With mature learners instruction consists of a combination and interplay of teacher-directed instruction and self-instruction. Table 3.2 has listed the phases of instruction, has shown how they are related to the phases of learning, and has summarized the activities that teachers, textbooks, and students themselves can undertake to cause these events to take place. As that table has shown, to the extent that learners can take charge of their own instruction, teachers can afford to give minimal attention to or even skip some of the events of instruction. For this reason teachers should try to teach students to manage as much of their own instruction as possible - not by merely telling them to "do it yourself," but rather by employing strategies like those described under the heading of "Self-Regulation" in chapter 7 to help them develop the capacity to manage parts or all of their own instruction. When teachers help students develop cognitive and metacognitive strategies, they are helping them develop tools that will prove useful during the various phases of self-instruction

It is important for teachers to be aware of the degree to which their students are capable of self-instruction. Some limitations on self-instruction are imposed by the developmental capabilities of the child. For example, a formal operational child is capable of more metacognitive monitoring than less cognitively mature children. Other limitations will arise from individual differences among children. For example, some children with specific learning disabilities lack the ability that most other children have to focus attention on tasks or simply do not have the same capacity for recalling information as other children. In addition, many children face limitations with regard to self-instruction because they have not had the opportunity to learn or practice these skills. By being aware of the phases of learning and instruction discussed in this chapter and by employing the strategies for teaching thinking skills discussed in chapter 7, teachers can help students overcome this limitation and take greater control of their own learning.

The events of learning and instruction represent sequences of events - that is, earlier events are expected to occur before later events. It is important to note that this is an oversimplification. The following examples will clarify this:

1. Sometimes retrieval of relevant information to working memory may appear not to take place. Actually, it does happen, but it happens automatically within the mind of the learner - for practical purposes, it's not worth worrying about. However, if the learner fails to move on to selective perception or encoding, then it is important to back off and make connections with relevant prior information.
   
   
2. Sometimes learning is incomplete - but still important. A student may learn what is being taught about a topic and move on to the last phases of learning. Later, while cueing retrieval, this student may discover an inadequacy in this knowledge and briefly move back to selective perception to see what is different and how it fits in with everything else. This student might immediately return the final phase of learning by transferring the new understanding to a problem at hand. In this case it would be worthwhile to focus on the intervening phases of learning only if the student encountered a difficulty - for example, if the student found it necessary to try out the new understanding and to obtain feedback before moving on.
   
   
3. Sometimes responding and encoding occur simultaneously or in an apparently reverse order. This happens because active involvement with information (responding) is an important way to transfer information to long-term memory (encoding). Likewise, in some forms of active learning it may be impossible (or at least unimportant) to distinguish between selective perception, encoding, responding, and feedback. This is because these phases sometimes occur almost simultaneously.
   
   
4. Almost always learners are focusing on more than a single unit of instruction. This instructional overlap is highly desirable, because it promotes the effective integration of information and the efficient use of learning time. The most common example of this overlap occurs during the third event of instruction - stimulating recall of prerequisite learning. Whatever is recalled during this step may also be the ninth step of a previous unit of instruction - promoting retention and transfer.

    

   1. For example, in a social studies unit the students may be learning about the causes of the American Civil War. Prerequisite learning would include information about the American Revolutionary War, the institution of slavery, westward expansion, states rights, etc. Unless students had learned about these concepts, it would be pointless to discuss them as causes of the Civil War; and so recalling this information would prepare the students for selective perception with regard to the Civil War.

      However, something else is going on at the same time. The students are actually continuing their previous learning. By recalling this earlier information, the students would be reviewing each of these other topics - hence, promoting the retention and transfer of this other information.

      In short, the students are actually taking part in two overlapping lessons: (1) they are in the middle of their lesson on the Civil War, and (2) they are in the final stage of their lesson on the Revolutionary War and some other topics.

      1.  

   By being aware of this possibility of instructional overlap, students and instructors can use instructional time much more efficiently.

    

Again, the important point is that when there is a breakdown, it makes sense to check to see where the problem lies. By identifying the phase of learning in which the breakdown occurs, the student or teacher can undertake remedial action.

Mastery Learning

Traditional instruction holds time constant and allows achievement to vary within a group of students. A college course may last sixteen weeks, for example, and at the end of that time students who have mastered the subject thoroughly receive grades of A, those who have mastered very little get grades of F, and so on. Mastery learning, on the other hand, holds achievement constant and lets the time students spend in pursuit of the objectives vary. In the same college course, a few students might meet the standards in ten weeks; most might meet the standards in sixteen weeks; but a few students might take twenty-five or thirty weeks to meet these standards.

Mastery learning overlaps considerably with other principles discussed in this chapter and throughout the rest of this book.

Mastery learning takes into account the elements cited by Carroll in the preceding section and states that given enough time and help, about 95 percent of the learners in any group can gain complete mastery of the designated instructional objectives. Mastery learning is not synonymous with pass/fail grading, nor does it imply that standards should be lowered. When mastery learning is successful, high standards are articulated and students receive ample time and help to meet these standards. Additional information about mastery learning can be found in Guskey and Gates (1986), Slavin (1987), and Levine (1987).

Mastery learning overlaps considerably with other principles discussed in this chapter and throughout the rest of this book. Mastery learning has received formal emphasis only in the past thirty years, but students and teachers have known about this principle for a long time. For example, if you have ever had trouble learning something, you very likely believed you could master it if you were given enough time and if you worked hard enough. That is a very simple statement of the principle of mastery learning.

Two problems often arise with mastery learning.

• First, grouping and scheduling may become difficult. Teachers often find it easier to force people to work at a constant pace and to complete tasks at a predictable rate than to permit wide variations in activities within a class.
  
  
• Second, while slow learners spend extra time on minimum standards, the faster learners may be forced to wait when they could be progressing to higher levels of achievement.

These problems are not insurmountable. We can overcome them by providing individualized attention, setting high but attainable standards, and making additional materials available for learners who master objectives more quickly than others.

Topics Related to Mastery Learning:

• What Happens to Motivation When Students Fail Repeatedly during Mastery Learning?
  
• Cooperative Mastery Learning
  
• Play (Flow)
  
• Minimalist Instruction

Implementation of Mastery Learning and Outcome-Based Education: A Review and Analysis of Lessons Learned by Doris W. Ryan
http://courses.ed.asu.edu/berliner/readings/fuss/fuss.htm

This article analyzes mastery learning and relates it to Outcome-Based Education. An abstract of this1998 article can be found online at this web site, from which you can also download the entire article for free:

 

Connecting Performance Assessment to Instruction
http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed381984.html

This ERIC Digest from 1995 is subtitled "A Comparison of Behavioral Assessment, Master

• Introduction
• Models of Learning
• Mastery Learning
• Phases of Learning
• The Events of Instruction
• Learning and Instruction <<You are here>>
• Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives
• Gagne's Outcomes of Learning
• Summary and Overview
• What Teachers Can Do About the Processes of Learning and Instruction
• What Parents Can Do About the Processes of Learning and Instruction
• What Students Can Do About the Processes of Learning and Instruction
• Annotated Bibliography
• Answers to Quizzes and Questions