Is doing the best way to learn ?
The general belief is that 'doing' is the best way to learn about anything. Many within the science education community see practical work carried out by students as an essential feature of science education. In this context, the best way to explore the role of ‘doing’ in learning science is to undertake research to study the effectiveness of ‘learning by doing’ as the primary teaching and learning strategy.
It just so happens that India is very lucky in having experimented the 'pedagogical* power of doing' for nearly three decades - a rare exception to the national character of near non-existent educational research. The experiment rightly brought out the unique strengths and weaknesses of learning by doing.
The Hoshangabad Experiment or the Hoshangabad Science Teaching Programme (HSTP), as it was titled, introduced the 'discovery' approach to learning science in village schools in place of the textbook-centered 'learning by rote'. It was a multi-lateral experiment with the best of credentials in terms of the participating organisations. The experiment was conducted in evolutionary versions for well over two decades in the classes VI -VIII of the government schools in the Hoshangabad district of the state of Madhya Pradesh.
Special set of books and simple yet extensive experimental aides were used with children. Class X board exam results were used as a proxy for measuring the learning gains of the students. However, even after years of experiment, the performance of the students in the Hoshangabad district, specifically in science, was not among the top 10 districts of the state. It was also lower than its neighbouring districts. Learning by doing did not seem to be working for the better for all the students.
No less pertinently, it was also found that the literacy growth rate in 2001 (after over 2 decades of HSTP) showed the bordering districts of Hoshangabad registering well over 20% growth whereas literacy growth rate in Hoshangabad was under 20%. Another study explored the effectiveness of practical work by analyzing a sample of 25 'typical' science lessons involving practical work in English secondary schools.
It was found that teachers' focus in these lessons were predominantly on developing students' substantive scientific information, rather than on developing understanding of scientific enquiry procedures. Practical work was generally effective in getting students to do the intended work with physical objects, but much less effective, in getting them to use the intended scientific ideas, to guide their actions and reflect upon the data they collected.
There is an opinion that learning by doing without the larger conceptual frameworks, conversations and reading will lack effectiveness. Learning by doing is a good supplementary educational tool, just as learning by seeing and listening is; reading is the most potent learning tool. The 'activity-based learning' mostly ends up as good riddance from other kinds of classwork if it tends to ignore extensive reading and conversations around the activities.
Besides, the quality of learning by doing is critically dependent on the following:
- Conceiving the best possible design for doing the practical activity.
- Implementing the design for the practical activity with clearly defined expectations in terms of learning.
- Strategies on helping students hypothesize about the practical activity based on their prior knowledge.
- Having an explicit strategy on how to link observations to hypotheses.
- Helping students generalise from accepting or rejecting hypotheses.
To sum, practical work has a key role in the teaching of science but only when the type of practical work is carefully selected with a clear purpose in mind and it is followed up to generalizations and re-experiments. This is a very tall order, impossible on a larger scale.
'Learning by doing' must be preceded and followed by extensive reading and conversations.
The above discussion has been culled from "EDUCATION 3.0: NO SCHOOL LEFT BEHIND " It is a book on new-age education! The book explores and settles the role of language, reading, concepts in mathematics and science, multiple intelligence development and subject-wise classroom strategies in a unique 'question and discussion' format to ensure an easy reading.
Source:
1. Abrahamsa Ian & Millarb Robin (2008);‘Does Practical Work Really Work?’ International Journal of science Education; Volume 30, Issue 14, 2008, pages 1945-1969.
2.Wikipedia
*Simply put, it implies teaching and learning methods.
Picture Credit : Wikipedia; Creative Commons license
Executive - Marang Education Trust, Social Impact Leader, Master Well-being and Mindfulness Trainer and Coach. Ubuntu Ambassador,GIBS Certified Business Coach, Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity and Belonging Advocate
9 年Every child is unique in having a learning style they prefer and this becomes more evident as we progress into adult learners, where, once again our learning styles evolves, depending on what it is we are learning. I therefore suggest that as educationist we engage learners of all ages to a variety of learning styles and allow the learner to use what best suits them.
Very true. Being a Science educator, when i see students in grades 9 and 10 doing badly with MCQs in their science theory which is based on practicals, learning by doing is really questionable. When I ask students as to how the practicals were conducted in their schools, I realize teachers do not try to address misconceptions, do not help in making and connecting the hypothesis but it becomes a mere cook book recipe for the students.
Teacher Coach
9 年What about Learning by Teaching or as Jean Pol Martin called it LdL which in German stands for “Lernen durch Lehren”, and means exactly“Learning by Teaching”. Here is a scholarly article about it which also gives you the pros and cons.... https://www.joachim-grzega.de/ldl-engl.pdf Does any one know of its use in schools? Collaborative Learning Techniques do fall, to some extent, within the gambit of Learning by Teaching but is there anything more?
Learning Specialist - Independent
9 年The design of the above study reflects the "either-or" mentality so prevalent in education. After 50 years in classrooms with students of all ages, I swear by the "learning by doing" approach. BUT I know of no one who would NOT combine that approach with well planned context and supplementary reading, etc. Good teaching has always included the recommendations made. They are not "new". What I would dearly like to see is a study that compares the learning achieved by students using the "learning-by-doing" model (including these recommendations), with those of students who follow the "learning-by-watching" model that has been foisted on even very young learners by technology gurus.