1. Chapter 2 discussed perceptual processes and different theories on how both our visual and auditory systems impose organization on our perceptual world. Some different theories were top-down and bottom-up processing, visual and auditory object recognition, face recognition, proximal stimuli vs. tre distal stimuli and the general mechanism approach to speech perception.
2. Chapter 1 discusses the idea that your cognitive processes are interrelated. For example, when one figures out a problem to something, they must use their perceptual processes, which according to Chapter 2, is the visual and auditory recognition that use our previous knowledge to interpreet the stimuli that are registerd by our senses.
3. With all of the different theories discussed in the chapter, I am a little confused on why some students are quicker learners than others or faster readers, etc. I am also confused on why students are different learners. How does this fit in with cognition. Is it active learning, genetic, or does it have to do with their surroundings (behaviorist theory) where they had reactions to stimuli in the environment. Is it top-down/bottom-up processing that makes a person "see" things or is it the fact that we build our memories the more we see or are exposed to something? I don't know.
4. How would apply this to my own teaching/work? According to Chapter 2, the way I would apply these theories, which I have done so already, is to make sure students see, hear, and have hands-on experiences in all areas. They must see a facial expression when being spoken to and they must hear the sounds that go along with certain things. Today I did a lesson on Adverbs and I used the bottom-up and top-down processing to help students become more familiar with these words. I gave them each a different adverb to write on a sticky note, then I had them stick their adverb on a chart in the correct column labeled "HOW," "WHEN," "WHERE," AND "TO WHAT DEGREE". Then they had to try to verbally use the word in a sentence. Students commented on how much easier it was for them to understand what an adverb was after that lesson.
5. I'm not sure this theory goes with the above lesson, but it was convincing enough to me when it talked about how students could read faster by recognizing words that were used correctly in a sentence vs. words that were spelled wrong or out of order.
6. I guess this is important because in order for us to be better teachers, we can create more successful lesson plans and be able to reach more students.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Kim. I loved the activity you described with the adverbs and chart. You gave them an experience that provided the auditory piece of instruction, along with a powerful visual. What a great way to create a foundation of understanding that they can refer to and build on. It is also a great example of active learning.
ReplyDeleteThis could be modified for other activities easily. I thought of nutrition education. Have you used this method in the past for other lessons?
This is the first time I've used this lesson for adverbs, but in the past I've used sticky notes with prepositional phrases on them and had students stick the notes wherever the phrase said (like, "in the desk" or "on the wall" or "under the chair", etc.) Students had fun with this too.
ReplyDeleteKim, regarding #3, those are the million dollar questions! That is why we study cognition and do all kinds of research. The answers to all your questions are it is some of all of them (e.g. top and bottom down processing, genetics and environment). The goal of research is to try to give us guidelines for answering those questions by describing the who, to what degree, and under what circumstances? You could easily do your post-it activity when you evaluate research studies! Keep this in mind for the article critique at the end of the semester. Glad you are thinking about the "big questions" in cognition.
ReplyDelete