From: Rachel Lucks
Email: rlucks@udel.edu
Course: Educ390; Instructional Strategies and Reflective Practices
College: University of Delaware
Instructor: Eugene Matusov
ClassWeb: http://ematusov.soe.udel.edu/EDUC390.99F
Date: 12/16/99
Time: 1:48:57 AM
Remote Name: 205.188.199.34
There are many differences between Constructivist Teaching and Direct Instruction. Some educators tend to use one method over the other, while others combine the two. As a future teacher, it is important to know and understand both of these teaching methods. It is also crucial to find which method works best for particular subjects. My goal in this project is to find out what actual teachers feel about these two approaches and how they use them in their own classroom.
Constructivism: Learner-Centered Instruction
In Constructivist Teaching learners construct their own understanding rather than having it delivered or transmitted to them. Learners use their own experiences to construct understandings that make sense to them. New learning depends on prior understanding and is interpreted in the context of current understanding, not first as isolated information that is later related to existing knowledge.
Learning is enhanced by social interaction. Social interaction in constructivist lessons encourage students to verbalize their thinking and refine their understandings by comparing them with those of others.
An important part of Constructivism are authentic learning tasks. They promote meaningful learning. Authentic tasks are classroom learning activities that require understanding similar to thinking encountered outside the classroom. Many abstract ideas can be made more realistic by embedding them in authentic tasks.
Constructivist learning activity lessons focus on explanations and answers to problems or questions. The explanations and answers come from learners, not from the teacher, and derive from content representations and social interaction. The teacher helps students construct knowledge by guiding the social interaction and providing content representation.
Constructivist lessons face students with a question that serves as a focus for the lesson. Students are active, both in their groups and in whole-class discussion. Students are given autonomy and control to work on their own. Students develop understandings that make sense to them. Students also acquire understandings that can be applied to the everyday world. Constructivist lessons are intrinsically motivating because they stimulate curiosity, keep learners actively involved, autonomous and controlling of what they learn. This also increases motivation which results in children learning more.
Teachers must know when to intervene to guide the lesson in the direction of the content goal. The also need to know when to provide additional representations of the topic, like when children are having a lot of trouble on a topic. It is very important to have proper timing on when to bring the lesson to closure.
One way to make constructivist teaching more effective is by providing students opportunities to verbalize and share the ideas they are constructing. Group work involves students working together in a group small enough so that everyone can participate on a task that has been clearly assigned. The purpose of group work is to provide opportunities for each student to become actively involved in the thinking task at hand which increases their learning.
Teacher’s were surveyed from New York, Delaware, and Maryland to compare their feelings on teaching. They were asked:
What is your opinion on constructivist teaching and why?
Benefits to Constructivism
*Constructivism is great in the special education inclusion class. It lends itself to higher order thinking and cooperative learning strategies. It enhances relevance.
*I prefer child-centered activity if the class can handle the responsibility and are clear on learning objectives. I think we all learn by doing.
*Constructivist teachers must be very organized and well thought out. It is good learning for kids.
*I feel that there is a lot of benefit to this form.
*It can be used in math productively. It is a great tool in kindergarten for developmental learning.
Limitations to Constructivism
*Constructivist teaching does NOT belong in the special education self-contained class, as most of these students lack the strategies to think critically.
*Constructivist teaching is a lot of work for teachers.
*Constructivist teaching is not effective all on its own. Children need modeling and examples to learn effectively.
*Constructivism is not good when you have to worry about standards.
*I have not used a Constructivist approach, but I assume it is similar to Whole Language. If it is, I would not be in favor of using it because the approach seems to be hit or miss. How can a teacher be expected to meet the needs of the individual students. This seems to be an approach which has students in one class on many different levels of instruction at the same time. I would not think phonics would be an emphasis in this approach. Both of my own children learned to read phonetically, and they are very good readers. When they would come to an unknown word, they would decode the word and continue reading. They had the necessary skills to be successful in Reading and other subjects.
What subjects do you prefer to teach constructively and why? Please give examples on how you teach constructively.
*Science: give students brain teasers or questions that require prior knowledge to solve. Social Studies: units on war, social concerns, exploration.
*I like teaching reading constructively- e.g.. buddy reading, peer responding. I also use it in writing when we do peer-conferencing. I also have taught science and social studies comparatively.
*I try to use both (constructivist and direct instruction) approaches in my instruction. Because children learn in different ways, I don’t feel it is appropriate to use just one approach in any area of instruction. Math is a good example where both are used. Teacher gives instruction, and then the children are given time to explore/problem solve on their own.
*Constructive teaching is good for science and math concepts so that children can visualize and deduce on their own.
I conclude from the teacher’s responses that Math, Science, Social Studies, Reading, and Writing can all be taught constructively.
Direct Instruction: Teacher-Centered Strategies
Direct Instruction assigns a central role to the teacher in explaining, modeling, and providing opportunities for practice with feedback. The goals are understanding, logic behind skills; automaticity, skills are over learned to the point that they are used with little mental effort; and transfer, something learned at one time is applied later in another setting.
Characteristics of direct instruction include the teacher’s classroom management is especially effective and the rate of student interruptive behaviors is very low. The teacher maintains a strong academic focus and uses available instructional time intensively to initiate and facilitate students’ learning activities. The teacher ensures that as many students as possible achieve good learning progress by carefully choosing appropriate tasks, clearly presenting subject-matter information and solution strategies. Continuously diagnosing each student’s learning progress and difficulties allows teachers to provide effective help through remedial instruction.
Direct instruction is very efficient when specific content and skills are the teacher’s primary goals. The central role of the teacher’s modeling of attitudes, skills, and behaviors is one of the most powerful vehicles available for teaching these kinds of attitudes and skills. Procedural skills have a specific set of operations or procedures. They can be illustrated with a wide variety of examples and are developed with practice.
Planning for skills instruction includes the process of task analysis. The teacher specifies the terminal behavior, identifies prerequisite skills, sequences subskills, and diagnoses students. The teacher must also provide multiple opportunities for student practice and feedback.
Students often have different learning needs. Children have diversity in background knowledge which effects what they learn. To help these students, peer tutoring is effective. More able students can work with other students on specific skills. Strategically designed cooperative learning groups in which some members know and can explain missing skills or concepts is also helpful. If the teacher needs to re-teach skills, enrichment activities are useful for students who already know the concept. Technology, such as computer programs, also can target specific concepts and skills. Those programs can help children without taking away from class time.
The skills model is arranged along a continuum of decreasing teacher control. The first phase is the introduction. The primary focus is for students to learn about the skill, why it is important, and when it’s used and how it’s applied. The teacher verbally introduces the skill. The second phase is the explanation and modeling. The mechanics and subcomponents of the skill are explained. The teacher models the skill and explains how it works. Third is the teacher-directed practice. Students try the skill out under teacher supervision. The teacher leads guided practice to further explain the skill and ensure high success rates. Effective feedback increases student motivation by making the process of skill acquisition more efficient. The feedback is immediate, specific, provides corrective information for the learner, and has a positive emotional tone. The forth phase is independent practice. The primary focus is on the students practicing the skill on their own. The teacher monitors practice to identify problem areas. Finally the fifth stage is extended practice. Automaticity and long-term retention and transfer is the primary focus. The teacher assigns homework and conducts long-term reviews.
Below are teachers responses to questions about direct instruction:
What is your opinion on direct instruction and why?
Benefits to Direct Instruction
*Direct instruction is invaluable in the special education room. Students need the teacher directed methods and the repetition, modeling, and monitoring that are the core of direct instruction.
*This is my fourth year teaching in a Direct Instruction school. In my 25 years as a teacher, this is the best form of instruction our children have received. I like Direct Instruction so much because the students are grouped according to ability levels. This allows the faster students to move at a faster, more challenging pace. My fifth graders are finishing Reading Mastery VI in a week. They are gifted readers and enjoy the challenge of more difficult material. I worked with these students when they were fourth graders last year and we finished Reading Mastery V and VI in about 13 total months. Each Reading Mastery level has 120 lessons. We averaged more than a lesson a day. Many of these students scored at the eighth-grade level and above on the CTBS last fall. I also use Direct Instruction for Language, Spelling and Math. My students have become remarkable writers. They are enjoying story writing for the first time. They are given a prompt and can write for 12 minutes or longer without "batting an eye." I do not have the top kids in Language, but they are performing like the top kids. Our Math program focuses on learning the basic facts and applying those facts in situations. We teach the students the three basic types of word problems. Once they learn the basic types, word problems are not the mystery the once were to solve. Even though the lessons are scripted, each teacher brings her own personality into the presentation. The teacher excites the students. Every day the children know if they have mastered the lesson taught. We score all work on a daily basis and give the students a % score. We praise success and try to fix the unsuccessful by using specific remedies. Some teachers need to be told what to teach and when to teach it. All of our students need to be brought up to their grade level. The students enjoy direct instruction because they feel successful. They are constantly reminded how well they are doing. I post their successes on charts around my classroom.
*I have used direct instruction and have found it to be very beneficial to my students.
*Children need a combination of direct instruction along with constructivist teaching.
Conditions for Direct Instruction
*I have used direct instruction in the regular education room when a concept has confused the students and structure is needed.
*Direct Instruction is remarkable because I was not able to get my students this enthusiastic using the traditional approach to teaching language ( parts of speech , verb tenses and writing different types of paragraphs.)
*Direct Instruction is especially necessary for underachieving systems like Baltimore City.
*I use direct instruction when I feel the class is not ready to handle an activity, often in the beginning of the year. I work with many remedial children who need a lot of guidance.
*Direct instruction is good, but is not as effective as constructive teaching. It also must be limited in time.
*Direct instruction is good for basic skills and drills.
What subjects do you prefer to teach through direct instruction and why?
Benefits
*This is a program which works for the fast learner as well as the slow learner. Our Special Education students also use Direct Instruction for all subjects except CORE (Geography, History and Science). One of my fifth graders came to us last year on a pre-primer level and she is on a 2-2 level now. This is great progress for her. She is also on a second grade Math level. This is up from a readiness level last year. We even use the unison response format in some of the CORE lessons when appropriate.
*I prefer to teach math and vocabulary through direct instruction.
*I have used direct instruction in reading, spelling, and math.
*Phonics and number concepts because these are absolute concepts and only one answer is correct.
Conditions
*I use direct instruction with the primary grades, mostly math, to show them operations. I always use it in my self contained special education room. The students really lack the metacognitive skills to build on prior knowledge.
*I use direct instruction when I am teaching a brand new concept or idea. For example, today I modeled how to make a double-entry journal-guiding responses of the class.
More subjects taught using direct instruction are:
*Math: adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing.
*Language Arts: capitalization, punctuation, subject-verb agreement, adding -ing, prefixes, and suffixes.
*Geography: longitude and latitude.
*Chemistry: students balance equations.
I conclude from the teacher’s responses that Math, Science, Social Studies, Language Arts including Phonics, and Geography can all be taught through Direct Instruction.
Which teaching strategy works best for testing and for your class to meet state and school requirements and why?
*That depends on your level of students. An inclusion class lends itself to cooperative learning; but if the students show no achievement, I’ll switch to more direct instruction with frequent feedback.
*The direct instruction approach has worked for our students. They are able to do better on the MSPAP (Maryland School Performance Assessment Profile) because they are used to reading longer passages and they are used to writing to suit a particular purpose. We have seen an increase in the MSPAP and CTBS scores in the last two years. On last year’s test, the students were able to solve and write about problems which involved probability without any difficulty because they had done probability problems in Connection Math Concepts D (which is a fourth grade level).
*I think you need a variety of teaching strategies. No one works best but a combination is needed.
*I think a combination of the two is essential to addressing state standards.
*Balanced literacy and a balance of all kinds of instruction.
*I use many different strategies depending on age and ability level: 1. Graphic organizers 2. Rubrics to self-assess 3. Cooperative learning 4. Response journals 5. Prediction guides 6. Word walls 7. Writing process
*I use a combination of both methods, but directed instruction for testing.
Many of the teachers prefer to use both constructivist instruction as well as direct instruction for testing and state standards. A combination of methods seems to work best in schools.
This comparison of constructivism and direct teaching methods was very useful for my future goals as a teacher. I learned what teachers feel works best for them and their classrooms. I cannot make judgments at this pre-stage of my career as to what teacher I will be. I feel that is unfair to say, when I have not had the full experience of teaching a class and seeing how children learn first hand. I did enjoy learning about constructivist teaching though, because I feel the children benefit more from it. I want my classroom to be lively and exciting. My students’ minds should be eager and curious to learn new things and constructivism seems to be the method that encourages that the most.