Online Educational Discourse on Teaching the Mishnah In Special Education Ilan Amar Hemdat HaDarom Academic College of Education Abstract Due to the accessibility of the Internet, we see greater opportunities for online educational discourse using Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL). The foundation of collaborative learning is knowledge that is distributed among group members, each of which has a different role and unique contribution. Group discussions and shared processes result in knowledge construction. The role of the teacher is to moderate the process, which varies in accordance with student, content, and environment. The study used CSCL, which is based on traditional collaborative learning basics, and conducted it in an innovative, synchronous/asynchronous, virtual learning environment. The effectiveness of the online discourse was dependent on the following four components: Student-Content, pre-service-teacher, Student-Student and Student-Interface. In each component, the student was the center of the process and his willingness to learn was required for learning efficiency. The current study examined an innovative method for teaching Mishnah in special education classes, which require more scaffolding and preliminary support before beginning an online discourse. The methodology consisted of two stages: Priming classroom teaching based on learning strategies and CSCL Online discourse 1
management. The study included eight 7th grade students with learning disabilities. Data was collected from observations, semi-structured interviews and the discourse's scripts. Content analysis was done on these findings. Conclusions: The first stage greatly contributed to the effectiveness of CSCL. Students gained new knowledge and a communal learning experience. They demonstrated emotional aspects resulting from the material and method. A new design and technical support is required to improve stage 2. Keywords: Teaching Mishnah, Learning Strategies, Independent Learning, Online Discourse. Introduction Teaching the Mishnah Even though the Mishnah was compiled by Rabbi Yehudah HaNassi around 1,800 years ago, at the beginning of the 3rd century, until the establishment of Israel, Mishnah as an independent subject was not common in religious Israeli schools and therefore the emphasis on teaching the Mishnah as literature was even less. In the late 19th century, there was an effort made to formalize the study of Mishnah in the various beit midrash and seminaries, but without success, since learning Mishnah was not the dominant trend at these institutions. From the 1920 s the learning of Mishnah received special attention and expansion of pedagogical creativity that was expressed in articles on the subject and in the preparation of guides for teachers for this subject (Schwartz, 2007). However, the learning of Mishnah in schools is not even a core subject in religious schools or yeshivas in which emphasis is placed on teaching the 2
Toshba (the Oral Law any book in Judaism that was not included in the Bible), even though the Mishnah is both the basis and foundation of the Oral Law. Since the Mishnah is the cornerstone of the Gemara, since it includes all aspects of life and enables one to extract relevant information and basic principles of contemporary ethical dilemmas. This is something that can be made more relevant and meaningful. Meaningful Learning In recent years, the Israeli Ministry of Education has emphasized the importance of meaningful learning. According to the Ministry of Education, among other things, meaningful learning refers to three aspects of the learning process: Skills Providing tools and strategies for learning rather than simply providing content, which is recognized more as the traditional way of teaching and learning; Relevance Learning that has a connection and association to the personal world of the student, him everyday life, its impact on social life and its contribution to the community; 21 st Century Skills Online communication, integration and assimilation of technological tools in the ongoing work of teaching. The three aspects relate to the meaningful learning process where the student acquires tools and skills for independent learning, is engaged in the construction of a collaborative knowledge base through the use of innovative technology tools. In such instruction, the teacher's role is to serve as a moderator in mastering the tools and educational skills, as well as facilitating worthwhile and effective online discussions. Beyond frontal classroom teaching, the teacher is also required to have the necessary skills to use the technological tools and implement traditional pedagogical principles within the virtual learning environment. 3
Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) In recent years, influenced by the advent of Internet, the online educational discourse has become more common and we are witnessing the growth of collaborative learning, which is the recognized interdisciplinary method called Computer Supported Cooperative Learning (CSCL). The foundation of collaborative learning is that knowledge from individual learners shall be distributed between group members, with each of its members having a different role and unique contribution to the joint outcome. The building of the knowledge is the result of group discussions and common resourcefulness. The role of the teacher, as a moderator of the collaborative learning varies from teacher to teacher in accordance with the content, students, their learning environment and other factors. Although CSCL is based on traditional, collaborative learning principles, it exists within a virtual and innovative learning environment, synchronous or asynchronous, with its advantages and disadvantages. It relates to four key elements that influence the quality of online discussion when the student is at the center of the learning process: Student - Content (files, movies, audio, discussions, blogs), Student - Teacher (facilitation and guidance of the teacher, for the group in general and each student individually), Student - Student (groups, discussion, ethics), Student - Interface (technical infrastructure, accessibility, friendliness). Teaching Mishnah to Students with Learning Disabilities According to the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities ( NJCLD, 1994), "learning disability" is a general term indicating a heterogeneous group of disorders manifested in significant difficulties in the acquisition of meaningful attention, 4
speaking, reading, writing, understanding causal relationships or mathematical skills, and the use of these capabilities. According to this definition, the teaching of special education should be based on the student obtaining skills enable independent learning and developing advanced language skills. These skills empower students to understand the text, ask questions, distinguish between essential and irrelevant information, extract the principles taught from the text, express opinions on what has been learned, make claims and formulate arguments that are meaningful to the educational peer dialogue. Teaching according to a method that combines linguistic learning strategies with the teaching of Mishnah will assist the student to better understand the language of the text, which is generally more difficult than other schoolbook texts. It will encourage and develop the ability to ask questions about the content, help identify the main idea of the Mishnah and will formulate an opinion, generalization of other cases and topics. What is a Learning Strategy? The term "strategy" is borrowed from the Greek and means "the organization of military operations in order to achieve a defined goal." Equally, learning strategies are all the actions a learner takes to reach the goal in the most optimal way (Melitz and Melitz 1995). Learning strategies require study skills and specific tactics, but above all the learner must know when to use a particular type of tactic and when not to use it (Derry, 1988). The term learning strategies is also related to the broader term meta cognition, which is actually one of the major fields of research in cognitive development (Melitz and Melitz 1995). Meta cognition knowledge refers to three components: knowledge about ourselves, knowledge about the task and knowledge 5
about the strategy that we will apply to perform the task (Flavell, 1979). When we talk about learning strategies we mean the same skills and tactics that help us deal with the text at different levels of thinking (Higher Forms of Thinking In Education, Bloom, 1956), such as: vocabulary (ways to break apart a difficult word), identifying the main idea, asking questions, structure and mapping of text, writing a synopsis and summary, and more (Melitz and Melitz 1995). Teaching Mishnah in conjunction with independent learning strategies in special education will be the first stage in online learning of Mishnah and prepare the students for online educational discourse that includes collaborative learning, peer discourse and formulate arguments. Given the above, the maintaining of effective CSCL requires an initial readiness of the students and the teacher as a moderator in such learning. Preparedness includes basic technical computer skills on the one hand and skills for higher forms of thinking in education on the other. It seems that in order to train students with learning disabilities for effective CSCL, greater preparation, priming and instructional scaffolding for each student in the class will be required. Therefore, the current study, which is a pilot study, is designed to test various aspects of online learning within the framework of special education. In order for students to arrive ready for an online discourse, study needed to be broken into two phases: Phase I Priming study class, incorporating learning strategies, moderating and extraction of the Mishnah main principles in order to train students and prepare them to enter into online discourse. Phase II Online discourse in the computer room on the learned subject matter, with moderation, including support and training of student teachers. The assumption is that students diagnosed with special needs and learning disabilities have difficulty applying multiple learning skills simultaneously: 6
Understanding, building an argument, computer skills, visual aspects of the mind map, management of cultural discourse, filtering stimulation and distractions, and more this phase of the study requires greater priming, moderation, training and than is required of students in a standard educational framework. Methodology Research Environment The study was conducted in a 7 th grade special education class at a public religious school in Southern Israel. The school had a computer room equipped with modern machines and a network that connected them. The lesson was divided into two sessions, with one taking place in the home class and the other in the being held in the computer room. Participants Students The study was comprised of a group of eight 7 th graders that were diagnosed with learning disabilities and emotional behavioral disorder (EBD). Students came from homes of lower socio-economic status. Student learning functions were very low, as expressed in low reading comprehension, lack of learning habits, difficulty writing and low ability of self-expression. Pre-service-Teachers During the testing period, the class was accompanied by four Pre-service-Teachers that were doing their practical training over the course of the current academic year, attending the classroom once a week for four hours. During their stay in the classroom, the student teachers taught an entire class various subjects, followed by individualized instruction according to the program that was determined with the 7
home class teacher. They also conducted social activities in both the class and throughout the entire school. Communication between Pre-service-Teachers to students was very good, with students looking forward to the class each week. Procedure and Tools Due to the nature of the study, both in terms of its pioneering research and the small number of participants, the paradigm of study was qualitative research and used a semi-structured interview. Afterwards, it used a second qualitative research tool, content analysis. Content analysis and the definition of categories was done by this researcher in the following way: Reading complete texts and several text samplings to build general categories. This procedure was repeated multiple times, in addition, other significant categories were added. Sentences were copied that were related to the categories and new groups of sentences were added that represented statements that were often repeated. On this basis, tables were defined with main and secondary categories. Data processing was carried out within the tables and findings were presented in graphs and summary tables. 8
Results Table 1: Interview Categories and Sub-categories with Frequencies Resulting from Content Analysis and Semi-structured Interviews Main Categories Sub-Categories Frequencies Total Learning Area Understanding & New Knowledge 10 35 Experience 12 Moderator Effect 6 Difficulties 7 (writing, low motivation) Emotional Area Self-confidence 5 8 Anxiety and fears 3 Social Area Peer relationships 7 18 External disruptions 11 Technology & Graphics Game/Experience 8 31 Learning knowledge 5 Guidance 3 Technical problems 8 Graphic improvement 7 Table 1 describes the result of this research. It is significant to note that the students and student teachers focused primarily on the Learning Area and Technology & Graphics. The Emotional Area was the least meaningful to them. The Social Area, while less significant than both the Learning Area and Technology & Graphics, was 9
still more meaningful than the Emotional Area. These findings will be discussed in the following Conclusions section. Conclusions The current study examined a new and innovative way to teach Mishnah to special education students through online educational discourse and technology tools. In both Phase I, learning in the classroom, and Phase II, online discourse, the experience and enjoyment of the learning stood out both among the students and student teachers. According to them, the learning was very unusual and more similar to a "game" than formal learning. This proves that there is a need for innovative learning methods that can take material, even an old-style Mishnah that has been made less relevant in the curriculum, and make it exciting and enjoyable while motivating all parties involved to learn it together. The ability of students to express their views and opinions in relation to a subject being studied strengthened their self-efficacy and confidence. Online discourse created a sense that they have a significant platform through which they can express their opinions, to the extent that they viewed themselves as if they were writing a story for the newspaper. (One of the students even asked me if what he had written would appear in the newspaper.) Online discourse also created a shared learning community, built a culture of dialogue and strengthened the connection between the group and their respect for one another. In this online discourse, each member of the first group expressed his opinion in the mind map (see below, Picture 1). For example, we find one of the students that was know not to participate in the regular classroom setting due to a low level of self- 10
esteem and inability to express himself, took part in the dialogue and expressed his opinion on the materials in ways that he had never done before in the classroom. Picture #1 shows the online discussion of Group A in the research It was important that the system be as friendly as possible and easy to navigate. None the less, the aspect that both the students and student teachers said must be improved the most was the online program s interface and support for technical problems. 11
References מליץ עמרם, מליץ ציפורה (1995), אסטרטגיות למידה, תיאוריה ומעשה. הוצאת המכון לשיפור הישגים לימודיים בע"מ, באר שבע. שוורץ, י. (2007). על מאמרו של דב רפל "הוראת המשנה על צד ההרחבה" פדגוגיה או אידיאולוגיה. בתוך, זכור דבר לעבדך אסופת מאמרים לזכר דב רפל. עמ' 207-223, רמת גן: הצאת אוניברסיטת בר אילן. Asterhan, C. S. C. (2012). Facilitating classroom argumentation with computer technology. Gillies, R. (Ed), Pedagogies: New Developments in the Learning Sciences. Nova Science. Derry, S.J. (1988) Putting Learning Strategies to Work. Educational Leadership.46, pp. 4-10. Flavell, J.H. (1979) Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A new area of Cognitive-Developmental Inquiry. American Psychology.34, pp. 906-911. NJCLD - National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities.(1994). Learning Disabilities Issues on Definition. In Collective perspectives on issues affecting learning disabilities (pp. 61-66). Austin, TX:PRO-ED. Vygotzky, L, S. (1978) Mind in Society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 12