Observations_of_a_Classroom

Observation/reflection My reflections are based on my observations of an art lesson of year 7 students and their teacher who facilitated a practical 90 minute lesson (Appendix). My reflections draw on the theories of Piaget and Vogotsky to offer possible explanations for the actions observed during the class. I will attempt to validate teacher and student actions and interactions as part of a larger educational developmental milieu. Piagets theory provides a frame of reference by which the teacher can conceptualise the behaviours of students and plan educational activities consistent with their development (Wadsworth, 1973). Piaget’s theory recognizes the traditional goals of education, but does not agree with all the traditional methods. (Kamii, 1983). Children construct their own knowledge by giving meaning to the people and places and things in their world. Piaget said ‘Construction is superior to instruction’ (Travers, Elliot & Kratochwill, 1993). Vygotsky states that children learn best when they are doing work themselves and creating their own understanding as opposed to being given an explanation by adults. Vygotsky has the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as central to his theory. It is explained as the distance between the most difficult task a child can do alone and the most difficult task a child can do with help from peers and teachers (Mooney, 2000). My observations are consistent with Piagetian principles and compliment Vygotsky’s theory. The normal open interaction of students, discussions between the teacher and groups of students allows students to interact in valuable ways. Group work allows children to coordinate different points of view, and to compare outcomes (Wadsworth, 1973). The group I observed demonstrated the view of the child from a Vygotskyian perspective of a social child. The sharing of ideas and the social interaction created a climate where ideas flowed and if a group member got stuck, discussion amongst the group took place and through their use of language and socialization they were able to continue with the given task. Although Vygotsky and Piaget share similar cognitive developmental philosophies they differ when considering the social aspect as a developmental tool (Fraser, 2006). Piaget’s views of the egocentric child who constructs knowledge in isolation from the social group and without the support of adults would be in question in the class I observed. The student conversations covered a variety of topics from social networks, extracurricular activities and local gossip. The common thread was that conversation starters were related to the themed topics of the task (Appendix). Students discovered new aspects about group members and were able to contribute about topics they had an interest in or involved themselves. I noticed that not all students were of the same cognitive and developmental level. Piaget’s theory states that there are four stages of cognitive development (Travers, Elliot & Kratochwill, 1993). Given that this is a year 7 class and therefore a group of 13 year old students they should, according to Piaget, fall into the formal operational stage of 11 years and up. This stage includes abstract thinking which not all the students exhibited. A number of the students were in the concrete operational stage which enabled them to classify objects according to tangible features but not in an abstract realm. Most groups exhibited the ability to arrange items into groups and subgroups based on the given themes (Szarkowicz, 2006) and therefore chose pictures that represented real people demonstrating or displaying the intended intention or idea. One group in particular used abstract images to convey their themed ideas, and although not all students in the group where operating at stage 4 of Piaget’s theory, this task progressed their abstract development. They were able to talk about ideas, reason to gain clarity and make individual selections (Szarkowicz, 2006). My observation of the lesson was that the teacher had used scaffolding techniques to structure her lesson. These included the use of language and moving the students learning from the known to the unknown. Vygotsky documented, in his sociocultural theory, the use of language, scaffolding and the zone of proximal development and how it will impact and positively affect a child’s development (Szarkowicz, 2006). The teacher’s intention was to support the student by allowing self discovery. I observed that a few of the students did not engage fully with the task and became distracted causing minor disruption to the group resulting in teacher intervention. The lesson was structured so as to give the students every opportunity for success. The teacher scafolded the lesson by: * Asking questions to make students think about a problem in a new way * Offering resources which enabled completion of the task. * Prompting students to try a new or different approach. * Gave clues and hints when sitting with a group. * Talking through a problem or task with a student. * Showing students how to complete the task. * Was aware of and catered for multiple intelligences of students. However, the scaffolding technique must be more than lesson deep to have its full impact, a suggestions would be to use prior lessons to engage thinking about the themed topics, including the use of abstract thought. Previous knowledge of student’s ability is vital in order to provide assistance and support. This includes developmental needs, specific syndromes, social level and medical disorders. This previous knowledge allows classroom tasks to be designed to allow for student success and individual development. Humans use tools (Physical and mental) to create new tools. For Vygoysky, one of the main aims of education is to help children acquire tools of their culture. By teaching children how to use mental tools children master their own behaviour, gain independence and reach a higher developmental level (Roopnarine & Johnson, 2009). This forms part of the scaffolding done prior to the lesson by the teacher. According to Vygotsky, learning and teaching leads to higher order mental function. This includes mediated perception, focused attention, deliberate memory and logical thinking (Roopnarine JL, Johnson JE, 2009). The students were given clear instructions at the beginning of the lesson including a period for questions to clarify the task. This successful strategy allowed students to formulate a rational approach as they did not have to guess the “why, what and how” aspects of the task. The teacher used effective communication techniques by speaking clearly, having examples to show the students and wrote the instructions on the board. She also focused on 2 students who had attention disorders and asked them to repeat certain instructions. Resources were provided for the students to complete the task. The logistical resources (scissors, glue and paper) where safe and appropriate, however the magazines did not provide enough choice and variation. I felt that they should have provided a wider range of options. Scaffolding helps children make a transition from assisted to independent performance. This is a gradual transition requiring reinforcement by designing and following a plan, providing and withdrawing appropriate amounts of assistance (Wood, Bruner, Ross, 1976). Information scaffolding is about delivering manageable learning chunks for the student to assimilate and then action (Snowman, Dobozy, Scevak, Bryer, Bartlett, & Biehler, 2009). The teacher used a record keeping technique to track individual students. This was used to inform the teachers own practice as well as to share with colleagues. Record keeping was in the form of anecdotal notes and observable skills. This is indicative of Vygotsky’s theory of learning development (Szarkowicz, 2006). This class participated in a small group activity, also known as cooperative learning. According to Piaget, cooperative learning methods increase student achievement more than traditional instructional methods (Slavin, 1983). Most groups produced detailed collages representing all group members. It was evident that some students who proudly displayed their work at the end of the lesson had achieved more than they thought they would. A few students made fun of the finished product and ridiculed the people represented in the collage. These children did not engage fully in the activity and closed themselves off from the group, not allowing for peer assistance, therefore not gaining an understanding of the group. These students, according to the theorists have not yet reached the cognitive threshold allowing them to advance (Hallinger, Leithwood & Murphy, 1993). The developmental perspective held by Vygotsky on cooperative learning is that interaction among children around appropriate tasks increases their mastery of critical concepts or skills (Vygotsky, 1978). Cooperative learning uses cooperative task structures in which students are required or encouraged to work with one another. In the lesson each group member was given a subtask within the group task allowing for cognitive development as required by each individual, without impeding the development of the other group members. Through the facilitation of taxonomies at an individual cognitive level teaching becomes personalized as opposed to teaching to the masses and therefore to the lowest common denominator . By utilizing the information – processing approach, the teacher designed the lesson around meaningful learning which teaches the students to learn more effectively (Snowman, Dobozy, Scevak, Bryer, Bartlett, & Biehler, 2009). The constructivist learning theory as documented by Piaget and Vygotsky complimented the lesson and provided students with a hands on activity. This provided the opportunity to experiment and manipulate objects of the world, and attempt to make real world connections. Constructivist theory attempts to help the student understand the world, not to construct their own (Hein, 1991) The lesson I observed was a learning opportunity for the students because the teacher understands the significance of childhood, the laws of development, the structure of child’s thought and the mechanisms of social life. This according to Piaget opens the world of the child to the teacher (Wood, 1998). In my rationalization of this learning experience I found that learning involves language and is a social activity. Learning is contextual in that we learn in relationship to what else we know. This lesson succeeded in trying to get students achieve their potential, problem solving under adult guidance, learning from their peers and developing new cognitive skills. Motivation is the key to learning (Hein, 1991). When facilitating a learning experience the mentor needs to focus on 2 core objectives. Moving the student towards achieving learning outcomes, which are curriculum based and educational goals which advance cognitive development (Snowman, et al 2009). References Fraser, S. (2006). Authentic childhood: Experiencing Reggio Emilia in the classroom (2nd ed). Toronto, Ontario: Thomson Nelson. Hallinger, P., Leithwood, K., & Murphy, J. (1993). Cognitive perspectives on educational leadership. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Hein, G. E. (1991). The museum and the needs of young people. In Proceedings from the International Committee of Museum Educators Conference. Jerusalem, Israel. Lesley College, Massachusetts. Kamii, C. (1983). Pedagogical principles derived from Piaget’s theory: Relevance for educational practice. In Piaget in the classroom. New York, NY: Basic, 1973. Mooney, C. G. (2000). An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget & Vygotsky. St Paul, MN: Red Leaf Press. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Developmental and motivational perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, 58, 1161-1167 Snowman, Dobozy, Scevak, Bryer, Bartlett, & Biehler, (2009). Psychology applied to teaching. Melbourne, Victoria: John Wiley & Sons. Roopnarine, J. L., & Johnson, J. E. (2009). Approaches to early childhood education. New Jersey Columbus, Ohio: Pearson. Szarkowicz, D. (2006). Observations and reflections in childhood. Melbourne, Victoria: Thomson Social Science Press. Travers, J.F., Elliot, S.N., & Kratochwill, T.R. (1993). Educational Psychology: Effective teaching, Effective learning. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown and Benchmark Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wadsworth, B. J. (1973). Piaget for the classroom teacher. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc. Wood, D. (1998). How children think and learn (2nd ed). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.