When initially reviewing the Guided Practice Approach, my first reaction was how thorough a teacher must plan/prepare for each class. Where I feel that this approach would need to be conducive to how the particular group of students learn, it would be imperative to ensure this would truly benefit the class as a whole. The approach seems to focus highly on the usage of small groups and interaction amongst students, however I feel as though this may discourage students who feel less comfortable working with others. Within a traditional classroom, it would seem as though the more students present would create a greater risk of students "falling through the cracks" or being overlooked. For instance, if there are 5 groups (of 5 students), the ability to ensure each group is truly functioning as they should may become a problem. For this reason, it would be highly necessary to establish clear defined tasks for each students and accountability.
I would personally not be able to utilize this model due to the pacing and enrollment of the students I currently teach. With having 4 various subjects within each class, it would be difficult to have "like" activities for each students. In addition, having self-paced courses would assume that all students would be on the same activities at the same time. This is not at all the case and would discourage the use within my personal classroom. I feel as though I could however use this model when having student complete Exam Review activities IF they were to be at the same place (according to their pacing guides) or in like classes.
Like I mentioned previously, it would have to be a way to ensure accountability amongst students. Using the web or any online resources, there would have to be a specific task assigned to each student to ensure that time is used wisely. Each participant must be working towards one common goal of the group. For instance, one may research, another may create a brochure, with one creating a letter, a PowerPoint, etc. I think the ability to incorporate this into a Business or Marketing class would be wonderful and highly beneficial to students.
I think your first react is spot on! Not only because of the preparation of authentic and engaging content and problems this approach entails, but also because students often lack the critical skills needed to function and thrive in a team setting. This is something additional that needs to taught and planned for by the teacher and because this approach is seldom incorporated into the instructional materials provided by the county, it places an additional burden on the teacher. I've often used this approach in math and science (not surprising that it stems from the engineering field) and I've seen the "miracle" that can happen, but I've seen the "monster" all too often as well. We spend a lot of time at the beginning of the year on simple groups tasks and procedures for working in groups like the roles you mentioned, but again, it's time consuming and difficult to fit into a curriculum that is already jammed pack with content. But just as student need to learn how to function as a team member to tack problems beyond the scope of most individuals, they also need to learn how to work independently, which is why I think none of these approaches we've studied so far should dominate a classroom setting.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I'm glad you brought up the potential drawbacks because I think there is a growing expectation among admin that teachers should be using this approach more frequently, but fail to provide the support and time needed to effectively implement this approach well.
Heather and Shaun -
ReplyDeleteYou guys show how this method can actually be de-motivating for students and cause them to become less engaged. I also think that you bring up a huge issue: if teachers are not supported and trained in how to address the group process aspect of this model then they will not be able to help or support their students. While this can be a powerful model, if not done well then it can be disastrous. As Shaun points out, over-reliance on any one method is not beneficial and we have to really understand why we choose whatever models we choose to make sure they are a good match for the content, a good match for the students and a good match for ourselves as well.
I teach Career and Technical education courses that tend to lend themselves to this method periodically through the semester. We have curriculum guides that have been developed by DPI to match Revised Bloom's taxonomy objectives; and these activities are already included in the curriculum. Thus, my job is to teach the content, then select activities to help students comprehend the content. Therefore, this method works well because some of the leg work has been done for me. Additionally, since we are an applied science - teaching kids how to use the math, english, social studies and science content they get from other classes in the real world - decision making; making choices is at the very core of our curriculum.
ReplyDelete