-
Beyond “Interesting”: Using Demand Control Schema to Structure Experiential Learning
- Gallaudet University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
R O B Y N K . D E A N A N D R O B E R T Q P O L L A R D Beyond “Interesting” Using Demand Control Schema to Structure Experiential Learning Problem-based learning, cooperative learning, and service learning are all terms associated with the active learning or student-centered learning movement that gained momentum in the 1960s (McKeachie, 1999). The literature in interpreter education over the last several years shows a growing interest in and use of these and other experiential learning approaches (e.g., Bentley-Sassaman, 2009; Dean et al, 2003, 2004a, 2009b; Dean, Pollard, & English, 2004; Peterson & Monikowski, 2005; Winston, 2005). While there are obvious benefits to the use of these methods in interpreter education, McKeachie (1999) warns of potential pitfalls: “All too often, experiential learning is entered into as something obviously valuable without enough consideration of the values to be achieved” (p. 156). New learning or the acquisition of knowledge per se is not always educational in a practical sense. It is therefore the job of educators to balance student independence and teacher control in the goal of employing experiential learning to foster meaningful development (McKeachie, 1999). Teachers overestimate students’ abilities to draw relevance from an experiential learning opportunity (Mercer, 2000); the connection between a given experience and one’s future work performance must be modeled by the teacher. Palmer (1998) cautions against what appears to be a problematic pendulum swing from teacher-centered educational approaches to studentcentered ones. Instead, he recommends a subject-centered philosophy. This would require interpreter educators to provide students and practitioners with learning experiences that build a sense of competence and demonstrate 77 Swabey Main Pgs 1-260.indd 77 1/5/2012 9:47:57 AM 78 Robyn K. Dean and Robert Q Pollard how concepts, principles, and skills are directly applicable and generalizable to various subjects relevant to interpreting work (McKeachie, 1999). That is, it is not enough for learning experiences to be interesting; they must also be relevant. Experiential learning and reflective learning practices have been the primary method we have employed in our medical and mental health interpreter training activities (Dean et al 2003; Dean & Pollard, 2004, 2005, 2009b, 2009c). Our educational approach has been driven by our position that interpreting is a practice profession rather than a technical profession (Dean & Pollard, 2004, 2005, 2011). Accordingly, we believe that the interpreting profession should educate students and working professionals in ways that are similar to those used in other practice professions, that is, through early and extensive exposure to in-vivo practice realities. In developing our experiential learning approaches, we have taken great care to structure the exposure, analysis, and discussion of the practical experience. Our DC-S approach to the conceptualization and teaching of interpreting work (Dean & Pollard, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008a, 2008b, 2009b, 2009c, 2011; Dean et al, 2003, 2004; Dean, Pollard, & English 2004) has proved valuable not only in providing structure during the experiential portion of such learning activities (helping interpreting students and practitioners know what they should be looking for) but also during the analysis portion of the experience (fostering generalizability of what is learned). In this chapter we argue for the use of such deliberate structure in experiential learning and illustrate how educators can use DC-S in this regard and thus “close the educational loop” between practical experiences and relevant educational outcomes—what Turner (2005) refers to as “real interpreting.” Given that the medical and mental health arenas are our content areas of greatest expertise, as well as the theme of this volume, examples of our use of DC-S methods in experiential learning in medical and mental health settings will be employed hereafter. However, it should be noted that the underlying ideas apply to any interpreting setting or content area. Why Structure and Terminology Matter Over the past decade of investigating and reporting on the effectiveness of DC-S (Dean et al. 2003; Dean & Pollard, 2001, 2004a, 2004b, 2009b; Swabey Main Pgs 1-260.indd 78 1/5/2012 9:47:57 AM [3.80.131.164] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 09:48 GMT) Beyond “Interesting” 79 Dean et al., 2004; Dean, Pollard, & English 2004; Pollard & Dean, 2008), we sometimes hear from interpreter educators comments such as “We have always taught DC-S concepts—we just don’t use that vocabulary” or “We recognize the novelty and value of DC-S, but we don’t use your specific terminology.” While such reactions were not...