Similarities
The Unit 3 models use different means to reach the same end which is learning in context. The models assume that learning is more effective when it occurs in an environment that is closer to a realistic situation. The models have iterative characteristics, building in repetition and revision until the desired end-point is achieved. There is also a focus on higher-order skills including analytical, problem-solving, decision making and critical thinking. All seem to be suitable for use by groups or individual learners.
Differences
There are distinctive differences amongst the models, providing a unique angle for each. For example, a main focus of goal-based scenarios is identifying a meaningful motivator for learning. Anchored instruction incorporates the aspect of appreciating the value of a discipline through the learning process. STAR legacy uses a cyclical, step-wise approach, providing a visual map as a navigational tool. An early step in STAR legacy includes recall of prior information as a way of inventorying knowledge and improving self-assessment of learning needs. MOST emphasizes use of multimedia and especially visual media for enhancing literacy development.
Initial Reactions
My initial reaction was that these are all relatively complex models compared to the earlier models we learned about. In thinking about why the models are so complex and about how involved the natural learning process is, I began to better appreciate the models. The contextual models more closely align the instruction to the biological process of learning. For example, Schank et al. discusses how information often cannot be retrieved from memory when learned out of context (e.g., for a test). His goal-based scenario model promotes “learning by doing”.
When I was in graduate school, we had to pass a comprehensive oral/written qualifying examination in order to progress and do our independent research. Every year there were several students who failed the exam. I can remember the professors lamenting about how these students knew lots of information, but had absolutely no concept of “the big picture” or the relevance of the information they knew. I think such gaps are much less likely when learning occurs in context.
Barriers
Designing instruction based on pathways essential to learning makes sense. However, the downside to these models in my mind relates to whether they can be effectively implemented for wide scale use in practice, due to their complexity. For example, Schwartz et al. (1999) describe how STAR legacy, a flexibly adaptive model, evolved from difficulties experienced with practical implementation of the Jasper anchored instruction program.
The model that I would be most likely to try in practice would be STAR legacy. The stepwise cycle provides a logical progression to follow and a relatively flexible approach.
Web tools/resources
The web seems particularly useful in presenting the context models. Video, images and text capabilities enhance the ability to simulate a real-life challenge. The ability to link to various web sites or pages simplifies the presentation. Multimedia is explicitly incorporated in MOST, with the assertion that a combination of video/audio/print/oral media (e.g., tools could include voice thread, YouTube, etc.) accelerates literacy development.
