I think Helen hit the nail on the head last week when she said that there was a hunger for pedagogy in GRAD602. In fact, I am one who thrists for more pedagogy. However, I completely understand how Jeff mentioned there isn't alot of time built into the schedule for an in-depth coverage of pedagogy. Something he proposed last week really resonated with me and will fulfill my hunger and quench my thirst for pedagogy. If an outsider came to me asking for a list of scientific papers, research labs, scientists, and pivotal stories that unveil the last 20+ years in viral immunology research (my expertise from my Ph.D. work)...I would be able to hand them a detailed list with references. It would help paint a picture of the prevailing theories in immunology. This list by no means encompasses every aspect of viral immunology. It would just give the individual a starting off point and would help facilitate further more in-depth research. Therefore, that is what I would like in GRAD602. A potential list of papers, books, and authors that will identify prevailing theories in pedagogy. Because it is out of my expertise, I am often overwhelmed when I start to delve into the research. As I am sure someone in education would be overwhelmed had they tried to figure out viral immunology research without some help. So, Jeff mentioning a potential reference list for pedagogy would be a great supplement to the class. Because it is just that-a supplement, it will not take up valuable time and it will hopefully fulfill the hunger for those searching for more pedagogy in this GRAD602 class!
I agree with the idea of many members of the class being hungry for more pedagogical instruction. I also think at the very least a list of key players (authors, etc.) in the field of pedagogy would be very helpful in getting us started in our hunt for pedagogical knowledge. If you're like me all you need is a taste and a good place to start and then you're set to figure it out from there. I think they have given us this in some senses (e.g. we as students could further explore publications from some of the authors of the readings for class), but I am always open to more 'people to follow.' They also give us some of this through Twitter links and links shared in the class Diigo, but we as a class can enhance those resources too with our own suggestions.
ReplyDeleteYour post drove some interesting conversation between David and I in our office. On the one hand, there are certain people and research that we could easily point people to. In my eLearning Theory course, we build a historical map from Behaviorist (1940s) to Cognivitist (1970s) to Constructionist (1990s) to finally Connectivitist (2000s) approaches to learning. I like the work Mishra and Koehler did on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (see http://www.tpack.org) As John Medina noted in his BRAIN RULES book and video that we shared a couple of weeks ago, we do know some things about how people learn ... and there is a lot we do not know. It is an evolving field, and the readings we have placed in our various sessions have pedagogy in mind.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I agree with Jeff that this is a vocation and life work. We can give you a taste, but trying to reduce it to an annotated bibliography in some ways reduces it in ways that do not feel comfortable.