WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ANDRAGOGY & PEDAGOGY?

I find this table (below) very interesting, particularly the "permanence of learning" row. I know what I am striving for... and it does seem to reinforce my previous postings. Is pedagogy a blst from the past and should it stay there?

From http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/andragogy/index.htm

	Andragogy	Pedagogy
Demands of learning	Learner must balance life responsibilities with the demands of learning.	Learner can devote more time to the demands of learning because responsibilities are minimal.
Role of instructor	Learners are autonomous and self directed. Teachers guide the learners to their own knowledge rather than supplying them with facts.	Learners rely on the instructor to direct the learning. Fact based lecturing is often the mode of knowledge transmission.
Life experiences	Learners have a tremendous amount of life experiences. They need to connect the learning to their knowledge base. They must recognize the value of the learning.	Learners are building a knowledge base and must be shown how their life experiences connect with the present learning.
Purpose for learning	Learners are goal oriented and know for what purpose they are learning new information	Learners often see no reason for taking a particular course. They just know they have to learn the information.
Permanence of learning	Learning is self-initiated and tends to last a long time.	Learning is compulsory and tends to disappear shortly after instruction.

IS THERE STILL A PLACE FOR PEDAGOGY?

The thought just wont go away! Last June I blogged about the place of pedagogy as opposed to andragogy (Knowles…)within a 21st century learning environment. The article focused around the pondering: Is it a case of only one (pedagogy as it is seen to apply specifically to children) or andragogy within the classroom?
I am still wondering....

Should we be examining a learning theory in light of the learning rather than the age of the people involved? My current leaning is more and more towards the principles of andragogy rather than pedagogy in a child centred classroom.

Two Definitions of Pedagogy From A Google Search:

o "Pedagogy , or paedagogy is the art or science of being a teacher. The term generally refers to strategies of instruction, or a style of instruction."
From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedagogy

o "An educational approach characterized by teacher-centredness. The teacher is viewed as an authority figure and students are not generally involved in decisions/actions in regard to learning. Related concepts include: directed learning."
From: www.nald.ca/adultlearningcourse/glossary.htm:


I understand the word pedagogy comes from the ancient Greek paidagogos, the slave who took little boys to and from school as part of paideia. The word "paidia" (παιδιά) refers to children, which I guess is why people make the distinction between pedagogy (teaching children) and andragogy (teaching adults).


Two Definitions of Androgogy:

o "Andragogy is the process of engaging adult learners in the structure of the learning experience."
From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andragogy

o "an educational approach characterized by learner-centredness (ie, the student's needs and wants are central to the process of teaching), self ..."
www.nald.ca/adultlearningcourse/glossary.htm


Aha! Perhaps the later definition is the key.


I am at the Art of Facilitation Course run by Joan Dalton and David Anderson. A poster displayed on the wall has caused me to reflect on my thinking and how it may have progressed since my June 08 article. I am feeling more and more that I lean towards pedagogy either needing to be revamped or trashed altogether. Wow! Now, this statement is a risk, a dramatic concept for me to publicly declare! As I do this, I wonder about the ramifications. Hmmm, I'll risk it.

The poster refers to the assertion that adults need:
- to be involved in planning and evaluating their instruction
- to use experience as the basis for learning activities
- to learn what has immediate relevance to their jobs/personal lives
- problem-centred learning rather than content-oriented learning.

Isn't this what we do and want for our classrooms? Why should the adults have all the fun?

Have a look at this link. Which on the list does not apply in a 21st C Classroom?

What am I missing?? I'd love some feedback and to have my thinking challenged.

Has the time come for pedagogy to be discarded and replaced with another term which encompasses all learners, recognising their cognitive ability rather than age?

What is informing our current practice and assisting us as we travel towards our vision for learning?

Pedagogy?

......Should it be?

SITECH CONFERENCE @ OWHATA SCHOOL

I am at the Sitech Champion Schools Conference this weekend at Owhata School, Rotorua. We have just been welcomed warmly by students from Owhata school and the team from Sitech and Breathe Technology. Great to see such an enthusiastic team behind Garry: Jenny; Nat; Jonathan; and others. Sitech have now joined iwth Umajin and it is always good to catch up with Alison and Russell from Umajin. I'm loving catching up with my old cluster. Nga Tii Roa not only add to the familiar faces but front the workshops as presenters. Just to think 3 years ago....

My search light at this conference:

"How are the tools impacting into the pedagogy of teaching and learning?
Are the tools changing classroom cultures?"

Peter Kent, the opening keynote, touched on this at the start so we were off in the right direction for me at least. People often are locked in by what they don’t know. This was illustrated beautifully with a You Tube video to do with escalators:

It was good to hear Peter so simply put out 3 points of Good Teaching:

1. High expectation of learners (intellectual quality),

2. Environment which is supportive of students. What engages and is useful for stdts?

3. Learning which is relevant.

Technology will not improve anything if it is not linked and embedded into this. Peter suggests IWBs facilitate No. 2 above. I suggest that yep, they can. They can also provide support to an environment which is more traditional. The teacher at the front with the chalk....

It is not the teacher's job to use the IWB – The teacher's job is to manage learning, ask the questions etc.

3 levels of using the IWB – What type of interaction occurs?

1. Best: Students asking questions of students and you.
2. Middle: Students asking qs of the teacher
3. Low Level: Teacher asking qs of students

IWBS support all 3 but good use supports the first.

E-Volution of E-Teaching. This led me to reflect on our own cluster's teacher inquiry process. I am left feeling even more confident that the thinking that went into our inquiry process provides a good foundation. It is a scaffolded process which will help us all to spiral on up. The progression supports the moving up from as Peter puts it -

"1. Using ICTs to do what we have always done. The tools have little impact other than superficial.

2. Choose one idea, need or problem to research, trial and implement.

3. Experiment, Review, Plan and Discuss

4. Share, Teach others, Reflect, Grow.

5. Embed and Spiral on Up."

It is not the tool that makes the difference in learning. It is the way the tools are used.

ICTs are different from many other tools. They challenge our practice. Being part of a professional learning community helps us to deepen these understandings, widen our perceptions and extend the possibilities.

ICTs have the potential to change the user but only the user can really change their own practice. It comes down to pedagogy. Our mental model, firmly embedded in our subconscious, is what controls our actions. We need to consider what our mental model for good teaching/learning really is.

HEARD OF PERSONALISED LEARNING?

What does “Personalised learning” mean to you?

It is a phrase we are hearing more about at the moment. Click here to check out Wikipedia’s entry

Looking on the net shows it has been around for a few years now and is often linked to learning for the 21st century. Reading the wikipedia entry is exciting and makes me feel good about what we are doing in the cluster e.g. student blogging systems certainly support these developments.

Personalised learning is a must inquiry as schools consider their practice and future planning.

So what does Personalised Learning mean to me? Hmm… P. L. goes beyond individualized learning and into the depth of ownership in learning. It goes beyond the old cliché of students being actively engaged in learning. Students are involved in the processes involved in learning. Processes are transparent. Students know how they learn, why they are at school and their learning environment is just that! P.L. impacts into all areas of teaching and learning. There is strong emphasis on learning in schools, rather than teaching.

Have a look at your schools vision for learning. How strong is the learning statement within this?
(Do you know it off by heart? Is this vision the focus for all you do? Is it real, regularly considered and revised? Or is it a heading with little substance?)

P.L. includes individual and group learning, with students knowing how they learn and able to discuss the what and, more importantly, the WHY of their learning. Students know and own how their learning will make a difference to themselves and/or those around them. It’s about learners being able to transfer and apply their learning in different situations.

This is sooo exciting!

TOWARDS THE FINISHING LINE -

- What will our teachers write as the eulogy to the Nga Tii Roa Contract once it has finished?

- Has it provided an immense challenge to thinking, pedagogy and community building skills?

- How have teachers been challenged to recognise the impact of ICTs into traditional teaching and learning models?

- Have schools been challenged to develop shared values and beliefs in each school?

Interesting questions as we move into our final year. If there are changes and they are to be sustained, the eulogy will hold consistent positive messages from those involved and these will be supported in teacher's present and future teaching and learning practices.