How does the work covered in previous weeks compare with Richardson's article?
In week 1 looking at the Google generation and how people search for information made me think whether learning and teaching is affected by this. Do people learn from what they have found online or do they just absorb the facts? I think Richardson's paper shows that the learning depends on the attitude of the learner. However I think that for teaching this is important. If the information and knowledge is searchable students no longer need a teacher to impart the facts they need a teacher to facilitate learning and understanding.
In week 2 John Seely-Brown said great learning occurs in groups and from this I have thought that this can translate to deep learning. This was also shown with the participatory type of learning that Engstrom discussed whereby learning happened in a group and understanding was developed. Sfard talked of both acquisition and participation but did not say one type of learning was better than another just different. Manton talked of passive learning where students felt learning was done to them but I did not feel that Sfard was saying one type of learning was passive and one was active just that one was done alone and one in a group.
In week 4 we looked at many different definitions of learning and also explored situational learning; where learning occurs more sucessfully when it is in context. It was stated that learning cannot happen in a vacuum and it affected by what is happening around the person.
In week 5 we explored how different representations can influence learning. It is therefore important to think about how teaching can take this into account.
In week 8 we looked at learning design and I think it does help to plan the learning to ensure the teacher can consider all aspects of the lesson. By planning it is possible to make lessons more student centred.
In my own context as a learner I definately feel that as I have got older my perception of learning has changed to be one that I understand I have to take an acitvely role in. I also agree that as I have proceeded through my education I have gone through the heirarchy of what I perceive learning to be.
I think in my role as a teacher I do try to take a student centred approach but think it is often a harder and more demanding way to teach.
There are a few things in the paper I was surprised about:
- In my own experience I found that my teaching became much more student-centred as my experience increased and also after I had studied my teaching certificate.
- I thought that he could have explored more about the differences in disciplines. Is a more teacher centred approach taken when there are facts to be learned, for example in science based subjects.
- There was little said about the assessment process and I think that this is really important both to how students learn and teachers teach. If the assessment only requires regurgitation of facts that is usually what will be learned and what will be taught.
Students’ Approaches to Learning and Teachers’ Approaches to Teaching in Higher Education John T. E. Richardson
Educational Psychology
Vol. 25, Iss. 6, 2005