Children rarely [are provided work in] redefining what has been encountered, reshaping it, reordering it. The cultivation of reflectiveness is one of the great problems one faces in devising curricula: how to lead children to discover the powers and pleasures that await the exercise of retrospection.
Jerome Bruner, Beyond the Information Given, 1957, p 449
Jerome Bruner, Beyond the Information Given, 1957, p 449
as cited by Wiggins and McTighe, Understanding by Design, 2005, p. 290
Before we "lead children to discover the powers and pleasures that await the exercise of retrospection." we have to believe they are capable of it. Moving away from Piaget's belief that children mature their way through stages of cognition Piaget's Theory allows me to see more potential in children's capacity to learn. In the last few eyars I've come across Vygotsky's work. Again, the interesting things is that I'm hearing about his work from a variety of sources, including this class. Vygotsky's Theory Vygotsky's explanation that learners can move to a new or deeper understanding if they have a social interaction with someone more knowledegable has influenced many educators and curriculum writers. Many of the underpinnings of current 'best' practices (guided reading, modeling, etc.) and pedagogies (explicit instruction, scaffolding) are built on Vygotsky's and other constructivist theorists' work. Why do we still see educators who state a belief in the capacity of all children of all ages to learn, but see instruction controlled by the content of the written curriculum, what's the disconnect? I wish I knew.
No comments:
Post a Comment