Where is the boundary in making a distinction between traditional methods of teaching from those that are not traditional?
In other words, traditional methods are teacher-focused, while modern methods are student-centered.
The traditional method of teaching is when a teacher directs students to learn through memorization and recitation techniques thereby not developing their critical thinking problem solving and decision-making skills.
traditional teaching is a teacher-centered approach. methods such as narration, question-answer, discussion can be used. However, today many education systems prefer student-centered methods.
Traditional teaching methods depend on memorization and instruction, while modern methods focus on understanding and exploration.
In other words, traditional methods are teacher-focused, while modern methods are student-centered.
Traditional methods of teaching is teachers' directive way and students participation is less. Mainly for memorization not for critical thinking.
Moses Kayola Phiri
Traditional method of teaching is when a teacher directs students to learn through memorization and recitation techniques thereby not developing Critical thinking, Problem Solving, and Decision making skills, just like @Ibraheem Kadhom Faroun as defined it.
Traditional methods of teaching may appear to be teacher centric but they are not always so. A teacher has to use diverse methods of teaching depending on the students. A combination of traditional and modern methods work best in my opinion.
Is it even possible to use modern methods purely (i.e. without the involvement of so-called traditional methods?
Most researchers consider a traditional method of teaching as a way that education has been delivered such as teaching through recitation and memorization techniques, with teacher-exposition being central. It may not be possible to deliver lessons without the involvement of some elements of expository teaching. That is why the term “traditional method of teaching” has to be operationalized based on the context in which it has been applied. In our paper, Data on students’ mathematical reasoning test scores: A quasi-experiment, @ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.105546, we operationalized it as a method of teaching that is characterized by ‘chalk and talk’ and what Slavin referred to as a “standard hear lecture–do problems–get feedback order of affairs.
Traditional usually refers to what we used to do. For example, most schools used to depend on a lecture-based curriculum and then moved to a student-centred curriculum. Currently, with COVID-19, moved schools moved to online learning versus what they used to do earlier, namely face-to-face teaching. Therefore, we need to look for the context.
Does this mean what are mordern teaching methods today may be traditional tomorrow? Where is the boundary? @ samy Azer
Any method that presumes teacher as depositor of knowledge into the mental treasury of the learners is a traditional method. Today, the assumption is that the learners are not empty slates. They know something which is related to the topic at hand. The duty of the teacher is to re-awake the latent knowledge by facilitate a link between known and unknown
Does this mean it is not possible to re-awake the student's latent knowledge by using traditional methods of teaching? @olusegun okunuuga owolewa.
Traditional methods of teaching usually depict teachers as sages on the stage rather than guides by the side of learners. They portray teachers as all-knowing rather than learners as well in the process of teaching. Students are passive recipients of information rather than active creators of knowledge.
Traditional methods of teaching are the methods that are used for years in the majority of schools worldwide, such as lectures and teacher-centred approaches. These days we may refer to face-to-face teaching as traditional teaching to differentiate it from online teaching.
Can we conclude that traditional methods of teaching are dynamic and as such we will always have them around? @samy azer
Can we conclude that traditional methods of teaching are dynamic and as such we will always have them around? @samy azer
Traditional methods of teaching are teacher centered. Without the teacher learner is seen an nothing while on the other hand modern methods give the learner a chance to think, create and improve with her little assistance from the facilitator. It is empowering one to believe in themselves
It’s a false dichotomy. In the current post-modern Western world, ‘traditional’ is regarded as bad and new is therefore good.
Teachers should do what works for their students in their context. In the Western Australian secondary system, where I teach, Year 12 is vastly different to Year 7. In Year 7 History, I am an expert on Ancient Rome so imparting knowledge is appropriate. The issue lies in what we then get the students to with it. Teaching critical thought is pointless unless we ensure the students have the basic knowledge to which they can apply their critical facilities. In Year 12, I am also an expert but the students have had 6 years of high school at this stage. With these students, I attempt to get them to critically analyse the topic at hand.
Traditional methods work on the assumption that the teacher is teaching homogenous students as far as their prior knowledge, characteristics and learning styles are concerned.
Lecture and question-answer can be. In fact, every form of expression in which the student is passive is traditional.
traditional methods of teaching are these methods which teacher make the main role in it like lecture.
Traditional methods of teaching are methods that are teacher-centered, such that the teacher is the person that will give all the required information pertaining to the topic discussed while the students just listen or observe. However, the new methods of teaching are both teacher and learner centered, that is, both the teacher and learners contribute knowledgeable to the selected topic.
The traditional way of teaching is the teacher to be the basis of the educational process. At present, the focus is on problem-based learning where the student is the basis for the educational process.
@ conorbuckley -It’s a false dichotomy. In the current post-modern Western world, ‘traditional’ is regarded as bad and new is therefore good.
Teachers should do what works for their students in their context. In the Western Australian secondary system, where I teach, Year 12 is vastly different to Year 7. In Year 7 History, I am an expert on Ancient Rome so imparting knowledge is appropriate. The issue lies in what we then get the students to with it. Teaching critical thought is pointless unless we ensure the students have the basic knowledge to which they can apply their critical facilities. In Year 12, I am also an expert but the students have had 6 years of high school at this stage. With these students, I attempt to get them to critically analyse the topic at hand.
I like this reasoning but how true is it?
This link maybe useful:
https://www.reference.com/world-view/examples-traditional-teaching-methods-a227abf51002c6f0
Grammar translation method and direct method
GTM & DM
general focus is on structures and forms rather than usage.
teacher-centered with passive students ....
It is evident that to establish a difference between something traditional and something modern, we must start from some kind of criteria. If possible, the most universal and recognized.
I think that when speaking of the traditional method of teaching, we must choose the criterion of the diffusion of the method. Thus being able to distinguish between the most extended method from the least extended methods.
This criterion is not without prejudice, since there are teaching methods that are very old in time and not very widespread, especially those that have been used in small or traditional communities.
If we use the temporal criterion, we should establish a moment in history to discern between which tradition is to be taken as a reference. And here we have the same problem, since depending on which culture we will have one tradition or another.
Therefore, we have to define what time and what tradition we take as a reference.
If we talk about the traditional method in Western European culture, which is the one that is part of the global, economic, political and social culture prevailing in the world. We have to talk about the Durkheimian method or the French method. Consistent in the use of rationalist education. It is also taken as a reference, the break that it makes about religious teaching methods, based on dogma.
Furthermore, it is this rationalist method adopted by bourgeois states and industrialized societies, not without discipline, instruction and organizational orientation in the style of a factory or manufacturing workshop. Reproducing the ranks, hierarchies and loyalty systems, based on rules and on rewards and punishments that imitate fines or salary payments. Through approved and suspended disciplinary sanctions in the form of additional school work and others.
Over time, this traditional method has been modified, incorporating more comprehensive and non-violent methods, or participatory methods based on student interest and practical experience, but, normally, they have been methods practiced in private schools that they applied experimental models of learning and teaching.
Currently, the transformation of the traditional teaching method is implemented with the teaching and learning experiences of various cultures that contribute to a revision of the traditional teaching methods, in whole or in part. Globalization has made it possible to value local experiences and make them global. Although the industrial teaching model and an education focused on the formation of an obedient workforce with the system continue to predominate. Maintaining an education for the great social majorities and another for a minority oriented to the direction and management of the key knowledge and knowledge, for the current international division of labor.
Moses Kayola Phiri
I hope I am consistent (assuming you that is what you mean my ‘true’).
Currently, I am teaching a class the structure of an essay, which requires prior knowledge of what a paragraph is. I have sufficient samples of their writing to know that I need to impart the structure of a paragraph and essay (teacher-led & student-focussed/traditional). The next step is for the students to select their topic for their essay. Then they will research as needed and write. In these stages, I act as a guide (student-led/modern).
Does it mean traditional methods of teaching are unavoidable in a lesson? @conorbuckley
I think Abdelkader Mohamed Elsayed and Ibraheem Kadhoum Faroun have succinctly captured the difference between traditional and non-traditional methods of teaching. Paulo Freire in his classic "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed" distinguishes between (a) a traditional "banking" approach in which the teacher is all knowing and students are passive recipients of the teacher's knowledge and (b) a "dialogical" approach in which students and teachers interact and are co-creators of knowledge. In the latter approach, the teacher is prepared to also learn from her/his students.
When teacher gives the information sometimes just notes, sometimes pictures or videos, sometimes lab experiments to make the concept fully understood.
If it is just notes, the students can read them at home.
Originally, Socrates conversed with his students in the agora or park until a shelter was found. They didn't know how to call this centre, but they named it (Academia) after their neighbour, Mr. Akademos.
I believe there is no such distinction or strict set of conditions that determine whether a method of teaching is traditional or not, the teaching methods has evolved continously over the period of human civilization and continues to do so, however in modern times the data analytics, in particular the methods of learning analytics provide a quick, quantitative assessment of effectiveness of methods and content of teaching certain material to certain audience, which provides a quick, critical feedback to update his/her teaching method and content, making it more adapted for the next iteration of the teaching session.
I think that if we discuss what is the difference that distinguishes a traditional method from a non-traditional one, we are faced with two dilemmas. One, is to take the traditional as the old versus the new. Another, is to take the traditional as dominant versus the emerging.
I agree that it was Paulo Freire who best identified the traditional method, in that sense I completely agree with @Oswell Namasasu and @Omar Hazem MOHAMMED. However, I must clarify that Freire exposes his Pedagogy of the Oppressed to point out that dialogic learning fosters learning autonomy in students, by becoming meaningful learning. In addition, it is liberating. In the sense that it allows the oppressed classes to become aware of the ownership of work, not only economically but above all ideologically. Free yourself from the consciousness of the dominant (oppressive) ideology to develop your own (liberating) worldview.
The question is whether this contribution by Freire is dominant or emerging. It is new or old.
I think that Freire's contribution is neither dominant nor new. The pedagogical movement called "Escuela Nueva" (http://www.educacionyfp.gob.es/revista-de-educacion/dam/jcr:f1d8e950-e275-4512-a85b-8383462bd0c1/re24202-pdf.pdf) (I regret that can only present it in Spanish) It is recognized as the set of alternative pedagogical innovation in the 19th century (Cecil Reddie, 1889, -Abbotsholme- New School) although significant innovations already existed since 1850 (“Ave María” Schools of Father Manjón. Spain) o 1859 (The Tolstoy school. "Yasnaia Poliana ”which was founded on a farm owned by him, in Russia, constituting one of the first experiences of a libertarian school) This was followed by a set of innovative initiatives in pedagogy, which have not passed to be the practices of the educational system in a systematic way, but they have been incorporated by the hand of the initiatives of teachers stimulated to innovation, sometimes in the public school (free) or in the private school.
Freire places pedagogical innovation at the level of the class struggle. Furthermore, in the context of capitalist imperialism. Therefore, it is very sensitive for cultural minorities, forced to accept the dominant western culture as universal culture. At the same time as the impoverished and popular classes, forced to accept as dominant culture the world view of the ruling classes.
As you can guess, this pedagogy of the oppressed has a powerful value for the current international and social division of labor. Since it questions the values seen from the experience of success of a social minority and a minority of nations, against the vision of values from a social majority and a majority of nations. And that brings as a consequence a strong revolution power of the societies that must accept the established social, cultural and ideological order.
Therefore, it cannot be said that the difference between the traditional and the current is the product of a change in the trend in teaching practices, but that, currently, traditional teaching models coexist with a growing practice of educational innovation circumscribed in large part, to the innovative initiative of teachers in their traditional classrooms and to private schools (for a fee) that sell the innovation only to those who accept the dominant ideology or to those who learn, in these schools, to develop a dialogical learning from their own social vision of the world (which, as we can guess, are those who can pay for these types of schools)
Another thing is if we talk about structural changes in public schools, which are those that welcome the child population through an official curriculum and the years of minimum schooling guaranteed or compulsory.
Here changes are detected that deserve their own debate.
Traditional Method is where the learners are passive listeners and the curriculum is teacher centered.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Teaching