TRANSACTIONAL TRANSACTION AL MODEL OF DIRECT INSTR UCTION UCTION IN TEACHING FILIPINO II
RICHELLE R. NAONAO Researcher
Stage 1 - ASSESS Introduction Filipino is expected to be one of the easiest subjects to understand since this is our national language. But based from the periodical test results with mastery level of for first to third grading, I can say that pupils still show poor performance even if the subject taught uses our national language.
Stage 1 - ASSESS Introduction Filipino is expected to be one of the easiest subjects to understand since this is our national language. But based from the periodical test results with mastery level of for first to third grading, I can say that pupils still show poor performance even if the subject taught uses our national language.
One of the factors to be considered is the type of instruction used in teaching the subject. The competencies are skill – based, thus the type of instruction to be used must also focused on the skill refflec re ectted in the comp mpe etency. The first step I did, was to write lesson plans using DII (Direct Interactive Instruction) as the model and following the K to 12 competency (Competency + Assessment + Activity)
Models based this approach are based on a combination of operant conditioning and in infform rma ation learn rniing theories and is called – The The Transactional Model. The primary purpose of Transactional Model is to focus on the repeated intera rac ction of teachers and students throughout the lesson. This is based in research showing that the incr in crea easse te tea ach cher er/s /sttud uden entt in inte tera ract ctio ion n is correlated with increase student achievement (Roseshine, 1979).
Research Questions
Will the Transactional Model of Direct Instruction improve the:
Teachers’ teaching competence? Pupils’ classroom interaction? Pupils’ study skills? Pupils’ test scores? Pupils’ involvement to classroom/ school activities?
Stage 2 - ANALYZE The researcher used the TMDI (Transactional Model of Direct Instruction) with the DII (Direct Interactive Instruction) as the method in making lesson plans.
The researcher used the TMDI (Transactional Model of Direct Instruction) with the DII (Direct Interactive Instruction) as the method in making lesson plans. The term “Direct Instruction” refers to a rigorously developed, highly scripted method for teaching that is fast paced and provides constant interaction between the student and the teacher (Seigfried Engelmann, 1968).
Direct Instruction is probably the most popular teaching strategy that is used by teachers to facilitate learning. It is a teacher directed and follows a definite structure with specific steps to guide pupils toward achieving clearly defined learning outcomes.
The teacher maintains the focus of control over the instructional process and monitors pupils’ learning throughout the process. Benefits of direct instruction include delivering large amounts of information in a timely manner. Also, because this model is teacher directed, it lends itself to designing instruction that is developmentally appropriate to pupils’ ages and stages (Zig Engelmann).
Guiding principles of DI include every child can learn if we teach him/her carefully and all teachers can be successful when given effective programs and instructional delivery techniques. Thus, ultimately it is the teacher who is responsible for student learning; students are not blamed for their failure to learn. One often hears the statement, “If the learner hasn’t learned, the teacher hasn’t taught” in reference to DI programs and instructional delivery (Tarver, 1999).
The goal of DI is to “do more in less time” – accelerating learning by carefully controlling the features of curriculum design and instructional delivery. There are three main components to the design and delivery of DI programs. These include: (a) program design, (b) organization of instruction, and (c) teacher/student interactions (Marchand-Martella, Slocum, & Martella, 2004).
Program design relates to: (a) careful content analysis that promotes generalizations (teaching the “big ideas” of instruction); (b) clear communication (the “wording of instruction” as well as how instruction is sequenced and examples are introduced);
(c) sequencing of skills (prerequisites are taught before a strategy is taught, easy skills are taught before more difficult skills; strategies/information likely to be confused are separated; instances consistent with a rule are taught before exceptions
(d) track organization (activity sequences are targeted that each skills over multiple lessons to ensure firm responding).
Organization of instruction centers on: (a) instructional grouping (using flexible skill grouping as compared to “tracking”); (b) instructional time (increasing academic learning time – the time students are engaged with high success rates); and
(c) continuous assessment (providing ongoing in-program assessments to inform instructional practice).
Teacher-student interactions include: (a) active student participation (increasing opportunities for students to respond and receive feedback); (b) unison responding (increasing students’ responding by having them chorally respond); (c) signals (providing a cue to evoke unison oral responses);
(d) pacing (promoting active student engagement with brisk teacher pacing); (e) teaching to mastery ( ensuring firm responding over time);
(f) error corrections (minimizing student errors by carefully sequencing instructions; when errors do occur, using careful error correction procedures – model, lead, test, retest); and (g) motivation (enhancing motivation through high levels of student success).
A typical DI lesson includes explicit and carefully sequenced instruction provided by the teacher (model) along the frequent opportunities for students to practice their skills with teacher delivered feedback (guided practice) and then on their own (independent practice) over time (distributed practice/review).
Four decades of teaching and learning research have proven that coherent unit/lesson design strategies, systematic instruction, pre – corrective and corrective routines, high level of engagement, ongoing formative assessment, re – teaching, acceleration and re – testing routines – in – combination – predictably and positively impact student achievement. Action Learning Systems has designed and developed a proven system for instructional design and delivery.
Called Direct Interactive Instruction, or DII, this is the single most efficient, effective, and research – based approach to closing the achievement gap. DII strategies guide the teachers to disaggregate and sequence even the most difficult concepts at the highest levels of cognition and achieve a high success rate with all students. DII delivers a comprehensive schema for teachers, coaches and principals to ensure every student is interacting with content from bell to bell.
Direct Interactive Instruction involves consistent, persistent, and creative application of four competencies: (1) Standards and Measurable Objectives; (2) Lesson Structure and Sequence; (3) Student Engagement, Feedback, and Correctives; (4) Proactive Classroom Management.
In 1970’s a study was conducted with Direct Instruction as the model – the Project Follow Through. This was the largest educational study ever done, costing over $600 million, and covering 79,000 children in 180 communities. This project examined a variety of programs and educational philosophies to learn how to improve education of disadvantaged children in grades K-3. (It was launched in response to the observation that Head Start children were losing the advantages from Head Start by third grade).
Desired positive outcomes included basic skills, cognitive skills, (“higher order thinking”)and affective gains (self-esteem). The various programs studied could be grouped into the three classes described above (Basic Skill, Cognitive-Conceptual, and Affective-Cognitive).
The program that gave the best results in general was true Direct Instruction, a subset of Basic Skills. The other program types, which closely resemble today’s educational strategies (having labels like “holistic,” “student-centered learning,” learning to learn,” “active learning,” cooperative education,” and “whole language”) were inferior. Students receiving Direct Instruction did better than those in all programs when tested in reading, arithmetic, spelling, and language.
Contrary to common assumptions, Direct Instruction improved cognitive skills dramatically relative to the control groups and also showed the highest improvement in selfesteem scores compared to control groups.
Darch (1984) conducted a study to examine the effectiveness of a method that teaches fourth graders to translate word story problems into mathematical equation form in a step-by-step explicit manner that closely paralleled the Direct Instruction Follow Through programs. This method was compared to a method developed from a composite of four basal arithmetic texts adopted for use in the Site of Oregon. Post test results indicated a significant positive effect for the explicit model.
Stage 3 - ACT Before writing a plan, a teacher must first understand fully what the competency is all about. He must analyze and visualize what he wants his pupils to do after the discussion. If he clearly sees what the pupils are expected to do after, then, lesson plan writing comes in. The teacher must not deviate from what is expected to do so pupils will not be confused and feel bored. That was the first step.
The second step was to make lesson plans using DII (Direct Interactive Instruction) as the model and following the K to 12 competency (Competency + Assessment + Activity). It has four learning episodes which emphasizes on the use of small-group, face to face instruction by teachers using are fully articulated lessons in which the skills are broken down into small units, sequenced deliberately, and taught explicitly. And then, the Filipino Supervisor checked the lesson plans which were further evaluated and checked by the SDS.
After the thorough evaluation of my lesson plans, I taught it in my Grade II – GT/SSES class with the presence of my principal and Filipino Supervisor. I monitored and evaluated the pupils’ performance by giving them daily quizzes, summative and periodic tests recorded their scores and computed the mastery levels.
I also observed and monitored their behaviors and wrote it in my daily reflections. I measured the learning changes of my pupils before and after TMDI was through a survey.
Result To determine the development of the pupils’ performance is the increase of their mastery levels in the fourth periodic test and daily quizzes.
The graph shows that in the First Grading Period, the mastery level was 81%, Second Grading Period, the mastery level was 82%, Third Grading Period, and the mastery level was 86%, although all scores is above the standard mastery level which is 75%, but for my section which is considered the first section in Grade II in our school, those scores were still low.
And in the Fourth Grading Period, when TMDI was used in their class, the mastery level was 92% which is above the standard mastery level and above 90%. A vivid evidence that TMDI was really an effective strategy in teaching Filipino.
Summary of the Teacher’s Observation of the Pupils’ Behavior Before and After TMDI was used in Teaching Filipino II.
Before TMDI was used, I was undecided and did not strongly agree if my pupils show some of the behaviors expressed in the indicators. But, after using the TMDI, I strongly agree that my pupils are motivated to learn.
They worked happily and efficiently with other pupils during the Guided Practice and in all activities in the class. They showed a healthy competition in their formative test since they knew already on how they will be evaluated because I always informed them on how they will be tested before the class starts.
Everybody was enthusiastic to present their ideas to the class. They reflect on their process of achieving their goals, use feedback from me and from their peers. They also changed and adapted strategies that are unsuccessful, monitored their goals, they can articulate of what is expected from them. They also give constructive feedback to their peers and change versions of their work to improve them.
Based on the result of the study, I concluded that the use of Transactional Model of Direct Instruction in teaching Filipino II has increased the pupils’ test scores and mastery level in the periodic test and has enhanced the behavior and skills of the pupils in the teaching-learning process, and in their whole being.
Reflection: Education is a process of bringing desirable changes in the behavior of human beings. It can also be defined as the process of imparting or acquiring knowledge and habits through instruction. The most important objective of educational process is to transfer knowledge to the next generation (Gedler,2001).
It is now widely recognized that the most important factors in teaching effectiveness are the interaction with students, the knowledge and personality of the teacher. It is the job of teachers to understand and identify barriers to learning, to remove those barriers and to bring the best output of those they educate (Bloom,1998).
In order to teach effectively, the teacher must have sufficient knowledge about the students, in addition to the knowledge about the subject and appropriate methods of teaching. Modern research indicates that if proper and suitable methods and techniques are used, even the students of normal intelligence can easily learn. It is the teacher’s responsibility to see that the lessons get taught in such a manner that the childrelated goals are met.
For the solution of these individual differences and for the better results from the learners, four teaching model have been developed, namely direct instruction, cooperative learning, mastery learning and problem-based instruction. One of which was examined thoroughly and introduced to us by our sharp-witted leader, Dr. Agustines E. Cepe; Transactional Model of Direct Instruction.
Comparison between TMDI and the Different Approaches used by the teachers before: • Lively and stimulating approach • Teacher directed, as needed. • Setting objectives, informing learners of the objectives • Activating prior knowledge. Activating motivation, directing attention.
• Sequenced instruction • Dependent and independent practice, providing learning guidance, more practices and homework if necessary. • Activities that focus on specific skills.
Providing feedback, reinforcing, eliciting performance, using pauses and praise strategy.
Next Step
Use Transactional Model of Direct Instruction in designing for another subject area in the first, second and third grading periods.
Bibliography
(Educational Philosophies; A Primer for Parents, Milwaukee: PRESS(Parents Raising Educational Standards in Schools), 1995 Stebbins, L/B., St. Pierre, E.C. Proper Education as Experimentation: A Plannede Variation Model, Volume IV-A, an Evaluation of Follow Through. Abt. Associates, Cambridge, MA, 1977. Meyer, L.A. Long – Term academic effects of the Direct Instruction Project Follow Through. Elementary School Journal. 84:380-304 (1984) Research on Direct Instruction by Gary Adams and Siegfried Engelmann, 1995
