Blog Entry #1

Throughout our first classes we have been building an understanding of learning theory and curriculum content. Drawing from our class discussions, assigned readings, and the BC ELA IRP for elementary/middle years, reflect upon and define:

(1) The characteristics of a learner in elementary/middle years ELA

According to Piaget’s Constructivist theory, the students in my future classroom will not be blank slates for me to simply “write on”, but rather they will all come together with a rich variety of knowledge and experiences, or schemas, that will inform their learning. They will come from many backgrounds, with vast differences in their cultures, socioeconomic statuses, learning styles, and learning levels. I will have to scaffold (Vygotsky) and support their learning by creating a “purposeful, caring, and supportive classroom” (Nancy Atwell) in which I address the students’ differences while creating a classroom culture of respect and unity.

In his Sociolinguistic model, Vygotsky said that learning doesn’t happen in a vacuum, but rather it is immersed in cultural and social settings. This ties in with Piaget’s theory that the people build upon their prior experiences when learning. All together, this Social Constructivism suggests that I as a teacher take into account the learning that has been done outside of the classroom when I teach and that I work with the individuality of my students rather than squashing out their uniqueness.

It is important for me to encourage the active participation of my students and to “teach lessons that allow students to apply what they are learning” (Tompkins et al). This means that I must find a way to engage all the different types of learners in a single classroom and be sure that they are developing the skills and strategies that the curriculum requires.

(2)The positive and negative aspects of the BC ELA IRP in supporting your teaching of those students

For me to support and scaffold the students’ learning, it is important that I am also being supported as a teacher by the Integrated Resource Package (IRP). The IRP is useful in that it is outcome-based; in other words, it tells me what my students must be able to do by the end of the school year. However, the IRP does not give explicit guidelines for how to teach the specific subjects. For example, one PLO strategy for grade one students is to “use diagrams, sketches, and pictures from books to prompt their writing,” (BC ELA IRP). This PLO explains what students should be able to do, but it does not tell the teacher specifically which diagrams to use or what the writing has to be about or how the teacher is to teach the lesson. Those factors are up to the teacher to decide. This quality of the IRP can be viewed as either an asset or as an annoyance for teachers.

Some teachers (especially ones who are just beginning their careers) may find that the IRP does not provide enough guidance with specific examples of how to teach so that students are able to reach the required outcomes. Other teachers will appreciate the freedom they have to teach the way they choose to. This opportunity for variety also is probably positive for the students as well; unconventional teaching and learning is often the most effective.

While the IRP is full of good information, the most important information can be difficult to pinpoint because it is laid out in long, repetitive, and wordy paragraphs. A more effective layout would include more bulleted lists of key points, more chart and diagrams, and perhaps a media component which would link certain vague ideas to pictures, videos, or other websites with further explanations. Also, the glossary is very useful for finding the meanings of some of the more confusing concepts, especially for a new teacher like myself.