Effects of Instructional Activities

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

In this chapter three issues have been addressed: factors affecting the instructional process, discussion about effects of instructional activities onto some variables and research suggestions. In the first section, the effectiveness of some variables onto instruction process is briefly analyzed. In the second section, a wide discussion about effects of the instructional activities onto five interlocutors (pupils, teachers, parents, school, and society) is made, and at the end of the chapter, some research suggestions are presented.

Keywords

Pedagogical Content Knowledge Instruction Process Personality Type Instructional Activity Effective Teacher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Glossary

Assessment

Assessment is the process of gathering data on student learning or the measurement of pre-determined criteria.

Behaviour

observable actions that can be seen and counted (Moore 2000).

Collaborative Learning

“An instruction method in which students at various performance levels work together in small groups toward a common goal” (Gokhale 1995).

Constructivism

View of knowledge as constructed by individuals acting withing a social context that molds knowledge but does not determine absolutely what constitutes knowledge (McNergney and McNergney 2009).

Crossdisciplinary

Viewing one curricular subject from the standpoint of another.

Curriculum integration

Curriculum integration and thematic teaching are also terms used to describe teaching methods that include interdisciplinary studies (Jacobs 1989).

Curriculum

Courses are constituting an area of specialization in the secondary educational institution (Canady and Retting 1996).

Effective instruction

Instruction that enables students to acquire specified skills, knowledge, and attitudes, and which students enjoy (Reiser and Dick 1996)

Epistemology

Branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of knowledge or how we come to know things (McNergney and McNergney 2009).

Evaluation

The formal reporting about a system, practice, individual, or group and a performance grade within the report (Danielson and McGreal 2000).

Activities (Lecture, review of previous materials, demonstration, board work, video clips, and reading assignments) currently observed in a traditional setting (Canady and Retting 1996).

Facilitator

A person assisting in needs identification and learning strategies for students (Knowles 1973).

Feedback

Providing the learner with answers to exercises and other information about progress in in learning.

Individualized instruction

Instruction tailored to the individual abilities of students. Means of individualizing instruction include allowing each student to proceed through instruction at his or her pace, providing different instructional materials for different students, and allowing different students to work on different objectives (Reiser and Dick 1996).

Instructional activities

The steps (events) that take place when the instruction is presented to students (Reiser and Dick 1996).

Instructional models

Deliberate, explicit, complete plans for teaching that can be fitted to students and objectives (McNergney and McNergney 2009).

Instructional strategy

The daily transactions that occur between teachers and students which lead to the attainment of the identified outcomes. These transactions should include multiple materials, techniques, and activities supported by modeling, intensive coaching, supervised practice, and monitoring

Instructions

Planned action, practice, or procedures for teaching (Canady and Retting 1996).

Knowledge

A type (or domain) of learning outcome that focuses on the ability to recall and state-specific information (Reiser and Dick 1996)

Learning centers

Situations designed to provide individuals or pairs of students the opportunity to practice skills extend knowledge and skills beyond those gained by the typical class, rehearse knowledge and skills before assessment, and practice skills that have not been mastered in an earlier assignment or activity (Canady and Retting 1996).

Learning

The assimilation of new information into the existing structure, and accommodating or modifying the existing structure to deal with the new information.

Mentors

People who assist students by being their guides, advisors, leaders, or tutors (Evans 1992).

Multidisciplinary

The combination of several content areas that are concerned with one problem, but without intentional integration (Jacobs and Borlands 1986).

Pedagogical content knowledge

Particular teaching knowledge necessary to impart content knowledge (McNergney and McNergney 2009).

PerformanceAssessment

Assessment based either on observation of a process while skills are being demonstrated or on the evaluation of products created (Stiggins 1997)

Personality

A set of individually and distinctive features from other people. Personality can also describe as a complete set of behaviors that are associated with the character traits of the individual (Jung 1971; Myers 1998).

Personalizing instruction

Instruction and course objectives are based on the unique needs and abilities of each student (Conti 2004).

Psychomotor domain

That area of learning devoted to becoming proficient in performing a physical action involving muscles of the body.

Teacher-centered learning

Direct instruction, sometimes synonymous with expository or didactic teaching, in which the teacher is the major provider of information (Borich 1988).

References

  1. Akdeniz, C. (2016). Case studies: Teaching behaviours of teacher candidates in their pre-service training. In O. C. Adıgüzel (Ed.), Congress book of XVIII congress AMSE-AMCE-WAER-teaching and training today for tomorrow. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi.Google Scholar
  2. Akdeniz, C., & Erişti, B. (2015). Kişilik ve Öğretim Süreci. Saarbrücken: Omniscriptum.Google Scholar
  3. Borich, G. D. (1988). Effective teaching methods. Columbus : Merrill Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  4. Canady, R. L., & Retting, M. D. (1996). Teaching in the block: Strategies for engaging active learners. Princeton, NJ: Eye on Education.Google Scholar
  5. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowledge, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Conti, G. (2004). Metacognitive enhancement and error correction: An investigation in the impact of self monitoring strategies on L2 Italian student writing. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Reading, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  7. Danielson, c., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, V A: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  8. Diaz, S. L. (1989). The home environment and Puertorican children’s achievement: a researcher’s diary. In B. K. Satir (Ed.), The national association for education conference (pp. 28–34).Google Scholar
  9. Gardner, P. L. (2009). Dimensions of the myers briggs temperament inventory and implications for the school library media specialist. PNLA Quarterly, 73(4), 1–15.Google Scholar
  10. Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22–30.Google Scholar
  11. Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Walker, J. M. T., Sandler, H. M., Whetsel, D., Green, C. L., Wilkins, A. S., & Closson, K. E. (2005). Why do parents become involved? Research findings and implications. Elementary School Journal, 106(2), 105–130.Google Scholar
  12. Jacobs, H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  13. Jacobs, H. H., & Borland, J. H. (1986). The interdisciplinary concept model: Design and implementation. Winter: Gifted Child Quarterly.Google Scholar
  14. James, T., & Woodsmall, W. (1988). Time line therapy and the basis of personality. Capitola: Meta Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (9th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Knowles, M. S. (1973). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  17. Marzano, R. J. (1991). Fostering thinking across the curriculum through knowledge restructuring. Journal of Reading, 34(7), 518–525.Google Scholar
  18. McNergney, R. F. & McNergney, J. M. (2009). Education : the practice and profession of teaching. N.J. : Pearson/Merrill.Google Scholar
  19. Moore, K. D. (2000). Classroom teaching skills (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  20. Myers, I., & Myers, P. B. (1997). Kişilik: Farklı tipler farklı yetenekler, (H. Ovsık, Trans.). İstanbul: Kuraldışı Yayınları.Google Scholar
  21. Myers, P. (1998). Physiological measurements with radionuclides in clinical practice. New York, USA: Oxford University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Perkins, D. N. (1991). Educating for insight. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 4–8.Google Scholar
  23. Perkins, D.N. (1986). Knowledge by design. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Resnick, L. B. (Ed.) (1989). Introduction. In Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (1–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Reiser, R. A., & W. Dick. (1996). Instructional planning: A guide for teachers. Allen and Bacon.Google Scholar
  26. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Google Scholar
  27. Silver, H., & Hanson, J. (1996). Learning styles and strategies. Silver Strong and Associates. Woodbridge, NJ.Google Scholar
  28. Silver, H. F., Hanson, J. R., Strong, R. W., & Schwartz, P. B. (1998). Teaching styles and strategies (3rd ed.). Woodbridge: Thoughtful Education Press.Google Scholar
  29. Silver, H. F., Strong, R. W., & Perini, M. J. (2007). So each may learn: Integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Alexandria: ASCD; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  30. Snow, E. (2007). Intimacy and face-to-face versus computer interaction. Undergraduate Review, 3, 37–50. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/undergrad_rev/vol3/iss1/9
  31. Stiggins, R. J. (1987). The design and development of performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 6, 33–42.Google Scholar
  32. Thaiss, C. (1986). Language across the curriculum in the elementary grades. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and the National Council for the Teaching of English.Google Scholar
  33. Wheeler, P. (2001). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and applications to accounting education and research. Issues in Accounting Education, 16(1), 125–150.Google Scholar
  34. Wyspianski, J. F. (1999). Relationships of personality types to the outcome of a values– based worplace seminar expressed as commitment to the principles taught. (Doctoral Dissertation). Ottowa: University of Ottowa. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (304578561)Google Scholar
  35. http://lifestyle.iloveindia.com/lounge/ Retrieved 02:19, July 1, 2016. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/ Retrieved 15:20, June 5, 2016

Bibliography

  1. Arends, R. (2004). Learning to teach. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  2. Bloom, B. S. (1965). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook 1 cognitive domain (9th ed.). David McKay Company: New York.Google Scholar
  3. Bromme, R. (2000). Beyond one’s own perspective: The psychology of cognitive interdisciplinarity. In P. Weingart & N. Stehr (Eds.), Practising interdisciplinarity. Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). Longman: Longman Ltd.Google Scholar
  5. Burden, P. R., & Byrd, D. M. (2003). Methods for effective teaching (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  6. Caffarella, R. S., & Daffron, S. R. (2013). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. (1971). Thinking. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  8. Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2004). Assessment strategies for self-directed learning. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Donovan, S., & Bransford, J. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Committee on how people learn, a targeted report for teachers. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ducasse, C. J. (1958). What can philosophy contribute to educational theory? In J. Part (Ed.), Selected reading in the philosophy of education. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Eggen, P. D., & Kauchak, D. P. (2001). Strategies for teachers: Teaching content and thinking skills. Massachusetts, USA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  12. Evans, T. (1992). Mentors: Making a difference in our public schools. Princeton, NJ: Peterson’s Guide.Google Scholar
  13. Fox, R. (2007). Teaching and learning: Lessons from psychology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Gagné, R. M. (1977). The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  15. Gagné, R. M., Wager, W, W., Goals, K. C., & Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional design (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
  16. Garcia, B. M. (1989). Focus on teaching. Approaches-methods-teaching. Philippines: Rex Book Store.Google Scholar
  17. Gardner, H. (2000). The disciplined mind. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  18. Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gibbons, M., et al. (1996). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Gunter, M. A., Estes, T. H., & Schwap, J. (2003). Instruction: A models approach (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  21. Hodgson, J., & Richards, E. (1966). Improvisation. London: Eyre Methuen.Google Scholar
  22. Hofer, B., & Pintrich, P. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jacobs, H. H. (2004). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment K-12. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  24. Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2004). Models of teaching (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  25. Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (1999). The structural approach: Six keys to cooperative learning. In S. Sharan (Ed.), Handbook of cooperative learning methods, (2nd ed., pp. 115–133) Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Kauchak, D. P., & Eggen, P. D. (1989). Learning and teaching: Research-based methods. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  27. Keller, F. S. (1974). Ten years of personalized instruction. Teaching of Psychology, 1(1), 4–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kelly, T., & Littman, J. (2001). The art of innovation. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  29. Killen, R. (2007b). Effective teaching strategies: Lessons from research and practice (4th ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria Australia: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  30. Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Leask, M., & Meadows, J. (2000). Teaching and learning with ICT in the primary school. London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  32. Levy, F., & Murnane, R. (2004). The new division of labor: How computers are creating the next job market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action? Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Google Scholar
  34. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality. NY: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  35. Moore, K. (2007). Classroom teaching skills (6th ed.). New York: McGrawHill.Google Scholar
  36. Moore, K. (2009). Effective instructional strategies: From theory to practice (2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  37. Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination; Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  38. Perkins, D. (1992). Smart schools: Better thinking and learning for every child. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  39. Perkins, D. N., & Grotzer, T. A. (2005). Dimensions of causal understanding: The role of complex causal models in students’ understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 41, 117–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Piaget, J. (1972). The epistemology of interdisciplinary relationships. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  41. Postman, N. (1995). The end of education: Redefining the value of school. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  42. Romizowski, A. J. (1986). Designing instructional system. Kogan Page, London, New York: Nichols Publishing.Google Scholar
  43. Salomon, G. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Simsek, A. (2011). Ogretim Tasarımı [Instructional design]. Ankara: Nobel.Google Scholar
  45. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  46. Taveggia, T. C. (1976). Personalized instruction: A summary of comparative research, 1967–1974. American Journal of Physics, 44(11), 1028–1033. doi: 10.1119/1.10579
  47. Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (Updated ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Weil, M., Joyce, B., & Kluwin, B. (1978). Personal models of teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  49. Wilson, H. (2006). How students really learn: Instructional strategies that work. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Education FacultyS. Demirel UniversityIspartaTurkey

Personalised recommendations