When we speak of instructional strategies, we often use the term pedagogy.  However adult learning is different and termed andragony.  I’ve been thinking about adragogical strategies and how to effectively apply them in my teaching of experienced teachers.  Below are some thoughts on the topic:

ped·a·go·gy/ˈpedəˌgäjē/

Noun: The method and practice of teaching, esp. as an academic subject or theoretical concept.

and

an· dra·go·gy/ änəˌgäjē /

Noun: the practice of teaching adults with emphasis on participation of students in the planning and evaluation

Adults have different expectations in learning than children do.  It is important to take into consideration the needs of the adult learner when engaging in professional development.  Androgogy is the term used to describe the methodology used in teaching adults.

Androgogy, the teaching of adults, contains the following important components and tenets.  Adult learning is voluntary and learner-oriented.  Education brings freedom to the learners as they assimilate learning with life experiences.  Androgogy encourages divergent thinking and active learning.  Often the roles of the learner and the teacher are blurred in the process.  Often there is an uncertainty about the outcome of learning, regardless of the curriculum content.

Research demonstrates that there is a difference in learning between novice professionals and expert professionals.  A professional developer should be aware of his audience’s expertise level and adjust instruction appropriately.  Three main aspects of performance change in novice to expert learners:

• i.) the novice professional’s work paradigm focuses on abstract principles while the expert uses concrete past experiences;
• ii.) the novice often views situations discretely where the expert sees situations as part of a whole;
• iii.) the novice is often a detached observer where the expert is an involved performer (Daley, 1999).

A striking difference when considering novices and experts is that novices are often hindered by specifics of the job, where experts are often hindered by the system.  Novices prefer, and best learn formally, where experts learn best informally, often in conjunction with their peers.  Novice professionals prefer learning strategies like memory and therefore accumulate information, while the expert professional uses dialogue to create a knowledge base (Daley, 1999).

I think, most important to consider, are some practical aspects of facilitating adult learning.  According to Knowles, there are six assumptions related to motivation of adults:

1. Adults need to know the reason for learning something (Need to Know)
2. Experience (including error) provides the basis for learning activities (Foundation).
3. Adults need to be responsible for their decisions on education; involvement in the planning and evaluation of their instruction (Self-concept).
4. Adults are most interested in learning subjects having immediate relevance to their work and/or personal lives (Readiness).
5. Adult learning is problem-centered rather than content-oriented (Orientation).
6. Adults respond better to internal versus external motivators (Motivation).

Daley, B.J. (1999). Novice to expert: an exploration of how professionals learn.  Adult Education Quarterly, 49, 4, 133-147.

Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From. (Revised Edition). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall/Cambridge

I began teaching  a graduate class in Instructional Leadership last week. I focused on the concept of teacher practice around the 21st century skill of collaboration. I structured an activity to allow educators to explore their views of collaboration: how does it manifest in the classroom, what are barriers and successes, and so on using the following prompts:

• What is collaboration?  What is the role of collaboration in instruction?
• How does collaboration promote and/or deter learning?
• How does collaboration look at different age levels?
• Provide an example/anecdote of collaboration in your own instruction.

Since this is the first class that the group of experienced teacher-practitioner doctoral students are taking, I wanted to take advantage of the expertise of the group by meaningful sharing.  The discussion was interesting – full of back and forths, and, as a teacher, what struck me most was how the questions lead to a perspective that I had not considered.  When writing the questions, I thought about collaboration from the student-student perspective.  Although that was a meaningful part of the conversation, I was struck by the “collaboration from teacher-teacher” perspective.  I am pleased, that as an instructor, I developed “ill-defined” (ala Jonassen, 1997) questions that lead to very meaningful discussions.

Once we had developed enough capacity around these ideas, I switched gears and related the concept of collaboration in instruction to Vygotsky‘s social learning theory.  I think we had a few “ah-ha” moments during that discussion:  good instruction is based on sound learning theory.

That’s not to say that you can’t have good instructional practice without explicitly knowing theory.  I think the message is that when you are more AWARE of the connection between research and practice, you can more purposefully think about the decisions you make as a practitioner to improve student achievement and engagement.

I have been pondering what it all means. I received 79 posts and comments related to my recent birthday via Facebook – many from people I haven’t seen in 15-20 years. Of the 79, I spoke to 8 of these people personally that day by phone or in person. (I also spoke to many others who did not post on my Facebook page (and I am certainly friends with some of them (e.g., my mother).) The power of social networking links people together – but does it increase relationships or does it give us an insight into someone else’s life? Does it connect us in a more profound way or does it allow us to disconnect easier? Am I responsible for watching my news feed to know what others are up to?

There are a bit of philosophical questions here, but nonetheless, I am appreciative of the time that these people took to give a quick shootout. I’ll send a general thank you post. What does that mean?

Today I conducted a project-based learning workshop for the Science Department at East Haven High School. It’s always a bit never-wracking to present on a new topic – although I have been under the influence of project-based learning almost my entire career.

It’s amazing to see what works successfully and how you question it. For example, when talking about problem solving, I always bring up alternatives to hypthesis-based strategies. For example:

Abstraction: solving the problem in a model of the system before applying it to the real system
Analogy: using a solution that solved an analogous problem
Brainstorming: (especially among groups of people) suggesting a large number of solutions or ideas and combining and developing them until an optimum is found
Divide and conquer: breaking down a large, complex problem into smaller, solvable problems
Hypothesis testing: assuming a possible explanation to the problem and trying to prove (or, in some contexts, disprove) the assumption
Lateral thinking: approaching solutions indirectly and creatively
Means-ends analysis: choosing an action at each step to move closer to the goal
Method of focal objects: synthesizing seemingly non-matching characteristics of different objects into something new
Morphological analysis: assessing the output and interactions of an entire system
Reduction: transforming the problem into another problem for which solutions exist
Research: employing existing ideas or adapting existing solutions to similar problems
Root cause analysis: eliminating the cause of the problem
Trial-and-error: testing possible solutions until the right one is found
Proof: try to prove that the problem cannot be solved. The point where the proof fails will be the starting point for solving it

I think it is important to give a tangible example as well. I am particularly fond of goal-oriented problem solving, which often takes the form of trial-and-error. Today I showed the square peg-round hole problem from the movie Apollo 13, and to follow up we made our own creation by just following oral instructions: an origami box. I am always curious/cautious to see what happens when I try a new activity. To my relief and surprise, I was informed that this was an activity some of the teachers were going to try on the first day of school. Glad it had an impact!

I think one of the things that made it a success, was that I was explicit about the reason for doing it: to promote spacial literacy – relationships of shapes – ability follow oral directions – and tactile development. I have found that many teachers fall short on the explicitly of learning. Students are often puzzled as to the reason for their learning – evident by “what do we need to know that for?” I have found that when students have a clear understanding of what they are learning and justified reasoning, they often engage better and are more accepting and willing.

Perhaps we all should do some origami today.

When I think about technology and value in education, I am always looking to examine how technology can be used to leverage learning in ways that can’t be done in other traditional formats.  I am currently working on a blended learning paper with my team and have started the following vignette to describe such an example:

Michael was teaching a high school Applied Science Research class.  The class was designed for students who demonstrated interest in pursuing research in biological, physical, medical, and/or engineering sciences.  Students conduct a year-long or multi-year independent science experimental research project under the mentorship of the instructor and field scientists and are expected to present the results of their research at local, state, or national fairs, symposia, or competitions.  To help his students find success, Michael set up the following course goals:

1.  Interact with practicing scientists

2. Participate in a significant research experience

3.  Select, develop and conduct an independent research project

4. Develop the skills of reporting and presenting research results.

A highly motivated student, Anna had a strong interest in the physical sciences and engineering, began to examine the properties of particle accelerators and decided that she would like to try to build one.  Even though Michael was a biologist, and lacked knowledge about particle accelerators, he encouraged Anna to pursue her ideas.

Anna discovered that old television and computer monitors contain cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and brought a junked monitor from home to school for examination.  She stopped to discuss her ideas with the IT staff member in school who warned her that the monitor could potentially have a capacitor still charged with 40,000 volts of electricity and she should have it discharged.  Begrudgingly, she found a local electrician who did the work for her.  Returning to school, she started to dissect the device, first removing the cover and then different circuit boards and parts.  She reached an impasse and wasn’t sure how to proceed.

Michael had a friend, Bob, a retired multipatent-holding electrical engineer, living on the other end of the state, and encouraged Anna to make contact.  The two connected and decided to have a conversation in class via Skype, an Internet telephony service provider that offers free calling between computers.  Sitting in his couch at home, one morning during class, Bob coached Anna through the process of removing the CRT and gave suggestions on how to proceed with the particle accelerator.  During the process, Anna often took the laptop and steered the camera towards the deconstructed monitor and they discussed parts and procedures.  Occasionally Bob would scratch some figures on paper and move his camera towards the document to share his feedback.  The two had an invigorating conversation that lasted the majority of the class period.  Nearing conclusion, Anna realized that she still had many more questions.  She politely asked if she could follow up with email with more questions.  Bob agreed, and they continued the mentor/mentee relationship throughout the year, never actually meeting face-to-face.

I am proud to announce the release of my paper:  Online Dynamic Asynchronous Audit Strategy for Reflexivity in the Qualitative Paradigm, just published in The Qualitative Report. It was a long process to publication, but I am really excited about this work.  The data for the study originated here on this blog back in 2007.  This study is about this BLOG from 2007-2008.   I first presented the research concepts in 2009 at the Connecticut State University Faculty Research Conference, and then in 2010 at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting in Denver.  Feel free to read it and leave a comment below.

At my last stop, I had the pleasure of working with Donna Ragaini.  Donna was a special education paraprofessional and spent a period a day with me while I taught academic biology each year.  I taught the 10th grade section that included all of the special education students and always appreciated Donna’s candor, dedication to the students, and ability to reach them on a personal level.  I think we really made a great team.  I often told Donna that she should have been a special education teacher – she had all of the skills, knowledge, and certainly the dispositions.  She had a gift – she could hold students to very high expectations while being a compassionate, caring adult.  She had children of her own, a bit older than mine, and would sometimes pass along a used Leapster or funky sweater that was too small.  At the all-to-young age of 46, Donna passed away.  Even though we aren’t working together now, I know I will miss her wit, sensibility, and friendship.  Donna was a 21st century educator – the ones we are really looking for now.

From the New Haven Register:

I am excited to report a new book review I recently wrote in the Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education entitled “Practical Strategies to Promote High Quality Authentic Student Research in High School Settings“. Check it out!

Special thanks to my editor, Dr. Ruth Gyure, who worked with me on this project!

My team and I have been talking lately about the notion of teaching videos. “Distance education” processes have been around for a long time, and have manifested in different ways. The challenge for the asynchronous delivery of content is that it be engaging. What does that mean? For a video, engagement might mean:

• interactive with the viewer (making the viewer complete a task to be an active, instead of passive, learner)
• interactive internally (when two or more people can talk and interact, it makes the video more engaging)
• short (too long, tuned out)
• specific (content should be very targeted)
• robust (include appropriate visual stimuli)
• seeing the speaker(s) (there’s something powerful about seeing a person talk and watching the specific content)

This video visually enhances some of this vision:

Tomorrow, presenting at the 2nd biennial International Instructional Leadership Conference, I am going to make a supposition that 21st century skills are inquiry process skills. Below, my prezi presentation: