Over on the Teacher Magazine forums, they’re talking about learning styles.
It seems that the learning styles debate didn’t penetrate very deeply. Or, to be more realistic and more charitable, that it has a long way to go.
Here are some snippets from the discussion:
“As a special education teacher, I am constantly frustrated in professional development. I chose the profession of teaching because I require conversation, movement and relevancy to learn. I need concrete examples and activities that involve practicing the skill. I sit through powerpoint presentations for 3 hours or more at a time where I am talked at about concepts, such as, “multi-modal learning”, “differentiating instruction” and “universal design.” It takes every bone in my body to not stand up during the weeks of inservice prior to day one and shout “practice what you preach.”"
That commenter sounds fairly… inflexible, perhaps like a child who insists on eating hot dogs and only hot dogs for every meal.
The conclusion of the learning styles video made it clear that good teaching – which doesn’t include 3 hours of PowerPoint viewing – is what matters. The issue in that comment isn’t learning styles, it’s bad teaching.
Why he/she doesn’t stand up and question it is beyond me. Go for it, it’ll make your school better.
The commenter continues:
“I cannot sit for extended amounts of time. 30 minutes for a TV show is difficult for me, a 3 hour inservice is like torture.”
3 hours of PowerPoint is about 170 minutes too many – I’m with you there – but is sitting through a 30-minute sitcom difficult? Really? Thank God the commenter isn’t in the military – he’d likely shoot up the platoon 5 minutes into encampment out of sheer boredom.
The hardship of it all!
Professor Willingham jumped into the [short] debate, but no one seemed to care. Another commenter says:
“Shuler’s [the first commenter that I quoted above] response implies the use of verbal and kinesthetic learning styles, plus opportunities to try out what s/he has learned (guided practice?).”
From what I’ve read on Jim Horn’s blog, “education profiteering” is an epidemic. How I missed that Rethuglican boat is beyond me. I guess I’m overdue.
My idea? A ‘learning styles’ Kool-Aid type drink mix. Apparently the stuff is out there, with thousands of gallons consumed daily, so why not slap a label on it and profit, profit, profit? See ya in Tahiti, suckers!
The final comment [at the time I'm writing this post] is a decent one:
“I agree that a lot of Professional Development does not engage teachers in the way they think they like to learn. I always do a debrief with teachers when they return from a conference (sometimes ridiculously short) but the biggest reason, for the prod [prod = "professional development," apparently] not being successful tends to link to their mental set. The teachers went to prod that they were either encouraged to go to or that was something close to what they thought they were looking for. As a result of all the concerns, we put in a committee that helps vet all the professional development in our school and helps find opportunities that relate directly to the teacher’s needs. Teachers now seem to be putting up with a different approach to their learning style if the topic relates directly to their need or interest.
One resource that our teachers use is, at the moment, a noncommercial site http://www.educatorsprofessionaldevelopment.com which lists prod from around the world and helps them see the myriad of opportunities that exist.”
Apparently some teachers don’t think that sitting for 30 minutes is cruel and unusual punishment.
The point of it all? Good teaching, good communication, a good attitude and good follow-up/analysis goes a long way toward good professional development.
This is why I like to use the phrase “common sense” re: this debate.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Stephen Downes 09.05.08 at 11:37 am
> Apparently some teachers don’t think that sitting for 30 minutes is cruel and unusual punishment.
And some do, as this discussion makes obviously clear. And unless learning-style-sceptics can offer an explanation of this, and a way of dealing with it (that doesn’t involve simply calling those people names) then people will be hard-pressed to take their scepticism seriously.
Stephen Downes 09.05.08 at 11:46 am
> The conclusion of the learning styles video made it clear that good teaching – which doesn’t include 3 hours of PowerPoint viewing – is what matters.
OK, first of all, the conclusion of the video doesn’t make this clear at all. All the conclusion states is that teachers need not adjust their teaching for learning styles.
Indeed, if you look at the reviews of the learning styles literature – such as this one http://www.lsda.org.uk/files/PDF/1543.pdf – you see comments like this:
“as Lave and Wenger (1991, 100) have argued, the most fundamental problems of education are not pedagogical. Above all, they have to do with the ways in which the community of adults reproduces itself, with the places that newcomers can or cannot find in such communities, and with relations that can or cannot be established between these newcomers and the cultural and political life of the community.”
And secondly, the author of the video has actually disavowed the conclusion. He writes:
“I get the sense that you’re concluding that I’m claiming every child and every classroom can be taught in exactly the same manner–a conclusion you could fairly draw from the clause in the last sentence of the video “good teaching is good teaching.” let me withdraw that and note that teachers should, as best they can, account for students interests, motivations, and so on.”
http://www.downes.ca/post/45687
Matthew K. Tabor 09.05.08 at 4:04 pm
Stephen,
This might be the first time in months that you’ve left more than one comment in a thread. Usually you’re a cut and run guy.
Unless the woman with anxiety over sitting for 30 minutes has a medical justification that I don’t know about – this might be the case, I don’t know – then it’s a simpler task for her to gird her loins and sit still than it is to recreate a PD session for her comfort/entertainment.
I believe in entitlement a bit less strongly than you do. Assuming there isn’t a legitimate reason for her dissatisfaction with committing half an hour, I think the teacher is immature and selfish.
Please, for the sake of my already-troubled public education system, stay in Canada.
Educator 06.22.10 at 5:11 pm
Teachers professional development
Professional development is important, but sometimes those conferences are a joke. Usually, it’s a ton of information delivered in a monotone that will put you to sleep. Impossible to actually learn anything. There are a few in which you do in fact learn something and those times usually involve more interaction and life. Education has become merely powerpoint-reading people at the front of a room full of sleepy students. We need more teachers that take the time to get the students involved (at any and every level of education).