentional. I feel like as naive future teachers, we thought how can I teach in a way that is fun and informational? where now we think, how can students LEARN? How can students develop their thoughts and ideas? I have also liked how we have been able to apply theories to our specific concentration. Its important to start thinking of teaching in regards to your subject, and how to edit/customize ideas for yourself. You cannot just assume that one method of teaching or one lesson plan can work for anything.

It is also neat that I can see the ties between my education classes, from the theorists in my ED 106 class to the theories in my ED 107 class, and the technology taught in my 109 class applied in my 107 class. Its all related and feels useful. Blogging has also helped me be more thoughtful and reflective on my learning. I think I do this anyways (since me and Joe reflect on the class pretty much every day on the walk back to campus) but writing it down makes it more permanent and something I can measure progress with. I will say, that learning in ED 107 is exhausting. I get a lot out of participating, it is the way I learn, and I do feel mentally challenged in the class- but if you have a headache coming into that class, it will probably get worse with each "consider this" or "what do you mean by that?"  : )  I can definitely say that I am starting to understand the perspective of a teacher (rather than a student) now more than I ever have.

"Think aloud": color

After having a “think out loud” with one of the girls on my floor about color and her knowledge on the topic, I realized that much of my major in art is very specific and not exactly relatable to the common person. The girl that I interviewed had never taken an art or design class before and that was apparent in her reports on the topic. It was almost as if her schemas (jn relation to the CLT) were visible as the conversation progressed, as she started with the most basic knowledge on the topic of color. She stated what the primary colors were, which is elementary level art and probably relating to the last art class she had taken. She then got vaguer and vaguer with her relations to the topic as she tried to stretch her knowledge. Her schemas got less supported as she related color to science, discussing how the cones in your eyes allow you to see different light spectrums, showing that she must have some experience with science. After stumbling a bit more with the topic, she did reach the concept of complimentary colors and knew that they were ”colors that looked good together” and also that white, black, and grey were shades, not colors. These concepts were a bit higher level, but her confidence in that topic wavered and her statements came off more so as questions. At one point she even began asking questions to me and the other student that was working on homework nearby. This reminded me of the more knowledgeable peer in SLT and her wanting me to say that her ideas were correct  which reminded me of that one learning theory we talked about at the end of class, behaviorism, where she wanted to give me the correct answer. 

Classrooms, Concepts, and Contradictions

Thinking about this class has made me reflect on my own high school's standards for education:

"Our mission is to educate each student to be self-directed learners, collaborative workers, complex thinkers, quality producers, and community contributors through the application of student-owned learning strategies."

and I have been trying to relate them to our new applications of the Developmental, Social, and Constructivist learning theories. I do think that complex thinkers relates to DLT, the idea of taking something concrete, and letting the students transform it into something as abstract as they can; the idea that a student should try to bridge the gap instead of expecting a teacher to create the scenario for them. I had an English teacher  who was successful at this idea in many of our units. We would read books and take them for what they were, and then she would ask us to do a creative interpretation of some aspect of the book. You could write a story, poem, rap, dance, make a facebook profile for one of the characters, WHATEVER is inspirational and meaningful to that individual student and will let them expand on the topic. I was always big on poetry and would interpret a scene or a character in a complex way, use metaphors to describe them, dive into the layers of their character. Since it was something I chose to create, I also would be very proud of my work as a piece without realizing that I had deepened my understanding in the process.

Other connections that I thought of are more simple to group, like Collaborative workers and community contributors to the Social Learning Theory. The more knowledgeable peer would hands-down be a community contributor.

I do struggle with the mission's statement regarding self-directed learners a little though. Obviously, kids should not be spoon-fed information or forced to sit in the classroom until their homework is done, but how can you expect a student to be a self-directed learner in relation to the Constructivist learning theory? A student cannot just be expected to connect and develop schemas out of thin air; they must be stimulated, challenged, and related to by someone (an educator). If students could grasp new ideas on their own, I think all teaching would just be online, reading and memorizing concepts without ever needing to experience them. I think the term would be better stated as self-motivated.

note: this is not part of the classroom assignment ( i was on the comment end) these are just stray thoughts/ reflections.

Artsy Fartsy

I know that I have addressed the DLT and art, but as I am taking all of these ed classes, I can't help but feel that my major is the exception to the rule. I'm sure others feel this same way about their areas of expertise, like all of the future music, or ESL teachers since they have different forms of content. But specifically for art, since it is so hands-on, sometimes my ed 109 class that talks about technology or blogging seems so un-relateable to my topic. I mean, yes, in my jewelry class we use things like blowtorches and centrifuges but I hardly consider that the same type of technology that we discuss in class. I can understand having students hang up their sketches on the wall to discuss as a class, but there is no "wallwisher" for that type of thing. I suppose methods could be shared via internet, but it would probably be easier, more concrete, and more helpful to demonstrate those methods in person.

I suppose it would be a good way to share examples of art, if we are doing a unit on line or pointalisim or something that I could post links to example art and sometimes even off the wall things like quotes, songs, or websites can offer good means of inspiration. I like the challenge of having to take the ideas we learn in class and applying them to my abstract major. I think it would be very beneficial to start some type of communication with other art teachers to see how they interpret how to grade their students, how to alter lesson plans, and other enhancements to the classroom experience. I am all-ears to anyone that has an opinion on art and applying the educational theories.

Direct Learning Theory and ART?

I think the past class period has helped me grasp the concept of Direct learning theory more than when it was first introduced. I also realized how encouraging teaching can be when this style is applied considering it is not based on a system of punishing and rewarding, but rather saying "you don't understand this? How can I break it down for you? How can I help you learn it through experiencing?"

However, the biggest struggle I have had with the theory (and other educational theories for that matter) is relating it to my subject field. Art itself is already so concrete, it is created and experienced in order to be learned. Concepts are expressed via demonstrations. For example, if the assignment was how to make a coil pot for a ceramics class, myself as the teacher would demonstrate the process by having the class watch my own techniques on the concept, then I would let them attempt to recreate the process for themselves while giving individual feedback. I suppose there are some topics, such as explaining the difference of abstract and realism, that I could more easily relate to the DLT though.

I did have a teacher in high school that I felt implemented the DLT very well. Mrs. Plackett, who I had for 4 semesters of various English classes  was constantly bringing in outside texts, having us act out, sing, draw, or discuss topics. Worksheets were far and few and creativity as well as hands on activities made up most of the classes. I loved it because it was engaging and made the curriculum much more memorable; as cheesy as it sounds, I was having fun while learning. I would consider her as a mentor and she has also been a huge influence on why I decided to go into the teaching field.