Aims of the Module
The module aims to enable students to develop their theoretical, practical and professional understanding of the key educational issues.
These will include an understanding of:
• The creation of a positive classroom ethos and a stimulating learning environment
• Creating the holistic and inclusive classroom
• Working successfully with learners/parents/carers and other professionals
• Current legal requirements, national policies including guidance on the safe-guarding and wellbeing
Knowledge and Understanding
A1 their understanding of the role of Child development and how it impacts on learning
A4 the use of ICT to support their own professional development
B1 Can relate theory and practice through recognising the relevance of theoretical concepts to observations from practice
B4 demonstrate initiative in synthesising complex information in order to solve problems both of a theoretical nature and in practice within a professional context.
C1 demonstrate confident technical expertise in the adoption of appropriate presentational and communication tools to aid learning in a range of settings, and for an audience of their own peers
C2 Skills of effective presentation
C3 Observations& recording of practice
C5 Competent undertaking of research task
D1 Professional autonomy, e.g. through the capacity to take responsibility for one’s own and the group’s learning, ability to evaluate and criticize one’s own and the group’s work;
D2 Communicates ideas clearly and effectively within the group and presents them to a wider audience in ways, which engage and convey the significance of the ideas.
D4 Manage own time and resources to meet own objectives
Assessment of the Module
This module will be assessed through
1) A 5 minute (maximum) presentation with a copy of the presentation and notes submitted on Moodle. During this you are expected to link the work of one educational theorist to your work-based practice. You should use the ‘notes’ on your slides to expand on what you intend to say in your presentation. This equates to 1000 words. You will need to make use of references both to established literature and to your learning log.
2) The Learning Log should demonstrate links between theory and practice drawing on professional work based experienced. (equivalent to 1000 words).
The two pieces of work are equally weighted and form one assessment of 100%
• Prepare 6 slides; the first slide should be the title slide.
• Use the slides to highlight to the audience and reader the main points of your discussion.
• Use the ‘notes’ facility to develop your points in an essay style format. The discussion in the notes section needs to contain reference to relevant reading and make links to your learning log. Optionally you may submit the notes as a separate word file numbering the sections by slide.
• The notes after the final slide of the ppt should include your full references go here for details of how to use the Harvard Referencing System. Not part of word count.
• There will be examples of how to structure the assignment provided as the module progresses.
The Learning Log:
Your learning log (1000 words) you will be expected to use the log to critically reflect upon work-based practice rather than describe events
• identification of critical incidences
• notes of observations (as appendices)
• interviews/discussions with children/carers/other adults
You should include a first page describing the setting and acknowledging your ethical standpoint. (not part of word count)
DDS extensions are only given on the written assignment NOT on the presentation.
Assignments submitted after this deadline will be capped or entered as a fail unless Extenuating Circumstances are successfully claimed for late submission (see Course Guide details). Tutors are not able to grant extensions and times are absolute so plan to submit early.
1. A comprehensive and thoughtful analysis of selected reading related to the identified learning theorist.
2. Penetrating critical reflection of the links between theories of learning and work-based experiences.
3. Written work highly coherent and logical in its structure. It is consistently relevant demonstrating a high level of communication through selection, synthesis and summary.
4. Notes on final slide presents appropriately wide ranging and correctly referenced sources.
5. Presentation is coherent and logical in its structure. It is clear and relevant demonstrating a high level of communication through selection, synthesis and summary.
6. There is evidence of a wide range of technical and creative skill. The presentation is innovative and engaging and of an appropriate length.
60 – 69%:
1 Thoughtful analysis of selected reading related to the identified learning theorist.
2. Insightful critical reflection of the links between theories of learning and work-based experiences.
3. Written work is well structured and logical. It demonstrates a good level of communication through the appropriate selection and summary of materials and good standard of written English.
4. Notes on final slide presents a range of appropriately and correctly referenced sources.
5. Presentation of slides is well structured and logical. It demonstrates a good level of communication through the appropriate selection and summary of materials.
6. There is evidence of technical skill. The presentation is interesting and of an appropriate length.
50 – 59%:
1. Some analysis of selected reading related to the identified learning theorist.
2. Some reflection of the links between theories of learning and work-based experiences. Some questioning or critique is evident.
3. Written work is structured. Materials presented are appropriately selected and clearly communicated.
4. Notes to final slide present an appropriate and mostly correct list of references.
5. Presentation is structured. Materials presented are appropriately selected and clearly communicated. 6. There is evidence of technical skill. The presentation is of an appropriate length.
40 – 49%:
1. Some limited analysis of selected reading related to the identified learning theorist. Some reliance on description apparent.
2. Links are made between theory and practice but there is limited reflection.
3. Written work has some structure. Materials presented are usually appropriately selected and generally clearly communicated. There may be errors in written English but meaning is clear.
Notes for final slide present a list of references with some accuracy however errors are apparent.
Presentation is often structured. Materials presented are usually appropriately selected and generally clearly communicated.
There is some limited evidence of technical skill. The presentation is of an approximately appropriate length.
Bare Fail 30%-39%:
1. Little analysis of selected reading seldom related to the identified learning theorist.
2. Very few links between theories of learning and work-based experiences these tend to be descriptive.
3. Written work has a structure which is inconsistent and at times unclear. English usage interferes with meaning.
4. There are some limited references, style does not conform to LSBU guidelines and is unclear.
5. Materials selected are not always appropriate. Oral communication is not clear but there is sufficient to identify some points of the discussion.
6. The presentation is poorly presented. Presentation is not of an appropriate length.
1. No apparent analysis of selected reading: theorist not easily identified.
2. No effective links between theories of learning and work-based experiences.
3. Written work has limited structure and is unclear or inconsistent. English usage often makes meaning unclear.
4. There are no or very limited references, style does not conform to LSBU guidelines and is unclear.
5. Materials selected are not appropriate. Oral communication is unclear it is difficult to identify any points of the discussion.
6. The presentation is poorly presented. Presentation is not of an appropriate length.
Feedback will normally be given to students 20 working days after the final submission date of an assignment. This will be made available on your page via Moodle.
The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordingly.” (Ausubel, 1968)
The above quotation encapsulates everything Ausubel believed about Meaningful Verbal Learning. The success of learning is dependent on what is already known. In other words we construct knowledge first by observing and recognising events and finding a place for them in our cognitive or mental structure (JOURNAL). He believed that the “…incorporation of a learning task into relevant portions of cognitive structure, so that a meaningful relationship is established, implies that the learning material becomes an organic part of a particular hierarchically organised conceptual system” (Ausubel, 1963). To learn meaningfully, we must relate new knowledge to relevant existing knowledge. Ausubel believed that meaningful learning can be achieved through deductive reasoning (Woolfolk et al., 2010), a logical process in which a conclusion is based on the concordance of multiple premises that are generally assumed to be true (Whatis.com/definition/deductivereasoning). He also promotes the view that the concepts we learn can be both general and very specific and these are organised in a hierarchical fashion in our cognitive structure. Educators must present information in a way that the learner can understand, retain and recall. It should also help them to develop and expand their thinking skills. This would include ensuring lessons are planned and delivered in manageable ‘chunks’ (JOURNAL). Lessons need to be built around previously learnt material (JOURNAL). Questions teachers must ask of themselves when planning lessons must include: what previous experiences has the learner had to help them understand this new information and what skills will the students need today in order to access the lesson? (JOURNAL)
Although he acknowledged the existence of other types of learning such as visual and discovery, he believed that meaningful learning was vital to enable future learning. Unlike Jerome Bruner he does not favour discovery learning as he believed that not all discovery learning had meaning.
A main focus was the development of the Subsumption Theory. Subsumption theory is the theory of how information is subsumed. To fully understand this theory it is useful to look at the following definition of subsume from Dictionary.com:
1. to consider or include (an idea, term, proposition, etc.) as part of a more comprehensive one.
2. to bring (a case, instance, etc.) under a rule.
3. to take up into a more inclusive classification.
From an education viewpoint, new information is subsumed or included in the students’ cognitive structure, where it finds its place amongst existing knowledge. Previous knowledge is the lynch pin of subsumption theory, often described as the ‘anchor’. During subsumption there are two processes: Learning and Retention. “Learning refers to the process of acquiring meanings from the potential meanings presented in the learning material, and of making them available. …Retention on the other hand, refers to the process of maintaining the availability…of the acquired new meanings” (Ausubel, 1963).
He defined two types of subsumption: correlative, where new information is an addition to what is already known and complements that knowledge, and derivative subsumption, where new material or relationships can be derived from the existing structure (Cooper, 2014). It can also be referred to as ‘figuring out’. (JOURNAL)
In order to assist in the subsumption process, David Ausubel created a tool called Advance Organisers. Unlike many other theorists, this was his only practical contribution to the classroom environment. He believed that learners would achieve more, remember more and be more successful students if they were given these organiser tools.
So what are they?
“An Advance Organiser is information presented by an instructor that helps the student organise new incoming information” (Mayer, 2003).
An Advance Organiser can take many forms: verbal, graphic, an experience, a video. It should strengthen the cognitive structure. It could be seen as a ‘warm up’ to what is about to be learnt. An example in the classroom environment is when the introduction to a new topic is given and students are asked to think about what they know about it, discuss in pairs or groups and then share this knowledge with the class (JOURNAL ). It could be argued that graphic organisers would certainly be more appealing to the younger learners in the 11-16 age range, where visual aids are a key part of their learning (JOURNAL).
The Advance Organiser tool aids the teacher in presenting the new information as effectively as possible. Students must organise pre-existing knowledge in their minds in a structured way so that they are receptive to receiving new concepts. Advance Organiser’s help with this process. Learners can identify linked information and can add to it in a logical manner. Their use should also have a positive impact on the quality of note taking, as students’ focus will be more precise (JOURNAL).
Ausubel felt that how subject content was being presented in the classroom environment was very important and he broke down the process into three parts:
• How the knowledge is organised – the content part
• How the mind works when processing new information – the learning part
• How teachers can be mindful of the above when introducing new topics – the teaching part
When giving the organiser, the teacher must highlight what is going to be important in the material about to be presented and bring to mind any previous applicable knowledge (JOURNAL) . It is NOT a lesson overview. It will give a hint as to what they are about to learn. Their purpose is to make new material easier to learn and to prepare the learner for what is forthcoming. However, to touch on what was discussed earlier, the student must be able to understand and interpret the organiser and it must reveal its relationship with any previous learning. Without these factors, it is unlikely to be a success.
After creating the Organiser, he categorised two types: Comparative and Expository.
A Comparative Organiser will introduce material that is familiar for students to recall prior knowledge and then allow for comparing and contrasting to take place.
An Expository Organiser is to be used to introduce new unfamiliar material that students will need in order to understand the content of the lesson, which is about to take place.
The below gives a visual of how teachers may meet the criteria (Joyce et al., 2000)
Introduce Advance Organiser Introduce Learning Material Strengthen Cognitive Structure
Lesson Aims Present Material Consolidate with existing
Present Organiser Maintain attention Promote active reception learning
Identify Characteristics Make organisation explicit Critically discuss subject matter
Give Examples Make learning material explicit by presenting in a logical order Clarify
Provide Context Make connections
Repeat and prompt existence
of learners prior knowledge
In the classroom, methods such as the sharing of prior knowledge as a group would be in keeping with Ausubel’s intentions. In today’s world we could view his methods as an early application of mind mapping. He saw the cognitive structure like a jigsaw, with a specific place for different types of knowledge. Additionally, Advance Organisers, when used for group work, certainly have some of the same characteristics as brainstorming.
Of course the success of the Advance Organiser model could be argued to be dependent on a number of factors. Learners need to be cognitively ready and this goes back to Ausubel’s view that his theory works best for students above the age of 11, where they are more likely to be at the same cognitive level. The learner must also want to digest the new information and build it into his prior knowledge. The teacher is critical in how the Advance Organiser model was conveyed initially. Was there a clear introduction? Was the new information introduced in a logical order? Was the supporting graphic material suitable? Was there opportunity for students to ask questions?
Although they might be used for revision and assessment purposes, this was not their primary purpose and as we have discovered they were developed to be used during the learning process.
He carried out a number of studies, which confirmed that Advance Organisers do create a positive impact on students’ learning. Ausubel noted that some were critical of them, stating that there was no criteria on how to construct them, making them vague. He responded to his critics in a journal (Ausubel, 1978) by stating that they “always depend on the nature of the learning material, the age of the learning, and his degree of prior familiarity with the learning passage”. It was also his intention for Advance Organisers to be inclusive and not to favour specific ability levels. He notes that “advance organisers are designed to favour meaningful learning” (Ausubel, 1978).
In conclusion, Ausubel certainly made a significant contribution to the theory of learning. He was committed to the teacher’s role in engaging the learner by using Advance Organisers and in turn was convinced that they would only enhance the learning and retention process. This view is central to current thinking of students owning the learning process and being able, as a result, to set themselves targets for achievement. However he remains a theorist without a high and his theories unheard of. Maybe his time will come round again.
You should demonstrate links between theory and practice drawing on professional work based experienced. (equivalent to 1000 words).
There are several theories of learning such as, cognitivist and behaviourism, humanism and its academics are literacy in the field of teaching and learning. I am going to talk about how Maslow’s theories are affecting my daily teaching and how they can support to learning in my specialised subject area (ESOL). Therefore, in this journal I will focus humanism theory and my own teaching. Maslow’s (1943, 1954) hierarchy of needs includes five motivational needs, often depicted as hierarchical levels within a pyramid.
I am currently working as an ESOL teacher at Community Learning Centre. I always prepare my lessons plan (Appendix I) and scheme of work according to my students’ profile in terms of their abilities and level. One student has lack of motivation and does not want to put any efforts on his work. He uses any excuses to avoid and wants a constant reminder of his tasks. Maslow (1943) stated that people are motivated to achieve certain needs. When one need is fulfilled a person seeks to fulfil the next one, and so on. The other 6 learners are much able to do their work by themselves, but one student is hyperactive, clever and finishes class activities before anyone else. He will start conversations and will joke for a considerable time unless he is occupied with an extra work; whereas the second student who is a girl has some sort of mental issues. She giggles or laughs at a quite regularly. In addition she has to leave the class in a specific time because she takes medicines. Also my communication with the students was not as effective as it should be. I have realised that I should have consider using a combination of voice tone and body language during my lesson. All these issues combined with some others create a noise which my lesson will not be delivered effectively.