Modeling: Yes, Yes, Yes!!!

BLOG POST 1 (Graded)

Modeling: Yes, Yes, Yes!!!

The start of this school has been engaging for me on multiple levels. I am at the point in my development where I find value in all the courses, subject matter, experiences, and techniques of teaching that I am exposed to. Anyone that has pursued any type of degree, taken a perquisite/ class of a degree checklist, knows that this is not the case for every time.

                In my classroom, one of the primary things that has impacted my teaching philosophy, to this point, is the extraordinary amount of modeling that students need to see from the teacher when they present a lesson. I have always included modeling as something that I intend to do every time I teach. However, at sometimes I have thought the amount of modeling presented by some teachers in the education core excessive and overdone. This is simply not the case. Even if students seem to be paying attention, it’s not rude to repeat and show several more times.

                In “Meta, Meta, Meta: Modeling in a Methods Course for Teaching English,” Joelle K. Jay says that “instructional scaffolding is a concept that is tremendously useful, and yet complex and unfamiliar to preservice teachers.” Most basically, a teacher needs to think about what tasks students already know how to do and start by modeling what they know. Then, as the teacher models what they know, something new can be included. Jay says, “A teacher helps students to do what is just out of their reach; instruction is scaffolded in the sense that students are supported over time, with support gradually removed as learners become more independent with the targeted skills.” We don’t want our students to have to navigate the depths of a cave that they aren’t prepared for with the correct light.

                The previous sentiments are especially important to me because I have witnessed, more often than not, students that are simply lost after the lesson and concept is explained. This is not just the case with preservice teachers; this is the case (I have witnessed) with many veteran teachers. All teachers, at least the ones interested in learning, want to know how to reach that student that never seems to participate. While every situation is unique, can involve behavior issues or exceptionalities, too often teachers are throwing students in the deep end of the pool before they know how to dog paddle.

                In Jay’s article, she highlights five elements of instructional scaffolding as first described by Applebee and Langer in 1983. The five elements are: ownership (or intentionality), appropriateness, choice, structure, and collaboration. Ownership means that the instructor must make the students want to learn. Appropriateness involves identifying what the students know and developing instruction around that. Choice places value on the student’s interest and learning requirements. Structure references the actual task and how the students are going to complete it. Collaboration makes the instructor answer the question: what is my role with the student in this activity?

                My takeaway from this examination of modeling, how important it really is/how to use modeling effectively in my classroom, is that I must consider what my students already know more when I am designing lessons. The content cannot be the focus; what I think is fun or engaging cannot drive the direction of the lesson. What the student is capable of, previous understanding, must be at the center of my lessons as I design them. When a teacher builds on a strong foundation, new heights are achieved.

Applebee, A.N., & Langer, J. A. (1983). Instructional Scaffolding: Reading and Writing as natural language activities. Language Arts, 60(2), 168-175.

Joelle K. Jay. (2002). Meta, Meta, Meta: Modeling in a Methods Course for Teaching English

Teacher Education Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1, Reflective Decision Making through Focused Inquiry, 83-102