SHEILA KING spoke of Drill and practice to DAN TRIPLETT on 08-27-96
SK>-> Drill and practice is out.
SK>:-(
SK>I've noted your previous remarks to the effect that you would "never"
SK>use worksheets. Coupled with this remark of yours that I've quoted
SK>above, I feel the need to make a comment.
Ok...here we go.  It was an emotional statement.  As for the word 
"never"...if I said *never* I should have said "in general" or "most of 
the time".  I have commented on worksheets on several posts and have 
stated that many worksheets can be completely appropriate.  I don't 
particularly like workbooks and worksheets as a rule.  I have seen 
second grade classrooms where the use of worksheets has been few and far 
between.  In most cases the worksheets were used with projects, book 
reports, and facilitated record keeping or responding to what had 
already been taught.
SK>"Drill" has become a dirty word in many educational circles. I,
SK>personally, believe that this originates from an excessive use of
SK>drill and isolated skill practice in classrooms from not too long ago
SK>(and long ago, as well). Such mindless drill and practice seems
SK>unconnected to any useful activities, and ends up being boring, not
SK>only for many students, but for the teachers as well.
Yes, I agree with this.  
SK>However, to swing 180 degrees in the opposite direction is an
SK>ill-advised overreaction IMO. Some students benefit from a reasonable
SK>amount of well-designed drill in the context of other meaningful
SK>activities.
What you're describing here seems very reasonable and doesn't seem the 
regimented drill and practice of my school experience.
 SK>I cannot reasonably discuss early childhood education, since that is
SK>an area I have no experience in (aside from raising my own two kids).
SK>However, I know that children, most children, DO benefit from
SK>structure in their learning environment. Certainly from middle school
SK>on. Probably much younger. I'd venture at least as young as third
SK>grade.
Structure is very important.  But too much structure is not good either.  
However (even though I cut the comments) I agree that some drill and 
practice may be good for children with learning disabilities.  I'm sure 
there are studies to help with this.  But as you say the drill must be 
reasonable and well-designed and must be in the context of other 
meaningful activities.  Actually that sounds like a whole language 
statement.  
SK>When you provide no structure for the student, some will be unable to
SK>construct for themselves the necessary structure from the potpourri
SK>of activities that you expose them to.
I didn't mean to suggest that there should be no structure in a 
classroom.  I think my room is very structured.  I have procedures that 
the children are expected to follow.  Things have a specific place and 
we follow a specific and consistent daily routine.  I have structured 
lessons throughout the week.  But within that structure is flexibility.
I was thinking that the idea of drill and practice is too structured and 
meaningless for some kids.  For early childhood, drill and practice is 
not only unnecessary, but it may also be incompetent teaching.  All the 
material I have ever read about early childhood development suggests (or 
comes right out and say it plainly) that young children learn best 
through play.  Drill and practice is boring.  Alphabet bingo and other 
alphabet games (math games etc....) are fun. 
It may be a problem of defining terms.  What do I mean when I say 
worksheet and what do you think when you say it.  I teach kindergarten 
and my perspective comes from early childhood.  Much of what I say 
reflects how I view that area of education.  If you relate my comments 
to high school math we may always disagree.
Dan
CMPQwk 1.42 445p
... "Nice landing...next time, put the wheels down first."
* ++++++  *
     _   /|    ACK!
     \'o.O'   /
     =(__)+
       U
 
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------