Zull, James E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: enriching teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, Va.: Stylus Pub.

Self-reflection on the Chapter 6 and Chapter 7

In Chapter 6 and 7, Zull discussed how new knowledge can be constructed in a neurological perspective. Most importantly, based on the existing neuronal networks (which holds the prior knowledge), teachers should help learners to change their neuronal network via new neurons connections. The prior knowledge is essential for the new connections to be built up since the existing network is the start point of the new connections.

Existing network may not hold correct connection, what teachers should do is not to correct the wrong connection but to reinforce the correct connection; the wrong connection will be weaken by ignoring them.

There are few points made by Zull in these 2 chapters. Firstly of all, prior knowledge is important to learners as well as teachers. Secondly, prior knowledge is personal and complex and teachers can use them as the starting point to construct new knowledge.

Thinking back to the article: A learner-centered framework for e-learning, the principle 12 13 and 14 have addressed the importance of learners’ priori knowledge. In particular in the principle 14, setting up diagnostic assessment is to determine learners’ prior knowledge. This strategy has been employed by many fields in education. For instance, adaptive learning system provides an example of determine and use learners’ priori knowledge even though it might not be an appropriate way.

Personally, I think it is difficult to know what learners have already known, especially in online learning environment. Adaptive learning systems has its flexibility as a content provider and content management system, but still it leaves the challenge for teachers to figure out learners’ prior knowledge and make use of them to alter learners existing neuronal connection.

ShinYi Lin, S,. Y., & Overbaugh , R., O. (2007). The Effect of Student Choice of Online Discussion Format on Tiered Achievement and Student Satisfaction. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 399-415

The study is trying to investigate if a media choice (chat and discussion forum) in the instructional design has effect on student’s course satisfaction as well as students’ cognitive achievement.

Some issues about the research method:

1 Learning Style Measurement: Introversion-Extroversion Index

Due to the synchronized nature, discussion forum provides students opportunities to think deeply before participate into the discussion. This tool seems to be beneficial for students who are real-thinkers. On the other hand, chat is a synchronized tool which may disadvantage such students. It make sense that this research picked Introversion-Extroversion Index to determine students learning style and try to find some relations with the media choice that students prefer. However, there are some issues. First of all, can we classify people as either academic introvert or academic extrovert? From the questionnaire, each question has two choices which are related to introvert and extrovert. But in reality, people are not extreme, very often, when answer such question, people may argue “it depends”.

2 Media Choice: Chat VS Discussion Forum

In the research paper, it has been stated that “all sections (F2F and Online) are essentially identical because the instructors use the same syllabus, identical readings, assignments and calendar”. What kind of role do instructors play in the online discussion and chat? There is no such description in the paper but it is important to know because instructors’ approaches may have impact on students ‘satisfaction as well as achievement.

Things I gain from this research paper:

1 This research found that when giving choice, students are more satisfied, however, there is no significant difference in overall course satisfaction between 2 groups (using chat and using discussion forum). This shows that in our teaching and instructional design, certain degree of flexibility is necessary in order to meet students’ individual need.

2 Student achieved similar level in both synchronous and asynchronous online discussion. This finding is consistent with other research which indicates that it is the teaching not the teaching tool that makes the difference.

3 Another finding from this research is that students do not always make their choice based on the way they learnt the best. For instance, some students chose the online discussion forum simply because they can not meet the time requirement for the chat room. This may be true for learning style as well since students, especially children and adolescents may not really know their own learning style and they chose the way that is the most convents for them. So this topic is back to the learning style and teaching style debate: should we teach the way that students think they learn the best. From this finding, it does not show positive result.

Zull, James E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: enriching teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, Va.: Stylus Pub.

Self-reflection on the Chapter 2 and Chapter 3

In chapter 2 of this book, based on David Kolb’s learning cycle (concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract hypothesis and active testing), Zull argued that the learning cycle involves using different parts of the brain, namely sensory cortex, integrative cortex, frontal integrative cortex and the motor brain. Hence a learning cycle can be reflected by a brain cycle.

Further on, Zull divided the brain structure into back cortex and front cortex. Two parts are connected to be able to communicate with each other; and the connection is crucial to learning which is defined by the author as Transformation Line. Learning is about the balance of using back cortex and front cortex.

This is linked back to my first article on the reading log (and the course discussion in weeek1), personal philosophy of teaching and learning. Teaching and learning can not be separated and a teacher’s teaching philosophy more or less reflects his perspective on learning and teaching. Even though all the teaching and learning philosophies are not equally good, from my point of view, a teacher should have multiple perspectives on teaching and to be open minded.

In this way, Zull’s argument provides a new perspective on learning philosophy from a biological point of view – learning and teaching is about changing the brain. A learning process is to use different parts of the brain to receive and process the information, then create new ideas and apply it. To be an effective learner, one should use his brain in a balanced way and here is where a teacher’s role involves in. We are not doing brain control, but to help learners to exercise his brain in a balanced way.

Zull’s book is written in an easy to read manner and it particular interested me since it opens a new perspective for me to look at how people learn and how we might be able to help people to learn.

Personal Philosophies of Teaching: A False Promise? By: Pratt, Daniel D., Academe, 20050101, Vol. 91, Issue 1

Database: ERIC

In colleges and universities, a teacher will be asked about his teaching philosophy during evaluation process of teaching. More or less, it is related to his reappointment, tenure, or promotion. The author raised four issues behind a personal philosophy of teaching that may affect the reviewer's judgment of "good teaching philosophy".

● Does everyone agreed on the acceptable statement of teaching philosophy?

Is teaching philosophy a description of aims and means or it is a deeper reflection of the values and beliefs. What should be suitable for the substance of teaching philosophy?

● Should acceptable philosophies of teaching only be "learner centered"?

There has been shift from teacher-centered teaching philosophy towards learner-centered philosophy. However, is learner-centered philosophy the only acceptable philosophies of teaching? Author has given an example of teaching philosophy in different culture, China, in this case. The Chinese version of "learner-centered" teaching may seem to be teacher-centered teaching in western view.

● Do Reviewers' own philosophies of teaching have influence on their judgment?

If a reviewer is holding different teaching philosophy, the evaluation may be biased.

● Is students’ evaluation of teaching fair?

In student assessment of teaching, nearly all the questionnaires are similar regardless of teachers' different teaching philosophy.

In conclusion, the author's argument is that the view of effective teaching should not be narrowed. The perspective on good teaching is various and differing views of teaching should be recognized and respected.