In Auditory Presentations and Language Laboratories the authors present research that include cognitive theories of audio processing and various research on applications of presentations of an aural nature. While many conclusions are reached in this article, the ones I took away more than any were the practical application of research on creating audio presentations that best fit theories of cognitive processing. Another important conclusion is the fact that print may be better when time and learners are held constant, however, when individualization of instruction can occur, audio can very effective. African Oral Traditions: Riddles Among The Haya of Northwestern Tanzania presents riddles as a way to allow learners to become active members of their culture. It shows the significance of oral traditions in introducing young learners to social, political, economic, and even more personal concepts such as understanding ones own body. The paper calls on African curriculum developers to use riddles in instructional design to provide an education that ensures critical thinking skills, is culturally relevant, and is a form of instruction that is truly an African. In The Return of Educational Radio the author explains the past uses for radio in education and suggests ways that radio can be used in current education practices. Radio is presented as a low-cost way to teach a broad subject to a broad group. Negative aspects to radio include the fact that in most cases it is a one way communication device; and furthermore, a teaching tool that does not afford the instructor the ability to understand prior knowledge of his or her general audience. In the Audiocast Diaries: Reflections on radio and podcasting for delivery of educational soap operas, Wendy Elliott allows readers to understand her perspective of a researcher on the best ways to implement a set of audio programs. Elliott provides historic and current uses of a variety of mediums and compares issues like cost and audience. While at the outset she appears to set out to answer her question with a more concrete answer, she arrives at the conclusion that many forms can be reliable in presenting programs. She goes on to suggest a likely convergence that will use mediums in a way that best fits the needs of instructors and learners in the 21st century.
This week the course materials helped me to understand possible applications of audio in the classroom. Particularly, I am seeing that well-trained teachers are, of course, preferred in each classroom. Yet, with radio instruction a teacher who does not understand best practices, instructional design theories, effective assessment practices, etc., can manage a classroom where effective learning occurs. I must however question radio education as cure-all for schools. I think it can provide a relevant service for education in developing nations, but should not be seen as an end to great instruction. For example it could be used for teaching while teachers are in the process of being trained.
As I read through the research provided by the other students on the board this week one issue I have been questioning is sustainability and radio instruction. While sustainability is an important aspect to programs that use ICT developing countries, at what point does a practice become sustainable to the point that it loses its effectiveness? For example, radio clearly presents low-cost, broad solution that could allow this practice to continue year after year. However, this comes at the cost of education that is tailored to individual learners and provides opportunity for quick feedback and relationship building. In my personal learning situations I value the ability to get to know the person who is leading my learning experience. At the same time I enjoy the benefits of educators getting to know me and creating instruction that fits my instructional needs. Radio seems that it could become a fix that serves the masses for issues such as AIDS education, clean water treatment, or agricultural market costs, but does not seem to me to provide a quality fix for the general education of a student who wishes to become successful in a specific area.
This all impacts me personally because when I step in front of my students I want to make sure I am bringing them the very best educational situations possible. In contrast to educators in some places in the world I have the ability tailor instruction to fit the personality, culture, and personal learning goals of my classes and students. I can teach concepts in a variety of ways to make sure all students are learning. In radio education most of the time the material and presentation time is held constant so learning is variable. In my classroom I am able foster an environment where the material presentation is suited to my students and I can try my best to provide them the time they need to learn. I feel this variable instruction/time dynamic makes learning more of a constant. I do see a potential for using audio in the classroom. From reading some of the resources on the board I see some great ideas for how Podcasting can be used to individualize instruction.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Module 01: ICTs and Development
In his chapter Development Agendas and the Place of ICTs, Tim Unwin provides a broad overview of the historical, geo-economical, and social constructs that have influenced and will continue to influence the changes that take place in cultures around the world. He notes a longstanding divide in cultures influenced by an economic drive for cheaper labor and production resources. He then goes on to elaborate on the transformative power of ICTs for developing nations. Finally, he suggests it is a moral obligation to empower those who have been marginalized by critically looking at the needs of those in the developing world and finding solutions that lead to greater social equality. In her chapter ICTs in Education: Catalyst for Development in the same book, Michelle Selinger looks at the power of ICTs to deliver better education to those in the developing world, thus helping to find solutions to help citizens of a nation take control of their own lives. She offers a framework that considers the many facets of the delivery of education from government to administrator to teacher to basic students needs. She concludes her chapter by emphasizing the importance of ICTs as a means of collaboration and coordination between stakeholders in an initiative and even between developing nations who wish to avoid costly mistakes made by others. In the chapter ICT for Development: Challenges and Possibilities, the authors suggest that a critical and systematic approach to ICT implementation that can lead to increased development and social justice in a country. They touch on issues related to ICT implementation in the areas of education, development, and the inclusion of those otherwise ignored by the present government or system in place. They view a use of ICTs as a means for greater solidarity within excluded groups in a nation, but also in a global context, that is allowing others to help in finding solutions that lead to greater peace and equality. In the chapter ICT for Education, Development, and Social Justice: Some Theoretical Issues, Michalinos Zembylas introduces two distinct development paradigms: the modernization development paradigm leading to inequality, and the social justice development paradigm leading to a more equal opportunity for all. He provides ideas on how the latter paradigm can be better supported by taking a critical look at social justice issues rather than just focusing on getting technology into the hands of those who do not have access.
While I learned many new things from our module this week, one theme I read, discussed and thought over more than any other is this idea is for fairer, more effective use, ICTs cannot be forced into a culture from the top down, but a more grassroots approach must be taken. Those entrusted with providing the ICTs need to take a critical, systematic consideration every stage of the process to ensure fairness and effectiveness in ICT administration (Zembylas, 2009). ICTs can aid development by adding value to those communities, schools, local governments, etc. who demonstrate the capacity and desire to benevolently develop for the good of all. This is something that the process of globalization historically has proven an inability to do (Unwin, 2009).
The idea that I found most valuable from the materials this week comes from the UC Berkley lecture: Ten Myths of ICT for International Development. The lecturer, Dr. Toyama downplays the role technology provided for development, and instead emphasizes the role of technology as a tool that can “magnify human intent and capacity.” Thus, the human element becomes the most important issue, and technology a means to magnify those desires and abilities of those who use it. This is a departure from what I previously understood. Socially speaking, I always saw technology as an equalizer much like Thomas Friedmen in his bestseller The World is Flat. Technology is spoken about in his book in almost a religious way. ICTs are seen as the cure to the common underdevelopment issue. I should have known this could not be true. While India has seen unprecedented development in the past 15 years due to ICTs, there still remains a large portion of the population outside of the major cities in India that still live in extreme poverty. This cognitive dissonance between Friedman’s world and the world I read about in our module this week has me thinking development is far more complex issue than I have ever understood it to be. While I see from our readings the potential and power behind ICTs in aiding development issues, I have a hard time wrapping my head around practical applications of development. We have been provided with many examples of ICTs in action in our course material this week. Yet it seems to me that what works for one situation, culture, nation, etc. will not always find success in another. I suppose to stand back after two weeks of reading and thinking and say I am more perplexed by issues of development and the role of ICTs than when I started is a great way to start this class. I truly look forward to unraveling the details as we continue on.
While I have no direct involvement in ICTs for development at this time, the readings this week have helped me to better understand the role of any communication technology in the lives of any context including my own. What I mean is communications technology cannot be the end of any initiative, classroom lesson plan, or development plan, but simply the means to more magnify the ends of these plans. In my life as a teacher I design units, recommend software/hardware to other teachers, and make technology decisions for my family (my personal favorite). Most technology decisions are costly. I need to get away from this unfounded belief that technology equals motivation. For example, how many times do people with no motivation to exercise buy a treadmill thinking it will help them to run more often and get in shape? Then, after a month or two it sits idle, making a great clothes hanger. If there is not already a strong desire to get in shape, the treadmill is practically useless. In this same way a treadmill purchase cannot provide a person with intent or capacity to be a great runner, a cell phone or satellite dish will not add an intent or capacity to a person outside previously existing desires to be a developer of his or her country, community, or household. That is why it is important for an educational technologist/husband/ICT4D advocate to think critically about what to purchase for whom and to provide education, motivation, and/or continued support for maximum benefits from any technology tool investment.
References
Selinger, M. (2009). ICT in education: Catalyst for development. In T. Unwin (Ed.), ICT4D: Information and Communication Technology for Development, (pp. 206-248). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Toyama, K. (2010, November 10). Lecture. Presented at the CITRIS Research Exchange, UC Berkley
Unwin, T. (2009). Development agendas and the place of ICTs. In T. Unwin (Ed.), ICT4D: Information and Communication Technology for Development (pp. 7-37). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Zembylas, M. (2009). ICT for development: Challenges and Possibilities. In C. Vrasidas, M. Zembylas, & G. V. Glass, ICT for education, development, and social justice (pp. 3-15). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers
Vrasidas, C., Zembylas, M., & Glass, G. V. (2009). ICT for education, development, and social justice: Some theoretical issues. In C. Vrasidas, M. Zembylas, & G. V. Glass, ICT for education, development, and social justice (pp. 17-29). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers.
While I learned many new things from our module this week, one theme I read, discussed and thought over more than any other is this idea is for fairer, more effective use, ICTs cannot be forced into a culture from the top down, but a more grassroots approach must be taken. Those entrusted with providing the ICTs need to take a critical, systematic consideration every stage of the process to ensure fairness and effectiveness in ICT administration (Zembylas, 2009). ICTs can aid development by adding value to those communities, schools, local governments, etc. who demonstrate the capacity and desire to benevolently develop for the good of all. This is something that the process of globalization historically has proven an inability to do (Unwin, 2009).
The idea that I found most valuable from the materials this week comes from the UC Berkley lecture: Ten Myths of ICT for International Development. The lecturer, Dr. Toyama downplays the role technology provided for development, and instead emphasizes the role of technology as a tool that can “magnify human intent and capacity.” Thus, the human element becomes the most important issue, and technology a means to magnify those desires and abilities of those who use it. This is a departure from what I previously understood. Socially speaking, I always saw technology as an equalizer much like Thomas Friedmen in his bestseller The World is Flat. Technology is spoken about in his book in almost a religious way. ICTs are seen as the cure to the common underdevelopment issue. I should have known this could not be true. While India has seen unprecedented development in the past 15 years due to ICTs, there still remains a large portion of the population outside of the major cities in India that still live in extreme poverty. This cognitive dissonance between Friedman’s world and the world I read about in our module this week has me thinking development is far more complex issue than I have ever understood it to be. While I see from our readings the potential and power behind ICTs in aiding development issues, I have a hard time wrapping my head around practical applications of development. We have been provided with many examples of ICTs in action in our course material this week. Yet it seems to me that what works for one situation, culture, nation, etc. will not always find success in another. I suppose to stand back after two weeks of reading and thinking and say I am more perplexed by issues of development and the role of ICTs than when I started is a great way to start this class. I truly look forward to unraveling the details as we continue on.
While I have no direct involvement in ICTs for development at this time, the readings this week have helped me to better understand the role of any communication technology in the lives of any context including my own. What I mean is communications technology cannot be the end of any initiative, classroom lesson plan, or development plan, but simply the means to more magnify the ends of these plans. In my life as a teacher I design units, recommend software/hardware to other teachers, and make technology decisions for my family (my personal favorite). Most technology decisions are costly. I need to get away from this unfounded belief that technology equals motivation. For example, how many times do people with no motivation to exercise buy a treadmill thinking it will help them to run more often and get in shape? Then, after a month or two it sits idle, making a great clothes hanger. If there is not already a strong desire to get in shape, the treadmill is practically useless. In this same way a treadmill purchase cannot provide a person with intent or capacity to be a great runner, a cell phone or satellite dish will not add an intent or capacity to a person outside previously existing desires to be a developer of his or her country, community, or household. That is why it is important for an educational technologist/husband/ICT4D advocate to think critically about what to purchase for whom and to provide education, motivation, and/or continued support for maximum benefits from any technology tool investment.
References
Selinger, M. (2009). ICT in education: Catalyst for development. In T. Unwin (Ed.), ICT4D: Information and Communication Technology for Development, (pp. 206-248). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Toyama, K. (2010, November 10). Lecture. Presented at the CITRIS Research Exchange, UC Berkley
Unwin, T. (2009). Development agendas and the place of ICTs. In T. Unwin (Ed.), ICT4D: Information and Communication Technology for Development (pp. 7-37). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Zembylas, M. (2009). ICT for development: Challenges and Possibilities. In C. Vrasidas, M. Zembylas, & G. V. Glass, ICT for education, development, and social justice (pp. 3-15). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers
Vrasidas, C., Zembylas, M., & Glass, G. V. (2009). ICT for education, development, and social justice: Some theoretical issues. In C. Vrasidas, M. Zembylas, & G. V. Glass, ICT for education, development, and social justice (pp. 17-29). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
EdTech 504 - Final Thoughts
I know that this coming school year will be one of change in my classroom because of the things I learned in this class. The course provided me with a definite foundation of theories on which to design and implement instruction. In addition, it will help me become a better guide in my perceptions and actions in daily classroom activity. However, exploring ideas from age old to brand new and emerging has developed my desire to make an impact on the world using this knowledge.
My family, wife and two kids, are not planning on staying in the area we live (and I grew up) for an extended time period of time. Our ideas of the future possibly involve living outside the United States teaching in an international school and/or becoming involved in education in another city or town in the country. Options seem wide open right now. Education has become my passion and heartbeat in the last 10 years of my life. I find a depth of rewards in teaching and the inherent learning that goes on in the process. I feel this program, and especially this class has transported my learning by leaps and bounds ahead the knowledge from experience that taught me so much in my first 5 years of practice. In conversations with my wife this summer I have been talking about how I could apply these things in my class this next year, but also in our future goals as educators.
As I said in the last post, I hold to the idea that what I believe will naturally flow out of my words and actions as an educator. I feel my beliefs have changed in many ways as I look back on my reflections from the past 7 weeks.
I now better understand:
I do not know what the future has in store, but I know that I will look back on this class as a real foundation to my idea of educational technology. When I started this program in the summer of 2008 I was ready to learn about Web 2.0 tools, web design, and ways to get my kids to use computers more in the learning process. I am now leaving this program with so much more than a better understanding of “computers and kids.” The process of providing effective, efficient learning has a potential to serve so many people by improving learning and providing a better quality of life. This is even if technology tools are not considered in design and implementation of instruction. The addition of access and consideration of technology tools in design opens exciting and seemingly endless possibilities in instruction. Education promotes change. If I am able to apply the things I learn in this class in a way that improves the quality of life of even one person I believe I will find satisfaction in goals. My hope, however, is to impact many more.
My family, wife and two kids, are not planning on staying in the area we live (and I grew up) for an extended time period of time. Our ideas of the future possibly involve living outside the United States teaching in an international school and/or becoming involved in education in another city or town in the country. Options seem wide open right now. Education has become my passion and heartbeat in the last 10 years of my life. I find a depth of rewards in teaching and the inherent learning that goes on in the process. I feel this program, and especially this class has transported my learning by leaps and bounds ahead the knowledge from experience that taught me so much in my first 5 years of practice. In conversations with my wife this summer I have been talking about how I could apply these things in my class this next year, but also in our future goals as educators.
As I said in the last post, I hold to the idea that what I believe will naturally flow out of my words and actions as an educator. I feel my beliefs have changed in many ways as I look back on my reflections from the past 7 weeks.
I now better understand:
- Knowledge and the ways of gaining knowledge in a totally different light
- Behaviorism as a helpful tool to understand learning and providing some instruction
- The importance of helping students form cognitive connections in learning
- The need to highly support students need in constructing their own knowledge and considerations to take in instructional design
- The application of research-based motivation in classroom practices
- An application for the interconnectedness of many different learning theories and an openness to more theories than previous beliefs
- How to critically analyze work that is above my head in an annotated bibliography
- How to cite papers in correct APA format (hopefully!)
- And much more...
I do not know what the future has in store, but I know that I will look back on this class as a real foundation to my idea of educational technology. When I started this program in the summer of 2008 I was ready to learn about Web 2.0 tools, web design, and ways to get my kids to use computers more in the learning process. I am now leaving this program with so much more than a better understanding of “computers and kids.” The process of providing effective, efficient learning has a potential to serve so many people by improving learning and providing a better quality of life. This is even if technology tools are not considered in design and implementation of instruction. The addition of access and consideration of technology tools in design opens exciting and seemingly endless possibilities in instruction. Education promotes change. If I am able to apply the things I learn in this class in a way that improves the quality of life of even one person I believe I will find satisfaction in goals. My hope, however, is to impact many more.
Module 07: More on Emerging Theories
This week I read more into theories of connectivism presented last week and started to read Seymour Papert’s The Children’s Machine, while skimming the remainder of the book before this post.
The articles on connectivism presented the learning theory as an improvement on past learning theories more relevant for 21st century learners and technology. Foundational concepts include knowledge as something that exists outside ourselves, not a entity. Learning is characterized as making connections and displaying the ability to construct and send information across connections. Connections can be both neural and through networks of people, databases and other informational systems.
The Children’s Machine seems to be a call for a massive shift in the current education system. Papert asserts education needs to shift from a system that provides knowledge to something that allows students to learn to provide themselves with knowledge in the context of the creation of a physical item. He divides people involved in academics into two categories based on actions over intentions, Schoolers and Yearners. “Schoolers” are people who recognize a problem but only look for quick fixes to these problems. While “yearners” are quite different: they are people who focus on shifting the paradigm of what it means to be educated and provide tools and instruction to students in smaller schools. He suggests the role of computers as tools that help students make connections, not an isolated skill or subject as many school assign them to be. His only reservation toward this type of schooling seems to be on elitism that could emerge. He compares education to the entity of the USSR providing the illusion to a good education, but not actually providing it.
I am learning what it means to learn and gain knowledge is a complex and ever-changing idea. Behavioral, cognitive, and constructional theories do not tell a complete story and shape education in possibly less effective ways than that that may be discovered. There are sure to be further developments in future thinking/learning theories and as technology evolves in the way it records and stores information. I have always viewed learning as something that happens inside someone alone, but the fact that patterns exist outside of what is held in the mind or has been conceived by the any brain is a radical concept that I am just beginning to wrap my mind around. The implications of this type of understanding could be revolutionary to learning and education.
An understanding that the pipe is more important than what is in the pipe as Siemens asserts, will help me to strive for looking for ways to help my students make connections and provide support and encouragement when my students make connections. While I do not know how this will look, I believe I can be a motivator of good thinking in my classroom. I hold the belief that what I believe naturally comes out of my mouth and can be seen in my actions. If I truly believe that I can be an agent of change in my students lives, I believe my actions in the classroom will reflect this shift.
The discussion board this week has focused on connectivism and the relation of this theory in special education. Understanding that the starting point of connectivism is an individual and special education revolves around individualized instruction, we discussed how we might frame education for specific learners. This discussion was helpful to me because individualized instruction is something that I deal with everyday in the classroom, but I was able to rethink this concept. Further, I was able to really look into the theory of connectivism and explore the implications of this revolutionary educational theory. We came up with ideas of how students can gain for themselves an individualized education. This relies on the student, the instructor, and the instructional institution. Instructional organizations need to understand that learning how to learn is more important than providing students with general knowledge. Instructors need to play the role of guides in this process, modeling how this can be actually done. Finally, students need to be open to learning and take autonomy provided in the learning process seriously. A belief I hold to in life is that you get out of things what you put into them. The more effort you put into learning, the more learning you will get out of it.
The articles on connectivism presented the learning theory as an improvement on past learning theories more relevant for 21st century learners and technology. Foundational concepts include knowledge as something that exists outside ourselves, not a entity. Learning is characterized as making connections and displaying the ability to construct and send information across connections. Connections can be both neural and through networks of people, databases and other informational systems.
The Children’s Machine seems to be a call for a massive shift in the current education system. Papert asserts education needs to shift from a system that provides knowledge to something that allows students to learn to provide themselves with knowledge in the context of the creation of a physical item. He divides people involved in academics into two categories based on actions over intentions, Schoolers and Yearners. “Schoolers” are people who recognize a problem but only look for quick fixes to these problems. While “yearners” are quite different: they are people who focus on shifting the paradigm of what it means to be educated and provide tools and instruction to students in smaller schools. He suggests the role of computers as tools that help students make connections, not an isolated skill or subject as many school assign them to be. His only reservation toward this type of schooling seems to be on elitism that could emerge. He compares education to the entity of the USSR providing the illusion to a good education, but not actually providing it.
I am learning what it means to learn and gain knowledge is a complex and ever-changing idea. Behavioral, cognitive, and constructional theories do not tell a complete story and shape education in possibly less effective ways than that that may be discovered. There are sure to be further developments in future thinking/learning theories and as technology evolves in the way it records and stores information. I have always viewed learning as something that happens inside someone alone, but the fact that patterns exist outside of what is held in the mind or has been conceived by the any brain is a radical concept that I am just beginning to wrap my mind around. The implications of this type of understanding could be revolutionary to learning and education.
An understanding that the pipe is more important than what is in the pipe as Siemens asserts, will help me to strive for looking for ways to help my students make connections and provide support and encouragement when my students make connections. While I do not know how this will look, I believe I can be a motivator of good thinking in my classroom. I hold the belief that what I believe naturally comes out of my mouth and can be seen in my actions. If I truly believe that I can be an agent of change in my students lives, I believe my actions in the classroom will reflect this shift.
The discussion board this week has focused on connectivism and the relation of this theory in special education. Understanding that the starting point of connectivism is an individual and special education revolves around individualized instruction, we discussed how we might frame education for specific learners. This discussion was helpful to me because individualized instruction is something that I deal with everyday in the classroom, but I was able to rethink this concept. Further, I was able to really look into the theory of connectivism and explore the implications of this revolutionary educational theory. We came up with ideas of how students can gain for themselves an individualized education. This relies on the student, the instructor, and the instructional institution. Instructional organizations need to understand that learning how to learn is more important than providing students with general knowledge. Instructors need to play the role of guides in this process, modeling how this can be actually done. Finally, students need to be open to learning and take autonomy provided in the learning process seriously. A belief I hold to in life is that you get out of things what you put into them. The more effort you put into learning, the more learning you will get out of it.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Module 06: A Closer Look at Emerging Theories
In his article Constructivism as a High-Tech Intervention Strategy for At-Risk Learners, Gary Stager describes the implementation of a Constructionist Learning Laboratory (CLL) for at-risk students in Maine. The program uses a model developed by Seymour Papert, which emphasizes creation of tangible artifacts to connect students to “powerful ideas” of the engineering process. Students at the learning center created the many devices using LEGO bricks, programmable microprocessors, gears, and sensors. Examples of student projects include: a temperature sensitive soda vending machine and a working scale model of an infrared sensing baggage conveyor belt. Students used technology and personal computers to do much more than design and program the machines. They researched, wrote letters to professionals, made presentations, and much more using personal computers. This article shows the importance of free choice in instruction, teacher guidance in constructionism, and the student use of technology tools to create useful knowledge.
Similarly, Designing, Developing, and Implementing a Course on LEGO Robotics for Technology Teacher Education exposes Paperts constructivist environment to instruct teachers on the uses of robotics in education. This article provides research on Mindtools, or tools that support higher-level thinking and learning processes. The tool of use in this article is also LEGO’s RoboLab. RoboLab was specifically developed for teachers with little or no computer programming and uses a windows -based graphical user interface to program the robots. Instruction revolved around learning programming language and building and programming a robot to solve a common task. Results of instruction are presented as positive for each participant. The most “intense” learning revolved around the creation, programming, and many test trials of the robots. Students in the course reported use of higher order thinking skills and connection to personal curriculum objectives. However, cost, space, and time were reasons a teacher may not implement the program.
After reading these articles I can see the power of giving students materials and freedom to create in instruction. The products students create reflect connections they make in their mind. I was amazed at the machines created by students in the Maine classroom. The products students create are not just reflections of connections, but can be used as a conversation piece from an instructor’s point of view to allow dialogue that guides students to make even more connections. It seems giving students chances to create something out of nothing lends itself to more natural forms of the learning process. I was thinking that most things we do of meaning in life are found in the creation paradigm. Many occupations and relationships are founded on building something out of nothing. If students can create Lego Robots they can use this success to provide motivation to help them create other objects, concepts, or ideas for example art for the community, knowledge in a work place, or even an idea that will change the world.
I believe I can take this idea of the importance of creation in education and use it to design and implement instruction that involves the creation of objects in my science class. I have been thinking about finding ways to use the knowledge of the Lego Robots in my classroom. The main things that limit this type of instruction are state mandated teaching/testing of standards and budgets. After reading the articles I think two things are very important to implementation of a constructionist lesson: 1.) obtaining the right amount of materials/equipment that allow for free construction and 2.) an instructor with good background knowledge on how to create with the constructionist tool and also good background knowledge to provide proper guidance of learning. I would not implement a program like the one in Maine unless I felt I was able to acquire both of these things. Compared to other forms of instruction, the cost of materials and training in this type of instruction seem to be high.
This brings me to another thing I have been considering this week: the state of the current public school system in relation to constructivist learning. In the discussion boards our leader directed our conversation to think about how constructivism fits into our current school system, which for me is a public school in Pennsylvania. I am thankful for the freedom my administrators give to our teaching staff, however, our instruction is still very much dictated by high-stakes testing and school budgetary concerns. I believe both of these factors (test scores and money) drive much of the constructs under which I work. I also believe these two things are in opposition to constructivist learning. This week I have been talking to my wife, who whether she likes it or not has become a recipient of knowledge from EDTECH 504 this summer. I gave her my thoughts on the public school and it’s obsession with normative evaluative testing. I also explained to her at one point how much I was looking forward to finishing my reading tests for the class so I could write my paper (a personal goal of mine). My wife, a former grad student herself, told me she would much rather take tests than write papers. She said she liked knowing what to study and the safety of providing the answer the teacher wanted to get a good grade. This made me think that some of my students must think the same way when I introduce another project or item they are expected to create in my class. From a teachers standpoint I do not like testing. Grading tests is obviously not a party and testing lacks the ability to inform me of key skills, habits, and higher order thinking my students are demonstrating. So which is better instruction driven by objectives and testing, or instruction driven by discovery and creation? My conclusion at this point is this: educational technology is about bringing instruction to students that is both effective AND efficient. While constructivist lessons, properly designed can be extremely effective, testing provides one of the most efficient ways to demonstrate learning of facts and concepts. This leads to believe that a balance is needed in the design of instruction.
One final anecdote relating to all of this: Inspired by all of my reading on constructionism I brought home some K-nex building supplies from my classroom this week and my almost 3-year-old son was THIRLLED to help me build a crane for him. I was surprised by his almost immediate and sustained enthusiasm during the project. It reminded me of something that seems inherent (but metacognitivly unknown) in kids even from a very early age, the excitement to create.
Similarly, Designing, Developing, and Implementing a Course on LEGO Robotics for Technology Teacher Education exposes Paperts constructivist environment to instruct teachers on the uses of robotics in education. This article provides research on Mindtools, or tools that support higher-level thinking and learning processes. The tool of use in this article is also LEGO’s RoboLab. RoboLab was specifically developed for teachers with little or no computer programming and uses a windows -based graphical user interface to program the robots. Instruction revolved around learning programming language and building and programming a robot to solve a common task. Results of instruction are presented as positive for each participant. The most “intense” learning revolved around the creation, programming, and many test trials of the robots. Students in the course reported use of higher order thinking skills and connection to personal curriculum objectives. However, cost, space, and time were reasons a teacher may not implement the program.
After reading these articles I can see the power of giving students materials and freedom to create in instruction. The products students create reflect connections they make in their mind. I was amazed at the machines created by students in the Maine classroom. The products students create are not just reflections of connections, but can be used as a conversation piece from an instructor’s point of view to allow dialogue that guides students to make even more connections. It seems giving students chances to create something out of nothing lends itself to more natural forms of the learning process. I was thinking that most things we do of meaning in life are found in the creation paradigm. Many occupations and relationships are founded on building something out of nothing. If students can create Lego Robots they can use this success to provide motivation to help them create other objects, concepts, or ideas for example art for the community, knowledge in a work place, or even an idea that will change the world.
I believe I can take this idea of the importance of creation in education and use it to design and implement instruction that involves the creation of objects in my science class. I have been thinking about finding ways to use the knowledge of the Lego Robots in my classroom. The main things that limit this type of instruction are state mandated teaching/testing of standards and budgets. After reading the articles I think two things are very important to implementation of a constructionist lesson: 1.) obtaining the right amount of materials/equipment that allow for free construction and 2.) an instructor with good background knowledge on how to create with the constructionist tool and also good background knowledge to provide proper guidance of learning. I would not implement a program like the one in Maine unless I felt I was able to acquire both of these things. Compared to other forms of instruction, the cost of materials and training in this type of instruction seem to be high.
This brings me to another thing I have been considering this week: the state of the current public school system in relation to constructivist learning. In the discussion boards our leader directed our conversation to think about how constructivism fits into our current school system, which for me is a public school in Pennsylvania. I am thankful for the freedom my administrators give to our teaching staff, however, our instruction is still very much dictated by high-stakes testing and school budgetary concerns. I believe both of these factors (test scores and money) drive much of the constructs under which I work. I also believe these two things are in opposition to constructivist learning. This week I have been talking to my wife, who whether she likes it or not has become a recipient of knowledge from EDTECH 504 this summer. I gave her my thoughts on the public school and it’s obsession with normative evaluative testing. I also explained to her at one point how much I was looking forward to finishing my reading tests for the class so I could write my paper (a personal goal of mine). My wife, a former grad student herself, told me she would much rather take tests than write papers. She said she liked knowing what to study and the safety of providing the answer the teacher wanted to get a good grade. This made me think that some of my students must think the same way when I introduce another project or item they are expected to create in my class. From a teachers standpoint I do not like testing. Grading tests is obviously not a party and testing lacks the ability to inform me of key skills, habits, and higher order thinking my students are demonstrating. So which is better instruction driven by objectives and testing, or instruction driven by discovery and creation? My conclusion at this point is this: educational technology is about bringing instruction to students that is both effective AND efficient. While constructivist lessons, properly designed can be extremely effective, testing provides one of the most efficient ways to demonstrate learning of facts and concepts. This leads to believe that a balance is needed in the design of instruction.
One final anecdote relating to all of this: Inspired by all of my reading on constructionism I brought home some K-nex building supplies from my classroom this week and my almost 3-year-old son was THIRLLED to help me build a crane for him. I was surprised by his almost immediate and sustained enthusiasm during the project. It reminded me of something that seems inherent (but metacognitivly unknown) in kids even from a very early age, the excitement to create.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Module 05: A Closer Look at Constructivism
In his article The Real World on a Short Leash: The (Mis)Application of Constructivism to the Design of Educational Technology, Joseph Petraglia offers a background on the theory behind constructivist teaching strategy and commentary on the current state of the design of instruction from a constructivist viewpoint. Petraglia goes on to assert that it is often decided, even assumed that constructivist instruction needs to be taught in “authentic” learning environments. The main concern that the author has with this viewpoint is it assumes too soon something for instruction that should be considered as an option in the process of instructional design. Authentic environments and ill-defined problems may not be the best way for students to learn an idea, concept or skill because they are not always the best structure for learning. The author concludes his article by giving a prescription for better structuring constructivist learning, the use of rhetoric.
In Constructing on Constructivism: The Role of Technology the authors provide reasons why technology and constructivism provide harmony in instruction. Fundamentals of both disciplines are explained and examples are provided. This article mostly pulls together basic research and concepts on the subject, but provides helpful rudiments from which to discuss the merits of technology in effective education.
I am learning that the place of a teacher in constructivist instruction is one that is highly involved in effective designing of quality instruction. In fact, this type of instruction requires much more expertise and time to create instruction that is effective. In addition, I am learning that implementation of constructivist teaching involves much more, as said in the Nanjappa, Grant article, “coaching, modeling, and scaffolding” to help each learner construct knowledge. The teacher must become highly involved in at very least understanding students learning, but most likely providing guidance, encouragement, and support in the midst of learning processes. In addition, efficiency of learning is highly dependent on the organization of resources. This scaffolding process is important especially in web-based activities when the whole of the Internet is situated before students.
I believe I too often fell into a mentality in constructivist teaching of “hanging back” and letting students “learn.” I think this came from an idea that problem solving in the real world does not always provide help. However, I need to understand that as a teacher my responsibility to provide the most effective and efficient instruction to my students comes first and foremost. I believe there will still be times for “hanging back” in my instruction. Yet, I need to balance this strategy with many more when I design and implement instruction in a classroom. The use of rhetoric in instruction is a great suggestion that I plan to begin to implement more. I will now try to pay more attention to understanding where learners are and posing better questions in the midst of learning. I believe proper use of rhetoric, modeling, scaffolding and coaching in instructive instruction will not only provide richer, more effective learning experiences, but also provide motivation to students as the press on in learning.
The most valuable interactions I have been having this week come in my everyday experiences with my family and my thoughts about this coming school year. Possibly because I am always in the process of reading something in this class, the different concepts and ideas I am learning are always looking for ways to make connections into my life. I am noticing that as a father I am often more willing to look at behavioral aspects when teaching my son right and wrong. My wife on the other hand looks at our son with more a more cognitive perspective. This example has helped me to understand parents of my students who always seem to “make excuses” for their son or daughter both academically and behaviorally. Maybe parents are not making excuses as much as they are helping a teacher understand their child who they understand much more deeply and cognitively. In addition, many parents today were educated by instructors that historically taught and dealt with problems from a much more behavioral perspective. Although this perspective may be more efficient (less time consuming) in trying to understand a child, it may not be the most effective way. I will go into teaching this next school year at very least with this thought in my head. I believe it has potential to help me make better decisions on how to better instruct and guide a student.
In Constructing on Constructivism: The Role of Technology the authors provide reasons why technology and constructivism provide harmony in instruction. Fundamentals of both disciplines are explained and examples are provided. This article mostly pulls together basic research and concepts on the subject, but provides helpful rudiments from which to discuss the merits of technology in effective education.
I am learning that the place of a teacher in constructivist instruction is one that is highly involved in effective designing of quality instruction. In fact, this type of instruction requires much more expertise and time to create instruction that is effective. In addition, I am learning that implementation of constructivist teaching involves much more, as said in the Nanjappa, Grant article, “coaching, modeling, and scaffolding” to help each learner construct knowledge. The teacher must become highly involved in at very least understanding students learning, but most likely providing guidance, encouragement, and support in the midst of learning processes. In addition, efficiency of learning is highly dependent on the organization of resources. This scaffolding process is important especially in web-based activities when the whole of the Internet is situated before students.
I believe I too often fell into a mentality in constructivist teaching of “hanging back” and letting students “learn.” I think this came from an idea that problem solving in the real world does not always provide help. However, I need to understand that as a teacher my responsibility to provide the most effective and efficient instruction to my students comes first and foremost. I believe there will still be times for “hanging back” in my instruction. Yet, I need to balance this strategy with many more when I design and implement instruction in a classroom. The use of rhetoric in instruction is a great suggestion that I plan to begin to implement more. I will now try to pay more attention to understanding where learners are and posing better questions in the midst of learning. I believe proper use of rhetoric, modeling, scaffolding and coaching in instructive instruction will not only provide richer, more effective learning experiences, but also provide motivation to students as the press on in learning.
The most valuable interactions I have been having this week come in my everyday experiences with my family and my thoughts about this coming school year. Possibly because I am always in the process of reading something in this class, the different concepts and ideas I am learning are always looking for ways to make connections into my life. I am noticing that as a father I am often more willing to look at behavioral aspects when teaching my son right and wrong. My wife on the other hand looks at our son with more a more cognitive perspective. This example has helped me to understand parents of my students who always seem to “make excuses” for their son or daughter both academically and behaviorally. Maybe parents are not making excuses as much as they are helping a teacher understand their child who they understand much more deeply and cognitively. In addition, many parents today were educated by instructors that historically taught and dealt with problems from a much more behavioral perspective. Although this perspective may be more efficient (less time consuming) in trying to understand a child, it may not be the most effective way. I will go into teaching this next school year at very least with this thought in my head. I believe it has potential to help me make better decisions on how to better instruct and guide a student.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Module 04: A Closer Look at Cognitivism
The Mind and Brain chapter from How People Learn: Brian, Mind, Experience, and School focuses on research-backed information on the biological changes that the brain goes through from birth into development and the consequential effects on learning. From the start the author refutes “pop-conceptions” such as right-brain/left-brain dominance and replaces them with research in such areas as neuroscience and cognitive science. Many of the studies describe animals put in different situations then analyzed for changes in the brain. Synaptic connections as well as the ability of the brain to organize and reorganize information are featured in the chapter as playing a major role in ability to learn.
Research on Cognitive Load Theory and Its Design Implications for E-Learning by Jeroen J.G. van Merrienboer and Paul Ayres describes the founding concepts of the Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) and present recent research on this theory as it applies to learning. CLT asserts that the brain can only process so much information and the theory seeks to make this processing easier and more efficient. Ways this is done include decreasing intrinsic cognitive load (what is already inside a learner), decreasing extrinsic cognitive load (how instruction is presented), and increasing germane cognitive load (willingness or motivation to free up space for learning). Much of the research noted by the authors asserts the key to using the CLT is in understanding the experience level of the learner and applying CLT informed instruction to this diagnosis. This not only decreases intrinsic cognitive load, but also provides motivation to the learner.
I have been thinking this week of the extreme importance finding the experience level of learners to motivation and effective, efficient learning. One thought I had is how do you do this with class sizes nearing 30 and students at least 5 new students arriving into the classroom who are new to the district? I would love to be able to meet with each student and understand what he or she knows, does not know and provide individual solutions to these processes. Yet, it seems time, at least as I have used it so far in my career, does not seem to allow for this. Does there exists processes and tools that I do not know about that would assist me as an instructor in making my instruction more effective to each student I teach?
I believe that I will pay much more attention to the previous experience of students in my classes. In addition, I will pay attention to the perquisite skills that I may need to provide students who do not have experience in order to make instruction more effective and meaningful to them. Gagne recommends learning hierarchies. I feel having (or creating) this piece of information would be very helpful to an instructor teaching a lesson. Another thing that I will take away from the readings this week is the importance of helping students organize and reorganize information. I hope create more concept mapping activities for students in my classes this year. This is a beneficial way to help them cognitively organize information.
I had some great interactions with students in the discussion forum this week. We discussed the importance of technology on the behaviors of people from a cultural perspective. Among other ideas, this discussion opened my eyes to the importance that is placed on technology to bring a free flow of information to the world. The question that I ask here that I hoped the discussion would go toward is: Does technology make people happy? I did not come out and ask this on the board and the conversation all went toward the benefits of technology. In spite of that, I believe Skinner (1986) in the article we discussed was looking at the world and seeing people unfulfilled by things that were easily “looked at and listened to.” He believed mankind would be happier if they did not rely on technology so much as it was so new to the evolutionary history of people. While my feelings on the matter (not voiced on the boards) are technology itself cannot make people happy. I personally believe far more organic and spiritual things do this. Yet, it cannot be denied that technology is a powerful tool to bring about positive worldwide change. This positive change can help people live lives more informed and free. Therefore, this in turn gives them a better opportunity to find happiness.
Skinner, B.F. (1986) What is wrong with daily life in the western world? American Psychologist, 1986, 41, 568-74.
Research on Cognitive Load Theory and Its Design Implications for E-Learning by Jeroen J.G. van Merrienboer and Paul Ayres describes the founding concepts of the Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) and present recent research on this theory as it applies to learning. CLT asserts that the brain can only process so much information and the theory seeks to make this processing easier and more efficient. Ways this is done include decreasing intrinsic cognitive load (what is already inside a learner), decreasing extrinsic cognitive load (how instruction is presented), and increasing germane cognitive load (willingness or motivation to free up space for learning). Much of the research noted by the authors asserts the key to using the CLT is in understanding the experience level of the learner and applying CLT informed instruction to this diagnosis. This not only decreases intrinsic cognitive load, but also provides motivation to the learner.
I have been thinking this week of the extreme importance finding the experience level of learners to motivation and effective, efficient learning. One thought I had is how do you do this with class sizes nearing 30 and students at least 5 new students arriving into the classroom who are new to the district? I would love to be able to meet with each student and understand what he or she knows, does not know and provide individual solutions to these processes. Yet, it seems time, at least as I have used it so far in my career, does not seem to allow for this. Does there exists processes and tools that I do not know about that would assist me as an instructor in making my instruction more effective to each student I teach?
I believe that I will pay much more attention to the previous experience of students in my classes. In addition, I will pay attention to the perquisite skills that I may need to provide students who do not have experience in order to make instruction more effective and meaningful to them. Gagne recommends learning hierarchies. I feel having (or creating) this piece of information would be very helpful to an instructor teaching a lesson. Another thing that I will take away from the readings this week is the importance of helping students organize and reorganize information. I hope create more concept mapping activities for students in my classes this year. This is a beneficial way to help them cognitively organize information.
I had some great interactions with students in the discussion forum this week. We discussed the importance of technology on the behaviors of people from a cultural perspective. Among other ideas, this discussion opened my eyes to the importance that is placed on technology to bring a free flow of information to the world. The question that I ask here that I hoped the discussion would go toward is: Does technology make people happy? I did not come out and ask this on the board and the conversation all went toward the benefits of technology. In spite of that, I believe Skinner (1986) in the article we discussed was looking at the world and seeing people unfulfilled by things that were easily “looked at and listened to.” He believed mankind would be happier if they did not rely on technology so much as it was so new to the evolutionary history of people. While my feelings on the matter (not voiced on the boards) are technology itself cannot make people happy. I personally believe far more organic and spiritual things do this. Yet, it cannot be denied that technology is a powerful tool to bring about positive worldwide change. This positive change can help people live lives more informed and free. Therefore, this in turn gives them a better opportunity to find happiness.
Skinner, B.F. (1986) What is wrong with daily life in the western world? American Psychologist, 1986, 41, 568-74.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)