Are Educators Ignoring Student's Learning Styles?

Last week in GRAD602, we continued our discussion on how people learn.  We identified 3 prevailing models about how people learn: Bloom's Taxonomy, SOLO Taxonomy, and Shulman Table of Learning.  What got me thinking is something that Jeff said in class...he brought up the rhetorical question about whether research on teaching should inform practice.  Furthermore, he mentioned that the discipline often governs which taxonomy is used in teaching.  I started thinking about this and it brought me to a pretty bold conclusion: I feel that most educators teach the way that they learn rather than how their students learn.  Therefore, the students are suffering in that they do not gain the simple information and knowledge in the class and this subsequently prevents their higher-order of thinking.  Here's how I came to this conclusion...

Early last week, I and a few other fellows in my program went to an undergraduate institution in the surrounding Richmond area to observe the teachers and students in science classes and labs.  The SOLO Taxonomy appeals to my style of learning.

 http://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/

It describes verbatim the process I went through to obtain my Ph.D. in Microbiology and Immunology.  Although this is a huge assumption, I suppose most people who love science and pursue a doctorate in the sciences learn in a similar manner to SOLO.  However, sitting in on these classes last week was an eye-opening experience.  These classes were required for students who were majoring either in nursing or biology.  I felt as if the teachers were conducting their class in a similar manner to the SOLO taxonomy.  For example, the instructors expected students to take their unconnected information (prestructural level) and to hypothesize and theorize about various phenomena (extended abstract).  However, when speaking with individual students, they had no idea how to do such a thing.  They couldn't connect the dots from small picture to big picture.  After studying the various learning styles, this suggested to me that they were not true SOLO learners and that their teachers were structuring their classes in a SOLO fashion which naturally appeals to us scientists.  To help them get from point A to B in an effort to connect the dots for them, I put a larger perspective/understanding on the assignment at hand.  Once they thought about the larger picture, they made the connections with some guided help.  This suggests that the students I spoke with identified with Shulman's Table of Learning.

http://rhetor.blogs.com/learning/2008/01/shulmans-tabl-1.html

They needed the understanding of the big picture first in order to make smaller connections and ultimately lead them to think about higher order hypotheses and theorizing about various phenomena.  What was incredibly eye-opening for me was that each student was capable of making the higher level connections.  However, the manner in which the information was presented was confusing for them and preventing their higher level of thinking.  Now, I am not saying this is how all educators are, but I feel more often than not they teach the way they learn vs. how the student learns. Therefore, as educators we cannot assume that everyone learns the exact same way we do even when talking about specific disciplines.  The goal is to get students to think on a higher level.  Maybe the only way to achieve that goal is to tailor lectures or classes to how individual students learn.  For example, start with the understanding first to help the Shulman learning style students while telling those SOLO learners to "zone out" from the discussion for a second.  Then when the details are presented both the SOLO and Shulman learners can actively engage in the lecture together again.  Additionally, an instructor could flip the class.  I would say it is hard to develop a lecture to appeal to all types of learners, but knowing that there are many types of learning styles in one classroom full of students is a start...  

Pigeon-hole, Combination, or None?

http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/earlycareer/teaching/learningstyles.html

Last week in GRAD602, we discussed how different people learn and how that may influence our teaching beliefs and practices.  It seemed that there was an overwhelming consensus that there were various learning styles.  And as a class, we focused on two distinct learning styles, in particular:  the auditory learners vs. the visual learners.  However, upon further research, it appears that we only scratched the surface when discussing the various learning styles...

Howard Gardner doesn't even use the coined phrase "learning styles."  Instead he addresses that intelligence comes in various flavors and uses the "multiple intelligences" phraseology.  Based on his theory, there are 9 different types of intelligences including:

Linguistic

Logical/Mathematical

Bodily

Musical

Spatial

Naturalist

Intrapersonal

Interpersonal

Existential

On the other hand, Anthony Gregorc believes that how a person learns is based on their type or "style" of mind.  The theory he puts forth suggests that there are 4 different types of mind styles:

Concrete Sequential

Abstract Sequential

Abstract Random

Concrete Random

Then, there is this 4MAT grouping of learning styles.  This system and terminology is based on multiple studies and theories and categorizes people into 4 types based on whether they want to know how, why, what, or what if.

And, I am just scratching the surface here...there are multiple models.

On the contrary, Daniel Willingham believes that the theories of different learning styles is a myth. 

So, here's my thought...

The picture above represents 1 student and brings up a valid point.  Should teachers teach a certain way based on how the students learn?  But, in a class of 20-100+ students, how is that possible?  My mind becomes overwhelmed thinking about how many learning styles might be in a class...so much so that some factorial equation comes to mind when I think about how many different learning styles could be in a class of 20.  I envision this...45645123564+ combinations of learning styles.  With multiple learning styles and intelligences, how can our teaching practices engage all students?  Are there some students that don't fit into the mold and would prove Daniel Willingham correct?  Or can students be a combination such as a type 1, concrete sequential learner with musical intelligence?  Or are students solely one learning style (i.e. type 2 and nothing else)?  Therefore, with all these possibilities it is hard to cater to every student's preference of learning.  Maybe the best idea is to change teaching practices frequently in order to engage more students.  This fits in with what Daniel Willingham recently said in the NPR article (link above)...

Mixing things up is something we know is scientifically supported as something that boosts attention   



Furthermore, the article goes on to state that engaging and maintaing a student's attention will help them learn better.  So in the end, regardless of whether you buy into the different types of learning styles or not...maybe change and mixing it up is truly the best way to teach.

               

What the Craft?

Prior to break, we started discussing the case of Professor Craft.  Even in our individual group discussion prior to the classroom discussion, we started veering off to left field with some of the comments and questions that were brought to the forefront.  Therefore, I am not surprised in the direction the classroom discussion went.

However, I think Teacher Learner brought up an excellent point in his blog post.  He mentions that these philosophies should be mentioned earlier in the course. As a bench research scientist, I often feel like I am ill-equipped to take part in these discussions.  Mainly from the stance that I do not know all of these different philosophies of learning and teaching.  Now put me in a debate on B cells, redox biology, and models for infective endocarditis and I will speak up!  But, these types of discussions are hard for a scientist to engage in especially when context and background information are lacking.  These discussions got me thinking about my future students.  Oftentimes, first-year faculty are forced to teach general biology courses to non-majors.  Therefore, the students often lack context and background information.  It is my responsibility as the course instructor to try to engage all students.  Maybe that takes an overhaul in the way in which the course is designed and taught, much like Craft felt like he had to do for the classes he taught.  It seems that if I can engage more students it is well worth the extra work and effort.   

If Everyone Else Is Doing It, Then Why Can't I?

Last week, we ended Module 1 of GRAD602.  It got me thinking and realizing that I am incredibly stubborn when it comes to change.  Especially technology changes.  Maybe it is a failure on my part to truly learn how the technology works.  Or, the fact that I want to stay off the grid when it comes to certain technologies.  However, my obstinate refusal to embrace these new technologies in the classroom cannot continue.  I have to change.  Because....

Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be.
-John Wooden

When I refuse to change, I am reminded of this blog posting that Nature tweeted (and I retweeted...see I am trying to embrace new technologies, although I have only tweeted 2 tweets...change can be slow, at first!).  This blog entry summarizes a study which concluded that scientists who actively engaged the public performed better academically.  Additionally, this blog entry highlights that the article was from 2008 and it would be interesting to see if this finding still holds up in the world of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and newer social media outlets.  But, is there a time where exposing too much is a bad thing?  The hashtag on Twitter #overlyhonestmethods reveals the everday truths about mistakes in scientific experiments tweeted by scientists themselves.  This article highlights some examples.  However, I did a quick Twitter search of this hashtag and revealed these tweets:

"I said I chose the 36hr timepoint based on the literature, but I actually chose it b/c I overslept the 24hr timepoint"

"I'm sure the measurements were done in centimeters, I mean I'm pretty sure....."

Does this "overexposure" create a bad image for a scientist? 

My first instinct is to say yes.  But, maybe not.  Maybe the public perceives scientists as human when their flaws are exposed making them and the subject at hand relatable and intriguing to the masses.  With the scientific world connected, I think I need to change and become a connected science educator for my future students.  While I feel like I have this blogging thing down, I need to embrace Twitter, Facebook, Diigo, YouTube, and RSS feeds as a viable method for obtaining and sharing scientific knowledge and findings.  If I don't, maybe (as the article points out) I won't outshine academically.  In a world where jobs are hard to come by (especially in academia), I can't afford not to change.  So here's to making a conscious effort at being "plugged-in" to the new and changing technologies out there.  That way, when I do teach students...I will already know various ways to connect with them and hopefully make science exciting for all.            

How I Realized Tagging and Social Bookmarking Is Important!

This week in GRAD602 we discussed social bookmarking and tagging.  To be incredibly honest, I had never given these social media practices much thought in the past.  Until this class and a personal experience in reading a blog with horrible tagging practices, I didn't think these practices were of much use.  Together, they changed my outlook on social bookmarking and tagging.  Here's how I came to this revelation....

For some time now as part of my daily leisurely reading, I follow fashion blogs.  Every once and a while, there is an outfit that sticks out in my mind and I remember it well.  Earlier last week, I wanted to find a particular outfit that stuck out in my mind on this fashion blog I follow.  I knew that blog post was from months ago.  The blogger had tags, but I couldn't locate that blog post using those tags.  Finally, after searching back through months of posts, I found what I was looking for.  At the time, I was annoyed it took so long to find what I wanted, but thought I was the problem and must have been searching incorrectly.  It wasn't until class later in the week that I realized why it took me so long to locate the past blog post.  The blogger's tags were too generic.  She needed to be more specific.  Had she been more specific and straightforward, I would have located it immediately.  Instead, I had to search multiple tags hoping it was located in there (which it wasn't) and ultimately gave up and decided looking through the archives was a smarter and more efficient way to go.

Prior to my experience of reading a blog with horrible tagging practices and this class, I thought these social media practices were not useful to a science researcher or educator.  But, my eyes were opened.  For instance, as a research scientist, we need to be able to recall papers and data quickly that relate to your particular project.  Unless you have a photographic memory, this is hard to do.  I think Diigo is an excellent way to organize all that information.  I had never even heard of Diigo before.  So, when I learned about it in class I was amazed and immediately thought "wished I had used this during my Ph.D. work!" Plus, an added bonus is letting a colleague or student access the folder in order to share information and knowledge.  Additionally, if trying to locate something as trivial as an old fashion blog post made me incredibly frustrated because the blogger had horrible tagging practices, then it made me re-evaluate a student's frustration when they want to recall a blog post on a particular subject matter that might not be so easy to recall.  Having good tags would help alleivate the problem and make the student less frustrated in the long run when trying to recall past subject matter.  Together, a "real-world" example and GRAD602, made me realize that tagging and social bookmarking is incredibly important.             

Dying to Ask A Science Question? Ask Your Science Teacher Via Twitter, Facebook, or Other Social Media Outlets!

This week in GRAD602, we discussed the use of networked communication in the classroom.  While I have always equated Facebook and Twitter accounts as a means for sharing personal information only, I have never considered their use in disseminating important scientific findings to the masses.  So, I decided to fire up Google and search important scientific events that have been broadcasted to the public via social media.  This particular article in the NY Times highlights two important scientific events of 2012

The Mars Rover Landing

(Photo Courtesy of NASA.gov)

-and-

Felix Baumgartner's jump from 24 miles above the Earth 

as two examples of scientific events that went viral via Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.  So, if NASA can embrace Facebook, why can't science teachers?  Because many teachers probably feel that being linked via social media to their students oversteps some boundaries, I think it is important to highlight ways in which social media can enhance learning in a science class.  For instance, here are some ways to use a closed Facebook page in a science classroom:

1) Create polls for students to participate in

2) Send out information to the whole class about important deadlines

3) Disseminate articles to the class

4) Creat classroom discussion boards

5) Post practice exam questions

6) Ask for feedback on exams, lectures, and other classroom activities

7) Create a question board and have both the students and the teacher respond to it

8) Add links to scientific blogs

Similarly, Twitter accounts and the use of hashtags can also be used in the classroom.  However, Twitter usage might be more restricted to disseminating information and asking/answering questions due to the constraint of the 140 characters.  Overall, social media as a means to engage and inspire students is appealing because so many people already use these types of media outlets daily.  Therefore, if a student had a burning science question but didn't feel comfortable asking it during class, then there would be social media outlets for the student to take advantage of for clarification.  In the end, if social media can reach one student and help them learn more about science, become inspired, and keep them engaged both in and outside of class, then establishing various social media accounts for a classroom is a must-do for future science educators, including myself!  

Do Undergraduate Science Classes Employ Chickering's 7 Principles?

As an aspiring undergraduate professor (hopefully in Microbiology and Immunology), I have been reflecting on how typical undergraduate science classes use Chickering's 7 Principles.  Where can they improve?  What principles are not being addressed?

At my undergraduate university, Appalachian State, every science class had two parts: the lecture and the laboratory section.  Looking back and reflecting, it seems the lecture part of the class missed the mark when it came to addressing the 7 Principles.  Basic courses had 100+ students in them.  With this class size, many principles fell by the wayside.  For example:

1) Larger class size often does not encourage student-faculty contact.  In my larger science classes, it was up to individual students to seek professor interaction rather than the professor initiating the contact.  Most of the interactions involved asking a question in class.

2 and 3) The lectures mainly consisted of powerpoints; while the assignments came in the form of multiple choice, short answers, and essay tests that were purely memorization.   There was no cooperation among students or active learning.

7) Because most professors only used powerpoint, different styles of teaching were not presented in order to engage students who have different ways of learning.

To sum up, the lecture part of the course only employed 3 of the 7 Principles.  Those 3 that were addressed in the class, could in some form be linked to the syllabus.  Needless to say, the lecture part missed the mark!

The lab section is a different story...

It addresses 6 out of the 7 Principles.  Here are the ones it addresses:

1) Because the lab is hands-on, students have many questions.  Therefore, professors are present in the lab, walking around, answering questions, and would show hands-on examples in class.

2) Labs were performed with partners.  Therefore, students were forced to interact with each other and to interact with a group sitting next to them, especially if reagents were shared.

3) A hands-on laboratory is active learning.  The student must complete an experiment in order to get a final answer.  The labs often relate to the lecture.  Therefore, a lecture they had received solely by powerpoint earlier in the week, they now get to apply the lecture to a "real world" example.

4, 5, and 6) Good laboratory practices involve taking excellent notes and keeping a well organized notebook.  Laboratory classes required notebooks to be graded by the professors.  4) Professors would grade and give feedback on the quality of the notebook.  5) Because the notebook was used each week during lab, students were required to turn them in on time, and professors had to grade them and return them before the next class.  6)  From the start, professors emphasize a good, meticulously kept notebook because the validity of the experiments come from what is written in the notebook.  Therefore, high expectations in how a notebook was kept was always emphasized and enforced.

However, the 7th Principle is not addressed.  Because the lab is solely hands-on, it does not reach the students who might perform well at hands-on tasks.

In conclusion (sorry this has been so long), I think that lecture science classes need to be improved.  As a future educator in science, I need to start thinking about how to make scientific lectures more engaging, more relatable, and present the material in a method to reach all types of learners in the audience.