Module 6 - Philosphy of Learning

Technology has forced education out of the traditional, knowledge-dispensing institutional model and into an ever-changing global society. As educators, our philosophy of learning must embrace this new world and create a knowledge-rich environment for our students. The single most crucial element to this new environment must be access to technology. George Siemens' asserts that knowledge is stored in networks populated by both people and electronic resources. Technology is the medium through which today's learners can most readily access these people and resources. Therfore, it is imperative that students have access to technology on a near constant basis. That is to say, providing 30 computers in a lab for hundreds of students to share is no longer an acceptable practice. Instead, as technology allows, access to the Internet needs to be provided to every student, every day in the form netbooks, PDAs, cell phones, and other personal devices.

However, simply providing teachers and students with access to these powerful technologies and networks is not enough. It is also imperative that teachers are trained in the proper use and implementation of these technologies. Too many teachers shy away from technology because they fail to see the value it has in society, they feel incompetent in the operation of this technology, or the live under the often false pretense that their students already know how to use technology effectively. These issues must be addressed, at first in professional development for current teachers and then in teacher education programs across the world. By producing teachers who are not only proficient in technology, but confident in how to implement it effectively, our students will increasingly be prepared for the ever-advancing, global society that awaits them.

Adam

Comments for this module:

http://everythingeducational.blogspot.com/2011/11/teaching-what-is-necessary.html?showComment=1322357431495#c3660652768873463918

http://bcollins-learningtheoryeducationalte.blogspot.com/2011/11/module-6-learning-in-digital-world.html?showComment=1322357606687#c2010053219372076910

Module 5 - Keller's ARCS Model

Two years ago, our district implemented a new website that, among other things, provided each teachers with space to create a classroom webpage. These classroom pages were created to be edited in-browser in an effort to make it easy to use. The district administration, to provide a consistent appearance, required all teachers to have a minimum amount of information on their pages. In other words, using the new technology was mandatory.

I was put in charge of training the staff to add content to the classroom pages. While all teachers were able to create a page and add the minimum content, very few teachers continue to use or update their classroom pages at this point in time. Using Keller’s ARCS Model for audience analysis as presented by Driscoll (2005) would have made it possible for me to more effectively motivate and inspire my colleagues to implement the technology.

Attention – My audience’s attention level was high. The training had been scheduled and announced weeks before, and the staff new that they would be required to create a page. Having a clear objective and knowing that they would have time to create their pages before they left the training session motivated them to focus and complete the task at hand; whether they agreed with the new technology or not.

Relevance – The perceived relevance of the training was low. Most of the tech-savvy teachers already had existing classroom pages through another medium, and many of the remaining staff members saw little use for a classroom webpage. In retrospect, I should have started the training by having some of the teachers who already had classroom pages share the benefits they have seen in its implementation. This would have piqued the interest of most of the remaining staff and opened their eyes to the relevance of the presentation. I could have also suggested to those teachers with existing pages that the new website would serve as yet another point of access to the sites they had already created.

Confidence – The confidence level of my audience was varied. As stated earlier, the technological know-how of our staff covers the spectrum. However, I could have used the experience of the knowledgeable staff to aid in the instruction of the less tech-savvy staff members by effectively grouping the trainees. Having someone confident with technology working closely to some of the struggling staff members could have reduced anxiety and increased confidence.

Satisfaction Potential – This aspect was likewise variable. Again, by leaning on the tech-savvy teachers on staff, less satisfied audience members may have been more willing to implement the technology effectively.  Knowing that classroom websites were already in use in the district and that several “mentors” were available to help would have made staff members more likely to view the training and potential outcomes in a positive light.

Adam

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.


Comments found at:


http://bcollins-learningtheoryeducationalte.blogspot.com/2011/11/module-5-new-technologies.html?showComment=1321152097170#c3225503974946617173


http://sgpugh3.blogspot.com/

Module 4 Blog - Connectivism

Here is my learning network. I realized after creating it just how intertwined my networks are. I used to pride myself on being able to separate my work life from my family and social life, but as I built this visual I started to see just how connected the corners of my life are. My connections at work become social connections, while several of my social connections prove to be valuable in the areas of work and continuing education. Before these networks existed, I had very few sources of credible information to turn to. Now, however, I find myself tapping into the networks of others with whom I work and socialize. This has increased my ability to access credible sources exponentially. 

Another realization I had is that I tend to use primarily social technologies to learn new information. While I began using Facebook, Twitter, and Skype simply to stay connected with friends and family, I now find myself turning to these tools in order to connect with colleagues and tap into a broader knowledge network. Each technology serves as a portal to a distinct network. While websites for professional organizations, electronic newsletters, and other technologies are still great sources for information, these social networks are the quickest and most efficient way to engage new material and find answers to my questions. 

Comment for the Module found at:

http://mboese.blogspot.com/2011/10/connectivism-mindmap.html?showComment=1319935045637#c1517904594142534949

http://rogeronblog-roger.blogspot.com/2011/10/connectivism.html

Module 3 Blog - Constructivism

I agree with Rheingold (2008) that humans have a natural propencity to collaborate and work in a social setting. While learning can certainly take place on an individual basis, the application and analysis of learned material necessary to the constructivist model requires the learner to interact with and seek support from his or her peers. Historian and futurist, Dr. David Thornburg (1996), explains the instinctive nature of learning through a metaphor based in pre-historic time. In the metaphor, he describe the campfire, the watering hole, the cave, and life as the four necessary components of a successful learning environment. Of these four learning spaces, only the cave requires that the learner be alone to reflect on what her or she has learned. Conversely, the campfire, the watering hole, and life require the learner to be engaged socially as they hear, discuss, and apply new information, respectively (Thornburg, 1996). As these examples illustrate, social interaction in a natural and essential part of learning.

In the current educational environment, the pre-historic learning spaces described by Thornburg have been replaced by interactive technology. Instead of being exposed to new information around a campfire, we can easily access expert lectures through technologies like YouTube and Skype. Websites such as Facebook and Twitter are today's watering holes, while interactive simulation technologies are giving us the opportunity to experiment in virtual worlds with little or no impact on "real" life. While technology has certainly changed the environment, social interaction remains a necessary component.

A recent study by Papanikolauo and Boubouka (2011) describes just how successful collaboration can be in the technology-rich environment of an elearning classroom. The authors suggest a four stage collaborative learning cycle in which students are presented with an open-ended problem scenario, work together to generate possible solutions, analyze the perspectives and suggestions of other student groups, and finally present a solution. Groups were able to successfully utilize both synchronous and asynchronous technologies to complete the projects assigned (Papanikolauo and Boubouka, 2011). The study is just one example of how the social component of constructivism can be successfully adapted to the online learning environment.

Papanikolauo, Kyparisia & Boubouka, Maria. (2011). Promoting collaboration in a project-based e-learning context. JRTE 43(2), pp. 135-155. Retrieved from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ907022.pdf


Rheingold, H. (2008, February). Howard Rheingold on collaboration [Video file]. Retrieved from  
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Thornburg, David D. (1996). Campfires in cyberspace. San Carlos, CA: Starsong Publications.

Comments found on the following blogs:

http://jancutforth.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/module-3-cooperation-collaboration/#comment-6

http://kscott317.blogspot.com/2011/10/module-3-educ-7105.html

EDUC 7105 - Module 2

The conversation begun by Kerr (2007) and Kapp (2007) on learning theory has sparked important debate and collaboration aimed at identifying the best pieces of each major theory. The relevancy of this conversation is evident in both the growing number of contributers and commenters as well as the fact that, now four years later, it continues to draw readers and their opinions on the topic.

So why is it that, decades, and even centuries, after these learning theories were introduced, educators are still trying to figure them out? The answer is simple: while each of the –isms is useful in the appropriate scenario, the conditions, culture, and eclecticism under which we teach seldom provide us with the ideal environment for one theory over another. This situational diversity is most likely what prompted Kerr (2007) to caution us not to view any one learning theory as superior to the others, and to make a whole-hearted effort to incorporate the best pieces of Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and Connectivism into our teaching repertoire. Kapp (2007) offers a slightly different suggestion in which each learning theory is appropriate to a different level of learning: Behaviorism for low-level tasks, Cognitivism for “procedural and rule-based learning" tasks, and the former two theories for higher-level thinking, such as project-based learning.

Personally, I agree with both Kerr and Kapp. Having a working knowledge of each learning theory, its strengths and weaknesses, is essential. This knowledge allows teachers to assess their objectives and apply an appropriate learning model. However, many teachers possess this knowledge and still struggle to implement these theories effectively. I believe that a recent response to Kerr’s blog addresses the issue. In it, a commenter who identifies himself as Software Trainer/Technology Coordinator (2010), suggests:

“Since no two people are alike, we will never get to a point where one -ism will serve all. Therefore, the prudent course of action at this point may be to extend this dialog beyond the brain trust and move it amongst the students.”

It seems that we have left a certain group of experts in learning theory out of the discussion: the learners themselves. By finding out what works for our students, we will better be able to utilize our knowledge of learning theory, not just on a situational basis, but on the individual level as well. It sounds complicated, but it’s worth having a conversation about.

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log     post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html


Comments found on:


http://rakinahfletcher.blogspot.com


http://kscott317.blogspot.com/

Metaphors for Teaching - EDUC 7105 Module 1

There are many anecdotes, analogies, and metaphors to describe the various jobs of an educator. Siemens (2008) puts forward five such metaphors: the Master Artist, Network Administrator, Concierge, Curator, and Instructivist/Constructivist. While each of these metaphors suggests the importance of recognizing student achievement and providing meaningful learning resources and experiences, one of them stands out as being particularly applicable to online learning; the Concierge. 

In the real world, a concierge’s job is to know his or her customers and to be knowledgeable about the area. This allows the concierge to point customers towards restaurants and other attractions that they might enjoy. Likewise, the instructor’s job is not only to understand a student’s goals, strengths, and learning styles, but also to direct him or her towards appropriate learning materials in order to deepen understanding (Siemens, 2008). This ability is essential for instructors in the online environment where the facilitation of learning is emphasized much more so than in most traditional, face-to-face classrooms. The role of the concierge also provides students with the opportunity to experience learning as defined by Driscoll (2005), who states that learning, “must come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the world” (pg. 9). There is no more qualified person to direct learners out into the world and provide them with meaningful experiences than a teacher.

Perhaps the only more all-encompassing metaphor for the job of teaching would be that of the Shoe Salesman. I liken my experience as a shoe salesman to that of a concierge in that I also had to know my customers’ goals and preferences in order to match them with the appropriate shoes. However, I had the added task of assessing problems with their existing shoes, as well as the opportunity to suggest additional accessories to go with their new purchases. As an educator, it is also important that I assess and attempt to solve any problems that a student may have. Educators also have the opportunity to provide extensions to assignments and to suggest optional resources they believe to be beneficial.

On a side note: As we read about and discussed behaviorism during this module, I could not help but be reminded of a scene from one of my favorite television shows. I thought this to be an appropriate venue to share it with you. Enjoy.

"Sheldon Trains Penny" - The Big Bang Theory

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA:

Pearson Education, Inc.

Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for

educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf


Module 1 Comments:


http://bcollins-learningtheoryeducationalte.blogspot.com/


http://everythingeducational.blogspot.com/2011/09/is-this-learning-or-just-pressing.html