Curriculum and the Structure of School.
1995; SAGE Publishing; Volume: 76; Issue: 8 Linguagem: Inglês
ISSN
1940-6487
Autores Tópico(s)Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
ResumoTeaching methodology, types of knowledge, and the structure of school are all intertwined, Mr. Cardellichio points out. In order to create a meaningful curriculum one that emphasizes process skills we must change both the structure of our schools and the methodology we use. Our ability to restructure schools depends on our ability to understand the complex and dynamic relationships between teaching methodology, the structure of school, and types of learning. How do these three domains interact, and what happens when they are interacting? Unless we begin to understand the answers to these questions, we will find that teaching the same material in the same way will constrain us in our worn-out structures and models of schooling - just as these structures will inhibit the development of a meaningful curriculum. To begin, let us consider two types of knowledge - factual knowledge and skill knowledge. As Robert Marzano has explained, factual - or declarative - knowledge is knowledge about what; skill - or procedural (or process) - knowledge is knowledge about how.(1) Knowing that lightning comes from a thunderstorm is an example of factual knowledge; being able to predict weather is an example of procedural knowledge. We teach both kinds of knowledge in schools. A good deal of what occurs in classrooms involves the transmission of factual knowledge. We teach students parts of speech, names of muscles, dates of wars, definitions of mathematical principles, and many other pieces of information. We also teach a lot of things that come under the heading of skill knowledge. We teach how to shoot a lay-up, how to read a map, how to write, how to read, how to add, how to draw a picture, and so on. There are some types of procedural knowledge that involve complex, abstract behaviors and are harder to teach: how to evaluate, how to compare, how to do an experiment - how to think in general. The two types of knowledge are different in important ways, but language about knowing is not really adequate to explain what the differences are. Our knowledge of brain physiology is not sufficient to explain how the two kinds of knowing are different in respect to brain function. Do we know how to read a map in the same way we know the parts of speech? Do we know how to dial a phone in the same way we know who wrote King Lear? In spite of the limitations of our understanding, we can think in useful ways about the types of knowledge. I like to approach the topic through a series of questions, the first of which is, Do we learn declarative knowledge in a different way from the way we learn procedural knowledge? Think about the way you learned to talk. You made sounds. Someone (your mother or father?) made sounds back at you. You associated the sounds with objects in your life. Gradually meaning was created. New vocabulary and new structures allowed you to start learning more things. You wanted to talk to get things you really needed. How did you learn to fide a bicycle? You got on the bike and promptly fell off. Maybe someone held the bike while you became familiar with it. Maybe your dad ran along beside you. Maybe you used training wheels for a while. If you were unlucky, like my youngest brother, your older brothers took you up a hill, put you on the bike, and sent you on your way. As you learned to ride, you got immediate, real feedback on your success. Did learning to ride the bike feel like learning, let us say, to parse sentences? How were those experiences alike and how were they different? Can you still ride the bike? Can you still parse sentences? How did you learn to read? How is learning to read different from learning about things by reading? How easy is it to forget how to read? How easy is it to forget what you read? Might we say that procedural knowledge seems to be used more often than knowledge of facts? It also seems to be less readily forgotten. Do you remember how to swim? …
Referência(s)