Bloom, B. S. (1968, May). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2). Retrieved February 16, 2009, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED053419.
“The thesis of this paper is that, to promote mastery learning, 5 variables must be dealt with effectively: (1) aptitude for kinds of learning, viewed as the amount of time required by the learner to attain mastery of the task; (2) quality of instruction, viewed in terms of its approaching the optimum for a given learner; (3) ability to understand instruction, i.e., to understand the nature of the task and the procedures to follow; (4) perseverance, the amount of time one is willing to spend in learning; and (5) time allowed for learning, the key to mastery.” (Abstract)
“Basically, the problem of developing a strategy for mastery learning is one of determining how individual differences in learners can be related to the learning and teaching process.” (p 1)
“A learning strategy for mastery may be derived from the work of Carroll (1963), supported by the ideas of Morrison (1926), Bruner (1966), Skinner (1954), Suppes (1966), Goodlad and Anderson (1959), and Glaser (1968).” (p 2)
“Put in its most brief form the model proposed by Carroll (1963) makes it clear that if the students are normally distributed with respect to aptitude for some subject (mathematics, science, literature, history, etc.) and all the students are provided with exactly the same instruction (same in terms of amount of instruction, quality of instruction, and time available for learning), the end result will be a normal distribution on an appropriate measure of achievement.” (p 2-3)
“Conversely, if the students are normally distributed with respect to aptitude, but the kind and quality of instruction and the amount of time available for learning are made appropriate to the characteristics and needs of each student, the majority of students may be expected to achieve mastery of the subject. And, the relationship between aptitude and achievement should approach zero.” (p 3)
“Quite in contrast to this is Carroll’s (1963) view that aptitude is the amount of time required by the learner to attain mastery of a learning task.” (p 3)
“Carroll (1963) defines the quality of instruction in terms of the degree to which the presentation, explanation, and ordering of elements of the task to be learned approach the optimum for a given learner.” (p 4)
[Stopped reading at p 4]
Carroll, John. (1963) A model of school learning. Teachers College Record. 64, 723-733.
- Aabø (2005). The role and value of public libraries in the age of digital technologies.
- Gervais (2011). Finding the faithless: Perceived atheist prevalence reduces anti-atheist prejudice.
- Dorner & Gorman (2011). Contextual Factors Affecting Learning in Laos and the Implications for Information Literacy Education.
- Gervais, Shariff, & Norenzayan (2011). Do you believe in atheists? Distrust is central to anti-atheist prejudice.
- Goleman (2000). Emotional intelligence: Issues in paradigm building.
- Smith (1996). David A. Kolb on experiential learning.
- Bruffee (1995). Sharing our toys: Cooperative learning versus collaborative learning.
- Britz (2004). To Know or Not to Know: A Moral Reflection on Information Poverty.
- Wright (2010). Twittering in teacher education.
- Kinasevych (2011). Considering culture in e-learning environments and post-secondary learning success (Abstract)
- Wicks et al. (2011). bPortfolios: Blogging for reflective practice.
- Rinaldo, Tapp, & Laverie (2011). Learning by tweeting: Using Twitter as a pedagogical tool.
- Gabriel & Richtel (2011). A Classroom Software Boom, but Mixed Results Despite the Hype.
- Elavsky, Mislan, & Elavsky (2011). When talking less is more: Exploring outcomes of Twitter usage in the large‐lecture hall.
- Junco, Heiberger, & Loken (2011). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades.
- Higdon, Reyerson, McFadden & Mummey (2011). Twitter, Wordle, and ChimeIn as Student Response Pedagogies.
- Veltsos & Veltsos (2010). Teaching responsibly with technology-mediated communication.
- Dunlap & Lowenthal (2009). Horton Hears a Tweet.
- Blankenship (2011). How Social Media Can and Should Impact Higher Education.
- Young (2010). Teaching with Twitter: Not for the Faint of Heart.
FeedbackComments, suggestions, criticisms, and any type of feedback would be greatly appreciated. Use the comment tools provided in the articles or use any of the means indicated on the Contact page to reach the author.