After refreshing ourselves with the different types of instructional strategies, the Adlit.org article provides for us a list of effective reading programs with brief descriptions of each.
-Taking into consideration Dweck's research, do you think she would agree with the idea of "Instructional Process Programs (IP), such as
cooperative learning, strategy instruction, and other approaches
primarily intended to change teachers' instructional methods rather than
curriculum or textbooks"?
-Given the types of reading programs listed as "Moderate evidence of effectiveness", do you feel their approaches support or dispute Dweck's ideas?
1. I do think Carol Dweck would agree with the idea of Instructional Process Programs or IP. These programs, as stated, intend to change the teacher's instructional methods instead of the material like curriculum and textbooks. Sometimes the material you are required to teach students is uninteresting, confusing, or boring. Most times it is also impossible to change the material you are required to teach your students but you CAN change the way you teach the material and the way you deliver the material to your students so that it is more interesting. Teachers and their instructional methods along with praise will determine whether or not a student will succeed and retain a lesson and information or be totally against it. Similar to the experiment Dweck preformed with the IQ test. With one group (A) she praised them on their efforts and presented the test in a different way. The next group (B) were praised just on their intelligences. She received better results with group A than B.
ReplyDelete2. I feel their approachs support Dweck's ideas. For example, the Read 180 program addresses individual needs of students through differentiated instruction, adaptive and instructional software, high-interest literature, and direct instruction in reading, writing, and vocabulary skills. Using all of these strategies, along with the proper praise like Dweck suggests will allow students to learn a "Growth Mindset" and eventually develop into master learners. These different strategies used in this reading program are instructional methods that will engage the student allowing them to be more incline to enjoy the work presented to them and learn the material as well.
I have to agree with Frankie in that I believe that Carol Dweck would agree with IP. I think that it's pretty inarguable that in her lecture, she truly stresses the idea that student growth and achievement has less to do with the subject matter or task at hand, but truly with the way in which same said is presented by the teacher to the student. Her research clearly shows that in the two groups, the only difference was the way in which the students were treated. I think that this speaks volumes in support of Instructional Process Programs.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the approaches neither support nor refute Dweck's claims. I don't believe that we are given sufficient information regarding how the teacher handled the approaches discussed in this study, or whether they addresses Dweck's ideas on the Growth Mindset. I think that if there were more evidence of the growth mindset, along with a combination of different aspects of the effective reading programs, there would have been significant growth indicated in these studies.
I agree Hannah. There was not enough information to confidently say yay or nay to whether to not the approaches discussed were in support or refute of Dweck's claims.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the information provided concerning the approaches researched as affective in the classroom did not provide enough clarity to make a strong assumption. However, within the highest-rank strategies implemented in the classrooms, IP was present in quite a few of them. Overall however, I agree with both of your comments concerning Dweck's stance on IP.
ReplyDelete