Puzzlebrains

I've been reading (way too much) and have hit a tough spot in my proposal. I've come begging for help if anyone of you wonderful teachers can add some insight-I'd be forever in your debt.

How do you "operationalize a psychological construct"? ( and can anyone explain what that means ) I have until Easter Monday to work this out, and it's driving me batty. Two weeks ago my Prof. told me I was off my rocker, but when I dug up an old paper he wrote and showed him a video clip of a speech he gave a few years back he decided that maybe there was something to my ideas (fighting very unfairly I was -If I'm a nutter, then you are too)

In a nutshell, I'm analyzing how our learning style effects our ability to learn languages. There seems to be a mismatch between teaching and learning styles with Chinese learners. They tend to be generally kinesthetic/tactile learners, but teaching tends to weigh heavily on the side of visual/auditory teaching. I'm adding in a manipulative element that stimulates tactile learning to help aid students recall. (ok, so I'm giving them a toy to play with, but the first sounds better)

So how do I test (or prove) that that added element was what changed the learning? Or is that impossible? HELP Please! I want to get back to attempting to solve Scurra's puzzles! (I can't believe I said that ) My desperation has caused me to post here. I seriously wouldn't have done so otherwise, because I can't possibly think of a more boring thing to read about on this forum.

My guess is that "operationalize a psychological construct" means "figure out how someone else thinks". (Which is what you are all trying to do when you are solving my puzzles )

My own personal feeling is that education too often assumes that we all learn in the same sort of way. Obviously that's an over-generalised view, because there will always be exceptions, but on the whole the school system tends to work on the principle that you should bombard someone with data and they will figure out how to piece it together for themselves. Or, worse, that they will be told one way to piece it together which may be completely inappropriate for them but not for others.

I was involved in a very active discussion about pattern recognition at the weekend. Imagine you have 12 different cards on a table, and you need to be able to easily distinguish them. If those cards only have one identifying factor, but that factor works relatively smoothly for most people (and most especially if it works for you!) then you don't always realise that other people are having to put in extra work to decode them before they can process the information. Whereas if you have two or three features that are distinctly different (e.g. a word and a colour) then different people will use those different "entry points" as their own short-cut to identification.

I guess what I'm arguing is that figuring out what sort of learning style suits a particular individual is almost more important than what they are actually learning. Because if you can get that individual into a teaching environment that is oriented towards that style then they are far less likely to feel frustrated by it, and more responsive to making those connections between things for themselves.

Then again, I'm not a teacher, so what do I know?

Scurra wrote:I guess what I'm arguing is that figuring out what sort of learning style suits a particular individual is almost more important than what they are actually learning. Because if you can get that individual into a teaching environment that is oriented towards that style then they are far less likely to feel frustrated by it, and more responsive to making those connections between things for themselves.

BINGO! And that is a very clear way of expressing my thoughts. Want to write my paper for me?

Scurra wrote:Then again, I'm not a teacher, so what do I know?

Apparently more than a lot of teachers, or this wouldn't be a problem for students would it? Formal education being what it is, the teaching environment does not cater to the needs of the individual, but rather aims towards a more central line based on tradition. Unless of course one is lucky enough to have a class of one, it can (almost) never happen. So my thought is the simplest way to help students help themselves learn is to change the teaching style, but this can't be done until there is evidence that students need that change to be made. Everyone "Knows this" but not everyone implements it, and until that starts to happen, teachers have classes of frustrated students. And it's no one's fault but ours.

I've been given a grant by the Uni and if it works-it might mean changes. I've been funded by a corporation and if this works-it might mean changes (and of course more money for the corporation ) But I can't do anything until I can work out how to measure (statistically that is, and by that I quantitative, not qualitative data) how students think.

Thanks for the non-teacher view Scurra I do appreciate it.

I would suggest that "operationalize a psychological construct" is unnecessary technical babble for "make something work for someone who operates in a particular way" (in this case, a kinaesthetic learner.)

How you would PROVE that what you had done had helped them is altogether a different matter. I would assume that you could approach it in various ways:
1. Studying the pupil's physical cues during a teaching session without the aid, and then during another with the aid. I'm meaning noting down signs of concentration lapses, such as fidgeting, pen tapping, leg jiggling, staring out of the window.
2. Records of previous attainment versus attainment with the aid.
3. Questionnaire produced to ask the pupil what difference they found, using both answer choices AND open questioning (why, how, what etc.) where they can actually record their own thoughts.
4. Possible peer analysis - get the pupils to work in groups using both methods, then ask them to say how the OTHER learner fared and which method they seemed to work better with.
5. It's very enlightening to do an analysis of preferred learning styles when you first meet a student. I'll try to get a copy of the one we have used in the past for you tomorrow (can't promise this as the person who made it has now retired, but I will try). This is a series of questions asking the pupil: given a choice, would you prefer...
At the end there is a bit of analysis which highlights if there are any particular trends.

And I don't want to shock anyone, but I totally agree with Scurra when he said

I guess what I'm arguing is that figuring out what sort of learning style suits a particular individual is almost more important than what they are actually learning. Because if you can get that individual into a teaching environment that is oriented towards that style then they are far less likely to feel frustrated by it, and more responsive to making those connections between things for themselves.

I understand that, most parents understand that, it's just the majority of TEACHERS that don't (present company excepted). I'm a massive advocate of trying anything until you find something which works. It doesn't matter how ridiculous it is, if it works FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL, then it's worth doing. If it's necessary to make kids shout words in French as they throw a ball into a basketball net to help them remember, then so be it. (I've actually done that!!) If they need to look at pictures, or have words in different colours to help them, then FINE. If they can learn by mind-mapping rather than reading, good.

But what do I know? I'm not a teacher.

katsmom wrote:Formal education being what it is, the teaching environment does not cater to the needs of the individual, but rather aims towards a more central line based on tradition. Unless of course one is lucky enough to have a class of one, it can (almost) never happen.

With a class environment it IS possible to teach the same thing in 3 or 4 different ways at once, but the teacher really needs to KNOW their stuff in a real (rather than 'learned') way. In the software house I worked, there were a pair of sisters running the reception/office area - one could only learn new computer systems HANDS ON and doing it herself, whereas the older sister could only learn by watching a process and making step-by-step notes in her own 'language' that she could then follow as crib sheets.

They were a JOY to teach together - but life is not always that lucky.

I've found that I use a story-telling approach to my teaching, and a lot of crossover knowledge based on what people already know. The second part is crossover with things MANY people know (of the age I deal with), driving, knitting, dancing, running a house. This may be more difficult in a classroom situation.

At a local group of adults with moderate to sever learning difficulties this week, I saw a set of mini jigsaws. OK - Mini - each one was 3 bits Left->Middle<-Right. But there were LOTS of them all together in a pile. On each was a picture, and some words.

The students were putting them together in interesting combinations - many of which made me laugh, such as:

The Monster --- put on some wellies --- and saved the Princess

The Dog --- climbed a tree --- and met a mermaid

It was only on closer inspection I realized that the words were in different colours on each piece - and if you could find the three of the SAME colour you would get:

The Fireman --- climbed a tree --- and saved the cat

The Prince --- beat the dragon --- and saved the Princess [sexist or WHAT? ]

Obviously this is way below the level of what you are talking about, but it shows that other aproaches are out there for those that look for them. I mention this as you specifically talk about language learning.

The teacher is already wondering if i could 'scan' these into the computer and let them drag and drop them into sentences.... Sneaky woman

[Speaking of sneaky women...

(fighting very unfairly I was -If I'm a nutter, then you are too)

]

I've created Spreadsheet resources for this group that they all enjoy very much. Number bonds / Coins making a total / Times tables with gaps to fill. Such individual generation of resources is not usually available, but it can hone in on specific problems in a very realistic way that gives positive feedback and guidance when the wrong answer is given.

Bunny's ideas for 'validation' all look good. The feedback from the students (especially if they've overcome something that was previously blocking them) is powerful information. There's nothing better than when someone says "That makes sense now", or "I hadn't thought of it like that", or the classic "Why didn't my teacher at school say that?"

You mention a toy... Toy = Fun... Fun can very easily equal learning, especially if they thrive in the physical, tactile environment. Looks like you're onto something, and if I can help, I will.


Oh! Also a non-teacher here - well officially

Apparently toys are too much like play and not academic enough. Well duh! That's why I wanted to play with them.

Switched topics to not be such a quack-and was still called a quack, but then I found another paper written by GOD and he's decided to let me run with it. I guess my ability to find out he's as nutty as he says I am has finally worn him down.

But that's not why I'm posting. This is:

Bunnylump wrote:Well I will wish you all the very best with that!! And yes, I do think you're barking mad - I'm FAR too lazy to do anything like that!!

Sorry Bunny! I just couldn't resist. Being called barking mad by you is a real treat! I feel like I've finally made it into the PuzzleBrains family! What an honour to be allowed to join such an outstanding bunch of nut cases

I've not had time to do puzzles, but I love reading the posts you all put up. It keeps me in tears. When I start to feel down, I always know I can come back over here and you all will just lift my spirits!

Well, happy to help in any way. Even if it's just for the amusement factor...