Module 6 Responses

I posted responses to Karen and Aimee for Module 6.

Learning in a Digital Age

Learning is a life-long event that is the central focus to all our accomplishments.  Learning occurs across the spectrum of favorable circumstances and negative ones.  It is not only about what happens in school.  We learn every day of our lives and can benefit from having some level of control over our learning.  I have sat in classrooms as a student, learned while teaching, participated in book studies, completed online classes, and struggled through hands on experiments.  All of these produced learning, although some were more effective than others.  Critical elements include focus, willingness, and, in some regards, aptitude.  I can zone out during a training session and learn something, just not the topic of the training!  I can enter into a book study grudgingly, and learn very little about the book.  I can sit in a science class, and due to my lack of schema, struggle to master the troublesome material.  The nonnegotiable elements in teaching are garnering the attention of the students, demonstrate the relevance of the material, and scaffold the learning to avoid student frustration.  Many adult learners have the ability to manage their own learning by establishing focus and willingness on their own.  They will study supplemental material or find a tutor to master material above their learning level.  That responsibility transfers to the teacher for our younger learners, however.  Part of the learning process for them is to develop those self-management skills.

The concepts of focus, willingness, and aptitude tie in with key learning theories.  John Keller’s ARCS model addresses the elements of attention and relevance.  A student can apply a level of focus if the teacher captures their attention on the material.  Sometimes the student shows interest in spite of the teacher due to an innate interest in the subject.  The role of the teacher is to capture their interest if it is not naturally occurring.  Willingness relates to relevance.  When a student identifies the value in the learning, they are willing to give the lesson their full attention.  The aptitude of every student varies across all subjects.  In a single classroom, a teacher encounters students with various aptitude levels.  Lev Vygotsky’s proposed the concept of scaffolding to address these differing levels.  His learning theory suggests that each learner has a zone of proximal development.  If the material is above the learner’s ability level, he or she will struggle to mastery.  Some students will shut down and cease to learn entirely.  This is also true at the other end of the spectrum.  If the material is substantially below the student’s learning level, he or she might sleep through class!  It is quite a balancing act to meet the learning needs of students across such a wide spectrum. 

Further information:

ARCS model:

http://www.arcsmodel.com/ 

Vygotsky:

http://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html

Responses to Module 5

I posted responses for Module 5 to Aderonke and Joshua Sherman.

Module 5 - New Technologies

A few years ago my principal asked me to train fellow teachers on the use of a lesson plan software system purchased by our district.  This system had the ability to format lesson plans, attach state objectives to each plan, track the use of the state objectives, and automatically update administration for each plan.  It accomplished everything the district required of teachers for documentation of lesson plans.  My love of technology and desire to locate new tools to accomplish required tasks supported my desire to teach the class.  In my naïveté, I assumed everyone would see the value of the system and eagerly learn how to put it to proper use.   

            I certainly misunderstood my audience.  Even before the training session began I received abundant questions and complaints.  Many teachers felt the requirement for documentation infringed on their independence in the classroom.  They attended the training session because the district required them to do so.  Their apprehension about the intent behind the program’s use and how difficult it would be to use colored their willingness to learn.  The session began with many participants covertly hostile.  They grudgingly sat and listened and performed the activities set in front of them.  When they walked out of the training, I knew that 90% of them never intended to use the software again.  This response occurred across all the schools in my district.  A few people used the program sparingly for the next two years and then the program faded from the system.   

            Now I ask, what could be done to change the response to this failed implementation?  One of the first problems to address is the apprehension related to increased documentation.  The audience was not ready to learn how to use the program.  They were still too concerned about the heavier burden they perceived it represented.  Following Keller’s ARCS model, I would recommend the following steps for handling a similar situation: 

Keller’s ARCS model 

A:  Attention 

R:  Relevance 

C:  Confidence 

S:  Satisfaction 

1.    Attention – Before beginning the training, gain the attention of the audience.  The first time the teachers hear about this new program should not coincide with increased documenting responsibilities.  Advance notification of these requirements, along with a time frame for implementation, would help in this area.  There are valid reasons to provide documentation that pertain to each teacher.  There is increasing evidence of lawsuits by parents when teachers do not teach the established curriculum.  Having documentation that you cover all state objectives in your classroom provides insurance from these lawsuits.  The program should be offered as a time saving solution to this documentation problem.  As soon as the presenter convinces the group of the need, it will be easier to grasp their attention when providing an efficient solution to the problem.  Sustaining their attention is the next critical need.  The design of the training was hands on and could have accomplished this task.  There were several helpers walking around giving assistance as needed and helping to diffuse the diversity in the learner’s abilities.   

2.    Relevance – This ties into the method for gaining their attention.  The relevance perceived by each teacher connects to the understanding of the need for documentation.  They need assured that they must provide the documentation using some method.  The software would be a fast and easy method, and thus supplies the most logical choice. 

3.    Confidence – Several of the participants needed positive feedback and reassurance about the software usage.  Assuring enough trainers assist in the presentation is critical for individual feedback.  The trainers need to be proficient in the usage of the program, so they can instill confidence in the students. 

4.    Satisfaction – Emphasizing the natural consequences of using this program will be helpful for the participants.  Teachers show interest in tools that are easy to use, and provide a more efficient way to complete required duties.  This training needed to emphasize those features continuously through the demonstration. 

References

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

Responses for Module 4

I have posted responses for Module 4 to Sandra Johnson and Debbie Stripling.

Module 4 - Connections

Learning occurs in multiple segments of my network.  I learn through discussions, observations, reading web sites, sharing blogs, completing online book studies, modifying and using shared resources, and so many more.  As I went through the mind mapping process, I identified some common networking themes.  Five years ago, Facebook and blogs would not have made my list.  Now they are communication tools in several nodes of my map.  The biggest change is in the quantity of connection styles available in all areas. 

Networks and the growing magnitude of digital tools are enriching communication and learning in my life.  There are so many avenues available to get information.  Learning new material allows me to explore in many different areas and not be restricted in my research.  If one approach is slow or unproductive, I can easily switch to a different one.  This ability to fluctuate between styles has improved the learning process for me.  It also makes things interesting and keeps my attention focused. 

The digital tools facilitating my learning are predominantly computer based.  My laptop, a desktop at work, and a smart phone provide instant connectivity.  I have access to work through Citrix on my laptop, so location does not impact my ability to work.  I am exploring the idea of adding and Ipad or EReader to my digital tools.  I feel they may have an element of being digital toys, however, so I have refrained so far.  We have a Smart TV with Internet access connected to a DVR where we can be connected while delaying our television viewing to a convenient time. 

On our recent vacation to Indonesia, we rented a villa in Bali.  There were seven adults in our group.  We had three laptops, one Ipad, one EReader, seven smart phones, and two “dumb” cell phones between us.  Two people in our group purchased SIM cards as we entered the country.  Having a cheap, local phone for communication was an obvious benefit.  On several occasions, we found ourselves sitting in this beautiful place with our digital toys posting to Facebook, sharing photos from the day, and having Skype conversations with friends and family.  I posted my class work on schedule with my classmates and professors unaware of my change in location. 

My new style of learning goes beyond the hardware.  When we are out to dinner puzzling over a question, someone in the group will pull out an Iphone to research the answer.  At home searching, someone will Google using one of the five computers in the house to come up with options.  I have not used a phone book in years and routinely recycle them when they arrive at my house.  My father, who is about to turn 90, uses an Ipad for reading the newspaper and books, working puzzles, playing games, accessing his bank information, and ordering prescription drugs.  He can increase font size, turn up the volume, and easily carry this eminently practical tool.

Ready access to data and communication is changing the scope of learning today.  This is true at home and hopefully in school.  Students are using these tools even if schools are behind in adoption of these practices.  I have to ask myself, if my 90-year-old father can do this, why are local schools having so much trouble?

Consider checking out the list of ten blogs on social learning.  This looks like an interesting link for blogs related to learning and networking with technology. http://www.blogs.com/topten/top-10-social-learning-blogs/

Module 3 - Responses

I posted responses for module 3 to

Joshua Sherman at http://shermanlearningtheoryandedtech.blogspot.com/2011/07/module-3-post-1-joshua-sherman.html#comments

Aderonke at
http://baedutech.blogspot.com/2011/07/collaboration-educ-8845-module-3.html#comments

Module 3 - Constructivism

Individuals vary on the desire to collaborate and interact with a group.  When designed and moderated, group activities can improve learning in the classroom.  There are numerous studies that support this concept.  Careful teacher training to facilitate collaborative learning is important, however. 

     My children hate group projects and select individual work if given the choice.  This is not because they dislike other people.  They are very social and enjoy the company of their peers.  The problem stems from a lack of skill in working in a group.  In several instances, the assignment of a group project deteriorated into a social disaster.  Some humans may exhibit a basic instinct for group work, but many need to learn the interpersonal skills required to be successful.  Part of the collaborative process has to be establishing norms and a requirement for equitable participation. 

       Collaboration among adults can suffer from a similar fate.  True collaboration requires a conscientious effort on the part of each member of the team.  One person cannot take the role of leader and run roughshod over the other group members.  The inverse is also a concern.  If every member of the group tiptoes through the process no one accepts the role of coordinator, the project will stall.  This illustrates that establishing norms and communication, even among adults, facilitates the collaboration process. 

       Technology is useful in the development of a collaborative group.  Using technology eliminates the need for physical proximity.  This means collaboration can take place in venues like Google Documents using tools such as Skype.  Graphic organizers can assist with the process of synthesizing ideas presented by various group members.  The use of technology for research to support decision-making allows each group member to contribute to the final product. 

       The education process needs to include the development of skills that facilitate collaborative learning.  Teaching behavioral expectations for group interactions will develop workers prepared for collaborative assignments.  Once students master these skills and strategies, the prospect of group projects will no longer bring on a feeling of dread.  This preparation will also support the learning gains evidenced in the collaborative process.

Further reading and resources on this topic can be found at:

Gupta, A. (2008). Constructivism and Peer Collaboration in Elementary Mathematics Education: The Connection to Epistemology. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(4), 381-386. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Vaas, E. & Littleton, K. (2010). Peer collaboration and learning in the classroom.  In K. Littleton, C. Wood, & J.K. Staarman (Eds.), International Handbook of Psychology in Education (p. 105-139). Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing.  Retrieved July 11, 2011, from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=tNepO17yQO4C&oi=fnd&pg=PA105&dq=+Peer+collaboration+and+learning+in+the+classroom+E+Vass&ots=4AV-SuPU1o&sig=qAd2c-0pBD8KSnivRuZ9sA8uCYc#v=onepage&q&f=false

Tinzmann, M.B., Jones, B.F., Fennimore, Bakker, T.F., Fine, J., C., and Pierce, J. (1990). The Collaborative Classroom.  Retrieved July 11, 2011, from http://www.arp.sprnet.org/admin/supt/collab2.htm

Module 2 Blog Responses

Blog responses for module 2 - Candice Jones and P. LaPollo.

Cognitivism as a Learning Theory

       The statement by Kerr in the blog from January 2007 summarizes the learning theory debate nicely.  He states that each theory is contributing something useful to an overall picture.  None of the strategies is complete in and of themselves (Kerr, 2007).  The debates and arguments over which theory should be employed in education fail to look at the overall picture.  Behaviorism cannot be abandoned as an instructional method.  It has its place in the learning environment.  Children and adults respond to reward systems, and they can be used successfully in fostering a positive attitude toward learning. 

       As I read through the dialogs referenced, Kerr seems to suggest the concepts function in a pyramid design.  Behaviorism is particularly useful in for memory type learning with lower level cognitive requirements.  The structure exemplifies cognitivism when the learning level advances to procedural learning.  Problem solving involving collaboration and creativity call for constructivism.  Each learner progresses through these learning stages for different learning concepts.  To attempt problem solving and collaboration without a proper foundation is problematic.  A teacher should use all the learning theories when developing a curriculum unit.

       Kapp introduces an intriguing idea into the learning theory discussion- the link between humanity and machines.  As we program computers to complete routine human tasks, we are creating a learning machine. They can make the rote memorization of material a pointless task.  Why should students memorize history facts when a simple Google search will provide sufficient information?  Is the availability of base level information on a computer sufficient?

       I believe that memorization and behaviorist rewards should not be the core strategy for a learning environment.  They have their place in a complete learning program, however.  It is not reasonable to begin the learning process at the higher-level learning platform.  A foundation of knowledge provides the schema needed to foster cognition and subsequently constructivism. 

       Please refer to the original blog postings for background information and a review on these topics.

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

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/

Blog Responses

I have posted blog responses to Aimee Cothran and Kevin Steele.

Module 1

What are your beliefs about how people learn best? What is the purpose of learning theory in educational technology?

My thoughts on how people learn best immediately focus on adolescents.  As a 7^th grade teacher, the majority of my experience is with this age group.  The adolescent learner is probably unique in many of their learning needs.  From my observations, they need to be involved in the learning process, see the relevance in material, and be motivated to succeed.  This view reflects the constructivist theory which defines learning as an active process of constructing knowledge through personal experiences.  This presents a continual challenge for a teacher to search for relevance and assure student involvement.  The third element of motivation is more difficult to understand and control.  It is very difficult to motivate an adolescent learner.  I have tried behaviorist type reward systems and have had some success.  The results are unpredictable and erratic especially with a convergence of many other influences in a teenager’s life. 

            Do these observations of adolescents apply to younger and older learners?  Based on some of the readings it would seem this is the case.  Human development supports the ideas of behaviorism as a learning theory for all age groups.  Adults tend to perform work tasks thoroughly when they are actively interested in the content of the work.  The growing mass of information available through the Internet stimulates active adult learning by allowing web searches and information gathering of topics of interest.  The ease at gathering volumes of information supports an active learning process.

            For further reading on this topic, I have attached links to three student blogs from this same course in preceding terms.  I find it fascinating reading through a wide variety of information and pondering my own opinion.

http://learningtechtalk.blogspot.com/2011/03/module-1-how-do-people-learn-best.html

http://ldart7105blog.blogspot.com/2011/03/week-1-blog-post.html

http://lochneruni.blogspot.com/2011/03/educ-8845-module-1_11.html

What is the purpose of learning theory in educational technology?

            Educational technology is an emerging field for delivering curriculum and instruction.  The development of this field depends on anchoring advances in the field to established learning theories.  In an article by George Siemens, he outlines the changing role of the educator in this environment (Siemens, 2008, p. 15).  The process of aligning the role of the educator to foundation learning theory will contribute to successful adoption of educational technology in the classroom.  For additional reading on this and related topics the following link proves very useful:

http://www.elearnspace.org/edutechblogs.htm

            As a teacher evaluates a website, consideration should include evaluation for strategic learning principles.  Understanding how a website incorporates learning theory into the design will assure successful student achievement.  Many websites are task oriented and provide an intrinsic reward system.  This design seems especially relevant to contemporary learning theory.   

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

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