Teaching Theories for Better Learning

Introduction

Teaching and learning are part of the process that enables students to score good marks in exams and build their careers. A teacher needs to utilise their experience and knowledge to properly teach the students and help them learn the subjects (Schleppegrell, 2012). There are a wide variety of factors and aspects that need to be given attention to in order to ensure that the students get excellent learning opportunities and also to make sure that the teacher utilises their skills and experience to the fullest. This report focuses on different theories and philosophies of teaching and learning that can improve this process and help the students to learn better and teachers to perform better. including the importance of resources like education dissertation help.

Enquiry Question

A well-developed chain of reasoning enables students to have a clear thought and also present their thoughts in a logical sequence. It allows them to perform better in exams and get good marks. The school's focus is on improving the learning abilities of the students and to ensure that they learn and understand the subjects clearly and effectively. The school teaches Business Studies to the students with a focus on getting them ready for the corporate world where they can contribute to helping the organisation to realise its goals and objectives. In a business scenario, the role of high-quality work is crucial (Karatepe, 2013). It forms the basis for the company to achieve success and sustain in the market (Achtenhagen, Melin, & Naldi, 2013). GCSE Business for Edexcel exam board is assessed by 2 exam paper; paper 1 is for theme 1 and paper 2 is for theme 2 of the syllabus. Each of these two papers is 90 minutes in duration and consist of 90 marks. Each paper is divided into sections A, B and C; A is 35 marks, B is 30 marks and C is 25 marks. Section B and C are based on two different case studies, and there is one 9 mark question in each of these two sections. Therefore there are two 9 mark questions in each Edexcel paper and there four 9 mark questions across the two papers. Hence the 9 mark questions constitute 20% of the total marks for Edexcel Business exam. This shows that for GCSE business students to get good grades, it is essential for them to understand how to answer the 9 mark question. The 9 mark questions in Edexcel papers are always in the same format, and they are always based on a business case study. Within the context of the case study, the business will be presented with two options. Students are required to choose between option 1 and 2, and they are required to ‘justify’ their choice. This should be done by analysing the pros and cons of the option they have chosen, using the logical al chain of reasoning and concluding with sound judgement.

Conceptual roots of Social Constructivism

The theory of social constructivism has links to theories of both philosophy and psychology (Sandu, Unguru, & Unguru, 2017). It states that individuals develop and expand on their learning through their social circles and social interactions. It was developed based on the belief that man is a social animal and grows by interacting or communicating with others (Kukla, 2013). Social constructivism argues that men construct their knowledge and meaning from their experiences. The emphasis of this theory is on the collaborative nature of learning. It also highlights the importance of cultural and social contexts. According to the theory, man can learn effectively by interacting with others frequently. Herein people collaborate and share the knowledge they possess (Haas, 2015). Such sharing of knowledge helps in expanding understanding of the individuals in different subject areas. According to Kivunja (2014), the theory of social constructivism is deep-rooted in cultural and social contexts. Herein exposure of individuals to cultural and social environment is of crucial importance. It can be the differentiating factor in the knowledge gained by the individuals and their ability to behave and perform in social settings (Hay, 2016). It states that knowledge is a human product, which is constructed through social and cultural interactions. It is not something that can be discovered; rather, it is the process that needs to be carried out for a particular length of time (Doolittle, 2014). Social constructivism has deep roots with social learning theories as it emphasises on interactions instead of observations. Vygotsky, a leading psychologist, provided a sociocultural perspective on the very subject matter (Deulen, 2013). He highlighted the role of social and cultural interactions in the process of learning. He further stated that knowledge is co-constructed, which means to develop the knowledge inputs from other people are also required. Without sharing and interaction, the process of developing knowledge is left incomplete, and therefore, it remains ineffective for the learners. Based on this discussion, it can be said that social constructivism is associated with cultural and social interactions (Schreiber & Valle, 2013). The more of such exposures lead to an increment in the knowledge. It also enhances the overall quality and applicability of knowledge.

Critical Review of Social Constructivism

The theory of social constructivism states that teachers should keep in mind the knowledge of their students (Lee, 2012). With such information, they can quickly develop the lesson plans and ensure that the needs and requirements of the students are fulfilled to the highest possible extent. By using information about knowledge of the students, the teachers have a base on which they can assess and evaluate student's performance and also recommend them ways to improve their learning as well. In view of Shotter (2012) the social constructivism is one of the leading theoretical positions in the field of education. By applying this theory, the process of learning and teaching can be simplified to a great extent, and it can help both the parties to perform their duties with ease. In this regard, Knoblauch (2013) states that use of this theory should be considered as an opportunity, especially for the teachers, because it enables them to understand their learners and their requirements in a better way. Such information can be considered as a tool that enables the teachers to provide better teaching to the students and help them in understanding and learning the topic better (Galbin, 2014). According to Schrader (2015) and Kiraly (2015) theory of social constructivism argues that an individual can learn better through social interactions with others and exposure to other cultures. Based on this, it can be said that this theory is better suited to people who have excellent communication skills. However, several individuals who do not have such skills would not be able to learn. In view of Carel & Cooper (2014), this is one of the major criticisms of the theory concerning the field of education. Although there has been growing evidence and body that supports the social constructivist theory, there have been many authors such as Thinley, Geva, & Reye (2014) who claim that the theory is not as useful as it seems. This is mainly due to reason that the use of the theory can limit both the teachers as well as the students in terms of the activities that they can perform along with approaches that they might use to perform their actions. For instance, some students might like to study and learn from resources like books and online articles alone. Therefore, for them interacting with other students might not be as practical or useful, as per Mathieson (2012). In view of Amineh & Asl (2015) the social constructivism theory is ineffective due to fact that when the students are left to learn without any proper structure or with minimal instructions, they tend to become lost. This means that in such situations, they are unable to understand the subjects or topics properly and thus, their learning process starts to get adversely influenced. According to the authors, the practice of designing minimally guided instructions or lesson plans tends to ignore the importance and structure of the working memory which is vital during the learning process. According to Barak (2017), unguided instructions are neither effective nor very useful in creating effective learning environments. Another point of criticism of the theory is that the learners are required to connect their knowledge to tangible objects to ensure that they have acquired the knowledge; but this aspect is not a part of the social constructivism theory (Thomas, Menon, & Boruff, 2014). It does not consider this aspect to be a part of the learning process and therefore does not focus on it. Lack of teacher provided instructions and overview by the teacher has a negative impact on the students’ learning process, as highlighted by Hyett, Kenny, & Dickson-Swift (2014). The authors stated that students lose their ability to concentrate and lose their interest in learning when either the teacher is not present in the room, or when the teacher is not paying enough attention to them. However, when teachers adopt a more structured approach, they are able to control the students and ensure that their learning is optimal and they gain clarity about the concepts and different aspects about the subject being taught (Ramoglou & Zyglidopoulos, 2015).

Some authors such as Schmitz & Höppner (2014) and Stigmar (2016) state that the social constructivism overlooks many essential contextual factors like educational resources need for integrating media into learning environments, preferences of the learners and many more. Due to this reason, these authors believe that the theory of social constructivism is not as effective and useful in a teaching and learning-based environment. By using such theories, the focus of the teacher's shifts from teaching the students to only managing them (Kennedy, 2014). This then negatively affects their commitment as well as their overall learning experience. On this basis, it can be said that theory of social constructivism does not help in improving the experience of the students, due to which they are unable to comprehend the subject properly and they are unable to learn properly (Karatepe, 2013). The fact that social constructivism promotes group thinking rather than promoting the individuality of the students is another major criticism of the theory (Barak, 2017). Wiersma & Devine‐Wright (2014) argues by using this theory; the teachers will focus only on the performance and needs of the group of students rather than meeting the requirements of the individual learners. This will reduce the overall effectiveness of teaching and learning experience. The theory is mainly criticised on the point that dominant students will control the whole group and might even try to influence groups’ thinking (McKinley, 2015). In such situations, the teachers will not be able to meet the demands and requirements of the individual learners.

Designing the Lessons to Address the Enquiry Question

In order to fulfil the enquiry question attention will have to be given on making the students understand the importance of the nine marks question and how it can be useful in helping them score good marks. In this regard, the first chapter would have to be on explaining the question and discussing some previous years’ questions as examples with the students. The objective of performing such activity was to inform students about the question and to discuss with them ways through which they can score good marks in the exam. In this chapter, attention will be given to teaching students the structure of the nine marks justify questions. Through this lesson, teachers will be able to inform students about the importance of the question and how they can learn to score good marks in this question. The relevance of this lesson can be understood through the fact that many students from the year 11 class failed to answer the long questions, especially the ones that were of 9 and 12 marks. While analysing the issue, it was observed that most of these students did not know how to structure their answers. Their presentation skills for such questions were lacking, as they were unable to present their thoughts, arguments and answers in general in a logical sequence. This resulted in a significant decline in the marks that they could have scored otherwise. Their answers showed a lack of logical chain of reasoning, which the examiners are usually very interested to see in answers of their students. The second lesson will entail scaffolding the case study. Herein focus will be on discussing case studies with the students. The teacher will have to ensure that there is an optimal level of participation from the pupil so that they can learn the topic. The teacher should also allow enough time for the students to discuss the case study amongst themselves. This will enable quick learning among them and also help them to understand various concepts highlighted within the case study. In the third lesson, the students will work in pairs to discuss the key points drawn from the classroom. They will further be required to read case studies provided to them in pairs, highlighting and discussing the key points. During this lesson, although the teacher will help the students, it would be limited to a great extent. Herein the teachers will give attention to scaffolding the case study. This way the students can be taught about ways in which they can develop their own chain of thoughts and also ensure that there is a logical chain in their reasoning.

In the third lesson, the teacher will use the technique of Dedicated Independent Reflection Time (DIRT) and self-marking. The main reason for selecting these techniques is to allow students to assess their understanding of the case study. In this lesson, students will have the opportunity to look at their own work and analyse it from a critical viewpoint. This will help them in identifying their mistakes and on the basis of such information, they can make an informed decision as to the best way to deal with the situation. They can take help from the teachers to understand the aspects that they should pay attention to when they are analysing their work. The fourth lesson will be a peer review in which the students will be asked to bring similar case studies and topics which they can present and discuss in the classroom. Performing such activities will help in enhancing their overall understanding of the subject and also improve their ability to develop a chain of reasoning. In this lesson, the students will have to give a test for the 9-mark questions under timed conditions. The teacher will give students a certain amount of time in which they will have to answer the questions. The answers will be checked through the peer-review method. By reviewing the work of their peers, the students will be able to get a broader perspective about the whole situation, on the basis of which they can compare their work and their peer’s work. Through such information, the students will be able to make a thorough assessment of their work and understand their weak points. This will help them in understanding the very concept of chain of reasoning and also determine ways in which they can develop their own chain. In lesson five, students will be given complete exam-like conditions. The objective of this lesson will be to test the student’s ability to maintain a chain of reasoning in a pressure situation. This exam will test the ability of the students to face difficult situations and yet maintain a proper chain of reasoning.

Presentation and Discussion of the Data

By considering the present condition of the classroom, it can be said that there was a need to determine ways to improve student’s understanding about the 9 marks question and also teach them ways in which their chain of responses and the ability to answer the questions to gain best possible marks. In this regard, a five lessons plan was developed that focused on different aspects of the 9-mark questions. The first lesson focused on teaching the structure of the questions. The focus of this lesson was on enabling the students to learn ways in which they can structure answers for these questions. Furthermore, through this approach, the teacher was able to explain the importance of the questions to the students and help them understand the ways it can be useful for the students to score good marks (Hyett, Kenny, & Dickson-Swift, 2014). For instance, APO Marks of the Student Number 3 were seven out nine, but after the intervention, it improved by one number and reached eight out of nine, as shown in Appendix 5. This shows that the lessons that the teacher undertook for the students helped them considerably to improve their understanding of the nine-mark questions and their ability to score good marks in the question. On this basis, it may be said that the intervention provided by the teacher were vastly useful for the student and enhanced their understanding of the questions. These interventions also helped them in learning about ways through which they can score good marks by using a logical and proper chain of reasoning (Amineh & Asl, 2015). The student had improved the structure of the answer that she gave during the exam. She also showed a significant improvement in her answers were logical and had more clarity. The flow of the answer also improved adequately after the interventions. She now displayed the ability to develop and present interconnected points, thereby making her answers more appealing to the readers and teachers. This was one of the main reasons for such significant improvement in her after intervention marks. However, there are still certain areas that she needs to improve upon in order to score full marks. In this regard, she needs to pay more attention to the questions and the way she learns and writes the answers to the questions (Shotter, 2012). It was further suggested on the basis of the exam that she should pay attention to highlighting points in the case study and use them while answering the questions. This way she can contextualise the answers better and make her point in a better manner.

There are some of the steps and ways with which she can improve her performance for the questions and present her answers in a way that they can be easily understood by the teachers and the readers and as a result be able to score more marks. Based on this, it can be said that the intervention programs used by the teacher proved to be very useful in enhancing the understanding of students about the nine-marks questions and score good marks. This further shows that the social constructivism theory is not as useful in helping to improve scores of students for the nine-mark questions because if the teacher or even a structured program is not put in place to intervene in the process, then it can have a negative impact on learning process and experience of the students (Thomas, Menon, & Boruff, 2014). Similarly, a significant improvement in scores of Student Number 15 was also observed, as shown in Appendix 5. The APO marks were one out nine, which improved to five out of nine. Although the student did not score full marks after the intervention, it was better than scoring only one mark and not being able to score full marks. His chain of thought and reasoning was very bad, and the student was unable to present his answers in a logical manner (Thinley, Geva, & Reye, 2014). Due to this reason he was unable to score good marks and his academic performance was also not up to the required level. There was an urgent need for the student to improve his understanding of the question and also learn the chain of reasoning so that he could appropriately answer the questions. One of the key areas that the student needed to improve upon was related to the way he connected the words. The way he wrote and presented the words did not help to understand of the readers. There were a lot of grammatical mistakes, due to which the student was unable to present the answers properly and that resulted in him scoring lower marks. By focusing on the intervention, the student learned about ways to properly connect the words and thus present his answers properly. After the intervention sessions, the student was able to improve his chain of reasoning in a considerable way that allowed him to write and present more interconnected points and in a logical manner as well (Stigmar, 2016). In addition, he also started connecting the words logically that further enhanced understanding of the readers such as the teacher and helped them to analyse the answers while awarding the marks.

The student, in addition, was able to better highlight information obtained from the case study better that provided for a way to present the answers that attracted the teacher. One of the areas that the student needs to improve in is to develop the logical chain of reasoning further and while writing answers for the nine-marks questions, the student should write at least six interconnected points. He also needs to improve the way he writes the conclusion. He should focus on evaluating his options and discuss the underlying issues. Another very good example of the improvement in scores as a result of improvement in the chain of reasoning is the Student Number 23. APO marks showed that the student only three marks, but after the intervention, it scored to six out of nine. It was imperative for the concerned student to improve his performance because if he did not score good marks, it could have been risky for his academics as well. Moreover, the 9- and 12-mark questions are some of the high scoring questions and therefore they need to be dealt with properly so that the students can score good and as a result improve their academic performance. By using information about knowledge of the students, the teachers have a base on which they can assess and evaluate student's performance and also recommend them ways to improve their learning as well. Social constructivism is one of the leading theoretical positions in the field of education. By applying this theory, the process of learning and teaching can be simplified to a great extent, and it can help both the parties to perform their duties with ease. Use of this theory should be considered as an opportunity, especially for the teachers, because it enables them to understand their learners and their requirements in a better way (Hyett, Kenny, & Dickson-Swift, 2014). Such information can be considered as a tool that enables the teachers to provide better teaching to the students and help them in understanding and learning the topic better. However, the student still needs to improve his logical chain of reasoning, and while answering the nine-mark questions should present at least six interconnected points. He also needs to improve the way he writes the conclusion. By improving on this, he can enhance his performance further. Performance of Student Number 19 was fairly average, but since these 9-mark questions hold so much importance, it was imperative for the student to improve the way she wrote the questions and presented them. Her APO marks were four out of nine which marginally improved to five after the intervention. This further shows that with such intervention practices, students can improve their performance in answering these questions and score good marks by improving their chain of reasoning. Unlike as per the social constructivism theory, in the current interventions and lessons, the teacher was significantly involved in every step of the process so as to ensure that the students have gained a proper understanding about the topic. This way they could present their answers in a logical manner, displaying their ability of chain of reasoning (Mathieson, 2012).

The theory of social constructivism is deep-rooted in cultural and social contexts. Herein exposure of individuals to cultural and social environment is of crucial importance (McKinley, 2015). It can be the differentiating factor in the knowledge gained by the individuals and their ability to behave and perform in social settings. Social constructivism has deep roots with social learning theories as it emphasises on interactions instead of observations. Theory of social constructivism argues that an individual can learn better through social interactions with others and exposure to other cultures. Based on this, it can be said that this theory is better suited to people who have excellent communication skills. However, several individuals who do not have such skills would not be able to learn. The theory is not as useful as it seems. This is mainly due to reason that the use of the theory can limit both the teachers as well as the students in terms of the activities that they can perform along with approaches that they might use to perform their actions (Shotter, 2012). For instance, some students might like to study and learn from resources like books and online articles alone. Therefore, for them interacting with other students might not be as practical or useful.

Evaluating the process

Helping the students to learn about the importance and structure of the nine-marks questions was a challenging task. However, to do so, I employed a democratic approach wherein I relied on first explaining the problem and current situation of the students. This way I was able to present them the whole situation and thus properly explain them the importance of the nine-marks questions and the way(s) in which it can create a difference in their overall scores for the course. On the basis of the above study, it can be said that I was able to use the approach to a great effect and get the desired results as well. During this process, I learned a number of things that enabled me to further my understanding of the importance of these questions and how I can make the students understand its importance. I would say that I was successful in achieving the objective that I was aiming for. I learned a great deal about the theory of social constructivism. this is one of the major criticisms of the theory concerning the field of education. Although there has been growing evidence and body that supports the social constructivist theory, there have been many authors who claim that the theory is not as useful as it seems (Haas, 2015). This is mainly due to reason that the use of the theory can limit both the teachers as well as the students in terms of the activities that they can perform along with approaches that they might use to perform their actions. For instance, some students might like to study and learn from resources like books and online articles alone. Therefore, for them interacting with other students might not be as practical or useful (Shotter, 2012). From the theory that I learned here has enabled me to understand that students need to be handled with extreme caution, and they require constant supervision. On the basis of the criticism I learned, I have understood that applying the social constructivism theory requires some very special circumstances and cannot be applied in normal teaching and learning situations. Here I came to an understanding that this theory, in general, is not very effective. The teachers need to control the classroom activities so that they can make sure that the students are learning and that they are behaving in the manner as warranted by the teacher.

Impact of the process

Teaching business studies is a very challenging and interesting task at the same time. There are so many aspects and concepts that require to be paid attention to so as to ensure that the students learn properly and thus will become significant contributors towards the attainment of firm’s goals that they become part of. Undertaking the current project and learning about the theory of social constructivism has helped me expand my thinking abilities and also understand that the needs and requirements of every student are different from one another. The best way to teach pupil is by identifying their weak areas and suggesting them ways through which they can improve upon those. Using such an approach can be the differentiating factor and can help me to become a better teacher. The experience that I have gained from this project will enable me to change my viewpoint while I become a teacher in the future. When I do become a teacher, I will make sure that I am always present for the students with whom they can share their queries and doubts. This way, I can perform better and also ensure that the students understand the concepts being taught to them, along with scoring good marks in the exams (Haas, 2015). Through the approach that I used here, I now have understood that through a well-developed lesson plan that has room for students to engage with the teacher on a one to one session can be most useful in clearing their doubts and helping them to understand concepts being taught in the class. I now have a very different viewpoint when it comes to teaching. Earlier I used to think that a teacher should teach the concepts and then it is upon the students to study and get their doubts cleared. However, now I have realised due to many reasons’ students do not study on their own and therefore, such tasks cannot be left on their own (Deulen, 2013). If they are not under the supervision of a teacher or they are not in a clearly developed structure or system, then their performance will not be as per the required standard. They will not score good marks during the exams due to which their academic performance will suffer. I am slowly learning that to be an effective teacher I need to have a clear structure so that I can control the students and thereby ensure that their performance is at par and they are learning the subjects being taught in the classes.

REFERENCES

Achtenhagen, L., Melin, L., & Naldi, L. (2013). Dynamics of business models–strategizing, critical capabilities and activities for sustained value creation. Long range planning, 427-442.

Barak, M. (2017). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science Education, 283-303.

Carel, H., & Cooper, R. (2014). Health and disease: Social constructivism as a combination of naturalism and normativism. Health, illness and disease, 49-68.

Doolittle, P. (2014). Complex constructivism: A theoretical model of complexity and cognition. International Journal of teaching and learning in higher education, 485-498.

Haas, P. (2015). Social constructivism and the evolution of environmental governance. Epistemic Communities, Constructivism, and International Environmental Politics, 143-171.

Hyett, N., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2014). Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 23606.

Karatepe, O. (2013). High-performance work practices and hotel employee performance: The mediation of work engagement. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 132-140.

Kennedy, J. (2014). Characteristics of massive open online courses (MOOCs): A research review, 2009-2012. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 131.

Kiraly, D. (2015). Occasioning translator competence: Moving beyond social constructivism toward a postmodern alternative to instructionism. Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association, 8-32.

Kivunja, C. (2014). Do You Want Your Students to Be Job-Ready with 21st Century Skills? Change Pedagogies: A Pedagogical Paradigm Shift from Vygotskyian Social Constructivism to Critical Thinking, Problem Solving and Siemens' Digital Connectivism. International Journal of Higher Education, 81-91.

Kukla, A. (2013). Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. Routledge.

Mathieson, S. (2012). Disciplinary cultures of teaching and learning as socially situated practice: Rethinking the space between social constructivism and epistemological essentialism from the South African experience. Higher Education , 549-564.

McKinley, J. (2015). Critical argument and writer identity: Social constructivism as a theoretical framework for EFL academic writing. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 184-207.

Riccomini, P., Smith, G., & Hughes, E. (2015). The language of mathematics: The importance of teaching and learning mathematical vocabulary. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 235-252.

Schleppegrell, M. (2012). Academic language in teaching and learning: Introduction to the special issue. The elementary school journal, 409-418.

Schrader, D. (2015). Constructivism and learning in the age of social media: Changing minds and learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 23-35.

Schreiber, L., & Valle, B. E. (2013). Social constructivist teaching strategies in the small group classroom. Small Group Research, 395-411.

Stigmar, M. (2016). Peer-to-peer teaching in higher education: A critical literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: partnership in learning, 124-136.

Thinley, P., Geva, S., & Reye, J. (2014). Tablets (iPad) for M-learning in the context of social constructivism to institute an effective learning environment. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 16-20.

Thomas, A., Menon, A., & Boruff, J. (2014). Applications of social constructivist learning theories in knowledge translation for healthcare professionals: a scoping review. Implementation Science, 54.

Wiersma, B., & Devine‐Wright, P. (2014). Public engagement with offshore renewable energy: a critical review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 493-507.