Thursday, February 24, 2011

Apprenticeship

Historically, the apprenticeship model was a means to learn, develop, and master a craft through the intentional relationship with an expert who modeled, coached, and then stepped back and allowed the student to become an experienced craftsman as well.

In their article, Collins, Brown, & Newman note that “Apprenticeship is the way we learn most naturally.”  The article outlines the underlying characteristics of the Cognitive Apprenticeship model, a beautiful means of meshing facts and problem solving skills as the apprentice is guided through the learning experience.  “Conceptual and factual knowledge thus are learned in terms of their uses in a variety of contexts, encouraging both a deeper understanding of the meaning of the concepts and facts themselves and a rich web of memorable associations between them and problem- solving contexts.” (p. 457)

There are several effective models of apprenticeship including reciprocal teaching in which students learn to form questions, summarize, ask questions, and clarify difficulties.  They take turns having the teacher model these strategies and taking on the role of the teacher to deliver the strategies.

The cognitive apprenticeship model can also be applied to varied subject areas such as writing as demonstrated in Scardamalia and Bereiter's Procedural Facilitation of Writing or math as outlined in Schoenfeld's Method for Teaching Mathematical Problem Solving.  Their methods include the same approach of modeling, coaching, and fading.

Hand in hand with the cognitive apprenticeship model is the use of situated learning in which students are given “real world” tasks or scenarios to solve.  Problem-solving is not learned in isolation, but is framed in a manner that provides meaning or purpose.


In thinking through the shift from apprenticeship & focus on developing a specific skill set to the generalized instruction of all subject areas now imparted through traditional education, I am reminded of the writing of C.S. Lewis.  He reasoned that "In those days a boy on the classical side officially did almost nothing but classics.  I think this wise; the greatest service we can do to education is to teach fewer subjects.  No one has time to do more than a very few things well before he is twenty, and when we force a boy to be a mediocrity in a dozen subjects we destroy his standards, perhaps for life.”

I wonder if we are indeed doing a disservice to students by straying from this model of instruction and/or thinking that we can realistically/fully use this model to teach EVERY subject area well.

3 comments:

  1. How do you manage a whole class using this model and theory? It seems like it would be hard to differentiate instruction as you are modelling the activities the students will then be practicing. I would think this would be easier to manage while students are working in small groups -- even 5 or 6 students at a time. It would be more hands-on and you could differentiate so that different learning styles/modes are used.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I also want to coment on your C.L. Lewis analogy! He and you point out very valid points! When we teach the skills to obtain specific knowledge and help students explore and develop their own learning through interests and choices, we equip them with the tools to enjoy a life of learning! Thanks for sharing that awesome quote!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for sharing the C.S. Lewis quote - It seems to me that you need both generalists and specialists, and the tendency to favor one over the other in the workplace is like a pendulum that swings from one to the other depending on what is abundant in supply. Books like Clifton's Strengths Finder argues against being well-rounded, and instead suggests that you develop your natural strengths to contribute something unique to a team. In a somewhat related way the apprenticeship readings made me think of 'the 10,000 hour rule' in Gladwell's Outliers (i.e., you need some amount of talent but more importantly, you need to spend about 10,000 hours of practice to really get good at something). I think the tricky thing for many people is that you don't always figure out what your 'classics' is as a 'boy', and this ambiguity makes it difficult to pick one or two things that you think you can do for the rest of your life. Tying these thoughts back to our readings, perhaps Collins et al., assume (too much?) that learners have already made a conscious decision to become apprentice to a particular domain, when in reality they are still trying to figure out which domain they need to pursue (e.g., in college many students switch majors).

    ReplyDelete