Showing papers in "Theory Into Practice in 1977"

Moral development: A review of the theory

Abstract: (1977). Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Moral Development, pp. 53-59.

Relationships Among Verbal and Nonverbal Classroom Behaviors.

Abstract: (1977). Relationships among verbal and nonverbal classroom behaviors. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Nonverbal, pp. 153-161.

Rational Emotive Education.

Abstract: William Knaus Fort Lee Consultation Center Fort Lee, New Jersey T he cummulative effects of technological, economic, political and moral change have made the task of teaching increasingly complex. Both the school and the educator are forced to modify traditional roles and methods in order to maintain contact with today's students. It is essential that educators mobilize to meet new challenges through the development and implementation of strategies aimed at harmonizing traditional and humanistic principles in education. Our goals now include not only teaching youngsters basic skills but, also, how to learn and how to cope more effectively in a progressively more sophisticated and demanding environment. Teaching children how to cope with the stresses of modern living is a valuable educational objective. Unfortunately, due to severe personnel shortages in the mental health field, the gap between available service and need is great. Consequently, many psychologists and educators have sought to develop mental health programs that help prevent emotional/ behavioral disturbance which can be utilized in the school setting. The goal is to foster psychological growth by teaching skills that enable youngsters to more effectively and objectively deal with personal problems.

A sense of story

Abstract: (1977). A sense of story. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Reading and Language, pp. 342-347.

Exploring with a pencil

Abstract: (1977). Exploring with a pencil. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Reading and Language, pp. 334-341.

Acquiring literacy is natural: Who skilled cock robin?

Abstract: Kenneth S. Goodman College of Education University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona A n old English folksong asks the question "Who Killed Cock Robin?". I've parodied that question in the title of this paper because I believe that many of the problems in literacy instruction in the world today are misunderstood because learning to read has been treated as a matter of acquiring a series of skills. In the literate nations particularly America we've built a technology of reading skills. On a world basis, literacy can be easily seen to be proportionate to the need for literacy within any society or subgroup of the particular society. Even within literate societies, different ethnic, cultural and economic groups show notably different patterns of acceptance of literacy and literacy instruction. But as we've built a technology of instruction in literate societies, we've created pathologies of failure which are independent of the need for language, the nature of language or the natural learning of language. The technology we've built treats reading as something difficult to be systematically taught skill upon skill. Though this technology has no foundation either in theory or research, it has acquired, over time, a credibility partly due to pedagogical traditionwe continue to do what others have done before us and partly due to its arbitrary specificity. Skills are arranged sequentially and hierarchically and drills and exercises are multiplied and duplicated to teach the skills. Research fills the professional literature reporting experiments on the most effective ways of teaching the skills, creating the illusion that the skills themselves have a base in scientific research. Achievement tests based on the skill hierarchies become the means for determining the extent of acquisition of literacy. Performance on these tests becomes synonymous with reading itself. Low scores on tests are offered as proof of failure and a new technology is created to find the pathological causes within the non-learner's failure to acquire the skills. And more drills and exercises are multiplied and duplicated to remediate the deficiencies and teach the skills. Networks of professionally trained diagnosticians, clinicians and remediators are

Literature as the content of reading

Abstract: (1986). Literature as the content of reading. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 26, Educational Perspectives, Then and Now, pp. 374-382.

The beginnings of literacy

Abstract: Moira McKenzie Centre for Language in Primary Education Teddington, England It is a salutary thought that, in general, the children who are least successful in school, in terms of becoming literate, are those who are most dependent on what the school offers in the way of instruction. Those who profit most seem to be those who have most going for them at home. They are taken out, and talked with, have stories read to them, own and share books as a pleasurable experience; they observe their parents read, and perhaps write and receive letters. Such background experiences nurture children's general knowledge as well as their understanding of books and written language. They appear to be the right contextual support for successful ventures into reading and writing and provide a foundation and a springboard for further learning. Yet outside pressures to do a better job for all children prompt teachers to undervalue these pre-requisites for reading and plunge into very highly structured pre-reading and reading programs which young children find difficult to make any sense of at all (NCTE, 1977). Such programs have little meaning for those children least experienced in literacy or the culture of the school. Even for more experienced children they have the effect of diverting attention away from, rather than directing it towards, the characteristics of written communication (Clark, 1976). For all children, an over-concern with teaching segments of language (sounds, letter-names) risks giving them a very narrow and restricted idea of what literacy is, and what it means to be literate. The mistaken notion is that one learns to read through knowing particular skills, not that the skills are learned through reading. (F. Smith 1975) The main issue in teaching reading today continues to be the same that has occupied the attention of educators and parents for more than a century: should children be taught to read from the wholeness of the task, or should they be taught decoding skills, essential sounds and letters first, leading to comprehension later? Today, new developments in theory and research in both linguistics and the reading process bring different perspectives to the debate. We know a great deal more now about how children learn

Creating the just community with children

Abstract: (1977). Creating the just community with children. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Moral Development, pp. 97-104.

The student‐teacher relationship

Abstract: (1977). The student‐teacher relationship. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Classroom Dynamics, pp. 285-289.

Nonverbal Communication for Educators.

Abstract: (1986). Nonverbal communication for educators. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 26, Educational Perspectives, Then and Now, pp. 364-367.

Nonverbal: Authentic or artificial

Abstract: (1977). Nonverbal: Authentic or artificial. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Nonverbal, pp. 129-133.

Setting the Stage for Learning

Abstract: (1977). Setting the Stage for Learning. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Nonverbal, pp. 167-173.

The Silent Language in the Multicultural Classroom

Abstract: (1977). The silent language in the multicultural classroom. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Nonverbal, pp. 145-152.

Our reason for teaching

Abstract: Benjamin D. Wright Department of Education University of Chicago Chicago, Illinois XW lhatever we may claim about how and why we finally got into teaching, we know we came under the spell of our vocation early. We began learning how to be teachers when we began school and we studied teaching, however inadvertantly, for 16 years or more. Our education for teaching and our idea of school is deeply and irrevocably influenced by our own school experiences, by our successes and failures and, most of all, by our own teachers. Our professional identity, our teaching style, cannot escape the sway of deep and ancient wishes, conscious or not, to consumate old relationships with teachers we once loved and hated. We cannot resist recreating in our own behavior heroes whose teaching once won our admiration and envy. Nor can we free ourselves from the awful force of even deeper compulsions to undo and master the dread and humiliation caused in us by tyrants we feared.1 Our classroom behavior reflects our motives for becoming teachers. But these motives, as with so much of human behavior, tend to remain unexamined. Sometimes they impel us into actions which are destructive to children and to classroom life. Even when our behavior is benign, it may be less effective than our ideals would have it. And this is painful, because most of us believe we have chosen our profession in order to make life better for children. The press of classroom life may make a running examination of motives difficult. Where in the course of a busy day will we find quiet moments in which to think over what we are doing and why? But afterwards we can reflect on what has happened and on what we have done, not only about it, but also to bring it about. When things go wrong it is hard to forget them. Then some awareness of our own motives and even more of their roots in identifications with our own teachers can lead us to discover alternatives that may mitigate what seems on reflection to have been ineffective if not downright wrong.2

Peer groups as settings for learning

Abstract: Richard A. Schmuck Center for Educational Policy and Management University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon l6vi6ost education takes place in group situations. In fact, the class group is not merely an economical way of teaching; it is at the heart of the learning process. Group impact and influence on its members can be a powerful force toward learning or toward supporting the learning process. If teachers were able to create learning groups in which members helped one another, learning results would be far greater." Leland P. Bradford-Founder National Training Laboratories Seems like sound theory, but what does Bradford's statement mean for practice? That is the fundamental question of this paper. Before addressing this question however, let's look at some actual learning settings in which peer relationships are being mobilized constructively for learning. For a few examples listen to these students of different ages chatting with their parents about school. Kindergarten. "Hi Janet, what a big girl you are now! How was your first day of school?" "OK!" "That's good. What happened?" "Oh, nothing." "Really?" Can't you remember anything that seemed important?" "I don't know." "Think real hard." "Well, the teacher said that she wasn't the teacher really. She said we all were the teachers-she meant us, the kids-and she would help us teach one another. What did she mean, Dad?" Second Grade. "How is your reading going, John?" "OK, I guess." "What book are you working on now?" "What do you mean? It's the same, regular book. I can't remember the name of it." "Are the stories good?" "They're OK, I guess." "Can you remember any of them?" "No." "Well, what else is happening in school?" "Nothing, much, except Jeff is really nice." "Oh, who's Jeff?" "He's a fifth grader who talks with me everyday for awhile. He's called my tutor. I really like him." "What do you do together?" "Nothing-well mostly we talk and do some reading-we read this neat story today about a circus-he helps me with the words and stuff-I really like him!" Fifth Grade. "I'm a tutor now Dad!" "That's great." "I told little Pete, the kid I'm working 272 Theory Into Practice

Nonverbal Skills in the Classroom.

Abstract: (1977). Nonverbal, skills in the, classroom. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Nonverbal, pp. 162-166.

What Do Fluent Readers Do

Abstract: Janet Hickman Faculty of Early and Middle Childhood Education The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio T eachers intent on producing fluent readers sometimes lose sight of just what fluent readers do. Since fluency does not lend itself to objective research, there is no definitive description. There are two ways, however, of finding out: watch and ask. Some years ago Robinson (1965) referred to research at the University of Chicago using techniques of introspection and retrospection. After a pilot study involving fourth-graders who "thought aloud" as they read from various sources and then drafted reports for social studies, he concluded that it was possible to gain information about the reading process through introspection coupled with observation.

Moral Development and Democratic Schooling.

Abstract: Peter Scharf University of California Program in Social Ecology Irvine, California D emocratic participation in schooling is a rather recent phenomenon Early American educators clearly did not intend nor believe that students should have a voice in their own education The colonial school (Bailyn, 1966) was authoritarian, teacher-directed, and often punitive The meaning of "democratic education," until the twentieth century, implied the problem of entrance (ie, that all children be able to enter the "common school") and not the problem of substance (ie, that education should be structured democratically) Only in the early twentieth century did "progressive" educators raise the possibility of democratizing the classroom itself John Dewey, of course, was both the foremost initiator as well as narrator of this movement to democratize the school In his view schooling in a democratic society requires democratic rhetoric The structure of the school must reflect its stated democratic aims He implies that if the ends of education are the creation of a democratic citizen and society, this purpose must be reflected in the "democratic organization" of the school itself A principal who justifies using authoritarian means with a"democratic" ideology would find these ends soon obviated Consistent with his views of education as "reflective experience," Dewey saw the school providing a natural "laboratory for democratic learning" This assumes, of course, a curriculum "which added upon and enlightened natural democratic experiences" In his Schools of To-Morrow (1906), Dewey sought to exemplify his beliefs by analyzing the most promising experiments of his day including the revolutionary Gary, Indiana, public schools (Gary Plan) Here, the students were not only involved in school-rule creation but in the democratic maintenance of the school's physical plant:

How and When Does Reading Occur in the Classroom

Abstract: (1977). How and when does reading occur in the classroom? Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Reading and Language, pp. 376-383.

Students need not be pawns

Abstract: Richard deCharms Graduate Institute of Education Washington University St. Louis, Missouri T he trend of the times seems to be a pendulum swing "back to basics," and away from the "open end of the spectrum" in classroom management and curriculum. My purpose is to suggest that pendulums swing in only one plane and the resulting analogy is oversimplified and hence misleading. The question is not whether students should be taught "basics" or should be allowed freedom to learn (or not learn) what they want. The question is how can student interest in learning be enhanced so that they will come to want to learn what they need to learn. This is a motivational problem. From the motivational point of view the paradox seems to be that the more the teacher pushes the more the student feels that she or he is a Pawn; the less the teacher pushes the more comfortable the student feels but the learning of basics seems to suffer. I shall propose that students who are trained to make responsible choices are not Pawns and yet readily take responsibility for their own learning of important academic skills. Further, I shall try to suggest concrete ways that teachers can develop responsibility in students. Let me start with an actual observation from an inner-city sixth grade classroom. On October 30, Ms. Edwards' class was having a science lesson. After reading a rather boring lesson on the oxygen/carbon dioxide breathing cycle, the children had formed a circle and Ms. Edwards was trying to elicit responses to questions indicating that they had understood what they had read. "Raise your hand if you think you know the answer," said Ms. Edwards after the first question had resulted in simultaneous yet animated responses from several students. The lively participation soon slowed to hesitant and not very satisfactory answers to specific questions. The teacher looked dissatisfied. "How could you demonstrate the importance of the oxygen cycle using what you have learned?" she asked. Troy raised his hand and said, "We could draw a picture." Tracey suggested writing an essay and Kimberley wanted to organize a group to act it out as in a TV talk show or news broad-

The role of the teacher in moral education

Abstract: (1977). The role of the teacher in moral education. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Moral Development, pp. 73-80.

A personal view of nonverbal communication

Abstract: Paul Byers Teachers College, Columbia University New York, New York T hroughout my life I have been a professional "communicator" I have been, serially, a writer, cryptanalyst, musician, photographer, and teacher Across all these involvements the same question kept cropping up to unsettle me: "What am I doing? What I really doing?" A little more than twenty years ago I became a researcher (in nonverbal communication, of course) and the question is still there Why does our species do all this stuff we call communication? And just what are we studying? As I look across the field of communication it appears to me that there are a number of important research thrusts I believe they are important because they have yielded important (or at least interesting) things about the operation of the human biotechnology involved in message exchanging and something about the subtleties of human relation But I ask myself "what has the study of communication told us about the nature of humankind in the context of this total (ie cosmic) environment?" and "why does our subdiscipline still appear to be a collection of bits and pieces held together by labels?" I believe it is important to consider these matters and that is what I propose to do in this article The answers I would like to find by asking my rather vague questions should have these characteristics: 1 The answers should reflect our most fundamental understanding of the nature of man Then, following the usual research paradigm of research to theory to further research, we can both contribute to and draw from that understanding 2 The answers should provide a perspective from which to understand the significance of our research results We can talk about our research and its significance in terms of a "what man does" perspective, but I am insisting here that we think in terms of "what man is" Our present scientific epistemology almost disallows that question But we can use a different epistemology, and I believe that present day research demands that we do 3 The answers should help us discover the farthest horizons of our research domain and, in so doing, suggest communication processes we have not yet imagined or at least not included in our research in communication

The role of skills in teaching reading

Abstract: Edmund H. Henderson Director, McGuffey Reading Center University of Virginia Charlottesville, Virginia S ome years ago the idea that there were specifiable skills underlying the learned ability to read was universally accepted. Methodologists did differ widely, of course, in their opinion about how and when and in what context such skills should be taught. The validity of the skills themselves, however, was not questioned. Formal reading programs today, moreover, be they synthetic or analytic, "linguistic," whole word or phonic in design are built on the premise that such skills exist and that they can be arrayed in a meaningful scope and sequence. The state of language research today is such that the concept of a reading skill is now under heavy challenge (Cooper and Petrosky, 1976). Indeed one must begin to see those skills, as operationally defined in reading programs, as the emptiest of concepts. It may be argued, in fact, that they are both invalid and at variance with the far more global, natural and highly complex things that children do and learn as they advance toward literacy. My interest in this paper is to present some part of this argument against reading skills. In doing so it is unavoidable that I will question the soundness of most contemporary programs of reading instruction. It is quite necessary, I think, that this should be done. My task, however, will not be ended until I succeed in putting the pieces back together. It is simply not the case that things we have done traditionally as teachers are all wrong. It is our Understanding of what we did that was benighted. Thus when we see the skill demolished, we must be prepared to see in its place broader actions taken by children and teachers that advance progressively. It is these I will argue that must replace the errant skills as the building blocks of formal reading instruction. Let me begin my account with a metaphor and personal experience. This is a form of discourse that used to be frowned upon in scientific circles, but is enjoying a considerable revival. For far too long we have shunned the simple appeal to common sense with the result that the questions we have asked about reading have become less and less important. No amount of

A structural theory of moral development

Abstract: (1977). A structural theory of moral development. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Moral Development, pp. 60-66.

A Children Teaching Children Program.

Abstract: Co-Director, Frank Riessman New Human Services Institute Graduate Center City University of New York T he purpose of the present article is to describe how a children-teaching-children tutoring program is being institutionalized in a school district in New York City, in Harlem. Particular attention will be paid to how theory is translated into practice-how the learningthrough-teaching principle is actually being implemented and how the specific problems of implementation are dealt with on a day to day basis in a school with a high percentage of underachieving children. In addition the program is concerned with the training of teacher interns (in a National Teacher Corps project) to utilize the children teaching children learning concept as a integral part of their teaching strategy. Children, of course, have been teaching other children throughout history in manifold settings. The approach was used in the one room school house, in the Lancaster system and it was an important ingredient in the Montessori approach in which the older more advanced children are utilized to teach the younger less advanced ones. The "each one teach one" approach has been applied in many countries-in Cuba, in China, in Great Britain in the infant schools, in the Soviet Union where one class of pupils adopts another class. In an intensive cross cultural study David Klaus observed that developing countries would benefit significantly from the use of tutoring techniques and that understaffed schools could utilize tutors for benefits to younger children. Benjamin Bloom notes that most students can learn what the schools have to teach if the problem is approached sensitively and systematically by tutors.3 Bloom observes that the top fourth of students in a class, typically are given the greatest attention by teachers and the bottom half are given the least attention. This system of group instruction produces errors in learning at each stage of a course or term. For Bloom the model of good instruction is the individual tutor who takes into account what the student has already learned, chooses the next learning task, immediately corrects mistakes, makes sure the student is participating, etc. Success leads to further success. And without the prerequisite skills, failure leads to

Citizen Advisory Committees.

Abstract: William F. Breivogel Robert E. Jester Institute for Development of Human Resources College of Education University of Florida Gainesville, Florida T here is a long tradition in American education of involving parents in the activities of the public school through participation in various parent groups. This participation has typically taken the form of such parent groups as parent-teacher organizations, band boosters, mother clubs, tip-off clubs, quarterback clubs, etc. Most of these parent groups appear to have at least two things in common: (1) they are not involved with the decision-making aspects of operating the school; and (2) they are primarily composed of and operated by middle-class parents. Observations of typical parent-teacher organization meetings and committee activities would not be likely to reveal the participation of very many low-income parents, particularly those from racial or ethnic minorities.

Theory and Practice: A New E.R.A.?.

Abstract: (1977). Theory and practice: A new E.R.A.? Theory Into Practice: Vol. 16, Moral Development, pp. 81-88.