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.