The Authority,
or lecture style
The authority model is
teacher-centered and frequently entails lengthy lecture sessions or one-way
presentations. Students are expected to take notes or absorb information.
·
Pros: This
style is acceptable for certain higher-education disciplines and auditorium
settings with large groups of students. The pure lecture style is most suitable
for subjects like history, which necessitate memorization of key facts, dates,
names, etc.
·
Cons: It’s
a questionable model for teaching children because there is little or no
interaction with the teacher. Plus it can get a little snooze-y. That’s why
it’s a better approach for older, more mature students.
The
Demonstrator, or coach style
The demonstrator retains the
formal authority role by showing students what they need to know. The
demonstrator is a lot like the lecturer, but their lessons include multimedia
presentations, activities, and demonstrations. (Think: Math. Science. Music.)
·
Pros: This
style gives teachers opportunities to incorporate a variety of formats
including lectures and multimedia presentations.
·
Cons:
Although it’s well-suited for teaching mathematics, music, physical education,
or arts and crafts, it is difficult to accommodate students’ individual needs
in larger classrooms.
The
Facilitator, or activity style
Facilitators promote self-learning
and help students develop critical thinking skills and retain knowledge that
leads to self-actualization.
·
Pros: This
style trains students to ask questions and helps develop skills to find answers
and solutions through exploration; it is ideal for teaching science and similar
subjects.
·
Cons:
Challenges teacher to interact with students and prompt them toward discovery
rather than lecturing facts and testing knowledge through memorization. So it’s
a bit harder to measure success in tangible terms.
The Delegator,
or group style
The delegator style is best
suited for curricula that require lab activities, such as chemistry and
biology, or subjects that warrant peer feedback, like debate and creative
writing.
·
Pros:
Guided discovery and inquiry-based learning place the teacher in an observer
role that inspires students by working in tandem toward common goals.
·
Cons:
Considered a modern style of teaching, it is sometimes criticized as eroding
teacher authority. As a delegator, the teacher acts more as a consultant rather
than the traditional authority figure.
The Hybrid, or
blended style
Hybrid, or blended style,
follows an integrated approach to teaching that blends the teacher’s
personality and interests with students’ needs and curriculum-appropriate
methods.
·
Pros:
Inclusive! And it enables teachers to tailor their styles to student needs and
appropriate subject matter.
·
Cons:
Hybrid style runs the risk of trying to be too many things to all students,
prompting teachers to spread themselves too thin and dilute learning.
Because teachers have styles
that reflect their distinct personalities and curriculum—from math and science
to English and history—it’s crucial that they remain focused on their teaching
objectives and avoid trying to be all things to all students.
What you need to know about your teaching style
Although it is not the
teacher’s job to entertain students, it is vital to engage them in the learning
process. Selecting a style that addresses the needs of diverse students at
different learning levels begins with a personal inventory—a self-evaluation—of
the teacher’s strengths and weaknesses. As they develop their teaching styles
and integrate them with effective classroom management skills, teachers will
learn what works best for their personalities and curriculum.
Our guide encapsulates today’s
different teaching styles and helps teachers identify the style that’s right
for them and their students. Browse through the article or use these links to
jump to your desired destination.
Emergence of the teaching style inventory
How have teaching styles
evolved? This is a question teachers are asked, and frequently ask themselves,
as they embark on their careers, and occasionally pause along the way to
reflect on job performance. To understand the differences in teaching styles,
it’s helpful to know where the modern concept of classifying teaching methods
originated.
The late Anthony F. Grasha, a noted professor of psychology at
the University of Cincinnati, is credited with developing the classic five
teaching styles. A follower of psychiatrist Carl Jung, Grasha began studying
the dynamics of the relationship between teachers and learning in college
classrooms. His ground breaking book, Teaching
with Style, was written both as a guide for teachers and as a tool to
help colleagues, administrators and students systematically evaluate an
instructor’s effectiveness in the classroom.
Grasha understood that schools
must use a consistent, formal approach in evaluating a teacher’s classroom
performance. He recognized that any system designed to help teachers improve
their instructional skills requires a simple classification system. He
developed a teaching style inventory that has since been adopted and modified
by followers.
·
Expert:
Similar to a coach, experts share knowledge, demonstrate their expertise,
advise students, and provide feedback to improve understanding and promote
learning.
·
Formal authority:
Authoritative teachers incorporate the traditional lecture format and share
many of the same characteristics as experts, but with less student interaction.
·
Personal model:
Incorporates blended teaching styles that match the best techniques with the
appropriate learning scenarios and students in an adaptive format.
·
Facilitator:
Designs participatory learning activities and manages classroom projects while
providing information and offering feedback to facilitate critical thinking.
·
Delegator:
Organizes group learning, observes students, provides consultation, and
promotes interaction between groups and among individuals to achieve learning
objectives.
Although he developed specific
teaching styles, Grasha warned against boxing teachers into a single category.
Instead, he advocated that teachers play multiple roles in the classroom. He
believed most teachers possess some combination of all or most of the classic
teaching styles.
How does
differentiated instruction affect teaching styles?
Carol Ann Tomlinson, a
professor at the University of Virginia, is an early advocate of differentiated
instruction and a pioneer in the development of learning-based teaching styles.
If Grasha laid the groundwork for 20th-century teachers to adopt styles tailored
to match their personalities and strengths, Tomlinson has advanced this theme
into the 21st century by focusing on differentiated instruction.
In the simplest terms,
differentiated instruction means keeping all students in mind when developing
lesson plans and workbook exercises, lectures, and interactive learning. These
student-focused differences necessitate instructional styles that embrace
diverse classrooms for students at all learning levels and from various
backgrounds without compromising the teacher’s strengths.
What teaching style is best for today’s students?
Whether you’re a first-year
teacher eager to put into practice all of the pedagogical techniques you
learned in college, or a classroom veteran examining differentiated instruction
and new learning methodologies, consider that not all students respond well to
one particular style. Although teaching styles have been categorized into five
groups, today’s ideal teaching style is not an either/or proposition but more
of a hybrid approach that blends the best of everything a teacher has to offer.
The traditional advice that
teachers not overreach with a cluster of all-encompassing teaching styles might
seem to conflict with today’s emphasis on student-centered classrooms.
Theoretically, the more teachers emphasize student-centric learning, the harder
it is to develop a well-focused style based on their personal attributes,
strengths, and goals.
In short, modern methods of
teaching require different types of teachers—from the analyst/organizer to the
negotiator/consultant. Here are some other factors to consider as teachers
determine the best teaching method for their students.
Empty vessel: Critics of the “sage on the
stage” lecture style point to the “empty vessel” theory, which assumes a student’s
mind is essentially empty and needs to be filled by the “expert” teacher.
Critics of this traditional approach to teaching insist this teaching style is
outmoded and needs to be updated for the diverse 21st-century classroom.
Active vs. passive: Proponents of the traditional
lecture approach believe that an overemphasis on group-oriented participatory
teaching styles, like facilitator and delegator, favor gifted and competitive
students over passive children with varied learning abilities, thereby exacerbating
the challenges of meeting the needs of all learners.
Knowledge vs. information: Knowledge implies a
complete understanding, or full comprehension, of a particular subject. A blend
of teaching styles that incorporate facilitator, delegator, demonstrator, and
lecturer techniques helps the broadest range of students acquire in-depth
knowledge and mastery of a given subject. This stands in contrast to passive
learning, which typically entails memorizing facts, or information, with the
short-term objective of scoring well on tests.
Interactive classrooms: Laptops and tablets, video
conferencing, and podcasts in classrooms play a vital role in today’s teaching
styles. With technology in mind, it is imperative that teachers assess their
students’ knowledge while they are learning. The alternative is to wait for
test results, only to discover knowledge gaps that should have been detected
during the active learning phase.
Constructivist teaching methods:
Contemporary teaching styles tend to be group-focused and inquiry-driven.
Constructivist teaching methods embrace subsets of alternative teaching styles,
including modeling, coaching, and test preparation through rubrics scaffolding.
All of these are designed to promote student participation and necessitate a
hybrid approach to teaching. One criticism of the constructivist approach is
that it caters to extroverted, group-oriented students, who tend to dominate
and benefit from these teaching methods more than introverts; however, this
assumes introverts aren’t learning by observing.
Student-centric learning does
not have to come at the expense of an instructor’s preferred teaching method.
However, differentiated instruction demands that teachers finesse their style
to accommodate the diverse needs of 21st-century classrooms.
Age of the
proactive parent
Regardless of what style a
teacher adopts, it’s important for teachers to develop positive attitudes, set
goals, and establish high expectations for students.
“Assume students can excel!” education authors Harry and
Rosemary Wong declare. As former teachers with a combined 80-plus years of
educational experience, the Wongs emphasize in their best-selling book, The First Days of School: How
to Be an Effective Teacher and their more recent, The Classroom Management Book that
successful teachers share three common characteristics:
·
effective classroom management skills
·
lesson mastery
·
positive expectations
All instructors, when
developing their teaching styles, should keep in mind these three goals, as
well as the primary objective of education: student learning.
How does classroom diversity influence teachers?
It is abundantly clear that
today’s teachers are responsible for students with a diverse range of learning
abilities. The 21st-century teacher does not have the luxury of “picking the
low-hanging fruit” and then leaving the rest of the tree for experts who
specialize in children with behavioral issues or learning disorders.
Today’s teachers must develop
instructional styles that work well in diverse classrooms. Effective teaching
methods engage gifted students, as well as slow-learning children and those
with attention deficit tendencies. This is where differentiated instruction and
a balanced mix of teaching styles can help reach all students in a given classroom—not
just the few who respond well to one particular style of teaching.
No comments:
Post a Comment