The Self-Teaching Process in Higher Education

PJ Hills, P.J. Hills

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781138338890
• eBook ISBN: 9780429803789
• Topic: Pedagogía
• Subtopic: Educación general

Originally published in 1976 The Self-Teaching Process in Higher Education looks at the major changes that took place in the structure of university education. The book looks at how more emphasis was placed on students to take responsibility for their own progress by becoming self-directed individuals. Traditional methods of university education and some alternative approaches are considered in light of course needs of both students and teachers. Self-teaching is then examined in the overall context of the learning process. The book looks at three case studies of the development and use of self-teaching systems, one for chemical bonding, one for electrical circuits and a third for audio-visual communication.

Chapter 1. The Self-Teaching Process

Most universities follow a pattern of teaching and learning which is obviously teacher-centred, suited perhaps to the kind of student who pursues learning for its own sake. Now however the role of the university is changing and the doors are open for all who wish for any reason to pursue higher education. Learning is now becoming for the majority of students a means to an end and no longer simply an end in itself. In spite of this, many traditional teaching methods are remaining unchanged, even in science and engineering courses where the rapid change in the mass of knowledge and the greater numbers of students participating in courses demand that the university should adapt its methods to these new requirements.

AIMS OF A UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

One of the important aims of a university education is of course to help a student to learn not only while he is engaged in courses of higher education but also to help him to continue to learn throughout life. The practical principles of learning theory discussed in chapter 4 thus become important not only as a means of involving the student in learning while at university but also to help him to become a self-directing individual in his later life.

This theme runs through many of the writings on higher education; Brook writing in “The Modern University” says: ‘among the aims of a university education must be included the acquisition of knowledge, but of far greater importance are the development of the intellectual curiosity and the realisation that the acquisition of knowledge is pleasurable, for the development of these qualities is a guarantee that the acquisition of knowledge will continue after the student has left university.’ (Brook, 1965)

Sir James Mountford emphasises and extends this point in his book “British Universities” when he says that we need to ‘…. provide the student with a body of positive knowledge which enhances his store of learning … To the limits of his capacity he is trained to collect evidence for himself and form a balanced judgement about it. He fortifies his ability to think for himself.’ (Mountford, 1966)

Whatever techniques have to be developed in order that the student should achieve these aims depend ultimately on the individual student himself, and it is the task of the teacher to help him with this. This is somewhat in contrast to the view given by Herbart in his book “Outlines of Educational Doctrine” when he advised that: ‘Cases may arise where the impetuosity of the pupil challenges the teacher to a kind of combat. Rather than accept such a challenge, he will usually find it sufficient at first to reprove calmly, to wait until fatigue sets in. ‘(Herbart, 1904)

Here we have perhaps the central tenet of nineteenth-century teaching theory – the importance of formal discipline, rigid training and learning by rote. In the latter half of the twentieth century there has been an increasing realisation that the process should be learner-rather than teacher-centred; consequently there has been an increasing emphasis on the teacher in a managerial role rather than as a sole provider of information. (Davies, 1971)

This managerial role means that teachers may need to rethink their attitude to their courses. It is no longer sufficient to provide the student with material, hope that he will learn, and tell him at the end that he did not.

SELF-TEACHING

It is in the context of the above that I have used the term “self-teaching” as the central theme of this book. I believe it to be appropriate in the context of a realisation of the learner as central to the teaching/ learning process, since it clearly indicates the change from a largely teacher-based process to one where the student actively takes responsibility for his own progress, that is, progress towards becoming a self-directed individual.

This shifting of responsibility therefore brings with it the need for the teacher to examine carefully course content and the methods and techniques employed, and to consider ways in which courses can be made more effective. This change in emphasis has expressed itself in the emergence of the discipline of educational technology. Educational technology is not concerned, as many people seem to believe, with only audio-visual equipment, it is essentially a way of looking at the total process of teaching and learning in a systematic way. It can be thought of as a coming together of developments in the fields of the systems approach, programmed learning, learning theory and audio-visual methods.

Practical applications of learning theory and the use of audio-visual methods will be discussed in later chapters. Here let us first examine programmed learning in terms of the contribution it makes towards a consideration of the teaching/learning process in a systematic way, and then look more closely at the systems approach.

A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO COURSE DEVELOPMENT

A consideration of programmed learning is important here since it exposes the need to look systematically at the material of the teaching/learning process and argues for a more active approach by the learner. Principles of programmed learning include active involvement of a student in a gradual progression through a programme by requiring him to answer or select answers for problems raised throughout the sequence. Simple ideas are related to previous knowledge and more complex material is built on these.(Gilbert, 1958; Holland, 1959; Margulies and Eigen, 1962; Markle, 1969) Motivation in programmed learning is often considered in terms of reward and punishment by the immediate feedback of the right answers to steps in a programme, although factors of self-pacing and the apparent individualisation of programmes may contribute to this. Skinner considered that students can be motivated by a controlled progression through structured learning material. (Skinner, 1954) Skinner is of course a leading figure in the programmed learning movement. The development of programmed learning and the parts played by the key figures have been the subject of many reviews (e.g. Hills, 1966).

In Great Britain the programmed learning movement gathered momentum in the late 1950 s and early 1960s, but after this initial momentum, in part artificially stimulated by the manufacturers of teaching machines, there were a number of investigations of more active alternatives including directed and self-enquiry methods. (Kersh, 1962) Gradually there was a realisation of the somewhat narrow focus of the programmed learning movement (Leith, 1969) and the techniques of programmed learning are now being seen in the wider context of course development. An example of this can be found in the 1967 yearbook of the United States National Society for the Study of Education. (Lange, 1967) Here the process of course development is defined in the following series of steps:

i) the formulation of objectives

ii) the design and testing of criterion measures to determine when the objectives had been achieved

iii) the definition of the target population

iv) the analysis of learning tasks

v) the preparation of the programme

vi) testing and revising the programme

vii) the validation of the programme (Lange, 1967)

These seven steps also form the basis of what is often now called a systems approach to curriculum development and which is central to the philosophy of educational technology.

THE SYSTEMS APPROACH

The systems approach was developed, not specifically for educational purposes, but initially to improve military defence and tactical strategies.

“… during the early days of World War II, teams made up mainly of biologists, mathematicians and physicists were mobilized – to help design software instead of hardware, plans instead of equipment. They used their methods of learning … in the cause of improving military tactics and strategies.”

“One famous analysis ran directly counter to the established practice of dropping depth charges set to explode a hundred feet beneath the surface, indicating that a shallow setting of twenty to thirty feet would prove far more effective. The change was made, after some opposition, and increased the number of U-boats sunk by more than fifty per cent.” (Pfeffer, 1968)

The systems approach, whether applied to defence, business or education, covers the whole process from the definition of the problem, the specification of the basic objectives, the selection of a course of action down to the final evaluation of the success of the system, not only in terms of the fulfilment of the objectives set, but also in terms of cost effectiveness and other considerations.

A simple example which illustrates this is given by Duckworth when he poses the problem that there are three pieces of bread and a toaster which only toasts one side of each of two pieces of bread at once. The time taken to toast one side is thirty seconds.

The objective is to toast the three pieces of bread completely and to do this a) in the shortest time and b) utilising the full capacity of the toaster as far as possible.

One course of action might be as follows:

		Time in seconds
	Toast one side of pieces A and B	30
	Toast other side of pieces A and B	30
	Toast one side of piece C	30
	Toast other side of piece C	30
	Total time:	120 seconds

A second course of action might be:

		Time in seconds
	Toast one side of pieces A and B	30
	Toast other side of A and one side of C	30
	Toast other side of B and other side of C	30
	Total time:	90 seconds

Both methods obviously fulfil the objective of toasting...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Original Title Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Chapter 1. The Self-Teaching Process
• Chapter 2. Traditional University Methods and Some Alternative Approaches in Present Use
• Chapter 3. Student and Teacher’s Perceptions of Course Needs
• Chapter 4. The Learning Process and the Design of a Self-Teaching System
• Chapter 5. Evaluation
• Chapter 6. A Study of a Self-Teaching System in a Course on Chemical Bonding at the University of Surrey
• Chapter 7. An Investigation of a Self-Teaching System Which Used Self-Tests and Library-Based Reference Material Integrated with Lectures
• Chapter 8. The Second Trial of a System Which Used Self-Tests and Library-Based Material Integrated With Lectures
• Chapter 9. A Study of a Self-Teaching System in Biology and Chemistry Courses on Audio-Visual Communication at Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
• Chapter 10. Some Implications from the Case Studies
• Chapter 11. The Self-Directing Individual
• Appendix. An Analysis of Cost and Time for the Self-Teaching System
• Bibliography
• Index