ETEC 510: Design of Technology-Supported Learning Environments (core course)
Assignments:
One-to-One Laptop ProjectThink about (a) the affordances construct, (b) the discussion of the role of values in determining what is prioritized in any educational design, and (c) about the relationship between theories concerning how people learn and the kinds of affordances that are built into specific learning technologies. What is significant, educationally, about this design? What does this design tell us about the values that matter to its designers? How have the designers taken into account the cultural setting where this educational technology will be used? Is constructivism a learning theory that can span across cultural borders without risk? What critical questions might educators ask about this design and/or this initiative.
"I'm just wondering how to do a technical talk to a non-technical audience" (“My Space”). It’s amazing to see how teaching and learning in the 21st century is evolving. I feel technology is evolving much faster than our teaching methods. Being a part of this paradigm shift, one can see divides in their own schools...teachers who are embracing change and other teachers who struggle to move forward. I’ve personally worked with colleagues who have taught for many years and have had tremendous difficulties using and implementing various technologies in their teaching practice. To some extent, some colleagues never used technology in their classroom, regardless of all the professional development given to help support these teachers. Now I look at developing countries where they are still at a place where they are trying to give their people access to basic necessities like clean water and education, and suddenly schools start receiving these XO tablets from the One to One laptop project (OLPC). I think this project has so much to offer. What an amazing opportunity for these kids to connect with the rest of the world and access information in a way that may better their lives. It sounds great; however, the goal of this tablet to be used in a much greater way beyond exploring and playing games probably never happened for most kids. In the article, Affordances, Conventions and Design, Donald Norman describes affordances as reflecting the possible relationships among actors and objects (Norman, Donald (1999). The affordances of these laptops need to be perceived by the children in order for it to be useful or effective. How do you think the children perceived these laptops to be? An object for gaming? A new kind of television? Maybe a high-tech calculator? Was there an Instructional design model behind this project? In the article, What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? Charles M. Reigeluth describes the Instructional Design theory as including clear information, thoughtful practice, informative feedback, and intrinsic or extrinsic motivation (Reigeluth, Charles, M. (1999). Was there guidance on how to better help people learn and develop? This theory reminds me of the backwards design model by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, where planning is done with the end in mind. What is the desired outcome? What are the objectives? How are the objectives going to be met? What about assessment and evidence of learning? Are these laptops being used the way they should be? If not, what evaluations are in place to make necessary changes? Are the learners involved in this process? Did the teachers get training on how to effectively use this technology in their classrooms? What about language barriers? This laptop is in the hands of 1.84 million children (“Wikipedia”) where english is not the first language, besides certain states in the United States. What kinds of issues arise when there is no knowledge base in using this technology? When I look at the stats on Wikipedia, it clearly states that the usage of the laptops declined considerably within the first two years. Reasons for this included hardware problems, breakage, and lack of knowledge on the users part (“Wikipedia”). I agree with some of the authors who felt the quick deployment of the laptops was attributed to thinking that the children would learn through collaborative discovery (“Wikipedia”). In some sense I agree that the children probably have learned how to use the tablet with a basic level of understanding. But they also do not have the experience or prior knowledge to go beyond the basics and that is where the risks of such a project arise. This tablet is not being used the way it is intended to be used. The latest news is that there will now be optional accessories such as a wireless keyboard, digital microscope and digital telescope (“OLPC News”). I can only imagine the outcomes of introducing these new toys. This project as a concept has tremendous benefits, however, without a sound Instructional design strategy, I feel the desired outcomes of such a project will continue to be a challenge. When reflecting on my opening quotation from Mary Lou Jepsen, I feel her comment exposes an underlying irony that reflects the OLPC project as a whole. References: Norman, D. (1999). Affordances, Conventions and Design. Interactions, 6 (3), 38-41. Reigeluth, C.M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol.2 ,. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Websites: “One Laptop Per Child.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc,. (03/01/2014). Web. (09/01/2014). <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Laptop_per_Child>. Knowledge BuildingThink about the definition of "knowledge-building" offered by Scardamalia & Bereiter.
The emphasis of this construct is on the class as a collective engaged in the processes of scientific community (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994). Whereas, “learning” or “constructing knowledge” is where individuals engage in the learning process and construct new understanding as a combination of prior learning, new information, and readiness to learn. I find schools which are getting rid of their traditional library and moving towards a Learning Commons are on the right track in fostering knowledge-building discourse. In Scardamalia & Bereiter’s article, they discuss how schools need to be restructured as communities in which knowledge-building is supported as a collective goal. They also talk about the role of technology replacing classroom discourse patterns with those having more immediate and natural extensions outside the four walls. A Learning Commons does just that. It is the hub or heart of a school..a shared space where knowledge-building is fully supported. Another example of where I have participated in knowledge-building discourse is In our current ETEC project proposal. My group and I chose to work from Google Docs. We are able to work simultaneously on our project, leaving comments/feedback, editing each others’ parts, and deleting or adding new information. It has been an amazing process to see how all of us have come together collectively to draft our proposal. Along with Google Docs, We’ve had a couple of Google Hangouts where we have talked about our vision and future steps, as well have had mini progress updates. Google Apps supports the collaborative construction, refinement and formalization of knowledge (Hall, 2010). Knowlege Forum™ definitely meets the design challenge. It is a public online environment where students can share knowledge or read what other students are posting. There is opportunity for conversations, questions, answers, debates, etc. The work, thoughts and ideas develop over time and new problems arise through this process. Students are able to work collaboratively with others or work in their own personal space prior to contributing. I feel a space like this forces students to take more risks in learning, especially for those students who are shy and quiet, yet have so much to offer. References: Hall, William, P. (2010). Using Google’s Apps for the Collaborative Construction, Refinement and Formalization of Knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/ Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283. Web 2.0What is important and, likely, interesting about the very idea of a new learning paradigm?
We are living in a society driven by information access. In 21st century education, there is more emphasis now on project-based learning. The new learning paradigm allows students to actively engage in their learning, collaborate and share with a larger community. Through this, students are developing skills needed to succeed in a digital environment. Think about Barab & Duffy's description of "communities of practice" and consider how that construct might be useful in thinking about the affordances of a learning 2.0 environment. “Being a participant in a community is an essential component of the educational process” (Barab & Duffy, 2000). A learning 2.0 environment coincides with Barab & Duffy’s description of “communities of practice” as it offers the affordances of collaborative knowledge construction through social networking sites, user created Web sites, self-publishing platforms, folksonomies, etc. Users can provide data and collaborate with other users to build on current knowledge. In essence, users are part of an educational process through an online community. As Barab & Duffy go on to talk about characteristics of communities of practice, a few characteristics which stood out for me and which also distinguish a 2.0 environment are: - shared goals, meanings, and practices - Individuals are part of something larger as they work within the context and become interconnected to the community - communities have the ability to reproduce as new members engage in mature practice with near peers and exemplars of mature practice What are the key impediments within your own educational environment, to implementing 2.0 designs for learning and what might you do to deal with these obstacles effectively? One of the key impediments within my own educational environment is infrastructure. I have had many moments in my classroom where the technology does not work reliably. It is ideal to have 25 laptops in a cart that wheels into your room so 25 kids can use them. It is not ideal when half of them have issues with networking and connectivity. Although I would love to have 25 laptops work at once, I have learned that I need to have kids circulate through and use a variety of technologies from laptops, ipads, Smart Board and Smart Table. Another impediment is the hesitancy from colleagues who are uncomfortable and unfamiliar with various technologies. Unfortunately, students are at a disadvantage when this happens. On-going professional development and support from other teachers, teacher librarians, learning leaders, etc. is what needs to continue to happen. Think about your own educational design efforts and the impact of the dominant learning paradigm within that context. How does it map on to the affordances Lankshear and Knobel outline as keys to learning 2.0 tools (pp. 4-5). How does the primary context where you work as an educator define and support learning? Lankshear & Knobel (2008) outline formal and informal rating systems that act as recommendations or filters for choosing appropriate web content. In reflecting on my own educational design efforts, I strive to educate my students about the variety of tools accessible to them when learning. For example, students should know that there are validated and credible resources to support their work. At the same time, there are user-generated and crowd-sourced information that may be just as reliable. As I have mentioned in previous posts, my grade one and two students would understand this at a basic level, knowing the difference between a book from the Learning Commons and an online blog. This type of online learning is fully supported by the Calgary Board of Education through a set of Web 2.0 guidelines they have established. The guidelines include a PIA (Privacy Impact Assessment) for Web 2.0 tools where student data is being disclosed, as well as a school digital citizenship plan which address six elements:
SECTIONSChoose any one of the categories within the SECTIONS Framework, and consider how the questions posed by Bates and Poole relate to design issues you face in your own work as an educator or, if you prefer, in the Design Project that you are undertaking as part of this course. Do any of the categories or questions provide you with insights concerning the implementation of educational technology in your local context (school district, university or private organization)?
S - Students: What is known about the students - or potential students - and the appropriateness of the technology for this particular group or range of students? E - Ease of use and reliability: how easy is it for both teachers and students to use? How reliable and well tested is the technology? C - Costs: what is the cost structure of each technology? What is the unit cost per learner? T - Teaching and learning: what kinds of learning are needed? What instructional approaches will best meet these needs? What are the best technologies for supporting this teaching and learning? I - Interactivity: what kind of interaction does this technology enable? O - Organizational issues: What are the organizational requirements and the barriers to be removed before this technology can be used successfully? What changes in organization need to be made? N - Novelty: how new is this technology? S - Speed: how quickly can courses be mounted with this technology? How quickly can materials be changed? When considering my Grade One class in my previous Elementary School, I see both movement in Educational Technology as well as limitations. For this discussion post, I will focus on “Ease” in the actions model provided by Bates and Poole (2003). In their article, Bates and Poole (2003) talk about computer and information literacy and how time should not be spent in learning how to use software for content delivery as it takes away from the learning and teaching. They do mention that the basic skills required, such as reading, writing, using a keyboard, and navigating the Internet, should be a prerequisite prior to using various technologies for learning. I found that most of my Grade Ones either had the basic skills necessary to be able to use the technology appropriately, or did require support but caught on quickly. For research, I would consolidate links to age-appropriate websites to make navigating more efficient, and for those who could do their own google search and filter through sites were able to do that on their own. My students primarily used a laptop or an ipad for research. As technology is not always reliable, the most frustrating part for both myself and my students was when it would not work. I learned to not have all my students using laptops at the same time, and I would have them work with a partner so that they could learn and troubleshoot together. We were fortunate to have 2 Learning Leaders at our school. In terms of professional support and design of materials, our Learning Leaders would help plan inquiry projects and support us in many ways such as, creating lessons on the Smart Table, gathering links for various websites and setting up a space on our school website where students could easily access them, and searching for and installing appropriate apps on the ipads. Like many institutions, a tech support team is available; however, it requires a call in, a heat ticket, and a few days before an issue is resolved. We also had a tech support person who came in once a week to update and install new software, deal with various tech issues, and support our school in making technology easier to use. All in all, there are good things happening with good intentions, and in the end the work from students is amazing. This goes without saying that there are always bumps in the road along the way. References: Bates and Poole. (2003) “A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology.” In Effective Teaching with Technology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pages 75-105. Education For The PresentWatch this panel, From MySpace to Hip Hop: Participatory Learning in a Networked Society, with presentations by danah boyd, Mimi Ito and other researchers from the Digital Youth project. Think about how peer-to-peer networks challenge not only the monolithic power of commercial media ownership and distribution, but the seemingly monologic power of institutions like schools. What might Education for the Present look like, and how might we best support its proliferation in classrooms? What kinds of designed spaces support collective intelligence and how might these be thought of as properly educational? What are the main challenges and risks to integration of collective intelligence tools into schools? What assumptions about learning do we need to give up if we loosen up our understandings of authorship and originality. What are the silo structures in the world of education? Post your thoughts in the Education for the Present: New Designs for New Learning Discussion Forum.
Think about how peer-to-peer networks challenge not only the monolithic power of commercial media ownership and distribution, but the seemingly monologic power of institutions like schools. What might Education for the Present look like, and how might we best support its proliferation in classrooms? How does a system break away from traditional transfer of knowledge and standardized testing? I am speaking today as a parent in the US, but always Canadian. I recently had a conversation with another parent in Denver about money being raised by the parent council and how it will be used to purchase computers for a lab in order to meet the requirements for standardized testing. I couldn’t help but think “Will this education system ever change in this country?” I sent an email to my son’s principal last week and shared with him my conversation with the parent from another school and asked, “What about purchasing technology for personalized learning?” This is what education for the present should look like. I know the Calgary Board of Education’s (CBE) three year education plan includes a commitment to personalized learning through the instructional core (teacher, student and content). The CBE implemented an innovative resource to personalized learning called IRIS. It is a place where teachers and students can “roadmap” learning opportunities and set learning goals. Educators can set up individual online learner profiles with their students and integrate multiple forms of information to meet students’ individual learning objectives (www.cbe.ab.ca). In Denver, my son is in “first grade” math, functioning at “third grade” math and is still going through the “first grade” math curriculum with all the other “first graders”. If he had a roadmap with his own individual goals, he would be a challenged, excited, engaged and eager “first grader” learning math. What kinds of designed spaces support collective intelligence and how might these be thought of as properly educational? I have shared about the school system in Sweden in a previous post, and I am sharing it again. “The newest school system in Sweden looks more like the hallways of Google or Pixar” (http://www.edudemic.com/swedens-newest-school-system-has-no-classrooms/). Of course, our schools will never look like this, but there are many features in these spaces that support collective intelligence. More and more schools are creating spaces (Learning Commons) which nurture collaboration, curiosity and creativity. What are the main challenges and risks to integration of collective intelligence tools into schools? What assumptions about learning do we need to give up if we loosen up our understandings of authorship and originality. What are the silo structures in the world of education? The fictitious short story in “The Genesis and Emergence of Education 3.0 In Higher Education and its Potential for Africa” truly captured the capabilities of Education 3.0 and the cross-cultural collaboration that potentially could be fully driven by the students. The networking among students from around the world moves silos in education (individual classrooms/schools) to a more global classroom. The main challenge to this kind of networking is copyright. The time it would take students to go through the right process and ask permission to use someone else’s work would make collaborating a lot more difficult and time-consuming. When looking at today's schools and curriculum, having options like art, drama, music and dance is an example of another silo in education. How do we better incorporate these silos in our curriculum? How do we extend these options beyond our schools? Can we connect our students who have a passion for the arts with other students around the world so peer collaboration and feedback can occur amonst students with common interests? What are the skills we need to equip our students with for the 60% of the jobs 10 years from now which have not been invented yet? (FuturistSpeaker.com). References: Keats, D., & Schmidt, P. (2007). The genesis and emergence of Education 3.0 in higher education and its potential for Africa. First Monday, 12(3). 55 Jobs of the Future Calgary Board of Education |
Constructivsm and DesignMany online locations could be profitably utilized as a significant element in a constructivist learning environment. Our job, as educators, is to think about the affordances in any given artifact. Take another look at the questions listed in Module 2 (Constructivism by Design) that pertain to affordances, and learning environments. Take a look at one (or more) of these sites, and think about the construct of affordances. What do these sites enable? What is educationally significant about how these sites are designed? Think about how you could use this to support learners. How would you structure a project-based learning activity that would include this site as a major resource? What kind of problem manipulation space could be created that includes this site?
My 6-year old son has been hooked on Minecraft all year. I bought the app for him because it is an approved educational app by the Calgary Board of Education. Personally, I have little knowledge about the game and have never played it myself. I find it quite fascinating that my son is obviously engaged in this game and loves that he can play on his own or he can invite others to join his world. This opportunity to learn more about Minecraft has opened my eyes to not only why my son loves this game so much, but also to the world of gaming and education. This virtual 3D simulation game involves players looking for resources to craft and build just about anything (Edublogs, 2012). When my son is in survival mode, he is alone trying to create and build his world, but has to look out for monsters. He can access resources like water, fire, lava, and much more. When playing with his cousins, he gets to interact with them in real-time. It involves quick problem-solving skills, communication and collaboration. This basic app sounds like just a fun game for kids, so how does Minecraft fit into the classroom? I agree this game allows learners to work together and develop communication and collaborative skills, but what about a deeper level of understanding of content areas? I sat back and watched “The Wonderful World of Humanities” from the http://minecraftedu.com/wiki/index.php?title=Wonderful_World_of_Humanities website, built using Minecraftedu software and made by Teacher Gaming. It gave me an overview of how students learned about history. I observed students interacting with other people from around the world. Students had the opportunity to go to other lands like Ancient Greece, India, and Ancient China; meet great philosophers, kings, and explorers; and walk through temples, lighthouses, and ruins. Throughout their travels, there were “info blocks” where all the important facts and other pertinent information could be found. This toolkit of facts is the start of building a knowledge base that supports the learner to build further on his/her understanding. Minecraft hooks in the 21st century learner by allowing them to create, construct, explore, and interact with others. I can see Minecraft being used as a major resource to launch a project but cannot be the only resource. In the video I watched, it gives the students a general introduction to history but then enables the students to begin the inquiry process by generating their own essential questions that could guide them to further investigate and learn about the past. I am intrigued by this game. I now see how this construction and strategy-based game supports learning on many levels. For educators, the minecraftedu site offers extensive support on how to incorporate this game into your program of studies. Teachers can create situations in which their students are challenged to work closely together, problem solve, and integrate multiple core objectives in math, social studies, science and language arts. In my Grade One class, I can see introducing Minecraft at a beginner level focussing on concepts of citizenship and collaboration. What a great way to start the year off learning how to work together and unite as one learning community. I am now aware of the endless ways Minecraft can be used in the classroom and I am excited to use this in my own class. Works Cited: Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: Volume II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Websites: http://markmarshall.edublogs.org/2012/02/16/minecraft-a-new-virtual-tool-for-learning/ http://minecraftedu.com/wiki/index.php?title=Wonderful_World_of_Humanities Implications of "learning without curriculum"Papert argues that LOGO is “a vehicle for Piagetian learning … learning without curriculum.” Think about the idea of “learning without curriculum.” What are the implications of this argument? How might its plausibility be profitably examined? What are the costs of educators’ attachment to curriculum? Papert argues that “many aspects of school… infantilize the child” and that there is a “conservative bias being built into the use of computers in education.” What do you think about this claim, and how it plays out in the implementation of new media? The Mindstorms excerpt we have read was written in the very early days of computers and education, but many of its claims still ring true today. What arguments does Papert make about schooling and new media that strike you as worthy of further discussion?
A group of team colleagues and I once shared photos of structures from around the world...places we’ve been to like the Eiffle Tower, Burj al Arab, the Leaning Tower of Pisa, the Colosseum, etc, with our grade one students. The kids were fascinated by these structures. They looked through books, magazines, and internet sites at more structures and each gravitated to one that inspired him/her. At this point, they documented everything they knew about structures and specifically, the one they chose. They also generated more questions from how the structure was built, by whom it was built, and what other facts are known about the structure today. A class generated rubric was created, using the program of studies, to ensure students were on the right track with their research. They used resources like books, internet sites (searched by teachers and compiled on one site accessed by the students so they were not searching the entire web), contacting experts via phone (as web 2.0 guidelines were not in place and skype was not an option at that time), and connecting with professionals like architects and designers (within our parent community). Once their research was complete, they worked on how they wanted to present their information in a way that was meaningful to them. Some prepared Notebook presentations, others created travel brochures and posters, and some even wrote song lyrics to present their findings. Every student built the structure they were learning about using recycled materials and paint. This inquiry-based project was a highlight for many students that year and the curriculum topic it fell under was “Building Things” from the Alberta Program of Studies.
When reflecting on “learning without curriculum”, I do not think it is possible in an education system to learn without curriculum. Papert writes, “But "teaching without curriculum" does not mean spontaneous, free-form classrooms or simply "leaving the child alone." It means supporting children as they build their own intellectual structures with materials drawn from the surrounding culture” (Papert, 1980). It is a reciprocal learning relationship between the students and the teachers. The teachers must have a proper design model in place in order to facilitate students through the learning process. As teachers are bound to a mandated curriculum, with this process, there is no risk of not meeting curriculum expectations, rather more objectives and real-life learning strategies are fulfilled. Papert argues that “many aspects of school… infantilize the child” and that there is a “conservative bias being built into the use of computers in education.” What do you think about this claim, and how it plays out in the implementation of new media?
In a 2002 MIT speech, Papert said: “The essence of Piaget was how much learning occurs without being planned or organized by teachers or schools. His whole point was that children develop intellectually without being taught!” If we consider a traditional classroom environment, I feel that children are almost “spoon-fed” knowledge. The teacher is likely not getting anything back from the child except for what he/she wants to know and needs to know. Transferring this point to LOGO and current new media, and thinking about our last discussion, a program, like Minecraft or WISE, which allows the child to navigate independently and build on his/her own experiences, will stimulate the mind and is “likely to lead to more reflective self-conscious thinking” (Papert, 1980).
What arguments does Papert make about schooling and new media that strike you as worthy of further discussion?
When I think about “learning-by-making”, I question if students could achieve the same outcomes, like in my “Building Things” project, without curriculum as a guide? This project would probably have looked so different from classroom to classroom and teacher to teacher. Would advantages or disadvantages present themselves without a curriculum to guide? What happens when not all teachers are on board or do not have the experience to facilitate projects as such? Without a standardized benchmark, where does student achievement fall? Would “meeting grade level expectations” look different in a high needs school as opposed to a “middle of the road” school when class generated rubrics are in place?
References: "Introduction: Computers and Children" and "Chapter 1: Computers and Computer Culture" in Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books. Transformative Learning Technologies Lab. (1992). Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. Retrieved from https://tltl.stanford.edu/content/seymour-papert-s-legacy-thinking-about-learning-and-learning-about-thinking Wikipedia. (December 2008). Constructionism (Learning Theory). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructionism_(learning_theory) GamingGo and play at least two games from the options below and make note of your experience of specific design features, including:
I have not been a gamer for many years; however, I did grow up playing Nintendo games like Super Mario Bros., Duck Hunt, and Mike Tyson’s Punch Out, as well as traditional arcade games like Pac Man, Frogger, and Popeye. I have tried to get into this new generation of gaming, but unfortunately it’s not something that interests me. Therefore, I have chosen to compare two games from my past, Pac-Man and Super Mario Bros. Pac-Man means “eating” in Japanese. The idea of the game is to eat as many pac-dots (or pellets), power pellets, fruit, and enemy as you can without getting caught by a ghost. It is a repetitive game speeding up as you complete each board. There are 255 boards in Pac-Man and the game runs out of code on board 256. One can be immersed in this game as it is easy to slip into Pac-Man’s character of always being on the run and trying to get away, yet still making it to the power pellets, and eating as much fruit as you can to achieve a high score. There really is no narrative for the game besides making it through a board without being caught by the ghosts. There is a choice to play solo or with a partner, so there is an opportunity for teamwork skills to develop further. As the game speeds up, one is forced with making quick decisions of where to go next and to strategize how not to get caught by the ghosts. Feelings of excitement and a certain rush emerge when trying to get away from the ghosts. Being unsuccessful on a board can leave you feeling disappointed. Super Mario Bros. is a game of two former plumbers, Mario and Luigi, who are on a mission to rescue Princess Toadstool of the Mushroom Kingdom. The narrative is simple. Princess Toadstool was kidnapped by Bowser, the evil king of the Koopas. To get to the Princess, Mario and Luigi must make it through eight worlds divided into four levels each. Throughout these worlds, they travel on land, under water, and underground facing enemies like Gumbas, Koopa Troopas, and Bullet Bills. Their final challenge at the end of each world is against Bowser, whom they have to get past before moving on to the next level. Although this is a game that can be played with two players, the two players cannot play simultaneously. When Mario dies, Luigi plays from the start, not from where Mario left off. A player who plays Mario’s character could essentially clear the entire game before player two (Luigi) even gets a chance to start. There are few aspects of this game that produce a feeling of immersion. Like Pac-Man, one can slip into Mario and Luigi’s character on a mission to defeat enemies, retrieve items like stars, projectile flowers, and power stars, and gain more life by gaining points through collecting coins. As one moves to higher levels, the game gets more challenging so the player continues to be stimulated. Players learn how to manage their time as each level is timed. I remember figuring out a way to gain extra life by continuously jumping on Buzzy Beetle on the steps of a certain level. I would do this until the last few seconds of the level and then speed through to the end. Even though I dodged the entire level, I must have gained 50 extra lives by doing this. I remember feeling like I was on a mission and similar to goal setting, the ultimate objective is to save Princess Toadstool. Designs for e-Learning enviornmentsOnline environments today can feature many possibilities that once could not have been considered. It allows learners the freedom to follow their own ideas, and challenges teachers to create environments that are captivating and that engage learners in practical, meaningful and authentic ways. New learning technologies offer many affordances that help to increase communication and interaction amongst learners. Student engagement through wikis, blogs, folksonomies, chat, journals, discussions, and other tools, are some ways to use technology to promote active learning beyond the classroom walls.
At this point in my life, an online learning environment is ideal only because it is convenient. I am also a more shy and reserved person; therefore, I feel that my participation in terms of sharing my thoughts and ideas in an online course is far greater than my participation in courses I took for my undergrad. Part of that reason is also because I have the time to collect my thoughts and think about what I want to say before "posting". Having said this, the discussion threads in online courses does an excellent job of helping to create a community-centred learning environment because everyone has to participate and more knowledge is shared because of that. There are many ways to assess learning online and it is refreshing to be in a course where the majority of your mark is not based on a research paper or critiques. Creating my own wiki and working with a team to design a Learning Management System (LMS) are both knowledge-building activities that are assessed formatively using a rubric and through ongoing feedback from the professor. Activities like these also make the environment a more knowledge-centered one. Anderson (2008) considers interaction as a defining and critical component of the educational process. They type of interaction does vary depending on the delivery mode. In a face-to-face learning environment, the student-teacher interaction is dominant, and in an asynchronous online learning environment, the student-content interaction is dominant. I recently came across this global weather project put together by a teacher in Australia. She uses a LMS called Schoology to collaborate with students all over the world in deciding where in the world is the best place to live? As this was a blended-learning approach, the online component clearly demonstrated a dominant student-content interaction that engaged learners in the global community to connect and learn together with the same objective in mind. I personally feel that this approach incorporates all four attributes of learning discussed by Anderson (2008), and the students and teachers are getting the best of both worlds. You can view the video at: http://www.schoology.com/group/25228991/blog/post/96508089 "The net provides opportunities to "plunge ever deeper into knowledge resources"-grow knowledge, find your way around knowledge, benefiting from thousands of formats/contexts" (Anderson, 2008). Referenes: Anderson, T. (2008). "Towards a Theory of Online Learning." In Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. Theory of Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca University. WikisReflect on your own participation in the ETEC 510 wiki space. What are the relevant design affordances that shape how learning happens in a wiki? It’s commonplace for educators to lament their students’ reliance on Wikipedia because of concerns about the validity and reliability of knowledge on this site. These concerns ought, of course, reasonably to be extended to any site students’ might use in their work. How could we provide a kind of critical media literacy that would assist students’ to evaluate the quality of knowledge – both their own, and the knowledge retrieved from online sources, or textbooks? How would you assess the quality of students’ own contributions in a wiki? How can arguments about the quality of knowledge impact educational decisions about appropriate media usage?
The interview featuring Jimmy Wales, founder of the WikiMedia Foundation, and Chris Anderson, editor-in-chief of Wired magazine, on NPR's Wikipedia, Open Source and the Future of the Web was an insightful interview to listen to. The discussion between the call from the professor and Jimmy Wales was so typical, similar to discussions between educators of the C20th and C21st mindset. This shift towards 21st century thinking and "The Knowledge Age" is an ongoing one where the need to rebuild our education system should strongly consider what we now know about how people learn. The wiki is one of the web 2.0 tools where collaborative learning and active participation occurs. People with common interests have the ability to publish, contribute, share resources, and build knowledge through engaging in such an environment. The wiki lends itself to many affordances from the ability to edit content quickly and easily by anyone visiting the page, to all the different versions of pages being accessible. Creating my wiki on the Reggio Emilia Approach was my first experience in creating a wiki. I spent a lot of time looking at other wiki pages, and more specifically, to learn how to code. Although this was challenging and time consuming at first, the project became easier as I progressed. Chris Anderson, in the NPR interview, spoke about the discussion entries in Wikipedia as being accurate and trustworthy, and that people who contribute to the discussions want to improve the site, not destroy it. He goes on to say that there has been a lot of intelligent discussions around entries which leads to a more intense review process. It would be interesting to see the activity that goes through my own entry to find out what others have to say regarding my content. This would allow for self-reflection and assessment of the quality of knowledge I have contributed. I did have a few people outside the course look over my wiki; however, it would have also been helpful had one or two students in this course contribute, share a resource, participate in a discussion, etc., so it mimics the "real" wikipedia. I understand that may happen in time, but going through the "live" process would ensure a quality contribution is made. In the article, Wikis in Teaching and Assessment: The M/Cyclopedia, Bruns and Humphrey talk about Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (NPOV) and how people need to adhere to this policy by presenting both sides of an argument. This style values the process of negotiating over content. Any changes made on wiki pages are noticed by a core community who are constantly watching the site, and pages can be removed quickly. In creating my own wiki, I found it difficult to not be biased at times. The Reggio Emilia Approach is one I am passionate about and stopping myself from writing on a personal level was one I struggled with. I also found myself finding sources that backed up my current knowledge, as opposed to researching to find out new information. Wikipedia has been questioned for its validity and reliability of knowledge, and in one case was termed a "lousy encyclopedia" by a professor who called into the NPR interview. I would argue against this notion as today's learners thrive on active participation in digital and media literacy, and their engagement in wikipedia stimulates intellectual curiosity on many levels. Peer reviews and debates alone lead to intelligent discussions and thoughtful entires. Having said this, students need to be accountable to ensure the sources are credible, and as Wales said in the NPR interview, "Take information sources and use sensible judgement when referencing wiki". |