Reflective thinking, learning styles and key skills are
something we use within the practice and environment in which I work. However
the depth, the amount of focus and the importance of each one is different from
one practice to another to which I have worked.
Reflective-on-action, ‘looks’ stronger in my current
practice compared to my previous work place, because the books are more unified
across the practice. Teacher Assistants are encouraged to assess and record how
a lesson went etc… to help the teacher with the next steps, follow the marking
scheme as well as teachers. In fact I would say more time is spent on this, than
my previous practice. Although time is limited for a Teacher Assistant and Teacher’s
do not always have the time to read comments. I would like to point out I say the
Reflection-on-action ‘looks’ stronger at my current practice and not ‘is’ because
this questionable; because the way of recording the Reflection-on-Action was
different at my last practice. It probably
reflected the learning style of the teacher, although there was a unified
assessment and recording of progress for the school; when in class I fed back
verbally or would write quick short notes about the children I was working with,
which the teacher read as she stuck them in her book. So the feedback was more reflective in Action
that impacted on the teacher’s Reflective on Action. I believe the Reflective
in Action is stronger at my previous work place and this may reflect style of
the head whose very hands on. Although
both practices would use both reflective approaches, I was more able to adapt
on the spot if needed when it came to the different abilities in class in my
previous practice. However I have started to use more Reflective in Action when
it comes to the lower abilities in my current practice and the overall independence
is good.
VAK as Gardner calls it, Visual, Auditory and Kinaesthetic
learning styles is often encouraged when teaching, sometimes ‘time’ may limit
its use, but when applied children are more engaged and you see the benefit. In
terms of my own learning style I lean heavily towards visual and kinaesthetic
learning. I have noticed that others learn complex names quicker than me when
they are auditory spoken, however after reading the register several times or
through reading names on a list. I am able to visually spell them; bearing in
mind that many of the names are tricky word and do not necessary follow
patterns or phonically sounds. In
addition I feel this reflects my ability to spell and the problems I had when I was younger. My spelling has improved over time through
reading, using the words, and some form of rota spelling. Furthermore after
working through the Letter and Sounds book, watching the video, learning Cued Articulation
and from teaching phonics. I have become more aware different phonemes, graphemes
and how sounds are made. I have to consider my own learning style especially as
phonics is auditory and going against my own learning style. This doesn’t limit
me teaching it, but I may consider this when planning what prompts/resources I
may need and consider other children that may have a weaker Auditory learning
style. Although I do not have the body for sport or dancing (though I do enjoy
dancing and sport), I also learn from doing and can often feel the vibes of a
room. Once I was able to communicate with a Downs Syndrome child who couldn’t
speak just by vibes and senses alone. I could always feel the presence of the child
whenever she entered the room and she could me. In some respect you could say
that is tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is something I have found interesting
from reading the Reader 2, and something I will look further into. I am also interested
in experimenting with muscle memory and understanding how dancers relate and use
it, could dancers still use their muscle memory whiles closing their eyes? How
could dancers communicate muscle memory?
When I look at David Kolb learning cycle, considering my own
learning style and thinking, I would say I would enter it at different stages
for different things. If I was to consider how I started my blog. I would split
into two parts, in terms of setting up the blog I dived straight in, so I would
consider this as a ‘Concrete Experience’, but when it came to how I was going to set it
up, I looked at other peoples to give me ideas so that was ‘Reflective
Observation. I then YouTube and Google, then experimented with links. When it
comes to working with a new child I am doing all four but at speed, I probably enter
at ‘Reflective Observation’. If it comes to cooking something new I would
probably plan what I need, so would start from ‘Active Experimentation’. When
it came to Task 3c I read the reader 2 first, made notes, reflected on my own
experience before writing on my blog. If I were to say what my preferred entry
point is, then I would like to do a little experiment and create a tally chart
to see where I enter more often. In addition how it relates to my practice,
considering abilities learning styles and learning something new. I would also
very much like to get different viewpoints on David Kolb learning cycle. As
well as learn a little bit more about multiple intelligences and its connection
to learning styles.
No comments:
Post a Comment