|
|
Advance Organizers and other approaches to structuring teaching
|
Advance Organizer
|
Isn't it nice to find out that something you have
been doing all along has a jargon name? It's like M. Jourdain
in Moličre's Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme who was gratified
to discover that he had been speaking prose all his life.
Advance
Organizers are like that: they are simply devices used in the
introduction of a topic which enable learners to orient themselves
to the topic, so that they can locate where any particular bit
of input fits in and how it links with what they already
know. (The name was coined by Ausubel.) Ausubel's
major principle — that the most important determinant of learning
is what the learner already knows — calls for an image or example which
directs the learner to relevant prior experience or learning (preferably of course live and significant experience) and also points
forward to new material.
|
Go
here for a more rigorous account.
...and
here
|
Common examples are:
- A simple statement of,
"We have been handling joints
of meat in the kitchen a lot, so in this class we are
going to look at cuts of beef. We'll find out which part
of the cow each one comes from, what its characteristics
are, and how you might prepare it."
Because this is
just verbal, it is transitory. In the example it did not
matter because the session had a sort of rhythm to it, repeating
the same headings in relation to a succession of different
cuts; but in a more complex area, it would be wise to have
something more permanent to re-visit.
- An OHT with a list of the
topics and sub-topics on it, which you can return to at
intervals during the session in order to mark how far you
have got, and show how the new material fits in with established
knowledge.
- A useful variation on this is to use a concept-
or mind-map:
you can put it on a whiteboard, and start with the major
branches identified and add sub-branches as you get
further into each topic. This also permits linkages
between topics.
- Even better, of course, is for students to build
their own mind-maps, because those will almost necessarily
establish linkages in terms of their prior learning.
- Or a poster
on the wall which is permanently there to refer to.
- A handout with the same kind of information on it, perhaps
laid out with lots of white space so that students can fill
in their own notes under each heading—again, linking back
to what they already know. It could contain more information,
of course, as a gapped
handout.
- On a larger scale, a study guide to the course, or a
handbook, can locate all the different bits: encourage students
to keep it with them and to use it by making frequent reference
to it.
- And don't forget the humble story or anecdote which
may be memorable in its own right, but also serves to relate
the abstract material to a more-or-less familiar situation
in the students' own world.
- And what about the "teaser"?
"I see Ben is yawning—heavy night last night, Ben? Ah! But so is Marie! Why is yawning contagious? There you go, Sam! Stay awake and we might get to some possible answers in this lecture!"
"Is Christmas pudding actually illegal? The Puritans were not keen on enjoying themselves, we know, but is this just a myth? We'll get on to that in a few moments."
"Freud made a big thing of getting people to confront their basest feelings, we know. But was he fooling himself because there were things too base even for him? One school of thought says so: we'll come to that later..."
Is this "dumbing-down"? Is it compromising the academic integrity and purity of your teaching?
Yes, OK, it may be at one level. But;
- Pragmatically, it is no good having academically pure "teaching" if the students don't learn as much (or fewer students learn much), and;
- More important, students are not just "learners" (which is one reason why I object to this current jargon which seems to have infected the FE but interestingly not yet the HE sector). They are complex people, who may be engaged and intrigued at several different levels. "Engaging" them requires that you recognise this. You have a lot in common with them, as well as formal differences in the classroom. They might have watched the same TV as you last night (some of them might even have listened to Radio 4, although I admit that I am lucky in finding some)... Relate to their experience. It is arrogant not to. (I know about academic arrogance; been there, done that!)
Evaluation
Advance organizers on their own are not particularly effective as teaching devices, according to Hattie's meta-analysis, but then as far as I am concerned they are only "openers" to a session, and they involve little effort, so they are worth using.
|
|
|
Bruner has another model of similar status, that of "scaffolding".
Although applied principally to a description of the way in
which we naturally teach young children, it also comes readily
to mind in taking anyone through new material or skills. The
teacher provides the external structure (the scaffold) within
which the learner can build their building. This includes engaging
the learner's interest, demonstrating, progressing from the
simple to the complex, encouraging practice, providing feedback,
and so on.
- Scaffolding, of course, is something which is taken
down when no longer needed. So aids such as vocabulary lists
in language learning, crib-sheets with formulae in engineering,
mnemonics for memorising procedures (like the old "ABC"
for first-aiders), can all be useful but are left behind
as competence develops.
Vygotsky's
wonderfully named "Zone of Proximal Development" has
elements of the same process. This points out that learners
can achieve more with help and guidance than they can left to
themselves. Such an observation is commonplace in assessing
the capabilities of people with learning disabilities, where
achievement is categorised as "can do alone", "can
do with guidance", "can do with physical assistance",
and so on.
However, there is more to it than that: judging how
it is reasonable to "stretch" learners requires complex
assessment. Too little and they don't get anywhere and get bored:
too much and the task is overwhelming and they are almost sure
to fail.
|
(Apart from that, a casual reference to Vygotsky and
the ZPD [always use the initials] is bound to impress if you
are trying to bluff your way with educationalists — it just
does not impress the students!)
|
|
|
Similarly fairly intuitive, as a way of structuring new ideas
is the use of simplified models, metaphors and analogies:
- A simplified model: this is routinely used in
science teaching. You start with the simplest possible case
of something, and then you elaborate and move on to those
which are closer to the real world. In discussing forces
acting on an object, for example, you may start with an
object falling vertically in a vacuum, and go on adding
variables and forces until you are discussing a car going
round an uphill corner in a cross-wind.
- In vaguer subjects, an artificially pure and perhaps
mythical example or anecdote can serve the purpose.
Indeed, that is in part what myths are all about.
- Analogy and metaphor: "The structure of
the atom is like a solar system...", "Think of
the hard disc as a filing cabinet", "White blood
cells are like guards", "Teaching is like gardening..."
This needs care, precisely because it can be so vivid that
learners get hooked on it and may not see where the analogy
begins to break down. Metaphor is even more problematic:
you are asserting that one thing is something else.
However, it has its place. While potentially confusing,
you can use more than one analogy to emphasise that each
one points to just one aspect of a phenomenon. The classic
example is that light behaves both like a wave and like
a particle.
- A variant is the physical
or visual arrangement of ideas or topics to depict their
relationship. See the pyramidal arrangement of the levels
of Bloom's
taxonomy as an example. Or the diagrammatic representation
of legitimate
peripheral participation — which is interesting
because the authors specifically reject any such representation
of their model.
- ...or, more interesting, get the learners to tell
you their metaphors, or to draw them. This may give
you more insight into the way in which they are construing
the material than anything else. I remember the lecturer,
who, when asked for a drawing of his metaphor of teaching,
drew an aircraft dropping bombs. He explained that his
first job was to destroy his students' preconceptions,
before he (or they?) could rebuild.
|
See also: www.doceo.co.uk/ tools/tools.htm
|
|
|
|
|