On the PG Cert, one of my key aims is to learn about the underlying theory of the way I teach. I have learnt the theory before over the years, but I’m aware that there is a lot that I have forgotten and much more to know. I feel pretty comfortable with the practicalities of teaching (albeit with the knowledge that it’s an ongoing process and there is always a lot to learn), but I want to know the roots of those practical skills, why are they a good idea and who said so?
To this end, I’ve started reading some of the key works on teaching. I’m aware I’m looking at older, seminal work, and that inevitably provides a more limited perspective, predominantly euro-centric, white and male. I am also, in a different stream of research, going to develop my knowledge of critical pedagogy, and a much broader range of voices, starting with Bell Hooks and Paulo Freire, amongst others but I’m hoping I’ll be able to do more of this in Unit 2.
For now, I’m starting in this place, with Piaget and Vygotsky, and I’ve already found references to some of the common terms and approaches used in English language teaching which was strangely exciting…
Schema – This is something we talk about a lot in ELT, in the context of activating schema, or existing knowledge, usually at the start of a session or topic. In that context it is about accessing and activating passive knowledge, particularly vocabulary. Schemas or shemata are ways of organising knowledge, experience, memory, etc.. These are modified and developed through assimilation (incorporating new ideas), and accommodation, described by Beard (1969) as ‘The process of modifying schemas to solve problems arising from new experiences within the environment’. I was excited to discover this as the activation and probing of existing knowledge and understanding, and the gradual incorporation of new information over time, through exploration, is really critical to the way I see teaching and learning.
Scaffolding – Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) and its connection with scaffolding is another huge area for me which I was thrilled to discover! Shabhani (2010) states, ‘It is widely believed that socio-cultural theory of mind and the concept of ZPD form the basis of the notion of scaffolding (Berk, 2001; Daniels, 2001; Wells, 2001)’. Supporting leaners to develop their own understanding from their individual starting points is a key element I try to incorporate into my teaching and an important way to do this through scaffolding. ‘In general, scaffolding is construed as support given by a teacher to a student when performing a task that the student might otherwise not be able to accomplish.’ (van de Pol, Volman, and Beishuizen, 2010). This seems to me to be similar to Stephen Krashen’s work on ‘comprehensible input’ in second language acquisition. It’s not the same, but there are parallels in that Krashen aims slightly beyond the skills or level of the learner, but specifically not too far, mirroring Vygotsky’s ZPD. I see scaffolding as not a steadily increasing jumping off point for learners, pre-determined by the teacher, but as 1. providing the tools and knowledge to attempt a task e.g. information and vocabulary, 2. to structure an activity for learners to construct their own ‘knowledge’, including their motivation to do so. It might include a steadily evolving set of tasks or questions, but also, it structures the session in a way that creates or makes visible a ‘gap’ or a discrepancy in participants’ awareness or knowledge, thus creating the need for the content of the session.
(I’ve just discovered that these people first coined the term scaffolding – Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Child Psychiatry, 17, 89−100 – very satisfying…)
Active learning – Again, I was excited to understand the role of Piaget in active learning. Indeed, Shabani cites (Verenikina, 2008), making reference ‘to a pre-Piagetian, traditional way of teaching through direct instruction’, thus highlighting his influence in this area. Piaget describes the creation of successful new schemas as an active process for all except young infants. New learning is done through exploration and experimentation, questioning and reflection. All my experience of teaching has been about what the students are doing, guided or facilitated by the teacher, rather than what the teacher is doing. Reading this about Piaget was a first step in understanding the roots of that approach.
Discussion, tasks and problem solving – These types of activity are another key facet of the way I approach teaching, although I do still see a vital place in teaching spaces for independent reflection, thought and processing (see Susan Cain’s ‘Quiet’!). Beard (1969) describes experiments done by Abercrombie (1960) with first year university students which show the benefit of free discussion. Although the students were knowledgeable, they were unable to use their information effectively. Through experimentation with free discussion, Abercrombie was able to show that the students who took this approach were better able to apply their knowledge and were more robust and flexible in evaluating arguments and considering more than one solution. In addition, Beard describes Piaget’s view, ‘that capacity for thinking in formal operations (the last of the key stages in development), is initiated by problems raised in attempting to reconcile different viewpoints in discussion and co-operative tasks’.
Both these works seem to provide foundation for the task-based learning and discussion-based tasks that underlie the communicative approach used in English language teaching. Beard (1969) also quotes Vygotsky, ‘…memorising words and connecting them with objects does not in itself lead to concept formation; for the process to begin, a problem must arise that cannot be solved otherwise than through the formation of new concepts’. He sees the social interaction as fundamental to the construction of new knoweldge.
This also helps to back up my view of university teaching, that there is (I realise this is a huge generalisation) too much emphasis on lectures and a didactic approach, whereas a discursive and student-centred approach allows students to relate the principles and concepts to their own experience and observations.
What next?
I can see from my cursory reading that I also really need to understand more about John Dewey here, and that this discussion is just a tiny snapshot of thoughts linked to big thinkers. However, it’s been useful to me in developing my own understanding of theory and practice. and it’s something I will continue.
There is a strong basis here for a dialogic approach and the role of teachers as guides, posing problems, creating space for knowledge to be created. This has helped me to articulate what I wanted from my microteach session. I knew the approach felt ‘right’ but I couldn’t really explain it. I’m still not sure how to write the Learning Outcome. Next stop, John Biggs…
References:
Beard, R. (1969) An outline of Piaget’s developmental psychology. Gateshead: Northumberland Press Limited.
Pol, Janneke van de, Monique Volman, and Jos Beishuizen. ‘Scaffolding in Teacher–Student Interaction: A Decade of Research’. Educational Psychology Review 22, no. 3 (1 September 2010): 271–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6.
Shabani, Karim, Mohamad Khatib, and Saman Ebadi. ‘Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development: Instructional Implications and Teachers’ Professional Development’. English Language Teaching 3, no. 4 (16 November 2010): p237. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p237.
To read further…
Boyles, D. ‘From Transmission to Transaction: John Dewey’s Imaginative Vision of Teaching’. Accessed 22 March 2023. https://www-tandfonline-com.arts.idm.oclc.org/doi/epdf/10.1080/03004279.2018.1445473?needAccess=true&role=button.
Glassman, Michael. ‘Dewey and Vygotsky: Society, Experience, and Inquiry in Educational Practice’. Educational Researcher 30, no. 4 (2001): 3–14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3594354.