Korean Job Discussion Forums

[regicide]

In 2003 research was carried out at the United States National Learning Lab in Maine to assess the most effective way that young people can learn. The researchers employed a variety of different teaching methods and then tested the students to find out how much they had learnt. From this the researchers were able to calculate what they called the Average Retention Rate. The results were as follows:

Teacher talking to a class (5%)
Student reading a book (10%)
Student watching an audio visual presentation (20%)
Student watching a teacher demonstration (30%)
Students taking part in a discussion group (50%)
Students involved in an activity that is related to what the teacher wants them to learn (75%)
Students teaching others (90%).

These research findings do not surprise me. I once carried out some research on a group whom I had taught over a period of six years (11 to 17). The information they had retained from their history lessons reflected the findings of US National Learning Lab, in that the most effective learning was related to the amount of active participation from the student.

However, it seems to me that the majority of teachers spend much of their time using teaching methods which, according to US National Learning Lab, are fairly ineffective. I suspect the main reasons for employing traditional instructional methods are as follows: (1) this was the way that the teachers were taught when they were pupils at school; (2) this was the way that teachers were trained to teach; (3) this is the accepted way of teaching amongst colleagues - i.e. peer group pressure; (4) teachers enjoy being performers; (5) the teacher feels more in control of the situation when traditional instructional methods are used.

Tradition is the great enemy of innovation. One of the advantages of using the Internet in the classroom is that it encourages teachers to think again about teaching methods. One of the fears that I have is that teachers producing materials online will attempt to duplicate the methods they use in the classroom.

The idea that students should play an active role in their learning is not a new idea. In the 1960s educationalists like Jerome Bruner argued that people learn best when they learn in an active rather than a passive manner. He used the example of how we learn language. It is claimed that this is the most difficult thing we have to do in our life, yet we learn it so young and so quickly – so easily in fact, that some experts in this field have argued that language is, to a certain extent, an inherited skill.

Bruner argues that the reason we learn language so quickly is due to the method we use. As we are introduced to words, we use them. We test them out. Words immediately became practical. We can quickly see why it helps us to know these words.

This method is very different from the way most subjects are taught at school. The student is usually a passive receptacle trying to take in information that they will need for some test or examination in the future. To complete this task effectively depends on students employing what sociologists have called deferred gratification. This is something that most young people are not very good at. They want their pleasures now, not in the distant future.

In his book, The Process of Education (1960), Bruner argues that it is possible to teach any topic or subject using the same methods that we use when learning language. This involves structuring the material so that the student can test out and use the information in a practical way.

Bruner’s ideas on learning helps to explain why the Learning Lab researchers found that the highest Retention Rate occurred when students were given the opportunity to teach other students. As teachers we have all had the experience of having to teach something we do not know too much about. How quickly we learn when we know that the next day we will be faced by students asking us questions about the material.

In my view, this forum is for good at creating active learning.

[spyro25]

not to sound funny but this post looks like a sample essay to send to CDI

its all good stuff - all of my MA TESOL stuff studied so far point to Task Based Learning and Teaching (students doing a task with the target language) has the best language acquistion rate out of most other forms of activity or instruction.

it doesn't work in all contexts though - not all countries, educational systems, teachers, students or parents are open to this kind of method. sometimes any other way but the teacher standing in front of the class lecturing will do in some contexts. a recent look by a teacher (i'll post the source when i get home) found that students in Oman did not appreciate any method other than teacher instruction and did not feel that they should be responsible in any way for their own learning.

in korea there are many opportunities for different contexts of learning, and these days koreans and the educational system is open to different ways of doing things. however for some workers this is not always the case - and i'm sure many teachers who tried and failed to implement different techniques for acquistion have been burned by non responsive students, angry parents and stupid directors.

however, with this information in mind, we should try to advance our approaches even in very difficult contexts, as the evidence is there to suggest that the best way to learn often doesnt come directly from the teacher at all, but from the students themselves.

[ddeubel]

Very good post.....

We need more of this type of stuff for our own reflection and discussion here as teachers.

I'd also state briefly that so much of this issue revolves around the concept of "power" , specifically as it too revolves around the cultural notion of "teacher" and our own belief's about self worth and our job.

Got to run but hope to come back again and add more thoughts regarding the above comments....

Thx,

DD

[regicide]

[cdninkorea]

[regicide]

[mrsquirrel]

The thing I found about Task Based Learning is that it's effective if students have a good basic vocabulary to start with but if they don't have the foundations already there then they don't really get anything out of it.

I've seen so much garbled crap because they have felt that they had to use a dictionary to write what they wanted to say.

I think it's effective at higher levels but not at starter level.

[mrsquirrel]

http://www.cofc.edu/bellsandwhistles/research/retentionmodel.html

[spyro25]

[Scotticus]

[mrsquirrel]

Got to agree with that.

I never speak Korean (not that I know any) and never spoke Thai to people so I never learned properly. Took three years to be at a level where I can communicate very basically and I mean basically.

Preach what you teach.

http://www.anecdote.com.au/archives/2006/06/learning_retent_1.html

The above website thinks that maybe these results are actually a hoax from the 60's. Interesting.

[Scott in Incheon]

The OP's post is a direct quote from some other page. I find it odd that the OP did acknowledge but rather led readers to believe that he did six years of research.

http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t1118.html

I am glad that someone checked out the validity of this post as it did seem a little odd to me.

Having checked into the link provided by mrssquirrel...I don't put much stock in the post at all.

Though discussion about these things is always good, we shouldn't be so ready to accept everything we read.

[tomato]

I wish I had these research findings when I was teaching a guitar student in the United States.
His mom wanted him to teach her how to play the guitar, but she insisted on waiting until after he learned to play the guitar.
I couldn't convince her that the time for him to start teaching her was NOW.

Besides, at what point does one stop learning to play an instrument and start playing the instrument?
John Holt asked that question in one of his books.

[ddeubel]

I know what you mean Tomato....

More and more I am coming to the conclusion that the teacher is a dinosaur, a relic, a cotton ginny..........

Especially with language, who needs a teacher????? Often the teacher gets in the way and actually limits or delimits learning.

We'd do well to ponder these questions and like the ancient zen story of the butcher who never sharpened his knife and when asked "how is this possible." -- we have to also state, "by never cutting and always finding the space inbetween." Teaching is more about getting out of the way than we think....time for a rethink.

DD