09 September 2010
08 September 2010
Synopsis
The Smart Classrooms Bytes (Queensland Government (Department of Education, Training and the Arts), 2008, pp. 2-3) have identified eLearning as “comprising of three interrelated and co-dependent components:
1. Digital Pedagogy
2. Digital Content (including eCurriculum)
3. eLearning Spaces
These components co-exist to create the conditions for a new generation of digital learners.”
eLearning is not simply about using digital tools, it is about integrating and utilising digital tools in everyday situations and learning experiences. Game based pedagogy utilising digital tools is not an adequate use of digital pedagogy, these are simply activities which may provide practice and rote learning in behaviourist style pedagogy, however these strategies do not enhance and refine knowledge nor do they align with a constructivists or connectedness learning style. E-learning is about incorporating digital tools into pedagogy, this is achieved by students contributing, constructing and engaging with content through authentic investigations, research, and collaboration while exploring the applications of digital tools.
E-learning in a primary teaching context resembles to a large degree that of a constructivist approach to pedagogy, the main difference being that pen and paper and a one-dimensional student or teacher directed approach has been replaced with students engaging using digital tools individually but collaboratively to achieve outcomes.
There are many safety issues to consider when managing a group of primary learners. The Queensland State education Department provides many policies and guidelines for the strict use of Internet sites and tools in learning sites are becoming more efficient at sourcing suitable software, courseware and tools. This being said there is substantial room for improvement both in availability and meaningful engagement for learning contexts. There needs to be further development to allow students to access the whole digital world safely and effectively, removing the risk and dangers should be the driving priority for Governments.
The extent of the use of digital tools in primary learning sites depends on the age and proficiency level of the cohort, for instance grade one students may only begin by engaging with the use of the keyboard and mouse to gain proficiency through game play. That is not to say that these games cannot be content based or interactive. The term interactive in this context means that the students are constructing and being provided with immediate feedback.
The opportunities for learning in primary learning sites are varied. According to Queensland government Department of Education Training and the Arts, smart classroom (2008 page 3), students deepen and create knowledge, build ideas, solutions, products and plans, communicate, share and work collaboratively, legally, ethically and safely to develop new thinking, learning and problem solving. Its opportunities present themselves through the use of such digital tools as blogs, wikis, concept maps, web pages to name a few. Used responsibly and managed closely these tools, because of their portability are available to students via various modes such as outside school for homework, extended absences, group work, field work and for enabling connection and collaboration amongst peers, communities and experts.
Digital pedagogy and the learning is imperative for the continued engagement of today’s digital natives, whether you agree with the notion of digital natives or not. In the context of lifelong learning, sociocultural construction and connectedness approaches, learning managers would be considered negligent in not providing students with learning opportunities which directly relate and prepare them for life beyond schooling. Already students return home each day to engage in their real world, after being exposed to classrooms which at best merely provide activities utilising digital tools (Prensky, 2005, p. 64).
I have selected the following digital tools for the following learning purposes:
• blogs
• wikis
• concept map
• Speech Recognition Software
The reason I selected the above tools is that they align with Digital pedagogy and lifelong learning (Queensland Government (Department of Education, Training and the Arts), 2008)and connectivism (Siemens, 2004). There were other tools explored which will not be discussed, however these also align with these theories.
Blogs
A blog is a page which can be accessed via the internet; it is created and developed by the author. Visitors to the blog are invited to review the information provided and to post comments about that information, visitors can not alter a blog page. The blog is a series of chronological entries made by the author similar to that of a journal. Opportunities for students to collaborate and contribute their comments and opinions, presents digital versions of conversations, knowledge construction, peer assessment and new ways of problem-solving. The choice of content should be related to the students real world focus and identify authentic problems or situations requiring analysis and solutions. Providing opportunities for students to engage in meaningful discussions toward this orientating phase would provide student constructed, collaborative learning. This type of engagement contributes towards higher order thinking and long term memory retention. This digital tool could be utilised in any of the three phases of the Engagement Theory framework (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999, p. 1), Relate – Create – Donate.
Wiki
A wiki is a page which can be accessed via the Internet, it is created by an individual, however visitors to the wiki have the opportunity to alter the content without being identified. This characteristic lends itself to corruption and graffiti, and in turn renders the content unreliable. Because of the anonymity, there is the risk of cyber bullying and other inappropriate behaviour. It is for this reason that a wiki loses its appeal in educational settings.
Concept Map
The concept map is a great tool which has been used without a digital emphasis and certainly the concept map model recommended for use during this course replicates the non-digital version, even though the construction of the concept map utilised digital tools, this particular version offers limited uses and lacks the ability to provide meaningful use post construction. However there is great scope for the use of digital, interactive concept maps such as Cmap (Novak & Canas, 2008). The blog entry (Scully, 2010) gives examples of both concept maps. Traditionally the concept map is used for organising and representing knowledge within a series of boxes, lines link boxes containing concepts. Concepts are represented in hierarchical manner beginning with the most general concept at the top and branching out to more specific concepts toward the bottom. The boxes traditionally contain keywords or phrases, however with the use of the second example, images, sound, videos, documents, and web links have been added to enhance knowledge construction and meaning and offers the reader the ability to further their understanding while maintaining in the unexpanded view the traditional succinct version. The traditional concept map provides benefits to organising prior/learnt knowledge (Marzano & Pickering, 1997, pp. 61-72), however if the goal of all learning is to embed knowledge into long-term memory then the use of the knowledge is paramount to this purpose. Concept maps help the brain to organise knowledge from working memory and processes this into long-term memory storage, but the second example of the concept map helps to promote deeper and higher order thinking because of its multimodal learning capabilities (Metiri Group, 2008, pp. 24-25). Furthermore the interactive concept map has the ability to “reduce cognitive load associated with searching for relations between the text and the diagram” (Sweller, 1998).
Speech Recognition Software
Speech recognition software has come a long way over the years. Not only has this technology developed great training tools but the scope of application has increased due to its continued reliability. The opportunities within learning sites extend beyond learning by students in traditional ways, hearing impaired students can use this tool to practice articulating sounds and words. Those students who have difficulty writing due to physical impairment can also be provided with opportunity to express their learning in meaningful authentic ways. Students who have difficulty overcoming the mental block associated with getting thoughts into written words can bypass the pen or keyboard and utilise their perceived strength of verbal preference. The outcomes are not compromised, proof reading skills are enhanced, students are engaged and behaviour management addressed. There are setup issues, however, once a user profile has been established and the software trained the software works well and can be a standalone program for use with whichever computer the user requires. A demonstration of this particular software’s (Voicerecognition.com.au Pty.Ltd, 2010) capabilities is embedded in the blog entry (Scully, 2010).
References
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1999, May 4). Engagement Theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from moodle.cqu.edu.au: http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm
Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (1997). Dimensions of learning : Teacher's manual (2nd ed.). Aurora, Colarado: McREL.
Metiri Group. (2008). Multimodal learning through media : What the research says. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from CISCO: http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/Multimodal-Learning-Through-Media.pdf
Novak, J. D., & Canas, A. J. (2008, January). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from Institute for Human and Machine Cognition: http://cmap.ihmc.us/publications/researchpapers/theorycmaps/theoryunderlyingconceptmaps.htm
Prensky, M. (2005). Engage me or enrage me : What today's learners demand. EDUCAUSE , 60-64.
Queensland Government (Department of Education, Training and the Arts). (2008, August). Smart Classrooms Bytes. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from Queensland Education: http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/
Scully, M. J. (2010, July). E-Learnings a BUZZ! Retrieved July 2010, from blogspot: http://mezza68.blogspot.com/
Siemens, G. (2004, December 12). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from elearnspace: http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from Theory Into Practice (TIP) database: http://tip.psychology.org/sweller.html
Voicerecognition.com.au Pty.Ltd. (2010, August 28). Dragon Naturally Speaking. Canberra, ACT.
1. Digital Pedagogy
2. Digital Content (including eCurriculum)
3. eLearning Spaces
These components co-exist to create the conditions for a new generation of digital learners.”
eLearning is not simply about using digital tools, it is about integrating and utilising digital tools in everyday situations and learning experiences. Game based pedagogy utilising digital tools is not an adequate use of digital pedagogy, these are simply activities which may provide practice and rote learning in behaviourist style pedagogy, however these strategies do not enhance and refine knowledge nor do they align with a constructivists or connectedness learning style. E-learning is about incorporating digital tools into pedagogy, this is achieved by students contributing, constructing and engaging with content through authentic investigations, research, and collaboration while exploring the applications of digital tools.
E-learning in a primary teaching context resembles to a large degree that of a constructivist approach to pedagogy, the main difference being that pen and paper and a one-dimensional student or teacher directed approach has been replaced with students engaging using digital tools individually but collaboratively to achieve outcomes.
There are many safety issues to consider when managing a group of primary learners. The Queensland State education Department provides many policies and guidelines for the strict use of Internet sites and tools in learning sites are becoming more efficient at sourcing suitable software, courseware and tools. This being said there is substantial room for improvement both in availability and meaningful engagement for learning contexts. There needs to be further development to allow students to access the whole digital world safely and effectively, removing the risk and dangers should be the driving priority for Governments.
The extent of the use of digital tools in primary learning sites depends on the age and proficiency level of the cohort, for instance grade one students may only begin by engaging with the use of the keyboard and mouse to gain proficiency through game play. That is not to say that these games cannot be content based or interactive. The term interactive in this context means that the students are constructing and being provided with immediate feedback.
The opportunities for learning in primary learning sites are varied. According to Queensland government Department of Education Training and the Arts, smart classroom (2008 page 3), students deepen and create knowledge, build ideas, solutions, products and plans, communicate, share and work collaboratively, legally, ethically and safely to develop new thinking, learning and problem solving. Its opportunities present themselves through the use of such digital tools as blogs, wikis, concept maps, web pages to name a few. Used responsibly and managed closely these tools, because of their portability are available to students via various modes such as outside school for homework, extended absences, group work, field work and for enabling connection and collaboration amongst peers, communities and experts.
Digital pedagogy and the learning is imperative for the continued engagement of today’s digital natives, whether you agree with the notion of digital natives or not. In the context of lifelong learning, sociocultural construction and connectedness approaches, learning managers would be considered negligent in not providing students with learning opportunities which directly relate and prepare them for life beyond schooling. Already students return home each day to engage in their real world, after being exposed to classrooms which at best merely provide activities utilising digital tools (Prensky, 2005, p. 64).
I have selected the following digital tools for the following learning purposes:
• blogs
• wikis
• concept map
• Speech Recognition Software
The reason I selected the above tools is that they align with Digital pedagogy and lifelong learning (Queensland Government (Department of Education, Training and the Arts), 2008)and connectivism (Siemens, 2004). There were other tools explored which will not be discussed, however these also align with these theories.
Blogs
A blog is a page which can be accessed via the internet; it is created and developed by the author. Visitors to the blog are invited to review the information provided and to post comments about that information, visitors can not alter a blog page. The blog is a series of chronological entries made by the author similar to that of a journal. Opportunities for students to collaborate and contribute their comments and opinions, presents digital versions of conversations, knowledge construction, peer assessment and new ways of problem-solving. The choice of content should be related to the students real world focus and identify authentic problems or situations requiring analysis and solutions. Providing opportunities for students to engage in meaningful discussions toward this orientating phase would provide student constructed, collaborative learning. This type of engagement contributes towards higher order thinking and long term memory retention. This digital tool could be utilised in any of the three phases of the Engagement Theory framework (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999, p. 1), Relate – Create – Donate.
Wiki
A wiki is a page which can be accessed via the Internet, it is created by an individual, however visitors to the wiki have the opportunity to alter the content without being identified. This characteristic lends itself to corruption and graffiti, and in turn renders the content unreliable. Because of the anonymity, there is the risk of cyber bullying and other inappropriate behaviour. It is for this reason that a wiki loses its appeal in educational settings.
Concept Map
The concept map is a great tool which has been used without a digital emphasis and certainly the concept map model recommended for use during this course replicates the non-digital version, even though the construction of the concept map utilised digital tools, this particular version offers limited uses and lacks the ability to provide meaningful use post construction. However there is great scope for the use of digital, interactive concept maps such as Cmap (Novak & Canas, 2008). The blog entry (Scully, 2010) gives examples of both concept maps. Traditionally the concept map is used for organising and representing knowledge within a series of boxes, lines link boxes containing concepts. Concepts are represented in hierarchical manner beginning with the most general concept at the top and branching out to more specific concepts toward the bottom. The boxes traditionally contain keywords or phrases, however with the use of the second example, images, sound, videos, documents, and web links have been added to enhance knowledge construction and meaning and offers the reader the ability to further their understanding while maintaining in the unexpanded view the traditional succinct version. The traditional concept map provides benefits to organising prior/learnt knowledge (Marzano & Pickering, 1997, pp. 61-72), however if the goal of all learning is to embed knowledge into long-term memory then the use of the knowledge is paramount to this purpose. Concept maps help the brain to organise knowledge from working memory and processes this into long-term memory storage, but the second example of the concept map helps to promote deeper and higher order thinking because of its multimodal learning capabilities (Metiri Group, 2008, pp. 24-25). Furthermore the interactive concept map has the ability to “reduce cognitive load associated with searching for relations between the text and the diagram” (Sweller, 1998).
Speech Recognition Software
Speech recognition software has come a long way over the years. Not only has this technology developed great training tools but the scope of application has increased due to its continued reliability. The opportunities within learning sites extend beyond learning by students in traditional ways, hearing impaired students can use this tool to practice articulating sounds and words. Those students who have difficulty writing due to physical impairment can also be provided with opportunity to express their learning in meaningful authentic ways. Students who have difficulty overcoming the mental block associated with getting thoughts into written words can bypass the pen or keyboard and utilise their perceived strength of verbal preference. The outcomes are not compromised, proof reading skills are enhanced, students are engaged and behaviour management addressed. There are setup issues, however, once a user profile has been established and the software trained the software works well and can be a standalone program for use with whichever computer the user requires. A demonstration of this particular software’s (Voicerecognition.com.au Pty.Ltd, 2010) capabilities is embedded in the blog entry (Scully, 2010).
References
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1999, May 4). Engagement Theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from moodle.cqu.edu.au: http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm
Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (1997). Dimensions of learning : Teacher's manual (2nd ed.). Aurora, Colarado: McREL.
Metiri Group. (2008). Multimodal learning through media : What the research says. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from CISCO: http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/Multimodal-Learning-Through-Media.pdf
Novak, J. D., & Canas, A. J. (2008, January). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from Institute for Human and Machine Cognition: http://cmap.ihmc.us/publications/researchpapers/theorycmaps/theoryunderlyingconceptmaps.htm
Prensky, M. (2005). Engage me or enrage me : What today's learners demand. EDUCAUSE , 60-64.
Queensland Government (Department of Education, Training and the Arts). (2008, August). Smart Classrooms Bytes. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from Queensland Education: http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/
Scully, M. J. (2010, July). E-Learnings a BUZZ! Retrieved July 2010, from blogspot: http://mezza68.blogspot.com/
Siemens, G. (2004, December 12). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from elearnspace: http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from Theory Into Practice (TIP) database: http://tip.psychology.org/sweller.html
Voicerecognition.com.au Pty.Ltd. (2010, August 28). Dragon Naturally Speaking. Canberra, ACT.
Digital Tool 3: Blog
A blog (or weblog) is "a public web site where users post informal journals of their thoughts, comments, and philosophies, updated frequently and normally reflecting the views of the blog's creator" (E-Learning Glossary ).
28 July 2010
Digital Tool 2: Concept Map
Concept maps are graphical tools for organizing and representing knowledge.
They allow for the categorisation of concepts in a hierarchal manner. This categorisation process is necessary for the first step of cognitive function as well as the first step to long term memory retention and higher order thinking.
This second concept map is an example of how the traditional static concept map can be transformed into an interactive higher order thinking, demonstration of deep understanding and links to long term memory retention.
14 July 2010
Learning Styles
Learning Styles Inventory - Results Page
For User: Mary Scully
Your results
These are the results of your inventory. The scores are out of 20 for each style. A score of 20 indicates you use that style often.
Memletic Learning Styles Graph:
Discover your style by following this link
According to Learning-styles-online.com (Advanogy.com, 2003-2007), I have a preference for a predominantly solitary and logical learning style, however since the scores are almost equal, the presumption is that I have strengths across most styles with exception to visual and aural. Most who know me will argue about the aural score as even I recognise my inability to stop talking until you delve deeper and discover that this style is referring to learners who “like to work with sound and music” (Advanogy.com, 2003-2007).
I have only recently discovered the type of learning which suits me best:
• Simultaneously listening to lecturers, reading power point, writing what I hear and highlighting in various colours;
• Set a goal to achieve;
• Plan how I will achieve the goal;
• Work alone;
• Limit disruptions;
• Total immersion in topic;
• Explaining new knowledge to others;
• Applying new knowledge.
Only when I have had the opportunity to participate in all these activities can I truly achieve deeper understanding. However, I use different strengths for different situations.
As I said earlier, I have only recently discovered what works best for me, this has occurred due to a lot of trial and error, critical thinking about my current abilities and achievements, and consultation with professionals who have helped guide me and offer meaningful suggestions and strategies.
In a typical classroom, many students may not have consciously developed their own preference, they may need multiple opportunities to discover, refine and extend their ability to learn utilising their preferred style. As a future learning manager, I will provide a variety of opportunities for learners to engage, which will include ICT’s and digital pedagogy.
For User: Mary Scully
Your results
These are the results of your inventory. The scores are out of 20 for each style. A score of 20 indicates you use that style often.
Memletic Learning Styles Graph:
Style Scores
Visual 7
Social 14
Physical 13
Aural 4
Verbal 15
Solitary 16
Logical 16
According to Learning-styles-online.com (Advanogy.com, 2003-2007), I have a preference for a predominantly solitary and logical learning style, however since the scores are almost equal, the presumption is that I have strengths across most styles with exception to visual and aural. Most who know me will argue about the aural score as even I recognise my inability to stop talking until you delve deeper and discover that this style is referring to learners who “like to work with sound and music” (Advanogy.com, 2003-2007).
I have only recently discovered the type of learning which suits me best:
• Simultaneously listening to lecturers, reading power point, writing what I hear and highlighting in various colours;
• Set a goal to achieve;
• Plan how I will achieve the goal;
• Work alone;
• Limit disruptions;
• Total immersion in topic;
• Explaining new knowledge to others;
• Applying new knowledge.
Only when I have had the opportunity to participate in all these activities can I truly achieve deeper understanding. However, I use different strengths for different situations.
As I said earlier, I have only recently discovered what works best for me, this has occurred due to a lot of trial and error, critical thinking about my current abilities and achievements, and consultation with professionals who have helped guide me and offer meaningful suggestions and strategies.
In a typical classroom, many students may not have consciously developed their own preference, they may need multiple opportunities to discover, refine and extend their ability to learn utilising their preferred style. As a future learning manager, I will provide a variety of opportunities for learners to engage, which will include ICT’s and digital pedagogy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)