Moore, K.D. (2009). Effective Instructional Strategies: From Theory to Practice, (2nd Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

In chapter 5 of Moore’s book, the author posits that exposition with interaction teaching is more effective than plain exposition teaching. I would have to agree for the most part with this assertion. However, I wonder how the factors of investment and age come into play here. If I were to think back to my (oh so recent) college days, lecture was the most commonly accepted form of teaching because it was the most efficient way to get across the most material in the least amount of time. As Moore indicates, students were expected to sit quietly and take notes while the professor lectured. This was and continues to be a fairly common facet of the college learning environment because it was based on the assumption that a college student is a self-motivated learner. Related to this assertion is the argument that even older, brighter students will not listen to a lecture for more than 20 minutes. I am not sure I agree with this point because I think there are so many different factors going into play her such as a student’s propensity toward the content area, the lecturing style of the teacher, or something as simple as tone of voice. In the second half of the chapter, Moore presents questioning as an art form in which higher-level and higher-order questions are valued over lower-level and lower-order questions. This is based on the reasoning that students will retain and grasp concepts longer if they are forced to think, analyze, critique, or evaluate the material they are being taught instead of just learning how to regurgitate information. What I found most interesting about questioning was the discussion of wait time. I am guilty of not giving students enough time to answer questions because I always feel pressed for time to get through the lesson. Since I teach middle school, I know that saving face is kind of important at this age. Accordingly, I hope to find a more effective (and less embarrassing) way to question ALL of my students so that they know how to get to the answer if they do not know it right away. In the same vein, I hope to get to the point where ALL of my students feel comfortable enough to raise their hand and ask when they do not understand something. I think that may be a key facet of questioning that Moore fails to address in this chapter. A lot of it stems from investment and community-building which is something I need to work on next quarter.

Moore, K.D. (2009). Effective Instructional Strategies: From Theory to Practice, (2nd Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

In chapter 6 of Moore’s book, the author speaks to the merits of using indirect teaching methods, particularly discussion. As a liberal arts major (and therefore someone who has been in a lot of discussion-based classrooms), I have always found discussions to be an extremely interesting and effective way of getting material across, while learning about the different perspectives and views of your peers. Having said that, what I think Moore fails to address is how discussions can be used for hard science and math subjects when these content areas are so fact-based. Rather, the heuristic method of teaching appears to be a more effective method in the math classroom, particularly problem solving and discovery learning. The two biggest drawbacks that come with these styles of learning though are time (which Moore acknowledges) and the importance of drilling fundamentals. In fact, the second drawback is something that we have been discussing as of late in our ITE 404G class. While student-driven learning has an important place in learning and retaining material, there is something to be said about rote memorization and practice especially in mathematics. In order to reach the more desired teaching plateau of student-driven learning, it is argued that teachers must feed students the fundamentals. The rationale behind this argument is that the students need to internalize these basic skills to the point that they become natural so that they can spend more brainpower on the analysis and critical thinking aspects of student-driven learning. On a related side note, I find the idea of the “discrepant event” in the Suchman inquiry fascinating. Anytime you can engage students by providing them with a phenomenon that appears out of the ordinary and asking them to figure out how it works they will be more engaged. Teachers must also have a good sense of their students’ capabilities and limitations at the start of the inquiry-based learning activity though so that the students are able to arrive at the desired conclusions. Otherwise, the students will give up after the first ten minutes.

Saphier, J., Haley-Speca, M.A. & Gower, R. (2008). The Skillful Teacher: Building YourTeaching Skills, (6th Edition). Carlisle, MA: Research for Better Teaching.

In chapter 11 of this text, what stuck out most to me was the sentence that no one model has been proven to be more effective or superior than another model. Although this may have been mentioned in passing at the very beginning, I saw it as an indirect argument regarding the effectiveness of a teacher. In other words, it doesn’t matter what model or style of teaching you use as long as you, the teacher, ensure that your students are learning and are engaged in the process. Having said that, it is clear that the authors are suggesting that the more models that a teacher has at his or her disposal the better off he or she is in the classroom. I tend to agree with this assertion. Teachers who are more adept at working in different models into their classroom are able to engage their students’ on a number of levels as well as play to the different learning styles that are present in their classroom. Of all the models that were discussed, what I found most intriguing was the “Advanced Organizer Model” being a math teacher and all. I like this model because it builds on previous knowledge and skills that were already attained, while allowing students the creative freedom to demonstrate and apply what they have learned. If I were to put it another way, it appears to be aligned with the “I do, we do, you do” approach to learning mathematics. In many ways, the “Advanced Organizer Model” enables the use of “Concept Attainment” which is getting more toward the ideal classroom which is student-driven and student-led. However, in contrast to Moore, the authors of this text appear to acknowledge that a mathematics teacher must provide students with some background knowledge and practice first before cutting them loose to do inquiry-based, discovery learning.