Some blog followers might be interested in a recent discussion-list post “Interactive Engagement vs Explicit Direct Instruction” [Hake (2012c)]. The abstract reads:
***************************************************
ABSTRACT: In my post “Google Donates One Million Dollars to Local Schools” [Hake (2012a)] at http://bit.ly/KMcNNw, I stated (paraphrasing): “The research reported in ‘Interactive-engagement (IE) vs traditional (T) methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses’ [Hake (1998a)] at http://bit.ly/9484DG strongly suggests that the ‘Explicit Direct Instruction’ (EDI) doesn't work nearly as well as IE in promoting conceptual understanding and problem-solving ability.”
In response Philip Freeman wrote (paraphrasing): “It’s possible that there is a linguistic issue here. . . . what this group calls “EDI” includes use of many of the approaches that Physics Education Research endorses. . . . . in talking to those in different contexts it is important to be careful about assumptions that words mean the same thing they do to us.”
I agree completely. In “Language Ambiguities in Education Research” [Hake (2008)] at http://bit.ly/bHTebD I wrote (paraphrasing): “Language ambiguities hinder development of education research and sometimes misrepresent its findings to both the education community and the general public. . . . . Such communication problems might be reduced if, quoting Klahr and Li (2005) at http://bit.ly/apA7es, ‘those engaged in discussions about implications and applications of educational research focus on clearly defined instructional methods and procedures, rather than vague labels and outmoded -isms.’ ”
After considering operational definitions for “Interactive Engagement” (IE) and “Explicit Direct Instruction” (EDI), I stick by my statement “that the research reported in Hake (1998a) strongly suggests that EDI doesn't work nearly as well as IE in promoting conceptual understanding and problem-solving ability.”
***************************************************
To access the complete 26 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/LdSe1e.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
REFERENCES [All URL's shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 19 June 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012a. “Google Donates One Million Dollars to Local Schools,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/KMcNNw. Post of 17 Jun 2012 14:45:21-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at http://bit.ly/KdQZZF with a provision for comments. See also Hake (2012b).
Hake, R.R. 2012b. “Gates Foundation Dispenses 400 Million/Year to Education,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/Mmc1aB. Post of 18 Jun 2012 10:33:07-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were also transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/NKPfwR with a provision for comments.
Hake, R.R. 2012c. “Interactive Engagement vs Explicit Direct Instruction,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/LdSe1e. Post of 19 Jun 2012 17:28:00-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Showing posts with label Explicit Direct Instruction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Explicit Direct Instruction. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Google Donates One Million Dollars to Local Schools
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent discussion-list post “Google Donates One Million Dollars to Local Schools” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:
***********************************************
ABSTRACT: Frank Noschese of the Modeling discussion list pointed to a report “Google donates $1 million to local schools” [Veronin (2012a)] at http://bit.ly/LXOcrY. Veronin wrote (paraphrasing): “The bulk of that money was used to set up the ‘Explicit Direct Instruction’ program. The district paid DataWORKS http://bit.ly/N6Rw4n for the program which is designed to keep students engaged through a variety of methods - including the use of individual white boards and peer-to-peer quick-study sessions - while simultaneously allowing teachers to quickly identify those students who are having trouble with the material as well as those who have a grasp on concepts, so that they can spend time with those children who need extra help and let the faster kids move ahead. Efficiency is the name of the game with EDI.”
Concerning DataWORKS, Kate Rosok of the Modeling discussion list pointed to “Research Supporting EDI" [DataWORKS (2012)] at http://bit.ly/LetW5m, which states (paraphrasing): “We aren't the only ones who feel that direct instruction is effective for students. Extensive research studies and meta-analyses have come to the same conclusion: Teacher-centered direct instruction is more effective and efficient, especially for struggling students. In fact, there is overwhelming research supporting teacher-centered instruction in lesson design and lesson delivery where teachers directly teach their students specific concepts and skills usually taken directly from the state content standards. . . . . A survey of six thousand students in introductory physics courses found that students in courses involving interactive engagement made substantial gains in problem solving abilities as well as the learning of physics [Hake (1998a)] at http://bit.ly/9484DG.”
Evidently DataWORKS didn't bother to scan Hake (1998a), because that article strongly suggests that the “Direct Explicit Instruction” advocated by DataWORKS doesn't work nearly as well at “interactive engagement” in promoting conceptual understanding and problem-solving ability.
BTW, Gene Glass (2012) at http://bit.ly/KcWqIs has an insightful essay “High Button Shoes and Education Reform” regarding support of education by organizations such as Google and the Gates Foundation, which seem to have more money than knowledge of education.
***********************************************
To access the complete 16 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/KMcNNw .
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
“I point to the following unwelcome truth: much as we might dislike the implications, research is showing that didactic exposition of abstract ideas and lines of reasoning (however engaging and lucid we might try to make them) to passive listeners yields pathetically thin results in learning and understanding - except in the very small percentage of students who are specially gifted in the field.”
- Arnold Arons inTeaching Introductory Physics (p. vii, 1997)
REFERENCES [All URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 17 June 2012.]
Arons, A.B. 1997. Teaching Introductory Physics. Wiley, publisher's information at http://bit.ly/jBcyBU. Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/nIiPGh.
Hake, R.R. 2012. "Google Donates One Million Dollars to Local Schools," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/KMcNNw. Post of 17 Jun 2012 14:45:21-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are also being transmitted to several discussion lists.
***********************************************
ABSTRACT: Frank Noschese of the Modeling discussion list pointed to a report “Google donates $1 million to local schools” [Veronin (2012a)] at http://bit.ly/LXOcrY. Veronin wrote (paraphrasing): “The bulk of that money was used to set up the ‘Explicit Direct Instruction’ program. The district paid DataWORKS http://bit.ly/N6Rw4n for the program which is designed to keep students engaged through a variety of methods - including the use of individual white boards and peer-to-peer quick-study sessions - while simultaneously allowing teachers to quickly identify those students who are having trouble with the material as well as those who have a grasp on concepts, so that they can spend time with those children who need extra help and let the faster kids move ahead. Efficiency is the name of the game with EDI.”
Concerning DataWORKS, Kate Rosok of the Modeling discussion list pointed to “Research Supporting EDI" [DataWORKS (2012)] at http://bit.ly/LetW5m, which states (paraphrasing): “We aren't the only ones who feel that direct instruction is effective for students. Extensive research studies and meta-analyses have come to the same conclusion: Teacher-centered direct instruction is more effective and efficient, especially for struggling students. In fact, there is overwhelming research supporting teacher-centered instruction in lesson design and lesson delivery where teachers directly teach their students specific concepts and skills usually taken directly from the state content standards. . . . . A survey of six thousand students in introductory physics courses found that students in courses involving interactive engagement made substantial gains in problem solving abilities as well as the learning of physics [Hake (1998a)] at http://bit.ly/9484DG.”
Evidently DataWORKS didn't bother to scan Hake (1998a), because that article strongly suggests that the “Direct Explicit Instruction” advocated by DataWORKS doesn't work nearly as well at “interactive engagement” in promoting conceptual understanding and problem-solving ability.
BTW, Gene Glass (2012) at http://bit.ly/KcWqIs has an insightful essay “High Button Shoes and Education Reform” regarding support of education by organizations such as Google and the Gates Foundation, which seem to have more money than knowledge of education.
***********************************************
To access the complete 16 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/KMcNNw .
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
“I point to the following unwelcome truth: much as we might dislike the implications, research is showing that didactic exposition of abstract ideas and lines of reasoning (however engaging and lucid we might try to make them) to passive listeners yields pathetically thin results in learning and understanding - except in the very small percentage of students who are specially gifted in the field.”
- Arnold Arons inTeaching Introductory Physics (p. vii, 1997)
REFERENCES [All URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 17 June 2012.]
Arons, A.B. 1997. Teaching Introductory Physics. Wiley, publisher's information at http://bit.ly/jBcyBU. Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/nIiPGh.
Hake, R.R. 2012. "Google Donates One Million Dollars to Local Schools," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/KMcNNw. Post of 17 Jun 2012 14:45:21-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are also being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
