6/12/23 – An active learning article stated, “Therefore, active learning as designed and implemented by typical college biology instructors may superficially resemble active learning used by education researchers, but lacks the constructivist elements necessary for improving learning” because “constructivist theory argues that we can expect students to retain serious misconceptions if instruction is not specifically designed to elicit and address the prior knowledge students bring to class” (Andrews, et al., 2011). Thus, instruction containing collaboration or a collaborative learning activity in it is not truly what improves learning. The collaboration or collaborative learning activity must address the prior knowledge students are bringing to the content and route out the misconceptions contained in that prior knowledge. After that, learning will improve with the content and be retained.
This requirement makes designing lessons more learner centered. An instructor must create activities that not only address misconceptions that are easily known, but also uncover those that the instructor may not already realize are there for the learner. This is where being able to have a PLC with experienced and new instructors collaborating over content is important. Thus, PD or PL needs to be designed with these small groups of teachers in the same content area in mind in order to make the PL more meaningful. Making choice available for these types of workshops will enable them to meet their students needs proactively versus reactively (Ed Can, 2014). I think this is one reason our quarterly grade level PLs on our campus are well received along with our weekly “Collaboration Wednesdays.”
Additionally, Goodwin’s article shared that “when teachers were given guiding questions for their collaborative conversations and protocols for observing classrooms, peer coaching was more incisive and productive” (Goodwin, 2015). This is something that we try to do as an instructional coaching team on my campus, and it is nice to see a study support this action and effort made by the coaches.
Andrews, T. M., Leonard, M. J., Colgrove, C. A., & Kalinowski, S. T. (2011). Active learning not associated with student learning in a random sample of college biology courses. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10(4), 394–405. http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0061
EdCan Network. (2014). Innovation that sticks case study. OCSB: Collaborative Professional Development. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUusuw-xdr4
Goodwin, B. (2015). Research says/does teacher collaboration promote teacher growth? Educational Leadership, 73(4), 82–83. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/dec15/vol73/num04/Does-Teacher-Collaboration-Promote-Teacher-Growth%C2%A2.aspx
Wings and a Wand 