The habit of not following directions is a recurringproblem in all school levels today. Pavlov (2003) holds the position that studentswill only follow directions when they are positively stimulated to do a certaintask. If said students weren’t given a stimulus or a negative stimulus, thenhe/she will not be motivated accomplish to task as there isn’t any instantgratification. Additionally, Pavlov (2003) also advocated that classicalconditioning is a reflexive or automatic type of learning in which a stimulusacquires the capacity to evoke a response that was originally activated byanother stimulus. The reputation of a certain direction will lead to a studentfinally obeying them without any questions nor hesitation.
Children and adolescents regularly ignoredirections given to by the teacher, which leads to repetitive questioning ofdirections. For example, Sy et. al., (2014) holds theposition that it is important to vary the instructions delivered and theinstructional context to ensure that instruction following comes under stimuluscontrol of the instructions.
Students will be more attentive if the way ofexplaining directions is altered. Braun’s theory offeedback loops said that if the effect of the feedback loop is positive, theydon’t seek homeostasis, rather they move organisms or systems away fromhomeostasis, seeking to intensify or change certain processes.Being inattentive while the teacher isspeaking is connected with the habit of not following directions. Additionally,Sy et. al., (2014) argue that if instruction following,as it is typically measured, becomes a reinforcer for the instruction giver,that person might inadvertently begin to deliver instructions associated withhigher levels of instruction following and less problem behavior. Young(2010) stated that metacognition does not affect the ability of the student to bythink aloud and stimulated recallwas not significantly or meaningfully related to school achievement.
At an early age, children who do not followdirections are not only a risk of punishment for not listening, they are alsolikely to develop not following directions into a full-blown habit. Pavlov(2003) holds the position that students will only follow directions when theyare positively stimulated to do a certain task. Students will only do certaintasks when there is instant gratification at the end.
Velta (2003) stated thatthe ability to follow directions also depends on the behavior and nature of theclass. If the students are rowdy and uncontrollable, they will be less likelyto listen and follow the given instructions. The inability to follow directions is now amajor problem in school communities all around the Philippines whether publicor private it is now seen as a habit/culture that needs to be broken. Sy et.al., (2014) advocate that if instruction following, as it is typicallymeasured, becomes a reinforcer for the instruction giver, that person mightinadvertently begin to deliver instructions associated with higher levels ofinstruction following and less problem behavior. Additionally, Velta (2003) observed thatteachers are the main disciplinaries in the classroom and they also serve asthe medium of delivering the instructions. The student’s ability to understandand preform the instructions depends also on the teacher and whether he or shecan assert their authority in giving instructions.
There is a need to investigate on thepotential ways of breaking the habit of not following directions to be used inall school communities in the Philippines. Additionally, Sy et al. (2014)commented that it is important to vary the instructions delivered and theinstructional context to ensure that instruction following comes under stimuluscontrol of the instructions. Students will be more attentive if the way ofexplaining directions is altered. The Department of Education (DepEd 2015) assertsthat following instructions is a basic requirement to be taught in all schoolsas it reveals the student’s ability to pass or fail when following a given setof instructions.
The Child Mind Institute (n.d.) states that giving studentsclear, specific and direct instructions can lead to them understanding andpreforming the instruction clearly. Aconsiderable amount of literature has been published on the analysis ofteaching children various lessons through different models. Researches regarding how peoplebest take in information has provided models, teaching styles, and reliable strategieson teaching people, children, and adults alike. The researchers regarding this topic have followedthe trend of utilizing surveys for gathering data. Lee et al.
(2009) argued that one provides metacognitivestrategy instructions to children should one want the child to make betterdecisions with non-routine everyday problems. Bernard et al. (2015) suggestedthat metacognition can be relied upon by children to evaluate their perceptualaccess to information.
The aforementioned literature see benefit in usingmetacognitive strategies in children lectures. In addition, Chan (2011) suggested the idea of problem-basedlearning in the classroom for prompting student’s learning motivation andknowledge acquisition. Schrader (1988) found that metacognition includesreflection from non-reflective tasks. In addition, Sy et. Al., (2014) observedthat tere is a need to ary the mode of delivering instructions.
All of theprevious studies found ways to invoke student engagement in the topicsdiscussed in class. Yeazel & Center (2009) argued that the use of modulesis an acceptable and effective learning method for students. Bartholomew (2009)found that wrong implementation of modules caused the failure of his project.Crimmins & Rupprecht (2010) suggested modules as a supplement to coursestudies an effective learning tool. In addition, AL-Tabbaa & Rustom (2011)argued two stages in forming a module that would prove to be effective inbuilding multi-simulation modules. Chen (2011) found behaviorism approach to be successfulon junior high students with learning disabilities.
Steele (2005) found keyideas for teaching students with learning disabilities based on constructivismand behaviorism. Griffin (2014) stated through statistical analysis thatauthoritative is the ideal teaching style. Yoo (2010) found democratic teachingstyles should be adopted by teachers. The literature above mentions differentteaching styles in line with modular teaching. However, Kwan (2000) found that authoritarian parentingstyles aid children learning. Smith (1987) suggested that the method ofinstruction does not benefit certain students. Andres & Akan (2015) proposedthe use of authoritarian teaching in class as a superior teaching style. Additionally,Young (2010) emphasized that stimulated recall is not significantly related toschool achievement.
To add on, Watson (1921) observed that classicalconditioning (Pavlov) had the ability to cause phobias in humans. Theliterature previously mentioned go against the paper. The purpose here is todocument the effectiveness of the student prepared module on grade 3 students.
Aclass will be lectured from the grade 3 of St. Therese Private School. Thisstudy focuses on a strategy for teaching younger students how to followinstructions.
Comments from the students will assess the quality of the moduleand Likert scales will be used to quantify the data. The module, which wasmeant to be several meetings long was condensed into a meeting of 3 hours dueto time limitations. The aim of this paper isto test the effectiveness of the prepared module on a grade 3 student’s abilityto understand and follow instructions. A class of about thirty to forty maleand female students from St. Therese Private School will participate in thistest.
This study focuses on finding an effective strategy in teaching childrenhow to follow and understand directions without reiteration. The present study testedwhether the use of modules will help improve a grade 3 student’s ability tounderstand directions. Comments and ratings from the grade 3 students willassess the quality of the module, proving to be whether ineffective oraffective and Likert scales will be used to quantify the data. This module,which is supposedly to last a span of one school week, is shortened andcompressed into one three-hour meeting due to time constraints.