Today I was able to FINALLY understand what DLT really is. I have been viewing it as a kind of teaching rather than something that influences how we teach. I found it really helpful to see how we would use this theory to help with classroom management which is a pretty hard task in itself. After discussing in class, I realized that through modeling, that is how I truly learned how to act in a classroom. Whether it was a group skit done by other members of my class or the teacher acting out different scenarios, it was much more beneficial when ideal behaviors were modeled. After learning and understanding more about the DLT, I found it interesting that Piaget put age limits on how the DLT works. I think it is hard enough to learn about this theory that being taught using parts of this theory would be even more difficult. I think it's apparent why you can't put age restrictions on how a student learns abstractly or concretely.
After finally grasping the concept of the Developmental Learning Theory, I was much more comfortable discussing and engaging more in group discussion. This made it easier once we started talking about SLT. I think that was because DLT and SLT are related. As it came up in class, the most knowledgeable peer seems to be a connector between the two theories. Both theories seem to rely on this peer, whether it is another classmate or the teacher. They also force us to acknowledge the role of other people in learning and utilize our peers to gain as much knowledge as possible.
I think in order to understand and build off of our knowledge of each theory, we have to truly understand the previous theory to learn about the next one. For example, knowing about the DLT informs us and makes it easier to learn about the SLT because they are related. Although the SLT relies mostly on language because language is socially constructed, they are similar and do have some common characteristics. To be good teachers, we have to be able to take bits and pieces of each theory and apply it to our teaching in order to help our students become well rounded and knowledgeable. This applies to the rest of the theories because they all must have some kind of relationship if they can eventually be used all together.
I have found it easy when talking or writing to refer to DLT as a learning theory instead of style. Yet I often have to stop myself when thinking and consider whether or not I truly consider it as a theory that informs my teaching. I'm still working through that. I agree that once I felt that I had a grasp on the Developmental Learning Theory it was easier to understand the Social Learning Theory. They are connected and do build off of each other. I've been considering the idea that the DLT may be the most concrete learning theory and that as we continue on they will become more abstract. Or perhaps the connecting of more than one learning theory is what makes this seem more abstract. I'm still thinking that one through as well. :)
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be on the right track with DLT and SLT separately, but when you tried to discuss how the two fit together your language became muddled. Keep working through these connections. When you have trouble expressing your ideas, it is likely because the ideas are not fully formed yet and you need to keep working to put them together.
ReplyDeleteI also found the model of class management to be an eye opener for me. I was stuck on using the DLT to inform teaching content and I knew that this of course, would affect the planning of the lesson. I also felt that assesment should be informed by this as well, using the abstract method for testing if the core knowledge is understood but I did not know how the DLT could be used to inform others that were not directly related to content. Now that I understand that modeling is one of the most concrete representations, I have a further understanding of how the DLT can be used to inform all aspects of teaching.
ReplyDelete