Review the learning the process with relevence to the educational theorists
...ls simply cannot cognitively function without them, and with a whole class approach the attention needed simply isn’t possible. Taking this discussion further, the need for support within a lesson corresponds with the idea of “scaffolding”. Bruner (1963) who pioneered the notion of scaffolding states: “…one sets the game, provides a scaffold to ensure that the child’s ineptitude can be rescued by appropriate intervention, and then removes the scaffold part by part as the reciprocal structure can stand on its own” (Bruner 1983, cited in Baumann et al, 1997 P.73) When a teacher asked a question he was keen to give a response, this was evident in Geography and French where the teacher used questioning as a medium for scaffolding. Although his answers were often inaccurate and out of context it shows willingness to learn. The fact that he gave an incorrect response could be put down to his weaknesses in listening and oral skills. In relation to the support needed, pupil A needs level 5 of Wood’s level of support (1988). Support where its very controlling, general and requires a whole demonstration. Pupil A’s clear uneasiness with whole class teaching and the need for support, a practical lesson in Maths uncovered significant findings. The lesson was based on practical problem solving using the computer. Throughout the lesson without support of any kind remained ON TASK (see appendix III). This signals that pupil A might have preference for a learning style that is practical and investigative in nature. From a theoretical perspective Pupil A appears a kinaesthetic learner and learns through “doing”. Bruner’s stages of learning Pupil A is a strong Enactive leaner “representing memories of actions which become stored…enabling actions to become automatic” (Capel et al 2001 P.239). One major finding from my observations was the direct proportionate relationship between solo work and ON TASK behaviour. This was a trend throughout my data (as seen in appendix IV) where a challenging solo writing task was set and responded positively showing uncharacteristically long periods of concentration (see bellow) Along with his motivated response to practical work and responding well to solo work, flags support for the Piagetian ideology. Piaget saw a child as a “lone investigator” where the child makes sense of the environment through individual “self discovery” (Borne 1994) Pupil B Pupil B was a year 7 student in mostly middle and top sets his behaviour was ON TASK for the majority, focusing on the work set. As a general observation I found pupil B to be a very multi-faceted learner, responding to most teaching styles and deliveries. In maths he showed a behaviour that might offer an insight into his motivational type. The teacher started off a game of Fizz Buzz, it involved the whole class and there was a reward system in place. The reward seemed to heighten his anxiety level and motivation. He ended up winning the game out of the whole class and seemed to get a great deal of satisfaction. Throughout the game he displayed a very competitive gamesman like attitude. This signal’s his motivation originates extrinsically: “Extrinsic motivation refers to those learning situations where the impetus for the motivation stems from the fact that successful completion of the task is a means towards some other end…satisfaction is derived from completing the task for its own sake and is not derived from the task itself” (Baumman 2003 p More specifically he is motivated from Achievement and Instrumental motivation (Baumann 2003). This can be a valuable source of motivation if he gets the sense of beating others and winning. However a performance orientation of this kind can be particularly debilitating if failure is constant (find a quote). Observations in PE showed an aptitude towards group work. The lesson focused on passing skills and moving into space, working in-groups of 6. Pupil B clearly enjoyed the experience, he was an interactive member of the group and looked to get involved at every opportunity. This illustrative of Vygotsky (1978) where learning very much a “social, collaborative and interactional activity” (Cohen et al 2002 p.169). In conjunction with Vygotsky’s findings was that of (Topping 1992). Topping emphasised the importance of talk and communication between peers to stimulate learning (1992). During the lesson there were many reciprocal relationships where advice and feedback were given between each other. This was further supported by Brown (1994) where he developed the idea “learning communities where group work provides a vehicle for learning” (cited in Capel et al 2002). A lesson in RE unearthed further information with regards into his learning styles and level of intelligence. The delivery was a question and answer session central to this was the use of the board, using pictures and symbols of specific religions. During the lesson behaviour was ON TASK in response to whole class Q and A indicating good listening skills. (see appendix V). During the lesson he showed a superior level of understanding compared to his colleagues. He had the ability of making a connection between different symbols and the type of religion. In addition to this he was able to explain the concept of religion and the inter-differences. In applying Bruner’s stages of learning, pupil B showed a bias towards both Iconic and Symbolic learning. Through imagery he was able to “pictorially” visualise the symbol of religions and offer an abstract explanation. Pupil B’s ability to think symbolically could indicate a maturing of the learning process moving away from “human sense” to “disembedded thought”. Disemdeded thought is the “ability to see the general truth which makes similar things become united as a concept” (Baumman et al 2003 p.58). Donaldson postulates pupils will move away from human sense as they mature cognitively. Form my observations Pupil B looks to have made the transition. At this point I feel it necessary to bring the Piagietan idea of ages and stages (1972). Based on maturation, Piaget categorised a child’s cognitive development into three stages. According to Piaget Pupil B should be representative of the “concrete operations” stage. However his knowledge and observed understanding replicates a more advanced stage, operating at “formal operations” stage. Martorano (1977) argued that the stages are far too rigid and that not all students develop at a set pre-determined rate, and from my findings I would be inclined to support this. Pupil C Pupil is in top set for all subjects and is clearly a focu...