Cognitive Apprenticeship

I have always found the work/thoughts of both Dewey and Vygotsky to be both interesting and helpful aids to my own teaching philosophy and methodology. In fact, I am currently reading Dewey's book "Democracy and Education" which I would recommend to any future or practicing educator. Recently I have adopted Dewey's views of "learn by doing" as somewhat of a motto for my teaching methods. That is to say, in order for a student to fully grasp, understand, and retain the content; they must apply/use it in a real-world situation. This is one of the core traits of apprenticeship. Rather than dealing simply in abstracts, the student learns the content through application.

Many of my most meaningful learning experiences have been in the form of apprenticeship (outside of formal education as well as within). The very skills I teach today, I learned through apprenticeship at an after-school job rather than in a school setting. Even the student-teaching process which every educator must go through is somewhat of an apprenticeship program. The student is placed in the care of a practicing educator where he/she observes the professional and slowly takes on the same responsibility while being coached and aided by the teacher. Although some would disagree with me, I feel that the student-teaching experience prepared me more for teaching than any other experience in college. There are few things that can compete with one-on-one coaching with an expert who guides you through formal application of a trade or skill.

Until reading the articles and watching the lectures, I hadn't considered the application of apprenticeship in areas such as reading an math; which I found to be a very interesting concept. If this method works for teaching complex skills and trades, why can't it work in other areas. I feel this is especially novel in something like a math class where most of the concepts are so abstract and detached from real situations (in many cases).

Another thing I had never considered was an adaptation of apprenticeship to multi-media, distance ed., or online learning. To me, the purpose of the process was one-on-one contact with a professional. I definitely agree that there are some barriers to applying apprenticeship through multi-media and web tools. Where this method may work for things like math and reading, I think it would be less applicable in some of the situations I have mentioned earlier such as student teaching or learning trade (such as woodworking, sculpting, printing, etc.) These are skills where it is most helpful to have the professional to observe the student as he/she carries out the task and then guide-coach them along the way; something that would prove highly difficult when relying on multi-media. For instance; when I teach a student to use a table saw, I feel it is best to stand next to them while they perform the task. This is for several reasons. First of all, the student is more comfortable having supervision or a coach (especially if this is the very first time they have used such a dangerous tool). Secondly, I am there to stop any mistakes before they occur; preventing injury and hazards. Third, I can provide feedback as a mistake is being made or improper usage occurs. Instant feedback allows for immediate correction. The process can be repeated over and over and I can gauge the students progress and gradually allow the student to work on his/her own (scaffolding). I feel that this would be impossible if I were contacting them through something like elluminate.

However, I realize that replacing a classic apprenticeship to teach a trade through media was not what the articles had in mind. I am simply raising the idea that it multi-media would not suffice in all situations (although it could be perfectly sufficient in others).

PBL

I see many parallels and commonalities between this approach and the guided design approach. As I stated last week, I am a huge fan of guided design; so naturally I am a fan of this approach as well. However, I have to say that I am less-partial to this approach than the guided design approach. Unless I have misunderstood the model, this approach is not a simple project that students are allotted a week or two to work together on in groups, this is a long-term model. Essentially there is no formal lecture or instruction but the students teach themselves along the way of solving the problem which is presented. I believe this is a novel approach and is a great idea (given the proper situation) but I do feel there are times when formal instruction is necessary. Perhaps this is why I favor the guided design approach more-so than PBL.

In the case of guided design, the student is presented with content and then asked to apply it. In contrast, PBL says "you must determine the knowledge you need, learn it, then use it". This puts an enormous burden on the student, in my opinion. I believe this process is valuable in creating students who are self-directed and life-long learners but I think that we are overlooking that fact that students are....well, students. Though they are capable of teaching themselves under certain circumstances, it shouldn't be left to them to fully instruct themselves. I also agree that there is a barrier with sacrificing breadth for depth. It raises the question of which is better, depth or breadth. Perhaps a good balance would be to shoot for breadth in general and then go for depth on the most essential elements of the course. If I were to use this model, I would use formal lecture to cover the breadth of the subject and then give the students PBL activities to focus on the most important areas of the curriculum. I am sure are many who will disagree with me on that statement (because it defeats many of the purposes of PBL) but it is merely a suggestion or food for thought at least.

Cooperative learning

I have a love-hate relationship with this approach. I feel like it shares many of the same problems and barriers with the guided design approach. Group dynamics  and management of the groups can be the very thing that makes or breaks cooperative learning (from my experience). One thing I have learned is quite a bad idea is allowing students to choose their own groups. If this is done, you will definitely have groups which are homogeneous and many groups will have a greater advantage over the others. Again we face the problem of the students who are either unwilling to work with others or prefers to do all/none of the work. I was intrigued by the article that pointed out these types of students and categorized them as individuals such as constant pupils. These were definitely patterns and roles I have noticed in the past.

However, I think the cooperative learning method can be highly effective and useful if done properly. My first experience using this method produced less than desirable results, mainly because I let them get into groups and then I stood back and watched. Later on, I found that the more involved I became in selecting the groups and supervising the groups, the better results I received. I think there may be a misconception that this type of activity requires less work for the instructor, if anything (done properly) it should be more demanding.

Guided Design

Of all the approaches we have looked at so far; guided design, by far, is the one to which I am the most partial. This is due, in part, to my background in Tech. Ed. The guided design approach is one that Tech. Ed. both supports and uses frequently (although not in an online or distance ed. setting). This is a technique that is often found in technology education courses because we are firm believers that design and problem solving are two areas that deserve a great deal of attention. Not only does this approach allow the students to apply the knowledge, but to apply it in a real-world scenario. Answers to divergent problems are not solved by plugging equations or resorting to a one-size-fits-all solution. Divergent problems must be solved through design. Design is rarely done by a single person alone; but, by and large, is done by a group of individuals who all bring a diverse array of expertise and knowledge to the table. This is what guided design teaches and fosters.

 Aside from the obvious benefits of using this approach, it is also a break from monotonous lecture, worksheets, and reading. It is, in some cases, a chance for the students to roll up their sleeves, get their hands dirty, and use their new knowledge. This is a much better method to ensure retention of that knowledge (as opposed to relying on rote memorization, which has been proven to be ineffective). Technology education courses are often-times project based. In a project-based course, this approach is very practical. However; I feel it is both practical and applicable in many other, if not all other, areas as well.

 As pointed out in the courses readings, this approach is not without its faults and barriers. Though many students relish a chance for collaborative projects, there are just as many who would prefer to work alone. I, myself, was one of those students in high school. I preferred to work alone, not because I was not social, but because I wanted full control of the project and its outcome. I eventually grew out of this after entering the TDE program, mainly because I was forced to do so (which I feel was to my benefit). The student who wishes to work alone can benefit from collaborative work even if they do not enjoy the process. After all, our job as educators is not to entertain and make learning seem like recreation (although it helps) but to use sound and effective methods to convey content that will be retained by the mind of the student. Even if this approach is one that all students do not find to be the most enjoyable, that does not imply that it is not an effective approach.

Another thing pointed out in the readings was that guided design can also be used to teach students in a group to discern a division of labor and work professionally just as they would in a future career. Still, it goes without saying that there will be those situations where one or more students are happy to sit back and watch the others do the work. However, with proper classroom management and efforts by the instructor, this is a barrier that can be dissolved.