Студента группы Пд 212 (4) Досжанова Алина г. Алматы
Stewart John. «Communicating expectations: Toward a Post-Semiotic Philosophy of Communication». Albany, NY: State University of New York Press 2000
жүктеу/скачать 239,65 Kb.
|
Портфолио
| Stewart John. «Communicating expectations: Toward a Post-Semiotic Philosophy of Communication». Albany, NY: State University of New York Press 2000.
Student’s self-confidence in their ability to learn is significantly affected by their teachers’ expectations. To a very large degree, students expect to learn if their teachers expect them to learn. One of the most consistent findings in research on affective teachers is that children in classrooms in which the teacher expects all children to learn achieve at a higher level than children in classrooms in which the teacher does not hold uniformly high expectations (Edmonds, 1979; Madaus, Airasian, & Kellaghan, 1980; Rutter, Maughan, Mortimore, Ouston, & Smith, 1979). (Дедуктивный) The effect of teacher expectations on student learning has also been demonstrated in experimental studies. The original Pygmalion study by Rosental and Jacobson (1968) spawned virtually hundreds of studies on teachers’ expectations. In this classic study, elementary-school teachers were told that some of the students in their class had demonstrated on a written test that they had remarkable potential for academic growth. The designated students had actually been selected randomly. Eight months later the students in early grades for whom teachers were led to hold artificially high expectations showed grater gains in IQ than other students in the school. These students, in a sense, fulfilled the teacher’s prophecy. The term self-fulfilling prophecy is apt because once an expectation is developed; people often behave as if the belief was true. In so behaving they actually assure that their expectations are fulfilled. (Дедуктивный) Inaccurate expectations are not always corrected because teachers create situations in which only confirming evidence is possible. For example, teachers sometimes develop strong “theories” about students and they structure the living environment in a way that does not allow information contrary to their theory to emerge. I once observed a first grader who had made no progress in six months in reading instruction. The child’s mother had taken drugs while she was pregnant and the teacher was convinced that the drugs caused brain damage and the child was unable to learn to read. Because of her theory, the teacher made no effort to experiment with alternative approaches to reading instruction with him and, therefore, denied the child any opportunity to make progress in reading and to disconfirm her theory. The school psychologist eventually intervened and gave the child a sixth-grade student tutor. In two months he was reading at the same level as his classmates in the lowest reading group. He did not excel, but he did learn to read and he might not have if the teacher had continued to base curriculum decisions on her original theory. (Дедуктивный) Information contrary to a teacher’s theory is frequently not noticed, even if it is present. Classrooms are busy places. One teacher may have as many as thirty or more students to monitor, and Jackson (1968) claims that a single elementary school teacher may engage in more than a thousand exchanges a day with students. Under such conditions the teacher can hardly notice every student’s behavior. Consequently, certain biases are likely to affect what the teacher does notice. For example, the teacher is more likely to monitor closely a child whom she expects to be inattentive than a child whom she expects to be task oriented. Consequently, she is more likely to notice the off-task behavior of the former than of the latter child, and therefore, to maintain her perception of the former child as distractible. (Дедуктивный) Expectations can also bias interpretations of students’ behavior. If a child whom the teacher believes is very bright gibes a wrong answer, the teacher is likely to attribute the wrong answer to a notability-related cause, such as inattention. The same answer from a child perceived to be less bright may be interpreted as confirming evidence of the child’s limited ability. Teachers’ expectations are, to a significant degree, based on students’ past behavior and performance (West & Anderson, 1976). However, because expectations bias opportunities for demonstrating certain kinds of behaviors and performance, and because they bias what teachers see and how they interpret what they see, inaccurate initial expectations are not always corrected. (Смешанный) These inaccurate expectations sometimes affect teachers’ behavior toward a student and curriculum decisions in ways that ultimately affect student learning. For example, considerable evidence suggests that teachers treat students whom they consider bright differently from the way they treat students whom they consider low in ability. Some of these differential behaviors have direct effects on learning. Students who are given more opportunities to learn, more clues, and more repetition, and who are called on more frequently should learn more than students who are given fewer opportunities to learn. Other teacher behaviors influence learning more indirectly by affecting students’ beliefs about their competencies and the likelihood of success. There are very good reasons for some kinds of differential behavior toward high and low achievers. Giving some children more difficult material than others is clearly necessary when there is variability in student skill level. Nevertheless, most of the teacher behaviors described below that have been shown to be associated with high versus low expectations cannot be defended on pedagogical grounds. (Смешанный) Таблица 9 - Средства связи в научном тексте
жүктеу/скачать 239,65 Kb. Достарыңызбен бөлісу:
|