1.
Similarities or differences
between the theories/models? Do they share common foundations or principles?
The glaring similarity between the Personalized System of Instruction and the Audio Tutorial Approach is that most units are modeled toward mastery of specific objectives set forth by the designer or teacher. The learners have to be self guided and motivated in order to master the objectives and move on to the next section. Another similarity is that while these types of models do have a place in education, they are best suited for higher level education as they both seem to be difficult to facilitate in most K-12 public schools. They can both be very effective learning management systems if they are implemented with the right group of students who are highly motivated and self-directed.
The obvious difference is between the two models is that one uses a learning management system that is text based supplemented by additional materials and the other uses audio recordings supplemented by additional materials. Also, the Audio Tutorial Approach does allow for time when students and a teacher can meet to discuss face to face any issues that may be hindering their achievement of each objective. Likewise, the Audio Tutorial Approach creates a slightly more collaborative environment where students use jig-saw type activities to review and revise their understanding of the objectives.
Both systems are deeply rooted in common principles. The idea is that in both systems the more efficient, knowledgeable, skilled learner is not held "captive" because he/she has to wait for others to achieve or the teacher to allow them to move on. The models are set up to allow for self individualized instruction. Also, in my opinion, the systems are set up to overcome the fear of failure because you simply work to achieve before you can move on. The goal of each system is for the learner to achieve, and the learner must be motivated enough to continue to move forward even if it means re-learning and reviewing certain ideas a little bit longer.
2. Initial reactions to learning theories/models? Barriers to their use? Benefits to overcoming the barriers?
My initial reactions to both of these learning theories is that they will not work in a K-12 setting, especially at the middle school level. Then I realized that with the right students that aspects of these models could work well especially the Audio Tutorial Approach, which is very similar to the flipped model. If I asked students to listen/watch a recording of a short lecture such as this one then complete a set of tasks and a take quiz in class, the set up is very similar to the Audio Tutorial Approach where students listen, work, meet, assess, and move on.
The biggest barriers with both approaches at the K-12 level is that both models are designed for students who are self-motivated, and they require a lot of up front work that lacks the ability to build in differentiation. As a teacher, sometimes I have an idea of what I want to teach the next day, but my students needs may require re-teaching or me to go in different direction. The PSI and ATA models are very structured and do not allow for that type of flexibility. Likewise, I would probably have to add in additional motivating factors to get certain students to engage in either of these learning management systems.
However, if you are able to overcome the barriers, then most teachers would probably be able to teach many more students at a much more efficient pace. One teacher could teach many students at once that would allow for more students to enroll in the class. I'm still not sure how this would look at the K-12 level, but I know there are examples of this out there in today's classroom, but until I see a successful model that reaches all types of students, then I'm not convinced either of these models are best suited for K-12 classrooms.
3. Would you attempt to use any of these theories/models with the students you are currently teaching or hope to teach in the future? Why or why not? Could elements of the theories/models be modified so that they would work with your current/future students?
I do not see myself using these models to replace anything that I already do in my classroom. The increased need for high motivation and a strong work ethic are so important in each of these models that not all of my students would respond well to either model. However, I could see myself using both of these models to help my students review towards the end of the year in just about any subject or grade level. If they know the material, they review and complete the assessment to move onto to the next objective. I could mix in elements of the ATA models with the PSI models to increase collaboration and mastery of the objectives.
As I stated earlier, I could see how elements of the PSI and ATA models could be modified to work with my current students. I am in the process of flipping my 8th grade SS classroom, and I am using some of the same principles that each of these models use. For example, I have my students watch a video, perform a task in class to apply the information they learned, and then they are tested to see if they are ready to move on. It's the combination of motivational principles, self-guided work ethic, and objective based learning that makes ATA, PSI, and flipping very similar.
4. Since we're taking learning theories/models that were not necessarily created with the Web in mind & turning them into Web modules, what Web-based tools/resources could be leveraged to carry out these learning theories/models online? Please spend some time identifying tools and resources for this last point, as this background research should help you complete your projects more efficiently.
To transition these models to web-based modules, my favorite tool of all time, Wordpress, would be a great web-based tool to teach any content. There are so many plugins that allow you to manipulate the pages and posts within each blog that you would be able to create modules that students learn in, complete a task, and then are assessed before "unlocking" the next unit.
Some other great tools would be Google Sites, Edmodo, Glogster (for younger ages). Google sites would work very similarly to Wordpress and many other blogging or website building platforms. Edmodo is similar to Facebook and has plenty of tools that teachers could use to create a web-based learning environment that allows students to master objectives as they move throughout the online module. Glogster would be neat - and unique - to try and attempt to create an online module for a younger audience if you are modeling your module after PSI or ATA models. You could simply create multiple, linked glogsters that allow you set up a learning management system similar to that of a web quest. Students would only be allowed to move onto the next glog after completing a series of tasks and mastering the set objectives.
The glaring similarity between the Personalized System of Instruction and the Audio Tutorial Approach is that most units are modeled toward mastery of specific objectives set forth by the designer or teacher. The learners have to be self guided and motivated in order to master the objectives and move on to the next section. Another similarity is that while these types of models do have a place in education, they are best suited for higher level education as they both seem to be difficult to facilitate in most K-12 public schools. They can both be very effective learning management systems if they are implemented with the right group of students who are highly motivated and self-directed.
The obvious difference is between the two models is that one uses a learning management system that is text based supplemented by additional materials and the other uses audio recordings supplemented by additional materials. Also, the Audio Tutorial Approach does allow for time when students and a teacher can meet to discuss face to face any issues that may be hindering their achievement of each objective. Likewise, the Audio Tutorial Approach creates a slightly more collaborative environment where students use jig-saw type activities to review and revise their understanding of the objectives.
Both systems are deeply rooted in common principles. The idea is that in both systems the more efficient, knowledgeable, skilled learner is not held "captive" because he/she has to wait for others to achieve or the teacher to allow them to move on. The models are set up to allow for self individualized instruction. Also, in my opinion, the systems are set up to overcome the fear of failure because you simply work to achieve before you can move on. The goal of each system is for the learner to achieve, and the learner must be motivated enough to continue to move forward even if it means re-learning and reviewing certain ideas a little bit longer.
2. Initial reactions to learning theories/models? Barriers to their use? Benefits to overcoming the barriers?
My initial reactions to both of these learning theories is that they will not work in a K-12 setting, especially at the middle school level. Then I realized that with the right students that aspects of these models could work well especially the Audio Tutorial Approach, which is very similar to the flipped model. If I asked students to listen/watch a recording of a short lecture such as this one then complete a set of tasks and a take quiz in class, the set up is very similar to the Audio Tutorial Approach where students listen, work, meet, assess, and move on.
The biggest barriers with both approaches at the K-12 level is that both models are designed for students who are self-motivated, and they require a lot of up front work that lacks the ability to build in differentiation. As a teacher, sometimes I have an idea of what I want to teach the next day, but my students needs may require re-teaching or me to go in different direction. The PSI and ATA models are very structured and do not allow for that type of flexibility. Likewise, I would probably have to add in additional motivating factors to get certain students to engage in either of these learning management systems.
However, if you are able to overcome the barriers, then most teachers would probably be able to teach many more students at a much more efficient pace. One teacher could teach many students at once that would allow for more students to enroll in the class. I'm still not sure how this would look at the K-12 level, but I know there are examples of this out there in today's classroom, but until I see a successful model that reaches all types of students, then I'm not convinced either of these models are best suited for K-12 classrooms.
3. Would you attempt to use any of these theories/models with the students you are currently teaching or hope to teach in the future? Why or why not? Could elements of the theories/models be modified so that they would work with your current/future students?
I do not see myself using these models to replace anything that I already do in my classroom. The increased need for high motivation and a strong work ethic are so important in each of these models that not all of my students would respond well to either model. However, I could see myself using both of these models to help my students review towards the end of the year in just about any subject or grade level. If they know the material, they review and complete the assessment to move onto to the next objective. I could mix in elements of the ATA models with the PSI models to increase collaboration and mastery of the objectives.
As I stated earlier, I could see how elements of the PSI and ATA models could be modified to work with my current students. I am in the process of flipping my 8th grade SS classroom, and I am using some of the same principles that each of these models use. For example, I have my students watch a video, perform a task in class to apply the information they learned, and then they are tested to see if they are ready to move on. It's the combination of motivational principles, self-guided work ethic, and objective based learning that makes ATA, PSI, and flipping very similar.
4. Since we're taking learning theories/models that were not necessarily created with the Web in mind & turning them into Web modules, what Web-based tools/resources could be leveraged to carry out these learning theories/models online? Please spend some time identifying tools and resources for this last point, as this background research should help you complete your projects more efficiently.
To transition these models to web-based modules, my favorite tool of all time, Wordpress, would be a great web-based tool to teach any content. There are so many plugins that allow you to manipulate the pages and posts within each blog that you would be able to create modules that students learn in, complete a task, and then are assessed before "unlocking" the next unit.
Some other great tools would be Google Sites, Edmodo, Glogster (for younger ages). Google sites would work very similarly to Wordpress and many other blogging or website building platforms. Edmodo is similar to Facebook and has plenty of tools that teachers could use to create a web-based learning environment that allows students to master objectives as they move throughout the online module. Glogster would be neat - and unique - to try and attempt to create an online module for a younger audience if you are modeling your module after PSI or ATA models. You could simply create multiple, linked glogsters that allow you set up a learning management system similar to that of a web quest. Students would only be allowed to move onto the next glog after completing a series of tasks and mastering the set objectives.
What we have here is a failure to communicate...sorry, couldn't help myself. However, it is true because you did an excellent job conveying your points in regards to this unit. Your discussion of implementing, or rather, not implementing these models in your classroom were on point. The average student today lacks the intrinsic motivation and discipline to study in such a self-reliant manner. A great deal struggle with teacher led education in a structured classrom setting so asking them to function without the influence of lecture and instruction would be a death sentence. While some of the AT theory could be used as supplemental activities and material it would have to be used sparingly. I think there will always be a place for some of the mastery skills and A_T multimedia activities nothing takes the place of a solid classroom teachr to motivate, guide, and check for understanding of all students.
ReplyDeletethat was supposed to say, "what we *do not* have here..." The brackets made it dissappear. Cheesy anyway...
DeleteAgreed, good warnings on using self-paced instruction with younger learners. We've heard this over and over again when evaluating the state's virtual school programs--some students really can't manage self-pacing on their own without significant prompting and encouraging from teachers, parents, etc. Luke, I like your brief mention of audio-tutorial as similar to a flipped classroom approach. I think that's a nice comparison, and I can see that too--the use of self-paced modules at home, followed-up with small group work and application in the classroom, as with audio-tutorial, does sort of fit that flipped model. Nice catch.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that both of these models require the students to be self guided and motivated. I believe it could work in a K-12 setting if the students were slowly guided into the systems. I think students would have to gain the understanding and take ownership of their learning as well as their advancement. In a typical classroom, the teacher holds the data and instructs accordingly. With the PSI and AT models, students would have to have that understanding about where they are and the goals they should reach. The thing I like most about these models is the fact that the students get to move at their own pace. Again, I think younger students would have to be slowly guided into this type of system, but I can see benefits for those students who want to learn and are currently held back due to those few students who may not “get it.” I also think that the self guided and motivated characteristics would benefit the needed self-discipline to be college career ready. I hadn’t thought about your point that the models could help students overcome the fear of failure due to the self-paced nature of the models. I also think it would ease student frustrations or embarrassment of being one of the few that didn’t understand and the teacher drilling and re-teaching. With the PSI or AT everyone would be working independently on their own learning agenda.
ReplyDeleteI love the part of your statement about the necessity for high motivation and strong work ethic being necessary for this to be successful at such a young age. And yes, you and Robert both hit it on the head for me. Just from what I've reflected on and noticed since having my own children, the degree of hard work necessary in a classroom setting alone is tough; add in a self-paced course and it's a wrap. My 5yr old is a prime example. Although he does enjoy technology--for designing paper airplanes, watching C-130s, or anything dealing with military aviation online) he finds it challenging at times to focus in class. He completes his work even though he does not want to, but he takes issue with it and gets bored quickly. So unless his teachers keep his hands moving, he breaks down. So, I agree 1000% there.
ReplyDeleteThe other aspect is the the maturity level of the participants. I really believe there has to be a certain level of maturity to go along with the discipline and motivation in order to succeed with one...or both...of these models. Heck! My little one would be the one to find a way to pull up YouTube and find a Fat Albert (the Blue Angels' C-130) video...just because that is where his motivation is and comes from....airplanes and tinkering. The kid next to him could be the EXACT opposite and do well with PSI/AT.
Thanks for you post, Luke! And your response, Robert! ;-)
Kim