Week 2

This week our discussion has been centered around two different schools of thought interpretivism and objectivism.  The article we read for our discussions were helpful in pulling out some key pieces to each theory.  I found a chart located in the Willis article to really help me to see the difference between the two.

Interpretivist                                                                Objectivists

ID process is non-linear/chaotic                                  Process is sequential and linear

Top down/systematic planning                                    Reflective/Collaborative planning

Objectives emerge as you go                                       Objectives are stated at the start

Experts are crucial                                                       Experts are a myth

Personal understanding/meaningful                            Teaching of sub-skills/Sequencing

Formative Eval most important                                   Summative Eval is most important

Subjective data is most valuable                                 Objective data is most important- the more data the better.

                                                                                    Delivery of preselected knowledge

                                                                                    I could see myself relating to parts of each of these theories.  I think if I really look deeply I am probably more of an interpretivist, but I can see some piece of the objectivist point of view as essential as well.  A large part of our group's discussion was about the need/want for linear and sequential steps in the learning process.  Some of the teaching in learning in the classroom is achieved more successfully when we follow steps and a process.  Math comes to mind when I'm thinking of this.  There are certain concepts of skills that are necessary to learn in a sequencial order.  My question to myself and other teachers is how many skills need to be taught this way?  AND do all students need to be taught this way?  Can we step away from that order for some students and some skills?  Are we doing some students a disservice by making them sit through the teaching of all parts of a skill?  Some students come to me in 3rd grade already knowing how to do something and yet I have made them sit through the instruction for another time.  Why?

                                                                                    I am also a lover of data, BUT we are very good at my school at using the data we collect.  Especially in recent years.  I think data takes on a whole new meaning when you know you are going to dig into it and make changes to your teaching and programs based on what our students know.  I do think that I need to work a lot more on using formative data as I go along to inform my teaching.  How do I create and use assessments that are quick and informal that will help my students on  daily basis?  This is something I need to work on as I move forward.

                                                                                    I wonder too about the objective piece.  Do they need to be known from the start or can we develop them as we go along? We have discussed in our PD this year of starting with the end in mind- so clearly stated objectives, and then build your lesson around that.  I think there is something to be said about the flexibility to change and develop those objective along the way though.  Flexibility is key in the classroom.  We have to be able to change along the way based on what our students need from us.  I keep thinking in my head that I can combine the two theories for my own hybrid??  Not sure if that is an option or not..... but I feel like it's what I do on a daily basis :)

I can't seem to fix the format on this blog post..... I'll work on it.....