Teaching Tactics

and
Teaching Strategy
ARTHUR W. FOSHAY'

HE TIMES are saturated with

the idea that we need to bring unity out of "/ h ave concluded that 'teaching strategy'
diversity. The social scientists attempt this has only limited usefulness for us, and that
what we chiefly have to concern ourselves
through the construction of successively
witli is 'teaching tactics.' There is only one
grander models. The politicians call for na teaching strategy; there are many teaching
tional unity, and a sense of direction. The tactics."
romantics among us seek unity through a
return to the primal elements of life. In edu
cation, our response is characteristic: to give the conditions for learning? Miller and
the urge a name, and to begin our efforts by Dollard put them in convenient form nearly
rallying around the new name. two generations ago:
The new name is "teaching strategies." 1. Drive or motive the student has to
We borrow the name from games theory. In want something.
chess, a strategy consists of a general plan 2. Cue or stimulus the student has to
for achieving the objective of checkmating notice something. ~-
one's opponent. The difficulty with the analo 3. Response the student has to do some
gy is that in teaching we are not engaging thing.
an adversary. We are trying to encourage 4. Reward the student has to get some
growth in a number of domains which taken thing. 1
together add up to the human condition. I
1 For a more recent summary of the Miller-
have concluded that "teaching strategy" has Dollard formulation, see: Celia S. Lavatelli, Walter
only limited usefulness for us, and that what J. Moore, and Theodore Kaltsounis. Elementary
we chiefly have to concern ourselves with is School Curriculum. New York: Holt, Rinehart 81
"teaching tactics." Winston, Inc., 1972.
There need be only one teaching strat * Arthur W . Foshay, Professor of Education,
egy. It is to induce a situation in which the Teachers College, Columbia University, New
conditions for learning are met. What are York

March 1975 373

 If a particular tactic fulfills all of these pear to be their failure to deal with the
requirements, it is within the framework of student's own purposes, either as expressed
an acceptable strategy. If it does not, or if it before learning is undertaken, or as met as a
emphasizes one at the expense of the others, consequence of learning activity.
its compliance with the strategic require Various other tactics seem to me to be
ments is thrown into question. derivatives of the teacher-centered classroom:
Our use of the term "teaching strategies" programmed instruction, computer-assisted
in the plural, it develops, is in error. Once instruction, individually prescribed instruc
more, we have inflated our language. There tion, and the like. The teacher, or a surrogate
is only one teaching strategy; there are many for the teacher, is the central figure in each
teaching tactics. Let us examine some of of these approaches. Students do not take
them. part in planning their learning, nor are their
motives considered. These derivatives differ
1. The Teacher-Centered Classroom from the teacher-centered classroom of 1900
principally in that the students progress at
Normal schools had become wide individual rates. The possibility that they
spread by the turn of this century, and teach need to proceed by different paths, or dif
ers were being trained in a tactic that we now ferent logics, is acknowledged only slightly,
call the teacher-centered classroom. The if at all. The common strength is that con
lesson plans they prepared bore a remarkably tent is organized in such a way as to make
close resemblance to plans for programmed it possible to master it in short steps, to bring
instruction, though without the intrinsic re th^se bits of mastery together into suc
ward. From the point of view of our strategic cessively larger groupings, until the students
model, the difficulty with the teacher-centered are finally able to respond to complex ques
classroom was that the student's drive what tions and to make complex statements. 2
he or she wanted was not examined or
taken into account deliberately. It was left 2. Mastery Learning
to take care of itself.
It was not surprising, therefore, that a As a tactic, mastery learning has ap
very large number of young children took as peared only during recent years, having been
their drive pleasing the teacher. The differ put forward by Benjamin Bloom.-1 As a tactic,
ence between wanting to learn subject matter mastery learning is best understood as a spe
and wanting to please the teacher was not cial case of criterion referenced instruction,
examined in those days, nor does it enter the in which the objective of instruction is made
minds of the many teachers who continue to apparent to the student at the outset, and
use this tactic. kept before the student until he or she has
The strength of the tactic is in its pre-
sentational character. In terms of the model, 2 It is perhaps unfair to ask of the designers
the "cue" is attended to with care. If a stu of programmed instruction and its variants that
they take into account the learning paths of stu
dent failed to learn something, it wasn't be dents. Perhaps this demands more of the art than
cause it hadn't been said within his or her can be delivered. Teachers take such learning paths
hearing. The response component of the into account when they say to students, "Think of
it this way. It is as if. . . ." Such knowledge as
model was confined to a very narrow band: there is in this field has clustered around the
The students answered questions that came examination of logical procedures in mathematics,
from the teacher. They "recited." The re and around heuristics. In this latter connection,
see an interesting article: "Judgment Under Uncer
ward was, generally speaking, irrelevant to tainty: Heuristics and Biases." Amos Tversky and
learning, but rather, a simple recognition Daniel Kahneman Science 185 (4157): 1124-31;
that in the teacher's opinion the learning had December 27, 1974.
taken place. 3 See: Benjamin S. Bloom, J. Thomas Hastings,
and George F. Madaus. The Handbook of forma
The principal failure of teacher-centered tive and Summative Evaluation. New York:
classrooms as a tactic, therefore, would ap McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971.

374 Educational Leadership

achieved it. While in the process of achieving learning has been that the goal is hard to
it, the student is given frequent feedback state clearly enough so that quantitative esti
about the proportion of the distance toward mates can be made about progress toward the
the goal that he or she has covered ("a per goal, once one leaves the field of mathe
centage of mastery"). matics. Most of the applications so far,
Bloom points out, following John Carroll, therefore, have been in mathematics. It re
that the normal curve of distribution of mains to be seen whether the tactic is equally
achievement is a product of holding time applicable in other domains.
constant. If time were allowed to vary ac
cording to the needs of the learners if every 3. The Project-Centered Approach
learner had the amount of time he or she
Old as it is, the project-centered ap
proach offers a valid alternative to those
The new name Is "teaching strategies." mentioned previously in that it focuses on
We borrow the name from games theory. the individual student, his talents, his inter
ests, his responses, and his rewards. As such,
In chess, a strategy consists of a general the old project curriculum of Kilpatrick and
plan for achieving the objective of his followers seems to come closest to meet
checkmating one's opponent. The ing the requirements of the strategic model
difficulty with the analogy is that in adopted here. In favor of reviving our inter
est in this whole set of ideas is the fact that
teaching we are not engaging an there is a solid body of literature and experi
adversary. ence extending over a 30 or 40 year period
with this approach. The excesses and mis
takes that are made in its name have long
needed then every learner theoretically since been exposed and can be avoided.
would achieve everything and the normal One need not have the whole class cen
curve would become skewed toward success. tering on one project there could be as
But the variation in the amount of time many projects as there are children. Indeed,
needed by learners is as between 1 and 7: that is what happens in the ordinary teach
the fastest students are 7 times as fast as ing of art in the elementary school now.
the slowest students. If we allow for such Within the framework of the project-centered
variation as these ratios suggest, the conven approach, or tactic, can be brought to bear
tional organization of the classroom has to the presentational skills associated with pro
be abandoned in favor of individual work grammed instruction and individually pre
programs. scribed instruction. This approach lends
From the point of view of our strategic itself naturally to the newly rediscovered
model, mastery learning places heavy em open classroom. All in all, the project-
phasis on drawing the student's attention to centered tactic appears to be the most satis
the ultimate goal, and soliciting his motiva factory of those discussed here.
tion toward achieving it by offering him the
promise that he can do it. He has constant In summary, I have argued that there
knowledge of results (formative evaluation) is only one grand strategy available for teach
through frequent checks on the progress he ing, and that it is satisfactorily set forth in
has made, and when he has mastered a given the Miller-Bollard formulation of the condi
objective, he knows it. His motive is more tions for learning. I have tested against this
nearly to achieve the objective than it is to strategy three classes of teaching tactics, and
please the teacher. As a tactic, mastery learn have found that the old project-centered cur
ing thus gets around some of the objections riculum meets the requirements of the Miller-
to programmed instruction in the teacher- Bollard model the most satisfactorily. I also
centered classroom. believe that the term "teaching strategies" is
The principal limitation to mastery inflated, and should be dropped. p

March 1975 375

Copyright © 1975 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development. All rights reserved.