TEACHING BY GROUPS

Press, Volume XCV, Issue 28183, 23 January 1957, Page 10

TEACHING BY GROUPS

“HIGHLY RATED” SYSTEM

“I think we still rely too much on methods originally designed to serve a minority,” said the senior inspector of schools in Canterbury (Mr J. F. Johnson), speaking last evening at the opening of the teachers’ refresher course at th£ School for the Deaf, Sumner. He said that these methods were usually quite successful for children who had verbal ability, but were often ineffective for many of the children who composed the average class. After surveying various teaching methods of the past and the present system, Mr Johnson spoke on group teaching methods. “Group teaching without understanding, or simply because it is fashionable or might be professionally profitable will have little merit,” he said. “But group teaching which honestly reflects the importance of group processes ow social interactions in the development of a mature and balanced personality must be highly rated, for that is the real basis of group work.” Group teaching methods were by no means easy to get under way, he said. Children accustomed to authoritarian methods might indulge in anti-social behaviour if given freedom too suddenly, because they had not been trained to use freedom properly. Traditional teaching methods, Mr Johnson said, broke down because they assumed uniformity of experience, skills, and rate and method of learning. However, traditional class teaching would always have a place as a useful technique. In the hands of a gifted teacher it would have inspirational value and there would always be times when it was more economical to give an explanation to a class than to a group of individuals.

“Children working together cooperatively,” he said, “achieve infinitely more than those working as a class, as many infant teachers have already discovered.” Freedom of Speech

The only rule really needed in group work, he said, was absolute freedom of speech as long as it did not interfere with the learning of others. The 50 teachers present were told that it was wrong for them to confirm the worth of their methods by drawing on their own experiences as pupils, as teachers were drawn from a higher than average intelligence level. The method used by a teacher was entirely a personal matter, he believed, and it was the relationships between pupil and teacher that really mattered. Standards of work were as important now as always, Mr Johnson said. He had yet to meet a responsible' teacher who believed otherwise. The wider values being worked for by progressive teachers were in no way inconsistent with this. The fullest personal development was inevitably accompanied by the greatest intellectual growth.