A teacher directed child centred classroom;
|
Whole Class Teaching.
Small Groups.
Individual Work.
|
Looks like
• The teacher giving time and encouragement to students in order to demonstrate their learning across curriculum areas.
– |
Sounds like
|
Feels like
|
Is direct teaching rote learning or can it be something else? What paradigm shift is required to enable teachers to develop strategies that foster Child Centred Learning with a large number of students in enquiry based classrooms?
Direct teaching and enquiry based learning need not be at opposite ends of the spectrum, effective classrooms reflect a variety of ways to organise learning opportunities for all students.
In reality, the majority of classroom activity is teacher directed. The extent of the direction will depend on the outcomes the teacher wishes to achieve. It is equally important for students to feel ownership of a task and therefore take on responsibility for their own learning. Initially, we feared that if we gave too many decision making opportunities to students about their learning, we may lose control over our teaching program. This did not happen as we remained in control of the learning program whilst at the same time giving students the chance to make guided decisions about their own learning opportunities. Direct teaching activities are an important and necessary part of good classroom practice, whether whole class or part of a group or individual activities. Meaningful learning in the classroom is a joint venture between the student and teacher.
Howard Gardner’s (1983) multiple intelligences (MI) theory has been a useful framework to help us understand that our students have different strengths and learn in different ways. MI theory includes the traditional academic intelligences of linguistic and logical mathematical intelligences as well as spatial, visual, musical, bodily kinaesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist intelligences.
Central to MI theory is that each intelligence has a different developmental trajectory and different ways of learning. This implies that students generally may engage higher order thinking and problem solving in an area of intellectual strength and only lower order thinking in an area of relative weakness. For example a student gifted in linguistic intelligence may produce a creative and original piece of writing but may struggle with a task that demands high-level spatial awareness.
Giving our students the opportunity to foster their curiosity and to develop their skills through a collection of guided choices e.g. art/craft drama, music etc. and teacher directed activities, was a powerful way to engage them in learning for understanding, whilst giving them opportunities to develop their multiple intelligences. We always ensured that any such choices were under our supervision, thus ensuring that students were engaged in activities that foster a deeper understanding.
Our classroom experience has shown us that when we combined our classes to include 50 students for a unit of work looking at ‘extinction’ (our planning is included in this article) our most effective strategies were those that took into account the skills, values and understandings we wanted our students to acquire. To achieve this we organised our classroom into;
Whole class teaching formed a very important part of our classroom practice. One example of this was ‘Tuning in’ as a whole class each morning, which helped to focus students on the tasks to be undertaken for the day or week. This was also an opportunity for students to share their work in progress or completed work to the whole class, as well as any interesting resources that they or we may have discovered.
Knowledge is constructed through our senses of, seeing, hearing and our emotional connection as well as touch, taste and smell. We found that when students are encouraged to work and learn together in small groups, a powerful way for them to develop their learning skills is using their senses. Groups were organised in a number of ways according to the unit of work being studied. We found that small groups were most effective when groups of mixed ability, ethnic and socio-economic, gender and age were given the opportunity to explore their ideas with others through dialogue and critical debate, as opposed to the transmission of knowledge in one direction from teacher to student. There is no doubt that teacher to student transmission of facts and ideas has its place, but it is only when students explore and confirm their ideas with others, that learning takes place.
An effective approach for us was to develop a ‘contract’ with students; this was a series of written questions organised on Bloom’s (1956) six levels for organising information. (See below).These questions were structured in such a way as to take into account the thinking of Howard Gardner’s MI theory as well as the hierarchy of research skills outlined by Bloom’s Taxonomy. Bloom & Krathwohl (1956). We always encouraged our students to use a range of media including writing, art and craft, music, drama and IT, to demonstrate their understanding. This allowed for student’s different s interest and abilities.
Bloom (1956), identified six levels, from the simple recall or recognition of facts, as the lowest level, through increasingly more complex and abstract mental levels, to the highest order which is classified as evaluation. Examples of verbs that represent intellectual activity on each level are listed below;
1. Knowledge: arrange, define, duplicate, label, list, memorize, name, order, recognize, relate, recall, repeat, reproduce, state.
2. Comprehension: classify, describe, discuss, explain, express, identify, indicate, locate, recognize, report, restate, review, select, translate.
3. Application: apply, choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, operate, practice, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write.
4. Analysis: analyse, appraise, calculate, categorize, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question, and test.
5. Synthesis: arrange, assemble, collect, compose, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, manage, organize, plan, prepare, propose, set up, and write.
6. Evaluation: appraise, argue, assess, attach, choose compare, defend estimate, judge, predict, rate, core, select, support, value, evaluate. (Bloom & Krathwohl. (1956).
Our evaluation of our students’ individual and group work was based on how well they demonstrated these understandings in their completed work. This included written, oral, graphic and drama presentations, as well as their own evaluation based on the student self-assessment rubrics.
Bloom, Benjamin S. & David R. Krathwohl. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York , Longmans.
Gardner, Howard (1983) Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, New York: Basic Books.
TOPICFeel good, feel great. The human body. |
SHARED VALUESSelf, family and others. Maintaining wellbeing, a healthy lifestyle, nutrition, fitness. |
PRINCIPLESIdentity and culture. Inclusivity, preparing for life (through change), relevance. |
KEY COMPETENCIESThinking and creativity. Relating to people. Making meaning. Living a healthy life. Learning sustainable practices. Using technology and media. |
Goals for Learning
|
|||
Overarching Goals.
Students will understand that:
|
|||
Learning Experiences that lead to Understanding
teachers’ and students’.
|
|||
Demonstrations of Successful Learning
Measure learning across all dimensions; multiple methods; use feedback; reflect on learning; express thought through writing, concept maps, rubrics, pictorial representations, oral presentations.
|
|||
Tuning InBrainstorm with the class the following question:
What do you know about wellbeing and good health?
Read Dr Dog story as Tuning In activity (Author Babette Cole. 1996)
Brainstorm with class what messages they think the author is giving in relation to well-being.
Ongoing Assessment
Focus on students’ ability to:
Ask the students to try not to just re-tell the story of Dr Dog
|
Finding Out, Sorting OutHow can we find out about how our bodies work?
Guiding questions:
What is inside my body?
Teacher directed: Lead a discussion on ways to look after our bodies related to what is inside our body and how it works.
Teacher directed: Explain the complex nature of how all the body parts work together. Tell students that to help us understand this complexity, we can look at ‘systems’ in the body.
Examples of body systems:
Ongoing Assessment· Display the students’ ‘bodies’ and use these representations as references for ongoing reflection.· Encourage oral presentations, technology (models etc.), visual artwork, graphs, maps, collage.· Have each group present their information about their specific body system to the class in the form of an oral presentation supported by a life-sized labelled poster/diagram, Power Point.· Explain to the groups the criteria that will be used to assess each group’s oral presentation. Suitable criteria include: using strong, clear voices, facing the audience, ensuring each person has equal turn to speak, agreeing on a time frame, making it interesting for the audience, referring to the poster/diagram to assist understanding, explaining how the system works.· Assess students’ oral presentations to the class of their research task, including their diagram/ body poster.· Assess how effectively the group explains the body system and how its parts work together.· Score 1-4 on each criterion. At the completion of each presentation, have the whole class assess the presentation using a rubric.
|
Investigate factors contributing to well beingFood Do we need more of some foods than others?
Teacher directed, ask the students:
Illustrative pictures. Ongoing Assessment
Assess students’ ability to:
How do we know what is in particular foods?
Teacher directed: Ask and discuss with students questions such as:
Investigate breakfast foods
Ensure students justify their choices when showing their graph to the class. Ongoing AssessmentAssess students’ ability to:
Describe the components of a balanced diet.
Teacher note: Ask students to refer to the Healthy Diet Pyramid and the information on the recommended number of serves per day in order to initiate a class discussion.
Pose these further questions:
Ongoing AssessmentAssess students’ ability to:
Plan a healthy breakfast or lunch for the class.
|
Culmination
|
Glossary
Overarching Goals: Goals which overshadow the whole topic.
Tuning In: Finding out what the students already know about the topic, as well as what they would like to find out in order to stimulate their interest and enthusiasm for the topic.
Brainstorm: group discussion and sharing of ideas.
Guiding Questions: questions related to the topic which promote thought as well as refining the investigation to be undertaken.
Graphic Organiser: Charts which help visually organise information (there are many examples, including Y charts, T charts, fish bones, placemats, concept maps, flow charts etc. on the internet)
Rubrics: Teacher or student generated charts based on the topic being studied to assist with self-assessment.
Formative Assessment: Teacher assessment, as well as student self-assessment which can be demonstratedthrough drama, oral presentations, written material, information technology, art and craft etc.
Summative Assessment: System and school based testing.
Culmination: The final part of the topic where students demonstrate their understandings using a variety of methods including drama, information technology, oral presentations, written material, art and craft etc.
ELLEN CORNISH
Ellen Cornish has had 33 years’ experience teaching in Tasmanian schools. She has taught in both primary and district high schools during that time. She has spent time in senior management roles within the school setting. Ellen has also held the positions of treasurer and president of the Early Childhood Educators of Tasmania Association. She has led many professional learning sessions for her colleagues and is skilled in the mentoring and training of pre-qualification teacher trainees, newly qualified teachers and teachers who experience difficulties and those re-entering the profession. Teaching in Korea helped to enrich her experience as an educator.
In March 2011the Mechai Viravaidya Foundation invited her to evaluate the leadership, curriculum, resources and teacher training and experience, at the Mechai Pattana Secondary School in north eastern Thailand. She was also asked to make recommendations for improvements to help bring the school up to the standard required to support the development of a teacher training institute.
She is skilled in providing a creative and challenging program where her students are encouraged to develop their own strengths as well as to take on board responsibility for their own learning and behaviour. She strongly believes that all children can reach their full potential by being given the appropriate guidance within an environment that is non-threatening and one which fosters self-belief.
She has expertise in the education of children with disabilities as well as those with challenging behaviour and their ability to function within the mainstream school.
One of her passions is to foster creativity in children. In order to facilitate this successfully she has regularly updated her skills by enrolling in professional learning courses. An example of this was a drawing course with the Art School, University of Tasmania.
Ellen has a Bachelor of Education, a Diploma of Teaching and is currently registered with the Teachers Registration Board of Tasmania, Australia.
Don W Jordan
Dr Don Jordan, D.Sc.Ed, is an experienced educator, having taught in primary schools in Tasmania, Australia.His perspective has been enriched by his work with disaffected students in the United Kingdom and with Bachelor of Education students in the Gaza Strip and working with curriculum developers and teachers on behalf of UNICEF in the Maldives.
In March 2011, Don was invited by the Mechai Viravaidya Foundation, to evaluate the leadership, curriculum, resources and teacher training and experience, at the Mechai Pattana Secondary School in north eastern Thailand, in preparation for it to become a demonstration school for the a proposed Teacher Training Institute.
Don has a particular interest in the philosophical and theoretical place of computers in primary classrooms in Tasmania, and their effect on students’ learning, behaviour and social development.
TOPICExtinction, Animals, Birds, Fish etc. |
SHARED VALUESCaring for our environment including all living creatures. Responsibility for the environment. |
PRINCIPLESSustainability of land, sea and air. Learning to create purposeful futures. Learning to act ethically. |
KEY COMPETENCIESThinking and creativity. Making meaning. Living a sustainable life. Learning sustainable practices. Using technology and media. |
Goals for Learning
|
|||
Overarching Goals.
Concepts: sustainability, extinction, eco-systems, biodiversity
Students will understand about:
|
|||
Learning Experiences that lead to Understanding
Rubrics: teachers’ and students’.
|
|||
Demonstrations of Successful Learning
Measure learning across all dimensions; multiple methods; use feedback; reflect on learning; express thought through writing, concept maps, rubrics, pictorial representations, oral presentations.
|
|||
Tuning In
Find and write the dictionary definitions for extinct, endangered and vulnerable. Brainstorm with the class the following question:
Does it matter if some animals become extinct? *(within the animal category we are including animals, birds, reptiles and fish)
Conduct an activity in groups of three to assess the students’ knowledge about extinction and sustainability.
Ongoing Assessment
Focus on students’ ability to:
|
|||
|
Finding Out, Sorting Out
How can we find out about the animals which are endangered of becoming extinct?
Guiding questions:
What do animals need to survive?
Teacher directed: Lead a discussion about what animals need to survive: (Whole class activity) Individual and group activities.
Ongoing Assessment
Assess students’ ability to:
|
|||
|
Culmination
|
|||
Glossary
Self-Assessment Rubric for Students
| 3 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
What have I learned about extinction and habitats? |
I enjoyed learning about extinction and habitats.
I would like to continue learning about extinction.
|
I sometimes liked learning about extinction and habitats and I think I have learned a little bit. | I don’t think that I learned anything about extinction and habitats. I was bored and I didn’t like the topic. |
|
How well did I participate in group work? |
I participated well in group work. I always did my share of the work and participated in class discussions.
|
I worked well most of the time. I did some of the work in the group and I thought about what I could share in class discussions.
|
I wasted time in the groups and I did not help much. I didn’t concentrate or try to think of things to share with the class. |
|
Was I able to answer the questions that were asked at the beginning of the unit? |
I was able to answer most / all of the questions. I thought about them during my work on the unit and answered them when I could.
|
I sometimes remembered the questions and answered one or two. The questions were difficult to answer. | I forgot about the questions and did not think about them again. |
|
Did I complete all the work of the unit?
|
I completed all the work for the unit as I was very interested in the topic | I completed most of the work and I will continue to finish it off for homework or when I have finishing off time in class.
|
I did not complete all the work and I did not try very hard. |
|
Have I used a number of ways to demonstrate my learning?
|
I have used a variety of art and craft materials to show what I now understand about extinction and habitats. I have given an oral presentation to the class about extinction and habitats. | I have made a model of a sustainable habitat to show what I think is important to help prevent the extinction of animals. | I drew a picture of a habitat. |
A Visit to the MaeChanWitayacom School: Inching Closer to
Student Centered Learning and Student Centered Teaching
by Peter J. Foley , Ed.D.
A visit to the MaeChan Witiacom School in Chiangrai at the end of November provided an opportunity to compare and contrast the visit I had made in early November to the Chiangmai Demonstration School.
The Chiangmai Demonstration school has 1, 356 students that include elementary and secondary schools , while the Mae Chan School has 2,488 just in the high school. Both schools have large numbers of students in classrooms. An average classroom has between 40 and 45 students in a class.
Demonstration schools throughout Thailand, known as Sathit schools, are very selective, with only the highest scoring students admitted. Demonstration Schools are expected to manifest excellent teaching models that the rest of Thailand’s teachers can learn from though visits to the Demonstration Schools. Amphur Schools are open to all whose elementary grades are high enough . Amphur schools are located in city centers and are of a higher caliber generally than rural schools. These smaller city schools attract higher performing students and generally, higher performing teachers. About 60% of the Mae Chan students go on to major public universities where at Chiangmai Demonstration School 100% or almost 100% of its graduates go on to major universities.
It was surprising therefore, that I did not find a vast difference in the teaching styles I observed this simply by standing outside the classrooms of both schools and listening to the teacher conduct classes. There is still a preponderance of teaching that relies on the teacher giving information and the students trying to soak up the information.
From the perspective of one who is an advocate for student centered learning, student centered teaching and a student centered classroom, I found the MaeChanWitiacom School more interesting than the Chiangmai Demonstration School on several counts. To be fair, I was unable to sit through a whole class with a regular teacher at both schools, so my information is gathered as the observations of as a casual observer. There was abundant evidence at the Ampur government school that a real effort was being made to incorporate student centered teaching practices. I observed some efforts in this direction at the Chiangmai Demonstration School but not on the scale of the MaeChan School
At Mae Chan School , I spent most of my time at the Mathematics building. There is no doubt that the math teachers at Mae Chan are aware and trying to apply the inquiry method in their teaching. There are math laboratories , for example, filled with “learning by doing” projects. Every room I passed had a definite theme. One room was for gifted math students, another was titled Pythagoras , another the Statistics Room.
Nevertheless, there was not enough evidence at either school that students are being made responsible for their own learning and that assessments of students are made on authentic performances as opposed to routine written exams that rarely test the true understanding of learning.
In order to recommend a school as a pathways school , that is , a school where other Thai teachers can learn student centered teaching methodologies, much more evidence of real student engagement in their own learning has to be in evidence. Only three schools to date have shown that promise: the Prasarnmit Demonstration School in Bangkok, The School for Life in Chiangmai, and the Mechai Pattana School in Buriram .
By Peter J. Foley, Ed.D.
Smack dab in the middle of ChiangmaiUniversity is a pot of gold in terms of talented teenagers. These teenagers study at the Chiangmai Demonstration School only a stone throw away from the Chiangmai University Faculty of Education. The school has 1,356 students , 80 teachers and 30 teacher assistants. Every year approximately 3,500 students take the entrance exam to be admitted to the Chiangmai Demonstration School ;only 240 are admitted. Those who attend this highly selective school , therefore, are the crème de la crème of the Northern Thai youth gifted brain pool.
It is little wonder that every year 100% or nearly 100% of these students go on to university. In addition, about a handful of their especially gifted students get scholarships to study overseas. Most of the graduating students take a few steps from their old high school and attend Chiangmai University, the premier Thai university in the North of Thailand.
I visited the Chiangmai Demonstration School on November 4th , a day full of sunshine and pleasant temperatures for which Chiangmai is noted in this beginning of the cool season. Ajaan Jum graciously showed me around the school. The school Director , Ajaan Patajan, kindly arranged for me to observe an English class of Matayom 2 ( 8th grade in the American system). A student teacher taught the class. This was the first time I had observed a student teacher inThailand. A stroke of luck since I got a first hand look at what currently was being taught to student teachers at Chiangmai University’s faculty of education and also by the regular teachers at the Chiangmai Demonstration School who advise the student teachers.
Twenty-two year old student teacher , Ms. Phachara, taught the class of 44 students. It was immediately apparent that she had what I call fire in the belly, meaning that she loved teaching and really wanted to be a teacher. I asked her if you thought about a different career besides teaching. “Oh no, I want to teach, that is what I really want to do.” she replied without a moment’s hesitation. Ajaan Bambi is her supervising teacher. It was obvious from the outset that there are good teacher training practices being taught to future teachers. There are also some disturbing continuations of traditional Thai rote teaching of language where students recite after the teacher in unison, sentence after sentence , word after word with little concern for real understanding.
Ms. Phachara, Student TeacherMs. Phachara, had planned her lesson well. She had organized a lesson in the conditional tense in four sections. In each section, she used what Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy refers to as learning domains. Ms. Phachara designed her lesson around a popular song by Beyonce. The song has a number of conditional sentences, such as, “if I were a boy”.
Once Ms. Phachara has gone over the meaning of the words in the song and isolated the conditional sentences for the students, she conducted a series of activities that involved analyzing , applying , understanding and remembering. The students were for the most part engaged and having fun learning.
What I found impressive was that about half way through the 50 minute period , Ms. Phachara divided up the class into four working groups. She gave each group sentences to each group to analyze and then apply by creating their own answers to questions raised in the song.
Once she handed out the sentences to the four groups, all the students suddenly broke out in animated discussions about the sentences they had been given. The noise level grew in the room ,yet the student teacher was unperturbed. Most student teachers in my experience would have been reluctant to let the class noise level increase to such a pitch, failing to note that this period of collaborative learning and application is when real learning , real understanding of the lesson is solidified.
Toward the end of the class period, she had groups of students writing on the black board and explaining their answers to the rest of the class. This class was not what observers dread the most: a class where the teacher lectures sleeping teen agers with no interaction with the students.
In sum, it was an impressive teacher performance given that this was a student teacher. The only drawback that I observed was a technique the student teacher used a couple of times and is still used in Thai schools of the teacher reciting word or sentence and then the class repeating in unison in dull and listless monotony. This is a throw back to a bygone era where the object of school was rote memorization with little regard for understanding.
Teachers come from all over Thailand come to observe good teaching practices at the Chiangmai Demonstration School. An area that perhaps can be explored is an assessment of how these teacher observations are structured and what is actually carried back by the observing teachers and used in their schools in their teaching.
เยี่ยมชมโรงเรียนสาธิตมหาวิยาลัยเชียงใหม่
โดย Peter J. Foley, Ed. D.
ใจกลางของมหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่เป็นแหล่งรวมของเหล่าวัยรุ่นผู้มีความสามารถ เด็กเหล่านี้คือนักเรียนของโรงเรียนสาธิตมหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่ ซึ่งอยู่ไม่ไกลจากคณะศึกษาศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่ โรงเรียนสาธิตมหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่ประกอบด้วยนักเรียน 1,356 คน ครู 80 คนและครูอัตราจ้าง 30 คน
ทุกๆปีจะมีจะมีเด็กราว 3,500 คนสอบเข้ามาเรียนที่นี่ และมีเพียง 240 คนที่ได้รับเลือก จากการคัดเลือกอย่างเข้มข้นเช่นนี้นักเรียนที่นี่จึงนับได้ว่าเป็นเด็กนักเรียนหัวกะทิในบรรดาเด็กหัวกะทิทั้งหมดทั่วภาคเหนือของไทย
ทุกปี ทั้งหมดหรือเกือบจะทั้งหมดของนักเรียนเหล่านี้เข้าเรียนต่อมหาวิทยาลัย หรือมีบางส่วนที่มีผลการเรียนยอดเยี่ยมได้รับทุนการศึกษาให้ไปศึกษาต่อต่างประเทศ ส่วนใหญ่เลือกเข้าในมหาวิยาลัยเชียงใหม่ มหาวิทยาลัยชั้นนำในภาคเหนือของประเทศไทย
ผู้เขียนมีโอกาสเข้าไปชมการเรียนการสอนที่โรงเรียนนี้เมื่อวันที่ 4 พฤศจิกายนที่ผ่านมา ได้รับความกรุณาจากอาจารย์จุ๋มเป็นผู้ดูแลในการเยี่ยมชมครั้งนั้น ผู้อำนวยการโรงเรียน อาจารย์ภัทรจารย์ให้ผู้เขียนได้มีโอกาสเข้าดูการเรียนภาษาอังกฤษของนักเรียนชั้นม. 2 (เกรด 8 เทียบกับระบบการศึกษาอเมริกา) ซึ่งสอนโดยครูฝึกสอน
นี่เป็นครั้งแรกที่ผู้เขียนได้มีโอกาสรู้จักกับครูฝึกสอน ถือเป็นโอกาสอันดีที่ผู้เขียนมีโอกาสได้รู้ว่าเดี๋ยวนี้ครูฝึกสอนเหล่านี้ได้รับการถ่ายทอดวิชาความรู้มาอย่างไร ทั้งจากทางคณะศึกษาศาสตร์มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่และจากอาจารย์ผู้สอนที่โรงเรียนสาธิตซึ่งเป็นที่ปรึกษา
ครูฝึกสอนอายุ 22 ปี คุณพัชรา รับผิดชอบสอนนักเรียนในชั้นซึ่งมีทั้งหมด 44 คน คุณพัชราเป็นคนประเภทที่ผู้เขียนเรียกว่าเป็นคนมีไฟ เธอมีความมุ่งมั่นตั้งใจอย่างแรงกล้าที่จะเป็นครู ในการพูดคุยกันครั้งหนึ่งผู้เขียนถามเธว่าเคยคิดจะทำงานอย่างอื่นที่ไม่ใช่ครูหรือไม่ เธอตอบกลับอย่างไม่ลังเลว่าไม่
อาจารย์แบมบี้เป็นอาจารย์ที่ปรึกษาของคุณพัชรา ในมุมมองของผู้เขียนเห็นว่าวิธีการถ่ายทอดความรู้ระหว่างครูและนักเรียนของที่นี่ทำได้ดี แม้ยังมีบางส่วนเป็นลักษณะการเรียนแบบท่องจำอันเป็นวิธีการเรียนการสอนภาษาต่างประเทศในประเทศไทยมาช้านาน ซึ่งเป็นที่น่ากังวลนิดหน่อยว่าตัวนักเรียนจะเข้าใจจริงๆสักแค่ไหน
คุณพัชรา ครูฝึกสอน
คุณพัชราเตรียมการสอนมาเป็นอย่างดี ในบทเรียนเรื่องประโยคเงื่อนไขทั้งสี่แบบ ในแต่ละแบบ เธอนำอนุกรมวิธานของบลูมมาปรับใช้ในการสอน คุณพัชราอธิบายบทเรียนนี้ผ่านเพลงฮิตของบียอนเซ่ “If I were a boy” (ถ้าฉันเป็นผู้ชาย) ซึ่งเนื้อเพลงมีประโยคเงื่อนไขหลายประโยคให้หยิบมาใช้เป็นตัวอย่างได้ รวมไปถึงชื่อเพลงเองด้วย
เมื่อจบการอธิบายความหมายคำคัพท์และแยกประโยคเงื่อนไขออกมาอธิบายแล้ว คุณพัชราจัดกิจกรรมการเรียนการสอนซึ่งมีทั้งการวิเคราะห์, การประยุกต์ใช้, ความเข้าใจและการจดจำ ซึ่งนักเรียนส่วนใหญ่ให้ความร่วมมือและเรียนรู้อย่างสนุกสนาน
สิ่งที่ผู้เขียนประทับใจคือ หลังคาบเรียน 50 นามีผ่านไปประมาณครึ่งทาง คุณพัชราแบ่งนักเรียนในชั้นออกเป็นสี่กลุ่มให้แต่ละกลุ่มสร้างคำถามของตัวเองในการตอบคำถามประโยคในเพลง
นักเรียนลงมือทำงานตามที่ได้รับมอบหมายทันที เสียงพูดคุยปรึกษาดังเซ็งแซ่ในห้องเรียน และคุณพัชราปล่อยให้มันเป็นเช่นนั้น จากประสบการณ์ของผู้เขียน ครูฝึกสอนส่วนใหญ่จะลังเลที่จะปล่อยให้มีการใช้เสียงดังในชั้นเรียน โดยลืมไปเด็กนักเรียนจะเกิดความเข้าใจในบทเรียนได้อย่างถ่องแท้โดยผ่านกระบวนการการเรียนรู้การทำงานเป็นกลุ่มและการมีส่วนร่วม
ก่อนหมดคาบ คุณพัชราให้แต่ละกลุ่มออกมาเขียนคำตอบของตนบนกระดานดำและอธิบายให้เพื่อนในชั้นฟัง ชั้นเรียนนี้ไม่มีบทบรรยายน่าเบื่อของครูกับเด็กหลับหลังห้องที่ผู้เขียนกลัวที่สุดปรากฏให้เห็น
โดยสรุปแล้วเป็นการสอนที่ประทับใจมาก ไม่น่าเชื่อว่าเป็นการสอนของครูฝึกสอน ข้อด้อยเดียวที่ผู้เขียนมองเห็นคือวิธีการที่ครูพูดประโยคตัวอย่างและนักเรียนพูดตาม เป็นภาพที่เราเคยเห็นมาตั้งแต่สมัยก่อน ที่การเรียนการสอนในโรงเรียนเน้นการท่องจำและนักเรียนมีความเข้าใจในเรื่องที่ตัวเองจำนั้นเพียงเล็กน้อย และยังคงมีให้เห็นในทั่วไปในชั้นเรียนของนักเรียนไทยในปัจจุบัน
ครูจากทั่วประเทศไทยมาที่โรงเรียนแห่งนี้เพื่อศึกษาเทกนิคการสอนจากโรงเรียนที่อาจอธิบายได้ว่าเป็นโรงเรียนต้นแบบด้านการพัฒนาครูและนำไปปรับใช้ที่โรงเรียนของตนเอง
GIVE THAI TEACHERS A BREAK
by Peter J. Foley, Ed.D.
Give Thai teachers good teacher training; a decent salary; and good working conditions. Above all give teachers credit and rewards for the work they are doing day in and day out with their students . Do this and Thailand will soar to the top of academic standing in Asia and the world instead of stagnating as evidenced from poor comparative scores of Thai students in math , science and English on the PISA exams.
Finland leads the world in academic standing. Singapore is a leader in Asia. They both attract students to become teachers who graduate in the upper third of their college graduating classes. They meet all the criteria above. Thailand has the money to do this too. Thailand actually spends more of its GDP on education than Singapore does. It is how the money is spent that is the touchstone.
Here is how the some of the money should be spent:
To get an idea of the kind of material that the M.O.E. might post on its web site I would like our readers to refer to the blog of one of Asia’s finest teacher trainers from Singapore, Professor Yeap Ban Har. Ban Har also serves on the SCLT board of editors. I observed Professor Yeap in Singapore giving a teacher training class. Professor Yeap personified inspiring, elegant teaching. Please see: http://banhar.blogspot.com
Thai teachers are responsible for educating the next generation of Thais. Too often , far too often, we all forget just how important these educators are. The short film , “Teddy’s Story” is a poignant reminder of just how important teacher can and should be. Please see: “Teddy’s Story”.ให้ครูไทยได้พักบ้าง
โดย Peter J. Foley, Ed.D.
ให้ครูไทยได้รับการฝึกอบรมอย่างเหมาะสม เงินเดือนที่เหมาะสมและสภาพการทำงานที่ดี สำคัญที่สุดให้กำลังใจและรางวัลสำหรับสิ่งที่พวกเขาทำเป็นประจำร่วมกับเด็กนักเรียน เพื่อให้ประเทศไทยได้ยกระดับสถานะทางการศึกษาของประเทศขึ้นมาทั้งในระดับภูมิภาคและเวทีโลกแทนการหยุดอยู่กับที่ เห็นได้จากคะแนนที่ตกต่ำในวิชาคณิตศาสตร์,วิทยาศาสตร์และภาษาอังกฤษของผลสอบวัดผลความสามารถทางวิชาการของนักเรียนไทยที่ผ่านมา
ฟินแลนด์เป็นประเทศที่มีสถานภาพทางการศึกษาเป็นอันดับหนึ่งของโลก ส่วนสิงคโปร์เป็นอันดับหนึ่งในเอเชีย ทั้งสองประเทศ ชักชวนนักศึกษาที่จบจากสถาบันการศึกษาชั้นแนวหน้าของประเทศให้เข้ามาเป็นครู ประเทศไทยเองก็สามารถทำเช่นนั้นได้เช่นกัน ในความเป็นจริง ไทยจัดสรรเงินงบประมาณให้กับการศึกษามากกว่าสิงคโปร์ สิ่งสำคัญคือเราจะใช้เงินนั้นอย่างไรให้เกิดประโยชน์ที่สุด
นี่เป็นตัวอย่างวิธีที่เราอาจลงทุน:
1. กำหนดเงินเดือนขั้นต่ำของครูให้อยู่ที่ 15,000 บาท เงินเดือนครูปัจจุบันส่วนมากจะอยู่ที่ 8,000 บาท ซึ่งเป็นจำนวนเงินที่ไม่ดึงดูดใจเอาเสียเลยสำหรับผู้จบการศึกษาในระดับปริญญา
2. คัดเลือกครูดีเด่นของแต่ละจังหวัดและส่งพวกเขาไปที่โรงเรียนแห่งอื่นๆช่วงสุดสัปดาห์เพื่อให้ช่วยเหลืออาจารย์ท่านอื่นๆในโรงเรียนที่ขาดแคลนหรือต้องการการพัฒนา โดยเฉพาะในพื้นที่ห่างไกล
3. เลือกครูดีเด่นระดับประถมและมัธยมจากครูดีเด่นทุกจังหวัดเป็นตัวแทนครูทั่วประเทศในแต่ละปี
4. ปรับปรุงเว็บไซต์ของกระทรวงศึกษาธิการให้เป็นศูนย์กลางแหล่งข้อมูลสำหรับครู ทั้งการอบรมครูและการรับสมัครในตำแหน่งต่างๆ ในเว็บไซต์ควรบรรจุข้อมูลพื้นฐานสำหรับโครงงานและแผนการสอนสำหรับนักเรียนแต่ละระดับชั้นที่สอดคล้องกับหลักสูตรการเรียนการสอน ยังอาจมีแหล่งข้อมูลสำหรับสื่อมัลติมีเดียการสอนของครูตัวอย่างเพื่อใช้เป็นแนวทางในการสอน
5. ปรับปรุงระบบการศึกษาของโรงเรียนที่ขาดแคลน
6. ปรับปรุงระบบการศึกษาของไทยให้เป็นระบบเดียวกับอเมริกา เพื่อดึงดูดนักศึกษาจบใหม่ที่มีผลการเรียนดี ยกเว้นค่าเล่าเรียนให้แก่นักศึกษาฝึกสอนที่ปฏิบัติหน้าที่ในพื้นที่ห่างไกลเป็นเวลาสามปี
สำหรับแนวคิดของเนื้อหาที่กระทรวงศึกษาธิการควรจะโพสต์ลงในเว็บไซต์ผู้เขียนอยากจะให้ผู้อ่านลองเข้าไปศึกษาในเว็บบล็อกของผู้อบรมการฝึกสอนที่ดีที่สุดคนหนึ่งของเอเชียจากสิงคโปร์ ที่ http://banhar.blogspot.com ศาสตราจารย์ Yeap Ban Har ศาตราจารย์เป็นหนึ่งในคณะบรรณาธิการของ SCLT ที่ผู้เขียนคิดว่าเขามีความสามารถมาก
ครูมีบทบาทเป็นผู้รับผิดชอบการศึกษาของประเทศชาติในอนาคต บ่อยครั้ง บ่อยครั้งมากที่เราทั้งหมดลืมเลือนความสำคัญของผู้ให้การศึกษาไป หนังสั้นเรื่อง “Teddy’s Story” ได้ให้ตัวอย่างไว้อย่างแสบสันต์ของความสำคัญที่ครูสามารถและควรเป็น อยากให้ลองดูกัน
Inquiry into Science Inquiry
By John R. Stiles, Ph.D.
Science Education consultant
Bangkok
jsscience@yahoo.com
For at least the past three decades, what is now known as “Science Inquiry” has been the prevailing paradigm among science educators. However, acceptance from classroom science teachers, administrators, and university science instructors has been slow.
The U. S. National Science Education Standards first drafted in 1996 included science inquiry as one of its standards, underscoring the idea that inquiry is not only important in school science, but also fundamental:
“The Standards call for more than “science as process,” in which students learn such skills as observing, inferring, and experimenting. Inquiry is central to science learning. When engaging in inquiry, students describe objects and events, ask questions, construct explanations, test those explanations against current scientific knowledge, and communicate their ideas to others. They identify their assumptions, use critical and logical thinking, and consider alternative explanations. In this way, students actively develop their understanding of science by combining scientific knowledge with reasoning and thinking skills.
“The importance of inquiry does not imply that all teachers should pursue a single approach to teaching science. Just as inquiry has many different facets, so teachers need to use many different strategies to develop the understandings and abilities described in the Standards” (National Academies Press).
While traditional science textbooks have devoted but a single chapter to science inquiry, generally the introductory chapter (“What do scientists do?”), it was not necessarily encouraged as an integrated part of classroom science beyond the first week. As the research base on science teaching and learning has evolved, even that introduction was revised, as such widely accepted, but mythological notions such as “The” Scientific Method needed to be re-thought (McComas, 1996). As early as the 1980’s, scientists also recognized that school science did not accurately reflect what science is, and joined science educators’ call for a redefining of teaching and learning. F. James Rutherford, science education pioneer, noted that teachers, particularly those in elementary levels, needed to be “re-educated” about the nature of science, and that science textbooks should be removed from the elementary schools because they “get in the way of good science instruction” (Rutherford, 1987). Rutherford echoed the position of other prominent science educators, such as Robert Yager, who in 1988 scolded school science instruction for rarely permitting students to investigate authentic scientific problems (Clough, 2000).
As science education research dramatically increased throughout the end of the 20th century, more and more, educators realized that school science was not reflecting the nature of science, which informs science education about what science is and how it works (Clough, 2000). Textbooks attempted to change their format to assimilate the shifting paradigm but with varying degrees of success. In short, the nature of science is not something easily read about, but rather something that needs to be experienced. As Colburn and Clough (1997) noted that in textbook science, “students are rarely mentally engaged in a meaningful manner.” Indeed, as Nobel prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman (1985) concluded after being asked to review a physics text, there was “no science” in it, “only memorization.”
Because of this shift in thinking about how and why school science needed to be more thoughtful regarding science teaching and learning, an evolution began of what classroom instruction should look like. Along with the development of the “Learning Cycle” strategy by Robert Karplus (1972), science educators gradually came to a consensus regarding what the research says about “science inquiry,” galvanized in five identified and widely recognized “Essential Features” (National Academy of Sciences, 2000). These five features and a short summary of each are as follows:
The Essential Features are not necessarily required for all science instruction, nor are all five required in each investigation. However, science educators encourage teachers to use all five features at some point in their school year. Depending on how comfortable teachers and their students are with science inquiry, and the experience that both have had using science inquiry, there will be a wide range of science inquiry actually used in each classroom, and at different levels. The goal is to engage in scientific inquiry as often as possible at all levels of instruction when practical.
As in any endeavor, it is not enough to simply read about science inquiry and be able to implement it any more than it is possible to compose a song by reading a passage in a music book. Science inquiry, to be done correctly and effectively, takes time and requires practice, taking small steps. Some commercial science kits are available, such as FOSS (Full Option Science Systems), which are made to be used with an inquiry approach, and comes with teacher guides and videos that instruct how to set-up for investigations.
Also important is to understand what misconceptions teachers have about science inqiry. Here are just a few:
Answering rhetorical or simple yes-no types of questions does not require critical thinking skills.
Although important, facts support the development of conceptual knowledge, but cannot, in isolation, possibly lead to understanding.
While these skills are necessary, they alone do not result in student understanding of scientific concepts.
Surprising to many science teachers, there is no such thing as the scientific method.
While scientists use many of these steps, they are not essential in science discovery.
Scientific discoveries occur using a variety of approaches, including accidental
discoveries.
While using manipulatives or allowing students to independently explore are important
aspects of science investigation, they alone are insufficient for deep conceptual
understanding.
These and other myths of science inquiry teaching and learning often inhibit deep student
understanding of science concepts and content, as well as give a misrepresentation as to
what science is and what scientists do.
Thailand’s Science Standards English Version drafted in 2008 (B.E. 2551) include references to scientific inquiry in school science. Specifically, Standard Sc 8.1 states: “The student should be able to use the scientific process and scientific mind in investigation, solve problems, know that most natural phenomena have definite patterns explainable and verifiable within the limitations of data and instrumentation during the period of investigation, understand that science, technology and environment are interrelated” (Institute for the Promotion of teaching Science and Technology [IPST], 2008).
Although inquiry is not explicitly described, it is implied in the standard. When reviewing the indicators for Nature of Science in the Thai science standards (all grade levels), many of the Essential Features of Inquiry are present, such as:
This year and next, Thailand is undergoing further review of its standards and benchmarks, as are many other countries. An outside team of science, math and technology experts from The U.S., U.K. and Australia will review and make recommendations to a team of educators from IPST. After gathering feedback from Thai teachers and administrators, a final revision will be made and recommendations sent to the Ministry of Education for approval sometime in mid-2012 (B.E. 2555).
References
Clough, M.P. (2000). The nature of science: Understanding how the game is played. EBSCO Clearinghouse; Sep/Oct, Vol 74 (1): 13-17. ISSN: 0009-8655. Accession number: 3537010, Professional Development Collection.
Colburn, A. & Clough, M.P. (1997). Implementing the Learning Cycle. The Science Teacher, 64 (5): 30-33.
Feynman, Richard P. (1985). Surely you’re joking Mr. Feynman! (Adventures of a curious character). New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Institute for the Promotion of teaching Science and Technology (2008). The Basic Education Core Curriculum B.E. 2551; Science.
Karplus, R. (1972). SCIS: Three guidelines for elementary school science. Science Activities, 8 (1): 47-49.
McComas, W. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know…School Science & Mathematics, 96 (January) 10pp.
National Academy of Sciences (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
National Academy of Sciences (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
The following letter was submitted to letters to the editor of The Nation newspaper. The letter was not published.
Is it possible the Nation’s editors like criticism flowing only one way?
To the editors:
Reading your editorial in the Nation , the reader is compelled to ask: does the writer really care about Thai school children dying on the vine? There is no mention of the huge disparity in wealth and educational resources between Bangkok and the rest of the nation. There is no mention that Thai students in the private and demonstration schools of Bangkok are not dying on the vine. There is no mention of positive steps that can be taken in order to make a more level playing field in terms of education and opportunity in Thailand.
Instead, the editorial states that the quality of teachers and other problems have “their roots in politics.” At this point the editorial itself turns into a political diatribe, slyly mentioning that since Thaksin became prime minister in 2001 there has been a crippling discontinuity in education policy. Nowhere is there mention of the coup , mention of the Abhisit administration, or mention of the 1997 economic disaster that occurred during the Democratic Party watch. Education Minister Woravat Auapinyaul is damned with faint praise and we are told he may lose his job.
It appears disingenuous ,too, to write that the failure to spot and develop good talent in education is a puzzle.Thailand is harnessed with a rigid hierarchical system where seniority rules the roost. The Ministry of Education is no exception, nor are the local public schools. Therefore, youthful talent is often suppressed by superiors, not nurtured . This is a cultural obstruction, not a political one.
The last straw for me was the mention of the tablet PC as a political gimmick. The tired old argument that the “educational mechanisms” aren’t ready for them is raised. Again , the editorial misses the real point. The children are ready for the tablet PC. This is the digital age. Thai children are ready. Thai youth are ready. Give them a chance. Please!
Peter J. Foley, Ed.D.
http://www.SCLThailand.org
So, Why Not Give Computer Tablets to All Thai Students?
How can giving a tablet computer filled with educational software to help a child learn to read and do their numbers be wrong? How can it be bad pedagogy? Yet, there has been an avalanche criticism in the Thai press ever since the Pheu Thai Party announced the Yingluck government was initially spending three billion baht in 2012 to hand out tablet PCs to every Thai child attending grade 1.
Respected educators like Dilaka Lathapipat, Ph.D. have voiced objection to the plan in his column “Chalk Talk” in the The Nation September 12, 2011 edition. Dr. Dilaka cited a study he co-authored of the damage to students’ PISA test scores when they are from the student cohort that use computers to play games. Other educators have been even more forceful in opposing the plan. The Nation posted an article on July 11, 2011 entitled: “Top Academics Oppose Computer Tablets Plan”. The article cited Maitree Inprasitaha, dean of education at Khon Kaen University and Chainarong Indharameesup of Boyden Global Executive Search as against the distribution of the Tablet PCs to Thai school children. Professor Maitree specifically referred to a lack of e-books and learning software in her objections. In another article in The Nation dated September 3, 2011, Veena Thoopkrajae sums up her argument in her title: “ Tablets Cannot Cure the Cancer in Thai Education.”
The devil of course is in the details. And herein lie many of the opposition’s a priori arguments.
First, no one in the Yingluck government said the Tablet PC would be a cure all for Thai education.
Next, let’s take the major, more serious arguments against giving the tablets to the children one by one and examine their validity.
Let’s start with the arguments that include no high speed internet access to the rural areas; lack of e-books and educational software, lack of ability to prevent kids from planning computer games that are not educational; and a no one to fix or replace the tablets once they are distributed.
Critics appear to have forgotten the basic principle that when there is a need in the market place ,ingenuity and energy are created to make the new product or service. In the middle of September the Forth Corporation announced the first Thai made educational tablet computer priced at 3,000 baht—under the Chinese market price. The spokesman for the company, Mr. Sawat, said the company was motivated to create this lost cost tablet in order to compete for the sudden huge demand for a tablet PC as a result of the one child one tablet PC policy. Moreover, the announcement stated that controls on the tablet PC this Thai company created ensure that only appropriate content can be used. The Forth Corporation spokesman also said that,” 800,000 tablets at 3,000 baht each could jumpstart Thai-language content such as eBooks and learning games.” Imagine the cost savings when students have an opportunity to download many school books for a fraction of the price that is now being spent on hard cover books.
Having a Thai made tablet PC is a game changer too in that the repair of tablets can be done in Thailand, and repair contracts can be made between the Thai government and the Thai manufactures.
Ah, but the nay sayers shout: what about corruption. How are you going to prevent corruption? But that is a question the Thais must answer across the board. It is patently unfair to argue that there is corruption in Thai politics and government and therefore a particular program that benefits children should not go forward. I argue that at least every Thai child will suddenly have a valuable resource in hand, unlike many corrupt Thai government projects in the past that have been bridges and roads to nowhere.
Some critics remind us that the computer and learning software is only a tool not a solution. Indeed, and what a tool! This tool is revolutionizing the way business is done throughout the world and is essential to learn for the modern day workforce. What a gift to Thai children to get started learning this essential digital tool from grade one!
Nay sayers forget too that political and social pressure are how change happens. Giving rural youth and their parents access to a computer will produce tremendous pressure to make broad band access throughout the Kingdom a reality. My argument is that this program will be a catalyst to make changes so necessary if Thailand is to be competitive in the digital age of the 21st century, including the development of educational software for Thai children, the broadening of wide band internet access to rural areas and the training of teachers in computer applications.
In sum, the big pay off will be that Thais will learn from the onset of their schooling how to use the digital tools, tools that already are essential to possess for a competitive work force. In addition, having access to powerful software packages that will help student master basic skills in language and math holds the promise of not only of helping to raise Thai children’s mediocre international based test scores ( the PISA tests) but also narrowing the learning opportunity gap between the rich and the poor. The children of the rich , concentrated in Bangkok , already have a computer or computer access and internet access. What giving a tablet PC to every child along with learning software does is to make the playing field of learning opportunities more level for the rural poor.
I agree that there is much work to be done to make the Tablet PC program a success. What I find interesting is that critics , including some of my fellow educators, fail to see the flip side of the coin. If we introduce the exciting world of digital learning to Thais just starting school they will not grow up thinking that gaming and computers are synonymous. The nay-sayers counter argument assumes that students will be able to load such games in their computer. It also assumes that students will even be allowed to load such games.
Perhaps the most logical argument of the contrarians is that not enough research and planning has gone into making the tablet PC program for children to ensure success. However, many of these objectors have been studying this problem for years and still have not given us a cogent plan.
Let us get the process started. Give the computers to the children. Trust Thai ingenuity. Let Thai corporations like Forth solve the problems that arise. Learn by doing. Trust Thai teachers to rise to the challenge of the digital age. Stop standing guard for the status quo. Take risks. Work to give all Thais access to authentic learning.
By Peter J. Foley, Ed.D. http://www.SCLThailand.org
