1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. The Teacher Q&A will be closing soon.

    If you have any information that you would like to keep or refer to in the future please can you copy and paste the information to a format suitable for you to save or take screen shots of the questions and responses you are interested in.

    Don’t forget you can still use the rest of the forums on theTes Community to post questions and get the advice, help and support you require from your peers for all your teaching needs.

    Dismiss Notice

Perhaps closed-minded question:

Discussion in 'Religious Education' started by leviosa, Apr 10, 2012.

  1. To be honest - and I am going back over 10 years ago now! - I found a lot of it bewildering and befuddling until I had actually taught! It made much more sense 12 months - 2 years on to be honest. I wouldn't worry about it too much just yet.
  2. The book called closing the learning gap is very readable, practical n sensible, well worth a read, won't take long to go through but super useful
  3. Thank you, so much both of you. I'm finding it all very bewildering, right now! xo
  4. I totally agree with what has been said, Just get your head round what you have to for your essays/ Uni work and it will all make sense when you are practising and the theory will be just that as you will learn the most important stuff doing the job. You sound very contientious and that is a vital quality to have to be to be a successful RE teacher x

  5. Thank you. The thing is, we didn't really get an essay on that part of the course - I found that frustrating. But, thank you for the compliment, nevertheless! xx
  6. mehmetdan

    mehmetdan New commenter

    The essential thing you need to know is that children learn in different ways and that's why there are a number of different theories and theorists that attempt to explain the ways children learn.
    For example, behaviourism can describe the way a teacher may attempt to transmit knowledge to a child directly, often by rote, and often with a reward (sticker, certificate).
    Constructivism considers the role of the child's environment on their learning. For example, a young child playing with water can learn a great deal about the properties of water without anyone directly teaching them. Piagets theories are relevant here because he suggested that children have to learn in stages - he felt children had to know about the concrete physical world before they could learn about the abstract.
    Social constructivism considers the role of the adult important: Vygotsky suggested that adults can take children upto a higher level of learning than they could by just engaging with the environment (Zone of Proximinal development).
    Both Vygotsky and Piaget suggested that it is through PLAY that children learn at their highest level.
    I hope this help. I have tried to explain the differences as simply as possible but it's not an easy subject.

Share This Page