Week 4: Planning

1. EY4106SUBJECT PEDAGOGICS 1:TECHNOLOGY WOODUnit 3 – Week 4:Planning Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology Lecturer/Teacher: Mr. Joseph Lyster Teaching Assistant 1: Mr. Jonathan Spillane Teaching Assistant 2: Mr. James O’Halloran Academic Year 2011: Spring Semester Technical Support: Mr. Joe Murray Notes prepared by: Mr. Joseph Lyster

2. EY4106 Curriculum & Aims/Objectives: Tyler’ Curriculum Design Process Model Stenhouse’s Four-Processes of Schooling Tyler’s Curriculum Design Objectives Model Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development Bloom’s Taxonomy Kolb's Model of Experiential Learning Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

3. EY4106 Curriculum Pedagogy: Tyler’s Model Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

4. EY4106 Curriculum Pedagogy: Pedagogical reasons: allows certain types of learning to take place: active learning, promote student responsibility Ethical reasons: allows all to be treated equality etc… Allows important concepts/principles/procedures from subject to be explored Inducts students into subject matter Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

6. Instruction– transmission of knowledge e.g. the events of history, the Periodic Table…

7. Initiation into the culture and values of society – often through the ‘hidden curriculum’.

8. Induction – into thought processes of the various disciplines e.g. thinking like a scientist, technologist, geographer etc.Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

10. Instruction– transmission of knowledge e.g. evolution of wood practices, building construction etc…

11. Initiation into the culture and values of society – often through the ‘hidden curriculum’ i.e. What type of work Bob the Builder does…realism.

12. Induction – into thought processes of the various disciplines e.g. thinking like a technologist, carpenter, construction worker, engineer, architect,etc.Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

14. Such closely formulated statements of intent are termed objectives.

15. Educational theorists and psychologists have largely concluded that there are three main psychological domains to be addressed when formulating statements of intent as follows:Affective Cognitive Psychomotor Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

16. EY4106 Aims and Objectives: Tyler’s Model Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

18. Bloom and his fellow workers have not produced a psychomotor classification, though others have attempted to provide one.

19. By means of such classifications Bloom hopes to promote greater clarity in thinking about behavioural objectives, a more exact language for communicating about objectives and a more effective means of evaluating objectives so classified.Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

22. symbolic statements and vice versa'

25. Because emphasis is place on reaching a point of ‘creation’ this it is reasonable to suggest that this taxonomy is closely relation to technological activity.Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

28. EY4106 Some Factors Influencing the Development of Aims/Objectives Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

29. EY4106 Motivational Needs: Maslow's Theory of Hierarchical Needs Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

31. The paper highlights aspects significant to engineering education such as the way in which students like to learn and how students can be reached through teaching and learning.

32. The dimensions of teaching and learning styles shown identify a range of preferred learning styles that can be achieved by a range of corresponding teaching styles. Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

34. The dialectic processes can be identified in the studies of Felder and Silverman (1988) and Prince (2004) along with Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) theory on the zone of proximal development (ZPD).

36. Kolb’s theory is significant in terms of how is pulls together core elements similar to that of collaborative and problem based learning.

37. Research shows that Kolb’s theory has been adapted to related disciplines such as architecture, design and engineering education.Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

39. Itwas found that the new active-engagement methods resulted in a higher percentage understanding among students than with previous and traditional instruction methods of learning.

40. A study by McCarthy and Anderson (2000) further supports this finding stating that students of active learning methods retained more information than those of traditional methods.Active-engagement vs. traditional instruction (Prince, 2004) Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

42. For example; a descriptive theory of learning reflects knowledge naturally constructed from experience where as a prescriptive theory of learning reflects knowledge constructed in a conditioned learning environment as directed by an instructor (Richardson, 1996).

43. Constructivist approach to learning involves the mindful and effortful involvement of the learner in the processes of knowledge and skill acquisition interacting with the environment by constructing knowledge through social interaction, negotiation and cooperation (De Corte, 2000).

44. It is often referred to as an active learning model (Prince, 2004).

45. Advanced cognitive constructivist theories produced by theorists such as Vygotsky (1978), Piaget (1989), Bruner (1977) and Kolb (1984) outline various approaches to cognitive constructivist learning (see appendix 1.4.1). Vygotsky added that: “As meaning-making is a dialogic and dialectic process mediated through language, individuals construct knowledge when they engage socially in talk and activity about shared problems or tasks.” (Vygotsky, 1978) Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

48. Stimulus and response can be introduced to the constructivist learning environment provided adequate support structures are in place to develop appropriate use (Dillenbourg, 2002).

49. Research indicates that teacher facilitation of group learning results in a better use of resources by students.

50. Collaboration can be influenced anticipatively, by structuringthe collaborative process in order to favour the emergence of productive interactions, or retroactively, by regulatinginteractions, as tutors do.

51. These two approaches are complementaryDepartment of Design & Manufacturing Technology

53. Educational psychologists have long been interested in the potential of collaborative learning activities to produce high-level learning (Voletet al, 2008). However, the nature of group work in schools is a complex phenomenon (Hanham & McCormick, 2008).

54. In the context of group interactions, high-level cognitive processing can refer to elaborations, speculations, justifications, inferences, drawing relations, asking thought-provoking questions and negotiation; all assumed to contribute to the co-construction of knowledge.

55. In contrast, low-level cognitive processing can refer to sharing information, exchanging ideas, clarifying understanding, or providing definitions without evidence of transformation or integration with own mental representations (Voletet al, 2008). Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

57. A recent study for science by Gillies and Khan (2008) reflected the positive impact of collaborative learning commenting that: “Teaching students to engage critically and constructively with each other’s ideas, challenge and counter-challenge proposals, and discuss alternative propositions before reaching agreement are important if students are to talk and reason effectively together and when students were taught to talk and reason together and apply those skills in the study of science they made greater gains in measures of individual reasoning than students who have not had such teaching.” (Gillies & Khan, 2008) Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

59. Cooperative learning methods improve problem-solving strategies because students are confronted with different interpretations of the given situation (Bruner, 1985).

60. Vygotsky (1978) commented that students perform on a higher intellectual level in a collaborative setting. Ghaith (2000) highlighted the assessment of collaborative learning commenting that:“Cooperative activities which use student learning groups to promote students' active involvement in their own learning, "can be used to facilitate alternative assessment given that it provides opportunities for continuous improvement and possibilities for assessing individual and group outcomes in a supportive and stress-reduced environment” (Ghaith, 2002) Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology

61. EY4106 A Suggested Approach to Construction Studies Pedagogy: Influential Factors Department of Design & Manufacturing Technology