Jan 29th - All is well with ECI 517 and my login to the blog

Session 3, Unit 1:

The Audio-Tutorial approach to learning struck me as a stark contrast to the traditional thought of lecture teaching.  Truly, in this day and time, I know of few teachers who deliver stoically their instruction using only lecture as their mode of material deliverance, but it was interesting to see how an entire course (biology in this instance) had been remade into the likeness of the AT model.

What interested me the most about this "experiment" was the final results.  Not that I rushed through to the end of the paper to see if it was Col. Mustard with the Candlestick in the Library, but I wanted to see the outcome nonetheless.  Though the overall passing/fail were comparable, it was the reflection on the learning from the students themselves that told the true outcome of the class.  They felt they received more out of the class in general...that the learning was deeper.

This deeper learning was of course from the small group sessions they did rather from the GAS/General assembly sessions.  These smaller, more intimate group sessions allowed for a greater comfort of the material int he give and take of ideas flowing from each other rather from the instructor only.  The idea that the small sessions were than concluded with the quiz on each session concerning the material also allowed for the students to walk away with something, though not tangible, more permanent than simply the lecture had previously.  As Kulik concluded in his paper, A-T is comparable to the Lecture method, but lacking in terms of comparison from the PSI method.

Now we must speak of the PSI method/Keller:  It feels like A-T but as the readings say, it is more objective based.  This reminds me of a correspondence/distance learning course I took to get my mathematics certification.  Your own pace, but completion of the objective was required before one could move ahead.  In most high school settings, this would be the style of learning that I have seen.  In fact, I am gearing up to implement a module or two for a homebound student in my Marketing class.  The thing that caught my eye the most about the Keller method was the instant feedback.  Between the self pacing, more personalized instruction and the feedback was the greatest draw of this method for me and for possible application in my classroom.


Share any common foundations?
Quite so.  The main difference is the whole approach with A-T.  A-T really strived to be lecture on tape...at a distance...with several small assembly sessions to bring the kids along and to keep their cadence throughout the course.  The commonality between PSI and A-T is the focus on a non-lecture environment for the benefit of the student.  Both of these methods approached this lectureless format a bit differently, but with the same goal of removing the direct instruction to one of greater functionality for the student.


Barriers/Benefits and the like?
Motivation and sticktoitness would be the greatest drawbacks of both.  There is something to be said about the pacing of a teacher in front of you.  I am not saying that in itself drives students, but the teacher cheerleader can push one to a regiment.

But if one can overcome this stumbling block, both have the potential to either deliver the same (A-t) if not better (PSI) results from regular lecture.  This intrigued me.  Was it really from the delivery method? or have we as a society turned off our receptors to lecture as a whole just like overuse of antibiotics makes one resistant to the benefits therein?  I see the duality of the PSI approach, hearing it, seeing it, replaying it, applying it (though only sometimes).


Current Application
I see this as being the next step in my teaching.  I know the lecture model is nearly dead.  It isn't until the kids seek out the answer and bring back a problem do our time together really click.  Objective based learning is all we have done for the last 4 years in Marketing due to the class set-up/guidelines from the state.  To take these objectives and present them to the students in different forms such that all students, regardless of their individual learning styles can take hold of the material and master it, yes, this has a future in my class.

I  look to better fulfill this ideal when we break fro summer thus affording me the time required to truly overhaul the deliverance of the curriculum for benefit of the students.  I see great benefit in frankensteining these learning methods into something I think the students will gain from in my classes.

Go Go Gadget!
As mentioned above, I have a student who just was placed on homebound status.  Part of the draw of my class is not the material, but rather me.  I am very animated in my delivery and by doing so, my energy is shared with the kids.  I really feel a Podcast or concept video series (made up of shorts) no more than 5 minutes long each to describe/highlight the learning without videoing the entire class.  I may be fun, but 90 minutes of me repeatedly would probably get on my nerves.

I have previously tried to make a webquest, but I haven't found they work too well in the exploring of the marketing concepts.  It is me and my creativity doing battle.  This is simply something I need to work harder on.