In the Marc Prensky article, I can almost see him jumping up and down, madly waving his hands in time with the expediential speed of the growth of information shouting, “Yesterday! These things: individual computers in the hands of individual students, new curricula, new organization, new architecture, new teaching, new student assessments, new parental connections, new administration procedures—should have all happened YESTERDAY. The ‘digital natives’ are at the gate.” While the data banks of information continue to grow, those of us in education must “move forward the only way possible by combining what we know about technology with what we know and require about education.”
Mr. Prensky demands a great deal of change. There are a lot of ideas about the best way to bring about change. In my limited experience, change brought about from the bottom up is the most effective and enduring. Where is the bottom in education? We’re looking at it, kid. If you think about it, the “digital immigrants” are in charge, and, to some extent, in control of the “digital natives.” How long can this last?
“Living and Learning with New Media: Conclusions and Implications”
The most important point I took from this article was one that made me a little uncomfortable: we want our students to trust us, yet we don’t always show trust in them. This is their territory. This is where they are growing up—“digital natives.”
This article speaks of “a cultural shift and a certain openness to experimentation and social exploration that is generally not characteristic of educational institutions.” What better way to protect students from any dangers lurking in the waves of technology and easy access to the World Wide Web than to include them in the planning? By letting them know that we trust them and value their ideas and allowing them to take on more grown-up roles, they can teach us about what they are ready to do and learn.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Disrupting Class: Student-Centric Education is the Future
Standardization in teaching, though with some variation, has been around since the late 1800s. This is the model that we are all familiar with – the teacher is the master of the classroom, and she/he teaches a selected curriculum to all students at the same time, often frustratingly trying to help the slower students to catch up and challenge the advanced students to race further ahead. Technology is changing this approach, and in the future things will be radically different.
Because technology is developing at a geometric, rather than linear, pace, predicting its specific integration and uses in future education is at least a bit iffy. However, these two authors, give us an imaginative example of a future classroom where, for example, students are learning Mandarin Chinese grammar, using noise-canceling headphones and laptop computers. One student connects remotely with a brick mason and helps him construct a sentence brick by brick in much the same way he would construct a wall. Virtual bricks are color-coded with words on them and when assembled in the correct sentence order, the English words change to phonetic Mandarin, and the two learners read the results together, working on proper pronunciation and tones. (One could suppose that if this student were working with a manicurist, then the words could be written on computer representations of fingernails and toenails.) The point here is that people learn in different ways, and elsewhere in the classroom, the software program might use the more typical and ancient rote method by speaking and repeating the words. The gist of all this is that the learning process should be tailored to the individual student’s most efficient way of learning. The teacher’s responsibility is to “float” around the classroom (which would be welcomed relief to her feet) and function more as a monitor than instructor.
The term “disruptive innovation” could be considered a misnomer, as there seems to be little disruption involved. To me it seems more supplemental in its effects. The authors note that the tendency is for advanced technology to be “crammed” into the existing classroom model – more computers at the back of the class, the establishment of computer labs, bigger, brighter white boards, etc. “Disruptive innovation” means providing technology for learning where no alternatives exist, not merely tweaking education methods already employed. Many schools are simply unable to offer what many students need. Remedial courses, courses that students must repeat in order to graduate, tutoring, home-schooled students, the educational needs of migrant workers’ children and other students whose life situations or health prevent them from attending school regularly and of course providing unlimited challenges for the brilliant students whose hunger for learning and knowledge cannot be met adequately in the classroom – all this hopefully can and will be addressed by the firestorm that educational technology is becoming.
Because technology is developing at a geometric, rather than linear, pace, predicting its specific integration and uses in future education is at least a bit iffy. However, these two authors, give us an imaginative example of a future classroom where, for example, students are learning Mandarin Chinese grammar, using noise-canceling headphones and laptop computers. One student connects remotely with a brick mason and helps him construct a sentence brick by brick in much the same way he would construct a wall. Virtual bricks are color-coded with words on them and when assembled in the correct sentence order, the English words change to phonetic Mandarin, and the two learners read the results together, working on proper pronunciation and tones. (One could suppose that if this student were working with a manicurist, then the words could be written on computer representations of fingernails and toenails.) The point here is that people learn in different ways, and elsewhere in the classroom, the software program might use the more typical and ancient rote method by speaking and repeating the words. The gist of all this is that the learning process should be tailored to the individual student’s most efficient way of learning. The teacher’s responsibility is to “float” around the classroom (which would be welcomed relief to her feet) and function more as a monitor than instructor.
The term “disruptive innovation” could be considered a misnomer, as there seems to be little disruption involved. To me it seems more supplemental in its effects. The authors note that the tendency is for advanced technology to be “crammed” into the existing classroom model – more computers at the back of the class, the establishment of computer labs, bigger, brighter white boards, etc. “Disruptive innovation” means providing technology for learning where no alternatives exist, not merely tweaking education methods already employed. Many schools are simply unable to offer what many students need. Remedial courses, courses that students must repeat in order to graduate, tutoring, home-schooled students, the educational needs of migrant workers’ children and other students whose life situations or health prevent them from attending school regularly and of course providing unlimited challenges for the brilliant students whose hunger for learning and knowledge cannot be met adequately in the classroom – all this hopefully can and will be addressed by the firestorm that educational technology is becoming.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Project Sketch
Project: The Crayfish Chronicles
As part of the FOSS science unit on Structures of Life, students will work in groups to observe crayfish over a period of 4 weeks. They will learn about:
• physical structures of a crayfish and the functions of those structures
• suitable habitat for a crayfish
• if changes in habitat have an affect on the crayfish’s behavior
As students observe the crayfish, they will document their observations via photographs, diagrams, tracking sheets, and daily logs.
Students will collaborate with their respective groups to produce weekly threads reporting their observations and learning. Students will take photos, sketch diagrams and use their daily logs/tracking sheets to document their observation reports. The final student product will be an information report produced by each student tracking his/her learning about the crayfish and its behaviors observed during the 4 weeks.
Essential Questions:
1. What are some of the different structures that serve different functions in growth, survival, and reproduction in living organisms?
2. What do living organisms do when their environment is changed?
3. How do some organisms respond within their environment?
Enduring Understandings:
1. Each plant and animal has different structures that serve different functions in growth, survival, and reproduction.
2. Living organisms may behave differently if their environment is changed.
3. Some animals claim a territory and protect that territory.
NETS--for Students
2. Communication and Collaboration
Students use digital media and environments to communicate and work collaboratively, including at a distance, to support individual learning and contribute to the learning of others. Students:
a. interact, collaborate, and publish with peers, experts, or others employing a variety of digital
environments and media.
b. communicate information and ideas effectively to multiple audiences using a variety of media
and formats.
As part of the FOSS science unit on Structures of Life, students will work in groups to observe crayfish over a period of 4 weeks. They will learn about:
• physical structures of a crayfish and the functions of those structures
• suitable habitat for a crayfish
• if changes in habitat have an affect on the crayfish’s behavior
As students observe the crayfish, they will document their observations via photographs, diagrams, tracking sheets, and daily logs.
Students will collaborate with their respective groups to produce weekly threads reporting their observations and learning. Students will take photos, sketch diagrams and use their daily logs/tracking sheets to document their observation reports. The final student product will be an information report produced by each student tracking his/her learning about the crayfish and its behaviors observed during the 4 weeks.
Essential Questions:
1. What are some of the different structures that serve different functions in growth, survival, and reproduction in living organisms?
2. What do living organisms do when their environment is changed?
3. How do some organisms respond within their environment?
Enduring Understandings:
1. Each plant and animal has different structures that serve different functions in growth, survival, and reproduction.
2. Living organisms may behave differently if their environment is changed.
3. Some animals claim a territory and protect that territory.
NETS--for Students
2. Communication and Collaboration
Students use digital media and environments to communicate and work collaboratively, including at a distance, to support individual learning and contribute to the learning of others. Students:
a. interact, collaborate, and publish with peers, experts, or others employing a variety of digital
environments and media.
b. communicate information and ideas effectively to multiple audiences using a variety of media
and formats.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
WORLD WITHOUT WALLS: LEARNING WELL WITH OTHERS
This article points out the obvious trends in recent years of like-minded people, regardless of their geographic location, seeking out each other over the internet for collaboration and amplification relative to their mutual interests. Thus, we have the birth of the “Collaboration Age,” a new and rapidly accelerating fundamental in learning, brought about by technological advances (whose developmental rapidity is ever increasing) that connect us with unlimited individuals and the unlimited knowledge those individuals possess and are willing to share. Collaboration of course is nothing more than teamwork, consisting of people being purposefully brought together to solve and/or create and in the process hopefully generate additional knowledge. But technology has made a paradigm shift in the logistics involved in setting up the team. The team is now at our finger tips, and should most definitely be at the finger tips of our students. (An attractive bonus outside the team’s immediate focus is that members -- collaborators -- can cross all time zones and be multi-cultured, possibly planting seeds of tolerance and understanding our world so desperately needs.)
The teacher becomes less and less a provider of information and more of a facilitator (“connector”) in the student’s quest for information and learning. How one goes about picking the gems from the trash is perhaps the top consideration. The deluge of information available, much of it dubious at best, must be skillfully pared and filtered for quality, and it is the teacher’s job to guide the student in developing the skills necessary to do this.
Although the author believes the “Collaboration Age” should be instigated into school systems, he seems to fear, perhaps rightfully so, resistance from classroom status quo. Change is frequently difficult for any number of organizations mired in the past, and many schools are likewise so. However, technology is a powerful force, and it is hard to imagine this kind of “collaboration” in learning not rooting itself, if only at a more evolutionary pace (which will still be quick) in institutionalized learning.
The teacher becomes less and less a provider of information and more of a facilitator (“connector”) in the student’s quest for information and learning. How one goes about picking the gems from the trash is perhaps the top consideration. The deluge of information available, much of it dubious at best, must be skillfully pared and filtered for quality, and it is the teacher’s job to guide the student in developing the skills necessary to do this.
Although the author believes the “Collaboration Age” should be instigated into school systems, he seems to fear, perhaps rightfully so, resistance from classroom status quo. Change is frequently difficult for any number of organizations mired in the past, and many schools are likewise so. However, technology is a powerful force, and it is hard to imagine this kind of “collaboration” in learning not rooting itself, if only at a more evolutionary pace (which will still be quick) in institutionalized learning.
Messing Around & Geeking Out: How are my thoughts changing?
Being somewhat removed for the past twenty years from people who are in their teens, my knowledge of middle and high school students and their leisure pastimes is limited. Two sections of “Living and Learning with New Media,” “Messing Around” and “Geeking Out,” have changed my thinking about this age group. It has also given me a name for what I see my third grade students doing.
On a recent field trip to the Thai Red Cross Snake Farm, three of my third graders brought their own digital cameras, and two were using their cell phones to take pictures. On the bus ride there,
another student and her friend played games on her mother’s iPhone. In their weekly journals students are always telling about visiting Millsberry website or their account with Club Penguin. A play-date with a friend always includes “messing around” on some kind of technological instrument.
During parent conferences, a dad proudly told me about the videos that his kids, two highschool sons and his third grade daughter, make and post on their “Space” for him whenever he is out of the country on business trips. My third grade students who have older siblings are ahead of everyone in the class in their ease and use of technology, including me.
"Geeking Out" was especially enlightening. My idea of the “Geeks” has always been the nerdy kids who are the misfits among their peers. From this article, I now see them as kids with a passion. How wonderful to find a passion at such a young age and have a forum in which to express yourself--a safe place to follow that passion.
I think back to Clarence’s comment about PLN’s allowing students to have an authentic audience. Students who are able to connect with peers who have a like interest not only have the opportunity to get substantive feedback, but to feel validated. Isn’t validation what it’s all about?
On a recent field trip to the Thai Red Cross Snake Farm, three of my third graders brought their own digital cameras, and two were using their cell phones to take pictures. On the bus ride there,
another student and her friend played games on her mother’s iPhone. In their weekly journals students are always telling about visiting Millsberry website or their account with Club Penguin. A play-date with a friend always includes “messing around” on some kind of technological instrument.
During parent conferences, a dad proudly told me about the videos that his kids, two highschool sons and his third grade daughter, make and post on their “Space” for him whenever he is out of the country on business trips. My third grade students who have older siblings are ahead of everyone in the class in their ease and use of technology, including me.
"Geeking Out" was especially enlightening. My idea of the “Geeks” has always been the nerdy kids who are the misfits among their peers. From this article, I now see them as kids with a passion. How wonderful to find a passion at such a young age and have a forum in which to express yourself--a safe place to follow that passion.
I think back to Clarence’s comment about PLN’s allowing students to have an authentic audience. Students who are able to connect with peers who have a like interest not only have the opportunity to get substantive feedback, but to feel validated. Isn’t validation what it’s all about?
Finding information online: How do we address truth and bias in the classroom?
Chris Betcher
Even though I use Google almost daily, it was beneficial to hear the search tips that Chris gave. I had never really understood exactly how to use some of the strategies, so it was good to have the opportunity to learn new tricks. His “Five Factors for Evaluating a Website” should be part of every technology literacy program. Teaching our students to be critical--to question, “Who said that?” “How do they know?” “Where do they get their information?” can and should begin at the elementary level. Speaking of the elementary level, the list of Search Engines for K-12 students is a great resource. Having elementary students searching through Google is most often a waste of time. They need search engines that will produce sites that are within their reading level, and sites that offer easy maneuverability.
Wikipedia! Interesting to get a glimpse of how the articles actually evolve. Comforting to know that there are Wikipedia Watch Dogs keeping an eye on the information being posted and keeping it legitimate.
I also liked Rob Rubis’s rule for the ISB middle and high school students, “Use it first, but not last.”
I think that in this world of technology and networking one of the main jobs of teachers is to teach students to think seriously and critically about the information they are reading—not to accept everything as it is presented. Students need to learn how to seek clarification, question sources and verify what they read. This all begins with good, basic reading skills.
Even though I use Google almost daily, it was beneficial to hear the search tips that Chris gave. I had never really understood exactly how to use some of the strategies, so it was good to have the opportunity to learn new tricks. His “Five Factors for Evaluating a Website” should be part of every technology literacy program. Teaching our students to be critical--to question, “Who said that?” “How do they know?” “Where do they get their information?” can and should begin at the elementary level. Speaking of the elementary level, the list of Search Engines for K-12 students is a great resource. Having elementary students searching through Google is most often a waste of time. They need search engines that will produce sites that are within their reading level, and sites that offer easy maneuverability.
Wikipedia! Interesting to get a glimpse of how the articles actually evolve. Comforting to know that there are Wikipedia Watch Dogs keeping an eye on the information being posted and keeping it legitimate.
I also liked Rob Rubis’s rule for the ISB middle and high school students, “Use it first, but not last.”
I think that in this world of technology and networking one of the main jobs of teachers is to teach students to think seriously and critically about the information they are reading—not to accept everything as it is presented. Students need to learn how to seek clarification, question sources and verify what they read. This all begins with good, basic reading skills.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Connectivism--Are My Thoughts Changing?
There is just too much in this article to disseminate and I am tired of reading it over and over. These are the major points that caught my attention.
“Learning theories are concerned with the actual process of learning, not with the value of what is being learned. The need to evaluate the worthiness of learning something is a meta-skill that is applied before learning itself begins.”
“Chaos is a new reality for knowledge workers. ScienceWeek (2004) quotes Nigel Calder's definition that chaos is “a cryptic form of order”. Chaos is the breakdown of predictability, evidenced in complicated arrangements that initially defy order. Unlike constructivism, which states that learners attempt to foster understanding by meaning making tasks, chaos states that the meaning exists – the learner's challenge is to recognize the patterns that appear to be hidden. Meaning-making and forming connections between specialized communities are important activities.”
Isn’t this similar to what happens in a young child’s brain? Synapses grow and connections get stronger, or synapses are abandoned, and the brain eliminates connections that are seldom or never used. Specialized neurons begin sending messages back and forth making connections and wa-lah! the child begins to take notice of the world around her as her vision begins to develop or she begins to speak.
“Chaos, as a science, recognizes the connection of everything to everything.”
“The capacity to form connections between sources of information, and thereby create useful information patterns, is required to learn in our knowledge economy.”
“Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical.”
The article states, “The health of the learning ecology of the organization depends on effective nurturing of information flow.” Then he speaks of well-connected people who foster and maintain knowledge flow. Some of us are very dependent on these well-connected people to do just that. Will they continue to do so?
The description of the cycle of ‘knowledge development” seemed to sum up the idea of Connectivism—that “personal knowledge is a network feeding into organizations and institutions which feed back into the network thereby continuing to provide learning to the individual. “Learners remain current in their field through the connections they have formed.”
The trick is to choose and maintain the right connections and watch for patterns, especially the hidden ones.
Are my thoughts changing? How can they not?
“Learning theories are concerned with the actual process of learning, not with the value of what is being learned. The need to evaluate the worthiness of learning something is a meta-skill that is applied before learning itself begins.”
“Chaos is a new reality for knowledge workers. ScienceWeek (2004) quotes Nigel Calder's definition that chaos is “a cryptic form of order”. Chaos is the breakdown of predictability, evidenced in complicated arrangements that initially defy order. Unlike constructivism, which states that learners attempt to foster understanding by meaning making tasks, chaos states that the meaning exists – the learner's challenge is to recognize the patterns that appear to be hidden. Meaning-making and forming connections between specialized communities are important activities.”
Isn’t this similar to what happens in a young child’s brain? Synapses grow and connections get stronger, or synapses are abandoned, and the brain eliminates connections that are seldom or never used. Specialized neurons begin sending messages back and forth making connections and wa-lah! the child begins to take notice of the world around her as her vision begins to develop or she begins to speak.
“Chaos, as a science, recognizes the connection of everything to everything.”
“The capacity to form connections between sources of information, and thereby create useful information patterns, is required to learn in our knowledge economy.”
“Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical.”
The article states, “The health of the learning ecology of the organization depends on effective nurturing of information flow.” Then he speaks of well-connected people who foster and maintain knowledge flow. Some of us are very dependent on these well-connected people to do just that. Will they continue to do so?
The description of the cycle of ‘knowledge development” seemed to sum up the idea of Connectivism—that “personal knowledge is a network feeding into organizations and institutions which feed back into the network thereby continuing to provide learning to the individual. “Learners remain current in their field through the connections they have formed.”
The trick is to choose and maintain the right connections and watch for patterns, especially the hidden ones.
Are my thoughts changing? How can they not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
