I decided to wrap up my thoughts on what I have learned in this book and in class, much like the final chapter of Bransford's book. I think the process of teaching and learning in a successful way parallels another model that I learned in my undergrad business classes, the software development cycle. The idea of this being a cycle is something important to grasp. Just when you think you have solved current issues or problems, it is basically time to go back to the drawing board in order to repeat the process. These are the five pieces to the software development cycle with and educational spin:
Define - It is important to define and assess your needs. From a teaching and learning perspective, this is where learning goals are defined and established. Teachers enter the classroom with an objective and goal to transfer knowledge to learners.
Design - Requirements and standards defined by teachers, school, community and government drive the design process. The learning environment is created with the appropriate tools and concepts needed to meet the goals. This phase compiles the tools and practices into a logical fashion that facilitates effective and efficient learning.
Deploy - Teachers and learners engage in the learning process and follow the plan designed in the previous phase.
Evaluate - This is the research portion of the process that Bransford defines in the last chapter. The research and evaluation that is done after the deployment of new teaching concepts and ideas is important on many levels. It identifies successful factors as well as flaws. Research also reaffirms the theories used to implement the tools and concepts implemented in the classroom. All of the information gathered from this stage is often the financial basis for moving forward and implementing ideas on larger scales.
Refine - Although this was not explicitly addressed in How People Learn, refining the entire process involves the ongoing analysis that brings us back to the defining stage of the process. There are multiple layers of knowledge and learning throughout this whole cycle and all aspects have the potential to be improved. Some changes can be minor tweaks or changes, and others can be more involve like an emerging technology that was previously unavailable. The research and evaluation done in the previous stage of the cycle helps to identify strengths and weaknesses of the current environment. The loose ends can be tied up to pull the entire process together, then back to the drawing board to tackle the bigger questions and issues.
Unlike software development, the process of teaching and learning impacts student learning and so this process should be handled with the strictest care. Teachers often have only one chance to make a lasting impression on learners.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Post blog entry #9 in reaction to "Technology to Support Learning"
A few weeks ago, I asked my brother to assist me with a project I've had on my mind for a few months. I wanted to create a two sided piece of furniture that consisted of a bookshelf and TV stand. As much as I tried to describe it, the concept was clearly too confusing for me to explain. I'm not artistically inclined, and I do not have much experience in software like Autocad or some other 3D graphics software. Fortunately for me, Google came out with a very simple piece of free software called Sketchup. It was a simple way for me to use technology to get my concept across, without having to invest a lot of time learning my away around the software. I've posted pictures of my sketch as well as the (almost) complete product, to show how my vision has become reality.
So how does my experience relate to how technology supports learning?
Products like Google Sketchup can be great learning tools that teachers can use to their advantage. Much like this week's chapter suggests, technology such as Sketchup can be an extension of human capability, with a benefit of only a small learning curve. Integrating technology into the classroom can benefit both teachers and learners in many ways. Tools such as the Internet provide access to vast amounts of information. Communication tools eliminate global distances, and tools like Sketchup can build on the content being taught in class. All of these tools also provide additional learning methods to help the learner gather knowledge. The knowledge that students get from such tools, can often be transferred toward life skills and tasks, just like my experience.
I think it is important to note that although technology has the potential to be a great learning tool, the teacher must invest the time to learn the tool and extract the pedagogical content prior to its use in the classroom. As I discussed in a previous blog of mine, tools like this may be very appealing to teachers. That does not mean that they should introduce students to it without a plan or expectation of what knowledge will be gained while using the technology. Properly implementing technology as a tool in the classroom takes careful consideration and analysis. In the case of Google Sketchup, this product could be a useful tool for acquiring early concepts in architecture and engineering classes. Using technology is almost inevitable in such fields, but some of the more complex tools can be confusing road blocks for students during the early stages of learning. Simpler tools can be used as stepping stones to build the learner up to a point where they have acquired the knowledge they need to progress to a more complex development of concepts. Technology is here to stay, and it has become an integral part of everyday life for most people. It is up to teachers to prepare their students and use these tools to their advantage.
So how does my experience relate to how technology supports learning?
Products like Google Sketchup can be great learning tools that teachers can use to their advantage. Much like this week's chapter suggests, technology such as Sketchup can be an extension of human capability, with a benefit of only a small learning curve. Integrating technology into the classroom can benefit both teachers and learners in many ways. Tools such as the Internet provide access to vast amounts of information. Communication tools eliminate global distances, and tools like Sketchup can build on the content being taught in class. All of these tools also provide additional learning methods to help the learner gather knowledge. The knowledge that students get from such tools, can often be transferred toward life skills and tasks, just like my experience.
I think it is important to note that although technology has the potential to be a great learning tool, the teacher must invest the time to learn the tool and extract the pedagogical content prior to its use in the classroom. As I discussed in a previous blog of mine, tools like this may be very appealing to teachers. That does not mean that they should introduce students to it without a plan or expectation of what knowledge will be gained while using the technology. Properly implementing technology as a tool in the classroom takes careful consideration and analysis. In the case of Google Sketchup, this product could be a useful tool for acquiring early concepts in architecture and engineering classes. Using technology is almost inevitable in such fields, but some of the more complex tools can be confusing road blocks for students during the early stages of learning. Simpler tools can be used as stepping stones to build the learner up to a point where they have acquired the knowledge they need to progress to a more complex development of concepts. Technology is here to stay, and it has become an integral part of everyday life for most people. It is up to teachers to prepare their students and use these tools to their advantage.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Post blog entry #8 in reaction to "Teacher Learning"
Practice what you teach?
Much like Bransford, I found it quite ironic that teachers have such a tough time trying to find the time and resources they need to expand their own knowledge and learn new things. Teacher learning is clearly important and builds upon everything we have been learning so far. During one of our classes, I recall a discussion about what teachers do all summer. Someone commented that summer time is spent attending workshops, training session, etc to get ready for the next year. Is this really the best approach for teachers to be learning? I see a couple holes in this scenario. The first is that you only have one chance to make an impact on a student. Does it really help to learn about something that would have helped a student from last year? The timing of it all really doesn't make much sense to me. The second hole is that there is typically no requirement to attend such things during the summers. Only those motivated by some factor, such as additional pay, attend such sessions. What about those teachers that don't take this opportunity to grow, and more importantly, what effect does this have on their students?
I wonder if changing the school year layout, by extending school to be year round, would impact this issue in a beneficial way. While this may seem counter intuitive, and result in teachers having less time to learn and grow, I think the exact opposite would happen. The additional time throughout the year would allow teachers to grow and expand their knowledge as well as their students. Currently, most teachers are forced to maintain a very structured course outline with little leeway to stray from the path. There are 180 days to get from point A to point B. There is little to no time in between for teachers to spend completing training and helping them to get from one step to the next. Teachers are also obligated make sure each student is excelling to the best of their ability. It seems as if there are a lot of expectations placed on teachers with few options to accomplish the tasks at hand.
Perhaps if the 180 day year was spaced more evenly through the year, the course outline could be a bit more dynamic. The shorter spaces of time available throughout the year could give the teachers the opportunity to take the issues they are identifying with current students, and attend training directed toward those issues. Once they are equipped with the tools they need, teachers could make adjustments to the course outline to facilitate learning in a more effective way. With more opportunity to attend these training sessions, I think it would also be beneficial to require teachers to attend or take part in a certain percentage of training sessions made available each year. By implementing these changes, it would hopefully have a positive effect on teaching and learning.
Much like Bransford, I found it quite ironic that teachers have such a tough time trying to find the time and resources they need to expand their own knowledge and learn new things. Teacher learning is clearly important and builds upon everything we have been learning so far. During one of our classes, I recall a discussion about what teachers do all summer. Someone commented that summer time is spent attending workshops, training session, etc to get ready for the next year. Is this really the best approach for teachers to be learning? I see a couple holes in this scenario. The first is that you only have one chance to make an impact on a student. Does it really help to learn about something that would have helped a student from last year? The timing of it all really doesn't make much sense to me. The second hole is that there is typically no requirement to attend such things during the summers. Only those motivated by some factor, such as additional pay, attend such sessions. What about those teachers that don't take this opportunity to grow, and more importantly, what effect does this have on their students?
I wonder if changing the school year layout, by extending school to be year round, would impact this issue in a beneficial way. While this may seem counter intuitive, and result in teachers having less time to learn and grow, I think the exact opposite would happen. The additional time throughout the year would allow teachers to grow and expand their knowledge as well as their students. Currently, most teachers are forced to maintain a very structured course outline with little leeway to stray from the path. There are 180 days to get from point A to point B. There is little to no time in between for teachers to spend completing training and helping them to get from one step to the next. Teachers are also obligated make sure each student is excelling to the best of their ability. It seems as if there are a lot of expectations placed on teachers with few options to accomplish the tasks at hand.
Perhaps if the 180 day year was spaced more evenly through the year, the course outline could be a bit more dynamic. The shorter spaces of time available throughout the year could give the teachers the opportunity to take the issues they are identifying with current students, and attend training directed toward those issues. Once they are equipped with the tools they need, teachers could make adjustments to the course outline to facilitate learning in a more effective way. With more opportunity to attend these training sessions, I think it would also be beneficial to require teachers to attend or take part in a certain percentage of training sessions made available each year. By implementing these changes, it would hopefully have a positive effect on teaching and learning.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Post blog entry #7 in reaction to "Effective Teaching"
A coworker of mine often says "I'm not an expert, I just know enough about a lot of things to make me dangerous." This line resonated with me as I read through this week's chapter. Fortunately for everyone, my coworker uses his knowledge and deep understanding of technology to build and enhance rather than destroy. The teachers that Bransford describes, do much the same in their classrooms to create well rounded environments conducive for learning.
I had the opportunity to attend an event last week regarding Lehigh's presence in Second Life. During the session, many faculty discussed their experiences with Second Life thus far. There were two examples that really struck a chord with me that made me think these two individuals clearly exemplified what Bransford was describing.
Example 1
The first scenario involved using Second Life for a choral arts class. The teacher was using this service as a way for her students to have extra "recording" time. Each student was able to access the studio at their convenience and post a vocal recording. While this was a great idea and gave students additional recording time and availability, the next step taken by the teacher identified her as someone who can think beyond conventional ways. She encouraged all of her students to work with singers from other countries via Second Life. Since a lot of the songs the students had to sing were in different languages, the teacher identified the importance of understanding other languages, and working with singers with different primary languages provided and effective way for these students to improve themselves.
Example 2
The second scenario involved a science teacher that created molecular structures in Second Life. She described her research and years spent learning about one particular molecule and explained how she could never really wrap her mind around the structure until she built in a way that allowed her to fly inside of it and view it from many perspectives that were impossible otherwise. Although she noted that she had yet to identify how she intended to use this in class, it was clear that the intention was there to push this tool in ways that could help her students understand the content she is teaching. The drive that this particular teacher possesses is inherent in the examples in this chapter as well. You may not get something out of everything you try, but you'll never know what can be accomplished until you try.
As Bransford (2000) says, these kinds of teachers aren't just gifted individuals that can teach anything (p. 163). Effective teachers may not always be experts, but they know enough about a lot of things to do their job well, and help students to learn and understand. They posses a deep understanding of their discipline that allows them to use their pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge to lead a classroom and teach in sometimes unconventional ways.
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
I had the opportunity to attend an event last week regarding Lehigh's presence in Second Life. During the session, many faculty discussed their experiences with Second Life thus far. There were two examples that really struck a chord with me that made me think these two individuals clearly exemplified what Bransford was describing.
Example 1
The first scenario involved using Second Life for a choral arts class. The teacher was using this service as a way for her students to have extra "recording" time. Each student was able to access the studio at their convenience and post a vocal recording. While this was a great idea and gave students additional recording time and availability, the next step taken by the teacher identified her as someone who can think beyond conventional ways. She encouraged all of her students to work with singers from other countries via Second Life. Since a lot of the songs the students had to sing were in different languages, the teacher identified the importance of understanding other languages, and working with singers with different primary languages provided and effective way for these students to improve themselves.
Example 2
The second scenario involved a science teacher that created molecular structures in Second Life. She described her research and years spent learning about one particular molecule and explained how she could never really wrap her mind around the structure until she built in a way that allowed her to fly inside of it and view it from many perspectives that were impossible otherwise. Although she noted that she had yet to identify how she intended to use this in class, it was clear that the intention was there to push this tool in ways that could help her students understand the content she is teaching. The drive that this particular teacher possesses is inherent in the examples in this chapter as well. You may not get something out of everything you try, but you'll never know what can be accomplished until you try.
As Bransford (2000) says, these kinds of teachers aren't just gifted individuals that can teach anything (p. 163). Effective teachers may not always be experts, but they know enough about a lot of things to do their job well, and help students to learn and understand. They posses a deep understanding of their discipline that allows them to use their pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge to lead a classroom and teach in sometimes unconventional ways.
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Post blog entry #6 in reaction to ""Design of Learning Environments""
When I reflect on this week's reading, the phrase "everything in moderation" comes to mind. I'd like to think this is a fairly obvious statement, but I find that this often is not the case. The movie we watched last week, 2 Million Minutes, is a good example of this. Bransford (2000) also discussed it a bit with his discussion about televisions' role, or lack thereof, in learning. (p.150-151) Throughout the learning process, there are a lot of things that need to be kept in balance, including student learning environments, learning activities and learning content.
In the movie 2 million minutes, it appeared that in India and China, learning was divided throughout the four categories that were discussed in this weeks chapter (learner, knowledge, assessment and community). There was a whole lot of learning and assessment going on throughout every aspect of their lives. What content was being learned? How is their knowledge being applied across activities and life experiences? These areas did not seem to be quite as diverse. Math and science were primary focuses for the students. Having such a narrow focus limited learning opportunities in other areas including sports, music, arts, etc. All of the children seemed to have taken interest in some of these areas, but were limited in their time to experience them in their learning environments. The reason for this is probably because the motivating factor for investing time in learning is the summative assessment tests that measure each students knowledge in math and science related topics over others.
For American students, it seemed quite the opposite. While they understood the importance of classroom based education, extracurricular activities were also important. Television's ability to teach, for instance, is a hot topic of discussion. Bransford clearly identified research that supports the fact that television can assist learning in small doses, but TV should clearly not be a child's babysitter. While this is true, video can be a strong learning tool in small doses. Youtube has become a breeding ground for short tutorials to teach content. This may be helpful in small doses, but interest tends to wane over time.
Although these are two very diverse ways of learning, in moderation, they have the ability to coexist quite nicely together. Life experience is just as important as classroom experience. As the chapter showed, children spend a lot more time out of the classroom than in the classroom and it is important to use that time to learn something. Skills and learning is applied through a variety of ways including while playing video games, having a job, practicing an instrument, or doing homework. However, balance needs to exist in order for effective learning to take place. I always thought the goal of schools is to develop the abilities of learners so that as they grow, they can use their knowledge and skills to contribute to society. If this is the case, then why do we only test knowledge in topics like math and science? Last time I checked, we need a lot more than multiplication and equations to get through life.
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
In the movie 2 million minutes, it appeared that in India and China, learning was divided throughout the four categories that were discussed in this weeks chapter (learner, knowledge, assessment and community). There was a whole lot of learning and assessment going on throughout every aspect of their lives. What content was being learned? How is their knowledge being applied across activities and life experiences? These areas did not seem to be quite as diverse. Math and science were primary focuses for the students. Having such a narrow focus limited learning opportunities in other areas including sports, music, arts, etc. All of the children seemed to have taken interest in some of these areas, but were limited in their time to experience them in their learning environments. The reason for this is probably because the motivating factor for investing time in learning is the summative assessment tests that measure each students knowledge in math and science related topics over others.
For American students, it seemed quite the opposite. While they understood the importance of classroom based education, extracurricular activities were also important. Television's ability to teach, for instance, is a hot topic of discussion. Bransford clearly identified research that supports the fact that television can assist learning in small doses, but TV should clearly not be a child's babysitter. While this is true, video can be a strong learning tool in small doses. Youtube has become a breeding ground for short tutorials to teach content. This may be helpful in small doses, but interest tends to wane over time.
Although these are two very diverse ways of learning, in moderation, they have the ability to coexist quite nicely together. Life experience is just as important as classroom experience. As the chapter showed, children spend a lot more time out of the classroom than in the classroom and it is important to use that time to learn something. Skills and learning is applied through a variety of ways including while playing video games, having a job, practicing an instrument, or doing homework. However, balance needs to exist in order for effective learning to take place. I always thought the goal of schools is to develop the abilities of learners so that as they grow, they can use their knowledge and skills to contribute to society. If this is the case, then why do we only test knowledge in topics like math and science? Last time I checked, we need a lot more than multiplication and equations to get through life.
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Post blog entry #5 in reaction to "Mind and Brain"
This week's reading took a far step away from the learning process and focused more on the science behind how the brain works. Although it discusses how we learn in a very scientific perspective, it is highly unlikely we will be dissecting the brains of our students to figure out how smart they are based on the ratio of capillaries to each nerve cell. The chapter does indicate ways in which a teacher can use instruction to exercise the brain and increase the capacity for learning. This idea builds upon my blog last week regarding how we can identify the strengths and weaknesses of the learner, and what methods are most efficient and effective.
This combination of brain exercise in tandem with learning methods reminded me of a game I own, Big Brain Academy for the Nintendo Wii. The point of the game is to be a student in the academy, and your task is to complete different exercises to increase learning and knowledge. You score points based on your skills and abilities to learn efficiently and effectively. I had not played the game in over a year so I decided to pop it in, put my figurative TLT hat on, and evaluate the software from an educational perspective. As I started to play, I noticed the following points of interest:
* Your brain is broken down into five categories of capabilities; identify, memorize, analyze, compute, and visualize.
* Your score is based on an algorithm that measures the amount of correct answers, as well as the time it takes to complete the tests.
* Although you can compete against others, your "grade" is based on your own abilities.
The game saves your best scores so that you can compare your current status to past ratings. After a few practice sessions, I took the test to measure my brain. It was not surprising to me to see that I had regressed from the last time I played. This coincides with the theory that you lose connection to certain things in your brain when you do not constantly exercise or use the information learned. The next day, I performed the same tasks, and came close to the score I had the year prior. On day three, my progression lead me to beat all of my previous best scores.
So what does this all mean? My experience supports a few different concepts. Although it is not the answer to all learning issues, technology such as the Wii can facilitate learning. It is possible to identify the strengths and weaknesses of learning, thus allowing the teacher to focus on more effective ways of teaching content to students. Last, it is also worth mentioning that I was able to have fun while learning and that is a great motivational feature when trying to teach.
This combination of brain exercise in tandem with learning methods reminded me of a game I own, Big Brain Academy for the Nintendo Wii. The point of the game is to be a student in the academy, and your task is to complete different exercises to increase learning and knowledge. You score points based on your skills and abilities to learn efficiently and effectively. I had not played the game in over a year so I decided to pop it in, put my figurative TLT hat on, and evaluate the software from an educational perspective. As I started to play, I noticed the following points of interest:
* Your brain is broken down into five categories of capabilities; identify, memorize, analyze, compute, and visualize.
* Your score is based on an algorithm that measures the amount of correct answers, as well as the time it takes to complete the tests.
* Although you can compete against others, your "grade" is based on your own abilities.
The game saves your best scores so that you can compare your current status to past ratings. After a few practice sessions, I took the test to measure my brain. It was not surprising to me to see that I had regressed from the last time I played. This coincides with the theory that you lose connection to certain things in your brain when you do not constantly exercise or use the information learned. The next day, I performed the same tasks, and came close to the score I had the year prior. On day three, my progression lead me to beat all of my previous best scores.
So what does this all mean? My experience supports a few different concepts. Although it is not the answer to all learning issues, technology such as the Wii can facilitate learning. It is possible to identify the strengths and weaknesses of learning, thus allowing the teacher to focus on more effective ways of teaching content to students. Last, it is also worth mentioning that I was able to have fun while learning and that is a great motivational feature when trying to teach.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Post blog entry #4 in reaction to "How Children Learn"
This week's chapter brought me back to a discussion we had in our last class. John discussed an issue with managing students entering his classroom that lack math skills that the other children possess. He questioned whether he should slow down, to allow learners to catch up, or keep going and hope they eventually catch on. Both options can have serious implications, and this obviously frustrated him (for good reason). We talked about potential reasons why there was such a variance in skills and the different strategies the children used to learn the content. We did not talk about how to identify how each child learns best.
As I began reading about how children learn, it seemed that a lot of research has been done to identify learning capabilities in children, but how does a teacher interpret this information to apply it in the classroom? An example in the book discussed an example where teachers performed questioning routines in a classroom (Bransford, J., 2000, p.110-111). The middle-class pupils and working-class African American children had drastically different performance and behavioral results. Once the social differences between the two classes were identified, teachers were able to manipulate their questioning routines to suit the learner. In my past work experience, I have taken a plethora of tests to identify my current skills, behaviors, and capabilities. Such tests include models like DISC to model behaviors and tendencies. The results gave my employer insight into properly managing me and assigning my role in a team more effectively. With all of the testing that they require children to do, why aren't there any tests to identify how children use their current skills and abilities to learn? There are tests to see how much a child knows or doesn't know about a particular topic, but what about identifying methods to allow them to learn effectively?
I searched for a while on the Internet, and did not find an answer to my question. It seems to be up to the teacher to identify each learner's needs as they move through topics and deal with them as they go. That is quite an undertaking to expect in a matter of 9 months, not to mention the time lost for children to learn the necessary content. Perhaps teachers would benefit by having each child complete such a test prior to entrance into their classroom. Much like my past jobs, it may give the teacher some insight into how the child will thrive most effectively in the classroom. Once the teacher has this information, they can use it to manage their students. It is up to the teacher to approach each lesson in a dynamic way and change the learning experience depending on how the children will learn best individually and as a class. If the teacher knows how to reach their students effectively, it is possible to teach the content to students in an effective way. This sounds like quite an undertaking, but knowing is half the battle isn't it?
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
As I began reading about how children learn, it seemed that a lot of research has been done to identify learning capabilities in children, but how does a teacher interpret this information to apply it in the classroom? An example in the book discussed an example where teachers performed questioning routines in a classroom (Bransford, J., 2000, p.110-111). The middle-class pupils and working-class African American children had drastically different performance and behavioral results. Once the social differences between the two classes were identified, teachers were able to manipulate their questioning routines to suit the learner. In my past work experience, I have taken a plethora of tests to identify my current skills, behaviors, and capabilities. Such tests include models like DISC to model behaviors and tendencies. The results gave my employer insight into properly managing me and assigning my role in a team more effectively. With all of the testing that they require children to do, why aren't there any tests to identify how children use their current skills and abilities to learn? There are tests to see how much a child knows or doesn't know about a particular topic, but what about identifying methods to allow them to learn effectively?
I searched for a while on the Internet, and did not find an answer to my question. It seems to be up to the teacher to identify each learner's needs as they move through topics and deal with them as they go. That is quite an undertaking to expect in a matter of 9 months, not to mention the time lost for children to learn the necessary content. Perhaps teachers would benefit by having each child complete such a test prior to entrance into their classroom. Much like my past jobs, it may give the teacher some insight into how the child will thrive most effectively in the classroom. Once the teacher has this information, they can use it to manage their students. It is up to the teacher to approach each lesson in a dynamic way and change the learning experience depending on how the children will learn best individually and as a class. If the teacher knows how to reach their students effectively, it is possible to teach the content to students in an effective way. This sounds like quite an undertaking, but knowing is half the battle isn't it?
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)