There has been a heated debate in our group discussion on the importance of certain elements of analysis of students in the ASSURE lesson planning model. These are ethnic background (to what extent should we analyse these students background? By country of origin, tribe, skin colour or others?), What learning styles need to be considered in what kind of lessons? and How do this analyses auger with the use of technology?
I strongly agree that analysis of students is important and MUST be done if proper planing for individual needs in a classroom is to be successful. However, only those criteria which may affect the teaching learning process should be considered. For instance, if you are going to handle a lesson on piggery in agriculture, you must consider religious affiliation as an issue otherwise some denominations may have a problem at the end of the day. The same would definitely not be true if you are handling "law of diminishing returns" in the same subject.
Some aspects of analysis like numbers, sex, streaming, learner achievement levels, previous knowledge and competencies, language proficiency etc. are a must analyse because they cut across irrespective of the lesson, concept or subject. Sex may affect grouping - some learners are not comfortable sitting next to those of opposite sex, previous competencies are, more or less, stepping stones to the next level of knowledge - from known to unknown, language proficiency will definitely dictate on the complexity of language to be used during the lesson and whether the technology has suitable language for the learners under consideration. The list is long.
I absolutely agree that we cannot do without learner analysis.
Comments
Post a Comment