THe deductive approach is more traditional, but I like the inductive approach. I think you should start with the specifics and build up to the big picture. To me planning would be much simpler and the planning would build the setting for the big picture.
I am most familiar with the deductive approach, but I was very interested to read about the Taba Model. Since our county is very "into" differentiation, I find that this is ultimately the model that we employ. We have units to teach, gauge student need, make our objectives, and then teach them. As we assess we may change the unit a little, ultimately developing the framework for teaching that skill and then creating more units to go along with it. I never really thought about it this way, but it is certainly an interesting idea and definitely not without its merits.
I prefer the inductive approach to curriculum and istruction. I think it is important to closely examine the pieces of the puzzle before putting it altogether. I also think that kids get the "big picture" when they have learned the information necessary first.
My preference would be to approach instruction through the inductive approach since it a "...grassroots approach to curriculum development ..." in that teachers design the curriculum rather than have it handed down by a 'higher authority' (133). However, (unfortunately) I do not believe that this is the practice utilized in most localities. The deductive approach is the one that I have utilized the most, not necessarily out of desire to do so, but because it is the 'requirement' of my job to carry out a prescribed curriculum.
I prefer the inductive approach also. I agee with Samantha in that the puzzle is much easier to work after you have examined all of the pieces. However, I feel that the powers that be often use the deductive method. There is validity in both agruments!
I prefer the deductive approach. I would rather start with my main goals and then plan the specifics. The deductive approach allows you to look at the "big picture" in the beginning. I think this is important because it helps us to plan a strategy in order to achieve specific goals.
I agree with Meslissa. With the population of students that I teach I need them to get a "birds eye view" of everything that we are going to discuss and then break it down further into the specific goals that need to be met; but when the students have the "big picture" in thier mind of what we are going to learn they are better able to understand the smaller details of what is being taught
I think it depends on what is being taught. I think that a good balance between the two is good. I've seen both and I like both. I think that if we, as instructors or administrators, believe that there is only one way of doing things than that's when instruction can get stagnant. I think it's good to mix it up. Throw a little inductive instruction with an english writing assignment or social studies discussion, more deductive when teaching language or math. It just depends.
I'm used to using the deductive approach. After reading this chapter, I am definitely more open to the thought of trying to utilize the inductive more. I agree with Kelli as well, in that you need to use each one for specific subjects at different times.
It depends on what I am teaching. Sometimes I need my students to exactly what is expected up front. While at other times I can use more of a inductive (let's figure this out) approach.
I have been most familiar with the deductive approach throughout my career. Although, like many others have been saying, the inductive approach is needed and has been added in to a teacher's style (mine included) depending on the class/subject being taught.
As someone pretty new to curriculum development, I think I would like to first feel comfortable with the deductive approach (I am presently involved in using this approach) but would really like to, at some point, try inductive; I, too, find Taba's model intriguing.
The approach that I am more comfortable with is the deductive model. I am a special education teacher and the students I serve must use the model. They need information presented to them by giving learners rules, then examples, then practice. It is a teacher-centred approach to presenting new content.
I agree with Carolyn. The majority of my students benefit from a deductive model. I need to be able to examine the needs and interests of the students before I move to the specific objectives of the lesson.
I like the inductive model when trying to improve or evolve curriculum. I use this in my computer programming class each year as I strive to improve a unit and then fit the unit with others to produce the overall curriculum. However, I think if would be difficult to design a curriculum from scratch or all at once this way.
When reading the chapter, I felt like it made a lot of sense to side with Taba and utilize a more inductive approach to curriculum development. However, I am not sure it would be very practical in terms of time and money spent. There would be a ton of meetings to go to in order to get the process rolling. I guess what I am saying is that districts use a more deductive approach because of size. It is more effecient to be deductive when developing curriculum.
After reading the chapter, I think I am more comfortable with the deductive approach and it is what I personally use; however, the inductive approach was very appealing to me when I read it. I agree with Steve when he stated that there would be a lot of money spent which would be hard to do for many schools. Even though it would take a great amount of work, I think it would be interesting to try it out!
I tend to lean to a more inductive approach. I think it is much easier to understand the main idea if you build up to it rather than the idea being thrown at you and then having to understand it and work your way down to all of the specifics. Therefore, I prefer Taba's model.
I believe I like the deductive approach. Having a common goal/objective is, I believe, the key to success. I really like how Tyler referred to educational objectives as "goals", "educational ends", "educational purposes" and "behavioral objectives."
I like the deductive approach to curriculum planning. I like having the goals/objectives that I am trying to accomplish first then building up from there, meaning going into all of the small details and specifics. Although I found Taba approach very interesting.
i find that I lean more toward the deductive approach to curriculum planning. I like following the curriculum framework for the content I teach. This way, I know exactly what my students are responsible for knowing and the skills they need in order to apply and synthesize their learning toward answering the mandated state testing. I strongly agree that the Oliva Model is on track with the components that not only guide curriculum, but also instruction based on data from assessing student knowledge. I find that this does lead to student achievement and closing the achievement gap because a culture of high expectations for all students has been put in place by the division and the different schools within the division to follow the vision, mission, and goal of the entire division.
I like Samantha's analogy of putting the puzzle pieces together to develop the whole picture. I would lean more towards the inductive approach, to helps ideas evolve into true meaning. I do agree that the appraoch will vary, depending on the subject that is taught.
I really like Samantha's metaphor to a puzzle, when relating to the inductive model, which I use regularly. Starting with examining all of the small parts, and looking to see what the variables are, is key, especially with the differentiation that is required in my setting. Starting with the classroom impact and moving up is most useful to me.
I like the inductive approach. In focusing on developing students’ self-constructive of the understanding, critical thinking and active participation in class as well as teacher’s role as an active guidance, you get active involvement in the classroom.
I prefer more of a deductive approach to curriculum and instruction. I believe in examining the whole picture and then being working on the wants, needs, and expectations of the goal set forth.
Donna Fortune I prefer the inductive approach, but see the value in the deductive approach as well. Students benefit from both depending on the area of instruction. A good teacher knows when to use the approach that will give the students the best instruction.
The inductive approach is more my stlye. I like using the inquiring method for student learning. I have used the Taba methodand had good results from my students. When students make generalizations about the subjects they seem to retain more.
I prefer the deductive approach. I usually give my students an idea of the big picture and then break it down for them. I show them the forest - then we talk about the trees. When I first started teaching, I most definitely used an inductive approach; I guess I have evolved . . .
In my classroom, I think I use the deductive approach more often. I think it's important for students to understand the wide-range concepts before delving into the specifics of those concepts.
I prefer the inductive approach, for I think it is good for developing higher level thinking skills. However, there are times when the deductive approach is more appropriate depending upon the instructional goals/ objectives and the needs of the students. A teacher must have many tools in her toolbox to meet the needs of the students and the curriculum.
In my classroom I prefer the inductive approach. In history I believe it is vital for students to understand the individual parts before putting the whole picture together.
I agree with both. Curriculum planning should start with the big picture (deductive) then be broken down into the smaller strands of the objective. When instructing, I think it depends on the class or individual student. Some students learn better when they have the big picture first and can relate the details to the end result. It sets a purpose for learning. Others students are overwhelmed by deductive and need only the detail for the moment.
There is equal importance from both inductive and deductive. As an administrator it is important to have the ability to utilize both approaches. I tend to favor the deductive approach because I feel it is important to understand the ulitimate goal.
I prefer the deductive approach for curriculum development because it helps to begin with the big picture in mind. However, the inductive approach works best for me in the classroom. I believe the inductive approach is better in this situation because it allows for more ownership than the deductive approach.
A big part of why I've felt my education was backwards is because of the strong deductive approach that seems prevalent. I am an inductive kind of person and prefer that approach, but not everyone is like me.
I prefer inductive which starts with the specifics and builds to the big picture. I feel I am able to help students grasp information at a more rapid rate if I give them small details which allows them to build to the big picture. It seems this step by step building process conveys information easier in my classroom.
I am most comfortable with a deductive approach to curriculum and instruction. Knowing the "end" and then determining how to get there is easier for me.
I prefer the deductive approach, especially with regard to Language Arts curriculum. It is important for me to see the big picture and show it to my students first, then build the basic skills to get there. This helps to lessen the ambiguity and subjectivity that occurs quite often with state standards in the English.
I feel that both approaches can be effective in both curriculum and instruction. The approach that I prefer is the inductive approach. I am more comforatable starting with the specifics and building to the bigger picture.
THe deductive approach is more traditional, but I like the inductive approach. I think you should start with the specifics and build up to the big picture. To me planning would be much simpler and the planning would build the setting for the big picture.
ReplyDeleteI like the deductive approach. I prefer the whole picture and then get to the specifics.
ReplyDeleteI am most familiar with the deductive approach, but I was very interested to read about the Taba Model. Since our county is very "into" differentiation, I find that this is ultimately the model that we employ. We have units to teach, gauge student need, make our objectives, and then teach them. As we assess we may change the unit a little, ultimately developing the framework for teaching that skill and then creating more units to go along with it. I never really thought about it this way, but it is certainly an interesting idea and definitely not without its merits.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the inductive approach to curriculum and istruction. I think it is important to closely examine the pieces of the puzzle before putting it altogether. I also think that kids get the "big picture" when they have learned the information necessary first.
ReplyDeleteMy preference would be to approach instruction through the inductive approach since it a "...grassroots approach to curriculum development ..." in that teachers design the curriculum rather than have it handed down by a 'higher authority' (133). However, (unfortunately) I do not believe that this is the practice utilized in most localities. The deductive approach is the one that I have utilized the most, not necessarily out of desire to do so, but because it is the 'requirement' of my job to carry out a prescribed curriculum.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the inductive approach also. I agee with Samantha in that the puzzle is much easier to work after you have examined all of the pieces. However, I feel that the powers that be often use the deductive method. There is validity in both agruments!
ReplyDeleteI prefer the deductive approach. I would rather start with my main goals and then plan the specifics. The deductive approach allows you to look at the "big picture" in the beginning. I think this is important because it helps us to plan a strategy in order to achieve specific goals.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Meslissa. With the population of students that I teach I need them to get a "birds eye view" of everything that we are going to discuss and then break it down further into the specific goals that need to be met; but when the students have the "big picture" in thier mind of what we are going to learn they are better able to understand the smaller details of what is being taught
ReplyDeleteI think it depends on what is being taught. I think that a good balance between the two is good. I've seen both and I like both. I think that if we, as instructors or administrators, believe that there is only one way of doing things than that's when instruction can get stagnant. I think it's good to mix it up. Throw a little inductive instruction with an english writing assignment or social studies discussion, more deductive when teaching language or math. It just depends.
ReplyDeleteI'm used to using the deductive approach. After reading this chapter, I am definitely more open to the thought of trying to utilize the inductive more. I agree with Kelli as well, in that you need to use each one for specific subjects at different times.
ReplyDeleteIt depends on what I am teaching. Sometimes I need my students to exactly what is expected up front. While at other times I can use more of a inductive (let's figure this out) approach.
ReplyDeleteI have been most familiar with the deductive approach throughout my career. Although, like many others have been saying, the inductive approach is needed and has been added in to a teacher's style (mine included) depending on the class/subject being taught.
ReplyDeleteAs someone pretty new to curriculum development, I think I would like to first feel comfortable with the deductive approach (I am presently involved in using this approach) but would really like to, at some point, try inductive; I, too, find Taba's model intriguing.
ReplyDeleteThe approach that I am more comfortable with is the deductive model. I am a special education teacher and the students I serve must use the model. They need information presented to them by giving learners rules, then examples, then practice. It is a teacher-centred approach to presenting new content.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Carolyn. The majority of my students benefit from a deductive model. I need to be able to examine the needs and interests of the students before I move to the specific objectives of the lesson.
ReplyDeleteI like the inductive model when trying to improve or evolve curriculum. I use this in my computer programming class each year as I strive to improve a unit and then fit the unit with others to produce the overall curriculum. However, I think if would be difficult to design a curriculum from scratch or all at once this way.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading the chapter, I felt like it made a lot of sense to side with Taba and utilize a more inductive approach to curriculum development. However, I am not sure it would be very practical in terms of time and money spent. There would be a ton of meetings to go to in order to get the process rolling. I guess what I am saying is that districts use a more deductive approach because of size. It is more effecient to be deductive when developing curriculum.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the chapter, I think I am more comfortable with the deductive approach and it is what I personally use; however, the inductive approach was very appealing to me when I read it. I agree with Steve when he stated that there would be a lot of money spent which would be hard to do for many schools. Even though it would take a great amount of work, I think it would be interesting to try it out!
ReplyDeleteI tend to lean to a more inductive approach. I think it is much easier to understand the main idea if you build up to it rather than the idea being thrown at you and then having to understand it and work your way down to all of the specifics. Therefore, I prefer Taba's model.
ReplyDeleteI believe I like the deductive approach. Having a common goal/objective is, I believe, the key to success. I really like how Tyler referred to educational objectives as "goals", "educational ends", "educational purposes" and "behavioral objectives."
ReplyDeleteI like the deductive approach to curriculum planning. I like having the goals/objectives that I am trying to accomplish first then building up from there, meaning going into all of the small details and specifics. Although I found Taba approach very interesting.
ReplyDeletei find that I lean more toward the deductive approach to curriculum planning. I like following the curriculum framework for the content I teach. This way, I know exactly what my students are responsible for knowing and the skills they need in order to apply and synthesize their learning toward answering the mandated state testing. I strongly agree that the Oliva Model is on track with the components that not only guide curriculum, but also instruction based on data from assessing student knowledge. I find that this does lead to student achievement and closing the achievement gap because a culture of high expectations for all students has been put in place by the division and the different schools within the division to follow the vision, mission, and goal of the entire division.
ReplyDeleteI like Samantha's analogy of putting the puzzle pieces together to develop the whole picture. I would lean more towards the inductive approach, to helps ideas evolve into true meaning. I do agree that the appraoch will vary, depending on the subject that is taught.
ReplyDeleteI really like Samantha's metaphor to a puzzle, when relating to the inductive model, which I use regularly. Starting with examining all of the small parts, and looking to see what the variables are, is key, especially with the differentiation that is required in my setting. Starting with the classroom impact and moving up is most useful to me.
ReplyDeleteI like the inductive approach. In focusing on developing students’ self-constructive of the understanding, critical thinking and active participation in class as well as teacher’s role as an active guidance, you get active involvement in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteI prefer more of a deductive approach to curriculum and instruction. I believe in examining the whole picture and then being working on the wants, needs, and expectations of the goal set forth.
ReplyDeleteDonna Fortune
ReplyDeleteI prefer the inductive approach, but see the value in the deductive approach as well. Students benefit from both depending on the area of instruction. A good teacher knows when to use the approach that will give the students the best instruction.
The inductive approach is more my stlye. I like using the inquiring method for student learning. I have used the Taba methodand had good results from my students. When students make generalizations about the subjects they seem to retain more.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the deductive approach. I prefer to start with the broad and narrow it into the specifics.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the deductive approach. I like to look at the main goals and then figure out what needs to be done to get my students there.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the deductive approach. I usually give my students an idea of the big picture and then break it down for them. I show them the forest - then we talk about the trees. When I first started teaching, I most definitely used an inductive approach; I guess I have evolved . . .
ReplyDeleteIn my classroom, I think I use the deductive approach more often. I think it's important for students to understand the wide-range concepts before delving into the specifics of those concepts.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the inductive approach, for I think it is good for developing higher level thinking skills. However, there are times when the deductive approach is more appropriate depending upon the instructional goals/ objectives and the needs of the students. A teacher must have many tools in her toolbox to meet the needs of the students and the curriculum.
ReplyDeleteIn my classroom I prefer the inductive approach. In history I believe it is vital for students to understand the individual parts before putting the whole picture together.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both. Curriculum planning should start with the big picture (deductive) then be broken down into the smaller strands of the objective. When instructing, I think it depends on the class or individual student. Some students learn better when they have the big picture first and can relate the details to the end result. It sets a purpose for learning. Others students are overwhelmed by deductive and need only the detail for the moment.
ReplyDeleteThere is equal importance from both inductive and deductive. As an administrator it is important to have the ability to utilize both approaches. I tend to favor the deductive approach because I feel it is important to understand the ulitimate goal.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the deductive approach for curriculum development because it helps to begin with the big picture in mind. However, the inductive approach works best for me in the classroom. I believe the inductive approach is better in this situation because it allows for more ownership than the deductive approach.
ReplyDeleteA big part of why I've felt my education was backwards is because of the strong deductive approach that seems prevalent. I am an inductive kind of person and prefer that approach, but not everyone is like me.
ReplyDeleteI prefer inductive which starts with the specifics and builds to the big picture. I feel I am able to help students grasp information at a more rapid rate if I give them small details which allows them to build to the big picture. It seems this step by step building process conveys information easier in my classroom.
ReplyDeleteI am most comfortable with a deductive approach to curriculum and instruction. Knowing the "end" and then determining how to get there is easier for me.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the deductive approach, especially with regard to Language Arts curriculum. It is important for me to see the big picture and show it to my students first, then build the basic skills to get there. This helps to lessen the ambiguity and subjectivity that occurs quite often with state standards in the English.
ReplyDeleteI feel that both approaches can be effective in both curriculum and instruction. The approach that I prefer is the inductive approach. I am more comforatable starting with the specifics and building to the bigger picture.
ReplyDelete