1. Similarities, Differences, Common Foundations.
In Unit III, we studied four more theories of instruction: Goal-Based Scenarios (GBS), Anchored Instruction (AI), the STAR Legacy Model, and the MOST Environment. The common element of each of these is that students are learning skills of some sort in some contextual environment of real-world tasks or scenarios. All of them emphasize “learn by doing” approaches1. The idea is that the learning in context will generate more interest in the students and enable them to see the relevance of what they are learning.
The models we learned accomplish this relevance and context in very slightly different ways. GBS provides a “cover story” that sets the stage for that to be learned, creating the need for what is to be learned. The student then proceeds through activities related to completing the goals with resources and feedback provided along the way. Students learn that it’s okay to make mistakes and that failures are something from which we can learn. But as Schank notes, if a student does not care about the information, or does not see why he/she needs it, then they probably won’t learn anything from their failure.2 AI will include generative and cooperative learning activities with the instruction situated (anchored) in “engaging, problem-rich environments that allow sustained exploration by students”.3 The goal here is to enable students to become independent thinkers and learners rather than simply be able to successfully do drill-type problems or retrieve simple knowledge facts. The STAR Legacy model encompasses learning cycles organized around successive challenges of increasing difficulty. A flow-chart visualization is used to show the student where he/she is in the cycle and how the activities fit together. Here, as in GBS, students learn that revision and back-tracking are a natural part of learning.4 Finally, while the MOST Environment model specifically targets development of literacy in children, it still does so in the context of a meaningful story.
2. My Initial Reactions / Barriers to Their Use
I have to admit that I struggled with seeing how I could apply this to my own teaching. Were I in a different setting, without the “confines” of an Advanced Placement curriculum to teach with very strict skills and knowledge that must be known by the students, then yes, utilizing any one of these models could bring a “breath of fresh air” to mathematics education. To be able to teach elementary or middle school mathematics in the context of something like the Jasper series or the STAR Legacy challenges would be so much more engaging to the students than what we tend to see now in schools. I don’t think anyone can deny that. But maybe I’m just too far removed from elementary or middle school teaching to see the possibilities. (Any thoughts from those teachers out there?)
I think one obstacle for some schools might be the technology required to utilize some of these models. All are very technology, multi-media driven. Many schools might not have the computer availability.
3. Implementation with My Students
Reading about the emphasis of each of these four models on “relevance”, I was reminded of that “dreaded” question that every math teacher hears ... “How are we ever going to use this?”! I think these models answer that! As I noted above, I don’t know if I could easily implement any of these with my AP students. Maybe after the AP Exam when we have time to do “extra learning”. I very well could see a place for these in that context. And no doubt the students would love it. But of course, a concern would be the time required to fully develop a model of one of these types into a rich experience for the students.
Another use I could see for models such as these are in Summer “math camps” or enrichment opportunities. The latter, especially, is something we do at NCSSM in our Distance Learning and Extended Programs department. I would love the opportunity to take a topic and develop a module in one of these veins that could be used by teachers throughout the state. But again, the development time is a concern.
4. Web-Based Tools
I very much could see any one of these models manifested in a web module such as those we develop in this course. Should collaboration across the miles be necessary, Elluminate, Adobe Connect, or FreeScreenSharing.com, or Google could be utilized for the sharing and collaboration on work. Otherwise, I foresee integration of movie clips (either self-made with Camtasia or similar software, or You Tube), voice threads, reference websites for the content to be learned, online quiz platforms (such as WebAssign or QuizStar4Teachers.org), etc. Basically, a very rich, inter-active multi-media environment, one that will engage the students and draw them in.
Citations:
1. Nowakowski, Alan. “Goal-Based Scenarios: A New Approach to Professional Education”, Page 4.
2. Schank, Roger C., Berman, Tamara R., and Macpherson, Kimberli A., “Learning by Doing”, Page 173.
3. The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt, “The Jasper Experiment: An Exploration of Issues in Learning and Instructional Design”, Page 65.
4. Schwartz, Daniel L., Lin, Xiaodong, Brophy, Sean, and Bransford, John D., “Toward the Development of Flexibly Adaptive Instructional Designs”, Page 191.
