 |
Investing
in the power of teachers
to improve teaching and learning. |
     |
|
  |
Project
#18 1997 Acknowledgments This research project has provided us with a new and different experience in teaching and learning; we have worked hard and learned much. We wish to acknowledge the support which we have received during the past two years. In particular, we want to thank the middle years students (and their parents) from St. Philip School; they were the ones who taught us about strategic learning. We are grateful to our principals Peter Boyko and Peter Nicholson who encouraged and supported our project. Also we acknowledge Bev Hanson, Ron Muench, and Brian Noonan who provided support on behalf of the Saskatoon Catholic Board of Education. Thanks to all of you. Finally, we wish to thank the McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching and the Saskatchewan Teachers Federation for their financial support for the project.
Information processing and cognitive learning strategies as general learning theory have been influential over the past decade or more. Indeed, instructional psychology has emphasized this approach in teacher training for some time (Gagne, 1985; Mayer, 1987). Further, Leinhardt (1992), Derry (1988), Weinstein et al. (1989), Weinstein and Mayer (1986), Wolfe (1993) and other have described how such strategies can be applied to classroom learning. For example, Weinstein and Mayer (1986) have described a conceptual framework for a cognitive approach to learning which is in contrast to traditional behaviorist (e.g., stimulus-response) learning. The framework includes eight general categories of learning strategies which, when taught explicitly, can improve classroom learning. Wolfe and Sorgen (1990) have adapted a general information processing model as a basis for developing specific learning strategies such as visualization, use of mnemonics, and graphic representation. Each of these strategies is based on students' use of their short and long-term memory to improve classroom learning. Other researchers (Derry, 1988; Weinstein et. al, 1989) have described how direct instruction in learning strategies can improve student learning. Clearly, student learning can be influenced by cognitive learning strategies based on general information processing theories. Cognitive theories of learning have also influenced new curricula and teaching strategies currently being advocated by the Saskatchewan Department of Education. Those curricula are based on principles that underlie learning strategies and tactics derived from information processing theory and other theories of cognition including:
Typically, curriculum documents do not link curriculum objectives with any one view of student learning. However, a review of the revised elementary and middle years language arts and mathematics curriculum guides, for Saskatchewan, indicates an emphasis on the general cognitive approach to learning. One of the assumptions of cognitive approaches is that student learning improves when students are taught explicit learning strategies. This is sometimes called strategic learning. For example, students need to develop strategies for using their memory in both language arts and mathematics and to develop meta-cognitive strategies (e.g. 'knowing what you know') in both areas. This general approach is quite clear in the instructional planning components of the revised Saskatchewan language arts and mathematics curricula. This approach is evident across grade levels, that is, for elementary, middle and high school curricula. An important concern for Saskatchewan teachers and principals is the effective implementation of these new curricula with their cognitive approach to learning. Recently the Saskatoon Catholic Board of Education undertook to implement the new provincial Language Arts and Mathematics curricula for middle years students (Grades 6-9) using an innovative school-based approach. One of the principles underlying the local implementation plan is that effective general learning strategies and tactics can be applied to student learning in both of these two basic curriculum areas. Following the principles of cognitive learning, it was assumed that there are learning strategies common for both language arts and mathematics. A further assumption was that the implementation of both language arts and mathematics curriculum could be more effective if there were more explicit focus on the learning strategies underlying the curriculum objectives. Consequently the implementation would be more student centered, more efficient, better integrated across curriculum areas, and produce more meaningful learning for students. These assumptions raise the following general research questions: To what extent does teaching cognitive and meta-cognitive learning strategies and tactics to students facilitate the integrated implementation of new language arts and mathematics curricula in middle years education (grades 6-8)? The general purposes of this study were; first, to examine the teacher and student perceptions of the development of effective learning strategies in the middle grades (grades 6-8); and second, to examine the effects of those strategies on integrated curriculum implementation in language arts and mathematics. The specific objectives of the study were:
Setting.
Data Collection.
Table 1 - Stages of Project Development Stage 1 - Teacher Development (Sept. - Dec. 1995)
Stage 2 - Instrument Collection (Nov. 1995 - Feb. 1996)
Stage 3 - Field-Test (Feb. 1996 - June 1996)
Stage 4 - Implementation/Experimentation (Oct. 1996 - May 1997)
In the first stage (teacher development) there were three sources of date. One source was the results of interviews with the four teachers on the team. Structured interviews were conducted in November 1995 and again in February 1996. The second source of data was the weekly reflective journals kept by teachers for mathematics and language arts classes. The journals contained teachers’ observations on their evolving understanding of the efficacy of teaching strategic learning to middle years students. These journals were summarized and synthesized to identify major and minor themes. A third source of the data was the minutes of the periodic research team meetings during which the research team shared and discussed insights on strategic teaching and learning and the transfer of specific strategies and tactics in both language arts and math. These minutes were interpreted and analyzed to develop a sense of the teachers’ growth in knowledge and expertise. In stage two and three the research team collected instruments and inventories from journals, articles and books related to various dimensions of strategic learning. During that stage teachers gained knowledge of the principles and practices of strategic learning based on the work of Derry (1988), Wolfe and Sorgen (1990), Weinstein et al. (1989) and others. As well the teacher team developed an implementation plan for teaching strategic learning to students. In the fourth (experimental) stage During the period from October, 1996 to March, 1997 grade 6 and grade 8 students at St. Philip school were taught the specific learning strategies in language arts and mathematics developed in stages two and three. During this time students were taught to use the techniques as outlined in Appendix A. Specifically the strategies included visualization, mind maps, mnemonics, team huddle, pegword strategy, graphic note-taking SQR4 and others. At the outset of this period of implementation and experimentation the university researchers conducted an evaluation of students’ knowledge and skills in strategic learning. Two types of instruments were used. First a questionnaire was administered to assess students’ knowledge of specific strategies (see Appendix B). The questionnaire was administered to all students within a ten day period in October 1996 at the beginning of the strategy-based instruction experiment. Second, five subtests (Reading Comprehension, Mathematics Concepts, Mathematics Problem Solving, Mathematics Computation, and Visual Materials) of the Canadian Test of Basic Skills (CTBS) were administered to grade 6 and grade 8 students at both St. Philip School and the control school. The tests were administered first in October then again in May. Thus there was a pre test and post-test academic achievement score for both the students who received specific instruction in learning strategies (St. Philip School) and those who did not receive such instruction (control school). Data Analysis. Three types of data analysis were undertaken. First, information was obtained on teachers’ understanding of strategic learning. Transcripts of the interviews, journals, and minutes of the meetings were analyzed to discern major and minor themes. A major theme was inferred if three or four of the participating teachers expressed the same opinion, feeling, and sense of the issue in response to the structured interview questions, journal entry, or discussion at the team meetings. The results were organized on the basis of the interview data and the first and the second data analysis. Responses to the interview questions were merged with the journals and the minutes. For the first set of interviews, journals and minutes to the end of January 1996 were incorporated. For the second set of interviews, all the data from February 1, 1996 to June 30, 1996 were considered. Finally, a synthesis of these results was made and related to the relevant past research on strategic instruction and learning. Second, for the student questionnaire a classification key was generated based on the responses of students, although in many instances students provided more than one classifiable response per question. The responses to each questionnaire were recorded and temporary categories were developed. A second reading was subsequently conducted to verify the categories and a final reading confirmed the categories and the subsequent response frequencies. The third form of analysis was a statistical comparison of the pre-and post-test scores of students from grade 6 and grade 8 at both St. Philip and the control school. Analyses of Covariance (ANCOVA) and Multi Variate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) were used to examine scores on the CTBS for each of the two schools. The independent variables were grade (grade 6 and grade 8) and gender; dependent variables were the results of the five CTBS subtests for both the pre-test and the post-test. In summary, this project was conducted in four distinct stages over the course of two school years. In the first year the focus was on teacher professional development and training in the principles of strategic learning. In the second year strategic learning approaches were implemented and their effectiveness evaluated in a research project. Data were collected in two of the four stages of the project. In the first stage qualitative data (interview and meeting notes, journals) were analyzed to develop an understanding of teachers’ conceptions of strategic learning. In the fourth stage two types of data were analyzed – additional qualitative data plus results of student achievement. In each case the qualitative data were first summarized by a university researcher then synthesized into themes which captured the views and opinions of the reachers and or students. The results are presented with respect to various aspects of the two stages of teacher development and for various dimensions of student achievement. Teacher development (stage 1). There were no major themes evident in the first phase of the data sets, however, a number of minor themes emerged from the interview data, the teachers’ journals and the meeting notes. Following is a summary of those minor themes.
Teacher development - follow-up (stage 1). The second sets of interviews were conducted three months after the first set of interviews. It was expected that the teachers would know more about learning strategies and this knowledge would result in more clarity and precision in answering the interview questions, writing journals, and discussing the activities and situations at team meetings. In this data set, there were several both major themes and minor themes related to their knowledge and understanding of strategic learning. The major themes were those where there seemed to be a consensus among teachers including:
There were also several minor themes in teachers' reflections. These demonstrate somewhat less consensus among teachers.
In summary, the teachers' journals, interviews and meeting notes were summarized at two points; first following a period of professional development and training in the use of learning strategies, and second following a period of actually using the learning strategies with their students. After the first period of teacher development there was little consensus among the teacher team with respect to strategic learning. However after the second period of professional development there was much more consensus among the team. Students understanding of strategic learning. To obtain information on students' perceptions of strategic learning, a questionnaire was administered to grade 6 and grade 8 students at St. Philip school and the control school. The questionnaire (Appendix B) concerned students' knowledge of learning strategies and the application of strategies in language arts and mathematics. Following is a summary of the students' responses:
Student achievement - experimental comparison The third form of analysis was a comparison of results of CTBS scores from the two schools. A Multi variate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was conducted using the five subtests of the CTBS as dependent variables. Pre-test and post-test scores on each of the five sub-tests were compared for grade 6 and grade 8 students at both St. Philip School and the control school. Results of the MANOVA indicated that there were no significant differences between schools and/or genders on the CTBS subtests (Appendix D). As shown there were no significant differences between pre- and post test scores for grade 6 students nor for grade 8 students at either school. Similarly with respect to gender, there was no difference in pre- and post-test scores between boys or girls at either school. The two general purposes of this study were to examine the teacher and student perception of strategic learning and to examine the effects of strategic learning on curriculum implementation. Teacher Development. The analysis of the journals of the teacher-researchers revealed changes in their knowledge and understanding of strategic learning. There was an emerging consensus among the teachers as illustrated by the thematic analysis of the two data sets. The first set yielded no major themes and some minor themes while the second set of interviews yielded five major themes and twelve minor themes related to learning strategies. Teachers, it seemed, were developing a deeper understanding of the principles and practices of strategic learning. Perhaps most important was the teachers' focus on student learning as opposed to a focus primarily on teaching methodology. That is to say that teachers were very conscious of how their students were processing information as well as on how they (the teachers) were presenting information. After the second set of interviews, some differences emerged in the teachers' responses. For example, some teachers believe that a learning strategy is important in both learning and remembering information. As one noted, "A learning strategy is a method that the students use to best attain or retain" what is being learned. After the first interview, the teachers' comments about learning strategies were imprecise, for example, those who mentioned learning did not mention retrieval, just as those who mentioned retrieval did not mention learning. Therefore a movement to understanding learning strategies in terms of learning and retrieval is significant. Also, in the first set of interviews, the teachers thought less about teaching strategies in relation to the needs of the students. So in the three months between the first and second interviews, it appears that the teachers had developed an understanding of learning strategies and the teaching of such strategies. The specifics of the teachers' knowledge about learning strategies, was also examined. For example, during the first interview, when asked about strategy usage by successful students in math, a teacher responded: "I see them as being somewhat methodical...I can see that there is a method in place." In the second interview, this same teacher, when asked the identical question, responded: "I think the most successful strategy I've seen is...is a student's ability to recognize a breakdown in process." During the second interview, when asked about the strategies unsuccessful students in math use, this teacher replies that such students probably "have fewer strategies" and do not use "as great a variety" as successful students do, but admits that he/she cannot identify the unsuccessful strategies. This more explicit awareness of strategic learning suggests that teachers had a deeper understanding of the concept. Similarly, teachers' approval of strategies used by successful students in math and language arts, a minor theme in the first set of interviews, became a major theme in the second set. For example, the answers given in the second interview in relation to the students' success in language arts are very basic. Teacher A answered: "Self talk, and some questioning about what they've read." "Self evaluation." Teacher B: "...breaking down the parts, and doing the self talk". He/she also mentioned mapping - planning, thinking in advance. Only Teacher C alluded to the students' abilities to see relationships to previous knowledge and experience. In the first set of interviews, the teachers said that they preferred to teach in the domain where they felt most comfortable. At that time, two of them preferred teaching language arts, two math, and one expressed a previous preference for language arts and was no less certain. When asked about the preference of the students, they responded in identical fashion. During the second set of interviews, when asked about teaching preference, three responded that they had no preference, and three responded that they felt students preferred language arts. It is likely that the teachers' increased confidence in teaching language arts resulted in at least one of them now having "no preference" in teaching domain as well as increased knowledge and confidence in correcting strategy usage. The four questions which focused on the practice of journal writing and reflective practice facilitated the emergence of themes in both sets of interviews. Teachers generally agreed that journal writing prompted reflection and that this reflection was important in influencing subsequent decisions in their teaching and guiding of their students' learning. Other than ongoing concern about time in relation to the act of journal writing, they did not see any problems with reflective practice. In summary, these results suggest that teachers had constructed their own unique sense of the conception of strategic learning and teaching. They all had moved from being overwhelmed and lacking confidence in the concept of strategic learning to a developing sense of control and reflection. Immobility and risk sensitivity have been replaced with venturesomeness, risk taking, and permitting students to hypothesize, try, revise, elaborate, and generalize. These teachers have felt confident to share their process of implementation of learning strategies across at least two areas, language arts and mathematics, with colleagues at the school and at conferences. They have given examples of specific strategies they have used in their classes particularly those which their students like to apply in text comprehension and mathematics problem solving. Teachers demonstrated the ability for theory building in their own unique way. Their views of the students were shaped by their emerging perspectives on teaching and learning. From the initial somewhat controlling view of students, teachers began to permit control and options to their students. Student achievement. As described earlier there were no significant differences statistically between students in the two schools (St.Philip School and the control school) for either grade 6 or grade 8 students during the course of the year. A pre/post-test design was used for this aspect of the study, therefore one can conclude that the extra time and effort used to develop the strategic learning skills had no detrimental affect on students' achievement in the basic skills. As described earlier, the results of the analysis of the student questionnaire suggested that knowledge of specific learning strategies was related to the age of students. Grade 8 students indicated a greater understanding than did grade 6 students. It would have been of interest to have information on students' perceptions following the instructional period. Curriculum implementation It is difficult from the results of this study to determine the extent to which instruction in strategic learning may have facilitated implementation of the revised provincial language arts and mathematics curricula. If the curricula expect students to develop explicit learning strategies such as those outlined in Appendix A, clearly there was growth on the part of teachers and students in strategic learning. As well this study demonstrates the importance of context in strategic learning; in this a case cognitive and meta-cognitive skills were taught through language arts and mathematics. It is of interest that the skills seemed more appropriate in language arts than in mathematics. Curriculum developers may wish to consider that in the future. On the other hand curriculum implementation is a long term process, occurring over several years. It would be necessary to conduct a follow-up evaluation to examine more specifically the effect of teaching strategic learning as a way to implement new curricula more efficiently. This project has provided information on several important components of strategic learning in language arts and mathematics. Researchers in cognitive learning (Gagne, 1985; Mayer, 1987) and others have promoted the idea of cognitive learning strategies as an alternative (or a complement) to behaviourist principles of classroom learning. Others such as Derry (1988), Wolfe and Sorgen (1990), and Weinstein et. al. (1989) have provided a framework for the integration of specific cognitive skills. This project has provided a practical classroom-based application of those principles. The teacher-researchers conducted in depth readings on cognition, meta-cognition and learning strategies. Initially it was critical to differentiate between learning strategies and teaching strategies. The researchers found a wealth of information on teaching strategies but a lack of literature on learning strategies. Through discussions and reading the team identified a number of learning strategies which underlie both language arts and mathematics. The researchers determined that learning strategies would be most effectively implemented through instruction that was explicit, embedded in curriculum and instruction. Further, the strategies needed to be applied in a meaningful context with frequent opportunities for practice over an extended period of time. The researchers concluded that learning strategy implementation must be viewed as a thinking process versus a set of skills to be taught in isolation. This philosophy is key when considering the implications for the implementation of the new language arts and mathematics curricula. Students began to expand their definition and understanding of achievements. They made statements defining school success as more related to ones' doing their best as opposed to a more traditional view of success as being defined in terms of marks. Students' changing paradigm was evident in the way they approached examination situations. They approached testing with less apprehension and worry. The emphasis was on which strategy was best for them to use to prepare for the exam. Students at St. Philip School demonstrated an increased motivation to being explicitly taught the various strategies. The novelty to the students may account for the motivational change, their personal skills developed through this teaching. The move to use this allows for a variety of student learning styles to be highlighted. The students were encouraged to explore which strategy best fits for which situation. A variety of product choices, and evaluation techniques, enables the individual needs of the students to be met. As well, the results of the comparison between St. Philip School and the control school indicate that a specific focus on learning strategies can assist students' learning and has no negative effect on academic achievement. The study has provided the teacher researchers with much practical and theoretical knowledge. They have developed an understanding of strategic learning through numerous resources, seminars and professional memberships; specifically, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Saskatchewan Middle Years Association and the International Reading Association. The project has allowed the students to learn about and begin to internalize the importance and process of learning strategies. They were able to explore numerous methods of instruction and process this information by the explicit strategic teaching that occurred. The teaching team has garnered the skills to incorporate the use of teaching learning strategies as an integral portion of their repertoire and teaching philosophy. The teaching of learning strategies is useful in a variety of grades and situations. The students at the grade 6 level warmed to the teaching of the strategies. They explored as one would a favorite game. The grade 8 level students viewed the strategies as another tool to assist in their learning. They explored the contextual uses of the various strategies. The maturity level of the students could account for this difference as both grades were taught the same strategies by the same teachers. For example, if a teacher was working on graphic-note taking, they would use the same lesson with both grades of students. The inclusion of learning strategies as a part of the teaching process has enhanced the effectiveness of the teachers to meet a larger variety of student needs. This in turn has a positive effect on the students definition of school effectiveness. It is a process that could be extended beyond the reaches of individual classrooms. The learning community plays a large supportive role in the exploration of new strategies to enhance the effectiveness. The benefits of using meta-cognitive strategies has been noted and a collection of specific learning strategies was developed. Given what we have learned about strategic learning during the project, there are a number of suggestions for further research. First, it will be of interest to explore the extent to which a learning-strategies approach can enhance school achievement. The results here demonstrate no negative effects on standardized measures of achievement, however, it would be of interest to now if classroom assessment would reveal differences in achievement. Second there is a need to examine the application of the learning-strategy approach at other grade levels (eg., primary, high school). Thus, there is a need to develop instruments which teachers could use to identify learning style and learning strategy choices of students.
A - Bibliography
of Resources on Strategic Learning
|
|||||||||||||
