Assignment 1 - Learning design brief

The following entry is my Assignment 1 submission - a conclusion of the learning design brief, synthesized from my learning and reflections in previous posts. The restriction of the 1000 word limit has seen, by necessity, a great deal of editing and less comprehensive coverage of the topic as a result.  Anyway...no sour grapes here!  Wish me luck!    

Assignment 1 - Learning design brief

My learning experiences to date within this course – ICTs for Learning Design – (a post-graduate course in teacher training at CQUniversity) have been challenging and insightful.  This course is focused on learning theories in practice and integrating potentials of modern Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) into teaching design, by using: blogs, wikis and (to a far lesser extent) websites.  As a group of learner-teachers who are learning about learning - or meta-learning -, students participated in activities catering for diversity of experiences within the cohort.  Notably, a clarion importance of meta-learning for professional teacher training is emphasized by; Dembo (cited in Pui-wah, 2008, p.85) – ‘…putting our focus on preparing teachers to learn how to teach is not enough; future teachers also should learn how to learn.’ –and Hammerness (cited in Pui-wah, 2008, p.85): ‘…effective teachers need to be meta-learners who can also take charge of their own learning.’

  The main active learning activities were; a profile wiki, a learning theories wiki and a mobile phones wiki.  The main reflective activity was creating and using a blog.  Some embraced the activities; some were daunted or even afraid of what the technologies or theories discussed means to pre-service-teachers.  However, the conclusions I’ve made through reflections are (summarily):

• Meta-learning is essential for modern teaching where change is a constant
• Reflection is an important learning strategy for pre-service and professional teachers to enhance skill in learning design
• Learning is a diverse experience; diversity of experience and learning features in all cohorts
• Learning theories are put into practice in class contexts
• Professional teachers develop a toolkit of engaging teaching strategies catering for diversity of learner profiles, all with potentially individualized learning strengths
• Constructivist learning projects are; engaging of students by encouraging experiential learning, are inherently challenging although non-teacher-centric, yet are also a collaborative platform for students learning skills which solo efforts may not provide access to
• Modern and emerging ICTs hold significant potential as engaging teaching tools
• Reflection on mental scaffolds for Web 2.0 applications by pre-service teachers, combined with concepts such as Bloom’s taxonomy of teaching classifications or other learning theories, conduce an integrated e-learning design framework for potentially successful teaching utilization of modern ICTs.

Genuine and critical reflective practices are vital for the professional development of teachers (Harford & MacRuairc, 2008, p.1890).  Reflections on own past learning began the task of pre-service teachers to reflect on their learning activities in a self-generated web-log (blog) and encourage good reflective habits.  Beyond apprehensions of publicly accessible (or restricted) reflections, blogs invite scrutiny and commentary of peers and lecturers/tutors alike, but often self-review is central to reflective practice.  Reflections in a blog put student commentary into the shared domain of Web 2.0 tools, -

…sometimes referred to as the “read/write Web”, provides online users with interactive services, in which they have control over their own data and information. (Madden & Fox; Maloney; cited in Ajjan & Hartshorne, 2008, p.71)

Control over learning activity, such as student inputs in wiki activities, empowers students, effectively engaging student ownership of participation in the learning (inter)activity.  Traditional approaches to learning demand student compliance without offering student input or an active experience, because loci of control rested in the teacher.  Ethridge (et al, 2009) observes: ‘Experiential learning has become an essential part of many educational settings from infancy through adulthood.’  However, readiness to assume control over self-directed experiential learning depends upon individual perceptions, and thus, the diversity of experiences in learner cohort demand appreciation by modern teachers.   As Moss (2008, p.219) illuminates diversity in active learning:

In experiential education, it is apparent that students bring their own perceptions to their activities. These perceptions are largely a result of their cultural identity. One’s cultural identity influences one’s definition of curriculum, instruction, and education. Reflection and reciprocity are important concepts in the field of service-learning and experiential education.

Essentially, a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to teaching will not work, and this is equally true of teaching students with other forms of diversity e.g. socio-economic status, impairments and disabilities, intellectual development, social skills, inter-personal skills, etc.   A professional toolkit approach to learning design enables preparedness in teaching to student diversities.   Moss (2008, p.216) argues that:

... diversity study circles can be integrated as integral to education that is multicultural in the development of preservice teachers’ critical self-reflection as a bridge to developing a critical lens for classroom practice and a democratic society.

Arguably, from the toolkit as diversity study circles, other (non-ICT) strategies of many kinds may well serve teaching to diversity. However, teaching to diversity may be relevant achieved through use of modern ICTs because of their presence in young generation learners.  Also, relating to how ICTs may garner cooperation from students, and enhance learning design and pedagogy, Dearstyne (cited in Ajjan & Hartshorne, 2008, p.71) notes:

Examples of Web 2.0 participatory technologies include wikis, blogs, instant messaging, internet telephony, social bookmarking, and social networking sites. These new technologies make sharing content among users and participants much easier than in the past and change the way documents are created, used, shared, and distributed.

- Also, ‘…use of Web 2.0 technologies offer many powerful information sharing and collaboration opportunities for learners and learning’ (Ajjan & Harthorne, 2008, p.80).  Whilst there may always be a place for chalk/whiteboards, photocopied handouts, overhead-projections, etc, modern ICTs such as Web 2.0 tools are highly suitable for modern, techno-savvy 21^st century learners.  Because these tools are, by nature, participative and collaborative, links to constructivist learning theory were reflected upon.  The functionality of wikis in learning design shows promise, but will only be truly assessable in actual class contexts.

In the classroom, the constructivist view of learning can point towards a number of different teaching practices. In the most general sense, it usually means encouraging students to use active techniques (experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. (Educational Broadcasting Corporation, 2004)

The course wikis did have some technical glitches, but wikis are edit-able and the history function allows reversals of edits to be made, back to any edit point.  But the learning goal was not simply ‘how to use a wiki’.  Rather recognizing a complex of benefits including; in the constructivist learning and problem solving, about ICTs in learning design through practical contextualization of learning theories, interpersonal skills, new knowledge acquired through collaboration with inputs from peers and lecturer.    Usefully, O’Leary (cited in Kear, et al, 2010, p.219) defines wikis thus:

A wiki is a browser-based software tool which enables users to collaboratively write, edit and link HTML-based documents. Wikis also provide a history facility to keep track of the modifications made by different users, and to enable changes to be reversed if necessary.  Wiki pages can be created and edited by using simple text editing facilities that are provided as part of the wiki software. The original philosophy of wikis was one of complete openness, with any web user able to modify the content. However, wikis can also be set up so that only certain users can access or edit the pages.

The profile wiki activity required students to post a profile about their self to the profile wiki.  Students had to follow written instructions, navigate to the wiki site, leave their profile for other students to read and potentially choose from among the profiles a partner for the later learning theory wiki activity. Whilst pairing was not always successful, the task was then to develop a wiki-posted PMI (plus, minus, interesting, an activity in itself collaborative, constructivist) of one learning theories from the list.    The collaborative constructivist activity of the learning theories wiki produced a communal resource for students to digest and therefore self-exploring students drew from that like water from a ‘knowledge well’. 

Whilst delving into the wiki analysis was precipitated by self-directed navigation towards to each wiki-site it was my blog reflections which etched potential teaching utility of wikis into my mind and affirmed the exercise was collaborative constructivist.  As Ethridge & Branscomb (2009, p.407) assert:    

For a transformation in understanding to truly occur, direct experience must be paired with reflection to facilitate and reinforce learning. 

A term, ‘scaffolding’ (used throughout course materials), is a metaphor clearly drawing upon industrial imagery of strengthening structures adding support to buildings during construction or under repair.  Interestingly, teaching scaffolds are described as: ‘…a form of support for the development and learning of children and young people’ (Rasmussen, cited in Verenikina, 2010, p.5) and how 'teachers or peers supply students with the tools they need in order to learn’ (Jacobs, cited in Verenikina, 2010, p.5).  Importantly, scaffolding is linked with Vygotsky’s learning theory on the Zone of Proximal Development, ‘…the distance between what a person can do with and without help’ which distinguishes between student’s actual vs. potential level of independence (Verenikina, 2010, pp.3-4).  Consider though, Verenikina’s (2010, p. 6) assertion of limits to the scaffold metaphor:

As the scaffolding metaphor provides an easy to grasp justification of teacher intervention in learning, it can be a hindrance rather than a help for children's development depending on the context of its use.

A given threshold for an intervention point may only be appreciated in context of real-world application, such as our oncoming EPL (Embedded Professional Learning) practicum periods.  Yet, a scaffold maybe as simple as a verbal connecting question ‘Johnny, what do you think of Jenny’s answer to the question?’ or ‘Group B, it appears Group A has chosen the geography of country X to research, so which countries are you thinking of choosing for your research?’  Some scaffolds may support learners to achieve independent capability, yet some do not.  For me the concept map became more helpful in supporting my reflections en route to this conclusion than less the written reflections scaffold that required decoding to apply.  De Bono's Hats (1992) served as a scaffold for the last wiki on mobile phones, which effectively saw perceptions evolve by virtue of different perspectives in each hat.   No doubt trial and error is a key to assessing a scaffolds worth in real-world, class-based contexts.  Note, that rather than abandon the scaffold-metaphor, Verenikina (2010, pp.3-4) identifies some risk and affirms scaffold-Vygotskian-Piagetian links:

… it is essential to keep in mind that a literal interpretation of the scaffolding metaphor might lead to a narrow view of child-teacher interaction and an image of the child as a passive recipient of a teacher's direct instruction.  This falls far behind the Vygotskian idea of the ZPD and the Piagetian view of the child as an active self-explorer.

Above: An integrated eLearning framework, Adapted by Paul Hilder

from ‘Engagement Theory’(Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999) & ‘Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domains’ (Bloom, 1956)

Another wiki task was development of an eLearning framework (pictured above), as informed by Kearsley’s and Schneiderman’s engagement theory (1999) & Bloom’s (1956) revised Taxonomy of Learning Domains.  Essentially the ‘relate-create-donate’ learning phases of engagement theory are compatible with Bloom’s revised domains (as notional subsets: creating-evaluating, analyzing-applying, and understanding-remembering).  The task of considering the implementation of wikis (or other ICTs) was scaffolded by these learning concepts.  The insertion of the compatible phase subsets (although somewhat subjective in practice to the context applied) onto the picture of working cogs struck a chord in my mind in that each cog-phase are linked and integrated into a working apparatus.  If the whole machine doesn’t work (successful constructivist learning), then the integrated links have not been achieved in the teaching.  One could have used a more complicated diagram (e.g. a computer schematic, with inputs, applications, outputs, etc) to visually convey the connections of learning activities through each phase, but the cogs presented a more accessible visual concept.
In summary, essentially my aim is to improve my own meta-learning, develop my own pedagogical toolkit and realistically trial my eLearning framework io utilize ICTs to greater learning benefit of my future students during the EPL period.

References                         

Ajjan, H, & Hartshorne, R, 2008, ‘Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and Empirical tests’, The Internet and Higher Education, Volume 11, Issue 2, 2008, pp. 71-80, date accessed: 20/3/2011, accessibility:

http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6W4X-4SHF4R2-2-5&_cdi=6554&_user=409397&_pii=S1096751608000225&_origin=search&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2008&_sk=999889997&wchp=dGLzVzz-zSkzS&md5=3b21c3c28dfc2da0f0fb867fc72d53f6&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

Bloom, B, 1956, Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Domains, date accessed: 20/3/2011,accessibility: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html#cognitive

De Bono, E, 1992, Edward De Bono's Six Thinking Hats, Education Queensland website, accessed: 17/3/2011, accessibility: http://www.kurwongbss.eq.edu.au/thinking/Hats/hats.htm

Educational Broadcast Online, 2004, Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning: Concept to Classroom, Thirteen Ed Online, viewed: 7/3/2011, accessed: http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/credit.html  

Ethridge, E & Branscomb, K R, 2009, ‘Learning through action: Parallel learning processes in children and adults’, Teaching and Teacher Education, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp.400-408, date accessed: 20/3/2011, accessibility: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6VD8-4TRR8SP-3-1&_cdi=5976&_user=409397&_pii=S0742051X08001595&_origin=search&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=04%2F30%2F2009&_sk=999749996&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkzV&md5=cb725fc12ae2513fa310af02bc2a46f7&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

Harford, J & MacRuairc, G, 2008, ‘Engaging student teachers in meaningful reflective practice’,
Teaching and Teacher Education, Volume 24, Issue 7, pp.1884-1892, date accessed 20/3/2011, accessibility: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6VD8-4S4S5M8-1-3&_cdi=5976&_user=409397&_pii=S0742051X08000255&_origin=search&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=10%2F31%2F2008&_sk=999759992&wchp=dGLbVzW-zSkzS&md5=0f55e6f3b8413ea3f02d4084bdaf4346&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

Kear, K, Woodthorpe, J, Robertson, S, & Hutchison, M, 2010, ‘From forums to wikis: Perspectives on tools for collaboration’, The Internet and Higher Education, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp.218-225, date accessed: 20/3/2011, accessibility: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=1693010998&_st=13&view=c&_acct=C000019483&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=409397&md5=fff443d180d0d05d128563e93271a886&searchtype=a

Kearsley, G & Shneiderman, B, 1999, Engagement Theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning, date accessed:17/3/2011, accessibility: http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm

Moss, G, 2006, Diversity study circles in teacher education practice: An experiential learning project,

Indiana University—Purdue University Fort Wayne, IN, USA, date accessed: 20/3/2011, accessibility: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6VD8-4MJS02K-1-1&_cdi=5976&_user=409397&_pii=S0742051X06001600&_origin=search&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=01%2F31%2F2008&_sk=999759998&wchp=dGLzVtb-zSkWA&md5=f04d9f0009cad3eff92b1a13b7a3fa18&ie=/sdarticle.pdf

Pui-wah, D C, 2008, ‘Meta-learning ability – a crucial component for the professional development of teachers in a changing context’, Teacher Development; Vol. 12 Issue 1, p85-95, date accessed: 20/3/2011, availability: http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=122&sid=fd85c095-77aa-45d8-b69b-407da2e6c925%40sessionmgr113&vid=12

Verenikina, I, 2010, Understanding Scaffolding and the ZPD in Educational Research, Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia, date accessed: 15/3/2011, available at: http://www.aare.edu.au/03pap/ver03682.pdf

Legal, safe and ethical use of this Blog

There is no need to belabor this point.  But it is expected by myself, as the author & proprietor of this blog, that all contributors shall be welcome to behave in such a manner as to not jeopardize the safety of others, show no compromise of the ethics of good conduct, or run foul of the law.  This blog, whilst moderated, is an open source and should remain so with only minor and legally prudent edits, so to speak.  Lets have robust discourse on the matters of serious consideration.  Yet, we shall not tolerate use of this blog to intimidate or harass those others who access it.

SWOT of a webpage as an ICT teaching tool

Strengths: Teacher controls the content.  Virtually limitless content applications. Very easy to use as the web page owner can just click and start editing the user friendly interface.  Good for dissertations.  Didactic content has integrity of the authors/architects intent.  Public domain context.  Gives some class quiet time if students read in silence.  Educational sites usually are not expensive.  The web is a connectivist tool by nature.  The exercise teaches individual skills as independently as student & teacher like.


Weaknesses: Not collaborative exercise unless a project team established or the website owner is willing to publish others inputs.  Highly dependent on the reader's/audience's interpretation.  Constricts teaching diversity strategies usable during reading experience.  Non-collaborative during reading.  Costs time & $$ to maintain.  Not overtly constructivist.  Not teaching group skills.

Opportunities: Pedagogically speaking ...accessing a website is transparent use of this form of ICT...but creating a website is an entirely different matter.. which would open up a great deal more opportunity to engage the students in the process.  Interacting with websites design by the teacher is another promising strategy, particular in 'pimping' up some of the heavier content covering a topic.

Threats:  You may miss the mark (not engage students to explore core topic content) if your appreciation of the preferred learning styles of your cohort is found lacking.  You must know your students otherwise you will lose them no matter how interesting you find the 'Rings of Saturn' or some such topic, no matter how 'whiz bang' you make the sight.  Unfortunately the web is not a problem free zone; e.g. viruses, and other unwanted or inappropriate content on some sites.  The surfing destinations of kids and any outside contacts they make during the exercise need to be well monitored.  Also, plagiarism must be stamped out at an early age.

Wiki creation reflection

The exercise of creating a wiki was easier than I expected.  It is the reflection that is the hard part.  I was able to add some text, upload pictures and even embed a video.  Here is the link to my wiki on the wikispaces website.  (Don't worry, we'er gonna spice it up a bit... with clips of jazz and other interesting performers soon to come!!)  My own learning in this exercise has essentially been one of a connectivist learning experience.  I used the links to wikispaces provided, read the instructions provided, and worked out that a 'Widget' includes videos, audios and other nifty little devices.  each step in the process was a new connection to new knowledge and now I know how to set up a wiki.

As a learning tool for others I reckon that wikis have a great deal of promise.  The next level of usage would be to open the membership of the wiki up to other contributors and see what happens.  I do believe that students would have some fun doing so.  But if an assignment covers a particular topic, the teacher integrating a wiki or even wiki creation into the assignment may really be able to achieve a high level of engagement from students with the topic.  The assignment becomes a focused lens and the wiki a tool (eg. like a proverbial tripod perhaps ?).  But the what of the role of the teacher?  Well,...give the kids some space to learn!

The potential for students to use wikis to relate-create-donate (see concepts of engagement theory, as per my integrated e-learning framework) and actually learn something useful for themselves, as well as others, is very high in this modern techno-centric world .  Yet, this is not teacher-centric learning, and presents an entirely new paradigm of mentoring.  No matter however adjectives are sought to describe it, our role is to not coach every step of the learning journey.  This means: an absence of teacher-centricity.  But why not, but for the ultra wireless connectivity of this new technological mileux? In my opinion, this may categorically eliminate some pedagogies for some, though not others....so what??  I would hope I am heading towards a well-balanced mix of learning theories.  Interestingly, a boss said to me one day, I will never use these theories again, ...no, I thought,...they will no longer be purely theoretical, but rather ...put into practice!  (Who once said: we are all teachers?)

Clearly diversity, by definition means that we are obliged to ever broaden our thinking and sharpen our teaching 'tools'.  Personally I do not have a preference for dismissing out-of-hand any of the learning theories.  There could a number of theories applied in the same lesson. I do not reject any I have read of so far in the course, so I allowing myself to develop a natural filter for whatever makes my mind drop the pedagogical penny, so to speak.  If a wiki will perform as one of my key teaching tools, ce la vie, but I have a strong sense of surety that we will be seeing more of this kind of comms in public domain and almost all of our social estates in the future anyway. So perhaps there is a certain degree of trepidation as to whether this is really an example of cutting edge, real-world comms we are trending/assimilating  here...Or perhaps this is just another way around for being coerced and induced by labour market demands of telco or media corporations to feed social appetites...or to possibly capitalize on them... Don't mind  me showing my Marxist tendencies now...

At this point I should say, the 'public vs. private internet domain' argument (freeware vs user pay) is a story for another entirely different thread of discourse, more suitable to a SOSE or some other humanties course, ironically.  But this reminds me,...pedagogically,... a wiki has potency, as you can fire any subject content through it, even the hairy ones, such as debate on something like the 'Intellectual property of cyberspace?'. (After all, ... not only was SOSE a fantastic major for me. One of the most enjoyable aspects of my Geography major was studying political geography...) 

Hang on, ...in hindsight, I have two important words: cognitive constructivism.  The whole wiki exercise has been a true exercise in light of this learning theory.  My own learning has been constructed from a clear recognition that we cannot have lecturers on speed dial, so a wiki building exercise is something we've had to think about ourselves.  But also about the resources powerful software provides.

(I wouldn't have admit this aloud before but I am totally amazed by the computer revolution! So as a student down payment on my professional integrity, I will back any successful strategy to some extent, until it stops working in the teaching-moment!)

The possibilities of wikis for classes is endless, but in the modern war of differing social network platform corporations, my cognition (thinking) tells me that the most popular software platform to carry the majority of this social function will be a highly prized socio-economic status.  (Media mogul anyone?)  Who knows what will be the most chosen format of the future?  It only matters is that your imagination is the limit!

As I write I can feel myself adopting, evolving new thoughts and even values...to me connectivist theoretical models of classroom structure are transparent.  So I am heading in that middle way again, and seeking a balance of the best teaching ideas and theories of this course.  When I didn't know a video was a widget I googled.  (How many different things are Widgets anyways?)

Although always astonished,as an artist, I find it noteworthy when, as a society, the more we become physically wired (or wireless), the more culturally creative yet socially isolated we feel.  Ever simply not checked yours Facebook lately?....It's soooo. liberating!  Sick of feeling lonely?  Me too! and I have hundreds of social contacts.  Sometimes I think my cyber-loneliness feeds my news hungry conscience, so maybe thats what drive us all to 'tweet' (etc). So why not use wikis in modernization of teaching?  At least it has the benefit of some focus or scaffolding, per se. It is after all, for the greater good!

But seriously, there really is a heck-of-a-lot of real-world learning opportunities and external customers in wikis.  Perhaps contemporarily, the vocational interviews held at an early school age are not such a bad idea (?), as this drive to human survival may be just the engaging carrot young pupils innately need to chase in their learnings.   

Hate to riff on it, but is there anybody out there??  I am creating here...so post me...someone? Anyone?  (What do you think of my post/s?  Feel free, as I can always delete you later! )

Now...next time we speak,....let me see... we shall have ourselves a website?

Mobile Phones Wiki

The mobile phones wiki is a collaborative project, set up by course lecturers and coordinators, using a significant scaffold broadly applied in the education sector: De Bono's Hats. This scaffold has benefits for both my own learning as a pre-service teacher and those of students, as it can be applied in classroom contexts for school students, or in TAFEs, universities or training colleges.

For my own learning , the use of De Bono's Hats assisted in dissection of the topic (mobile phones in classrooms), with a great deal of information brought into the wiki and formation of focused ideas relative to the debates surrounding the topic.  On this topic, as expected, I easily wore the 'black hat' and recognized many problems with integrating mobile phones in the classroom.  But in 'putting on' the other coloured hats representing different perspectives of the topic and reading other points of view, a new and slightly evolved perspective was synthesized.  As a result, my own perspective changed slightly but significantly.  The argument I had before the De Bono exercise: mobile phones should be kept out of classrooms because of the inherent risks and inequities to integrating their uses in any student cohort.  My new perspective (post-De Bono exercise): mobile phones could be used in class context if sufficient resources and broadly applied guidelines for responsible use in schools are available.  It should be noted that my aversion to mobile phones at school is coloured somewhat by my current employer, Education Queensland, which has a no phone policy for students at school.  I believe the legal considerations underpin this policy.

The mobile phone wiki, and use of De Bono's Hats as a scaffold for the wiki as a collaborative forum, holds some promise for the learning of my (future) students.  Given that the hats enable synthesis of perspectives, and more than one student has editorial and contributing access, the collective produced a diversity of ideas extensively covering the debate. 

The collaborative nature of the mobile phone wiki, as well as the real-world focus, indicates that the exercise is a predominantly constructivist learning strategy. The whole of the perspectives is no doubt greater than that of the sum of the individual parts.  It is plausible that not one of us in the course could have synthesized the information now present in the whole wiki.  However, in reading the collective of responses, the tyranny of the majority is present, as there seems to be present a centripedal dynamic in the constructivist exercise which compelled some contributors to move there opinions to somewhere in the middle between support and rejection of mobile phones in classes.  I know I certainly was one of these contributors.

So by nature of the collaboration, the range of opinions and ideas has served the diversity of the group.  Some of us have been pro-mobile use (ie. the barriers should be overcome so as to engage modern learners with the technology they use almost every day).  Some of us remain anti-mobile phone use (i.e. the risks are too great, the ethics not socially & culturally established, the resources not yet devoted, the technology is not equitably available or distributed, the health risks unknown or too great, etc).    

As an online e-learning activity, I believe wikis and De Bono's hats do have some promise.  Wikis alone can give the teacher great insight into the breakdown of students thought processes, furnishing insight to each students background and their knowledge of the topic.  The knowledge is shared among the group and assists those learners who did not consider particular insights.  I for one was enlightening by those brave enough to reject mobile phone based upon health risks.  In hindsight, given the opportunity to add another risk into the mix of negatives, I would add 'environmental' risks.  The amount of mobile phone waste that is building up around the world is significant and recycling is not always cost effective...so hang on, I will go back and edit that risk in!  (Another beauty of wikis is ability to edit, but modifications can be undone by moderators or other contributors too).

As indicated earlier, De Bono's Hats is a good scaffold for gaining a collaboration of perspectives on a topic, but it is probably more suited to high school student cohorts.  The hatted points of views are problem centred approaches, so if integrated with an e-learning strategy, they certainly can assist in establishing a foundation for group projects.  At some points a teacher may return to each or any of the 'hats' so as to focus perspectives of students and to help guide them if they were off-task or off-topic.  The' hats' also provide a powerful platform for the students to be assertive and even make persuasive arguments about their idea/s and how their idea/s is relevant.  Occasionally teachers themselves are taught/persuaded about a point of view by the students and perhaps accept an idea as being relevant they'd previously discounted as irrelevant. I do believe that the e-learning possibilities are considerable with using De Bono's hats.  But as a scaffold to the  technology, De Bono's hats removes the limiting factor of ICTs simply being a tool (i.e. a transparent ICT like a photocopy or OHP), but an advance learning strategy. 

Note: Both the wikis and the De Bono exercise is highly compatible with my own 'Integrated eLearning' framework from the previous post.  Particularly as there is a significant outside audience, i.e. future students, and the exercise is channeled towards real-world experiences, preparing us for taking up the role of teachers. 

eLearning Framework

Above: An integrated eLearning framework, Adapted by Paul Hilder

from ‘Engagement Theory’(Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1999)

& ‘Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Domains’ (Bloom, 1956)

Reflection on Learning Theories

Learning theories of different kinds have been developed and explored by teachers and human scientists such as psychologists.   The following is my reflection of these theories, drawing from the reflections of others in this course posted onto the learning theories , as well as my own experiences and knowledge base.


Behaviourism
(Note: I found this theory evoked the most amount of reflection of all the learning theories, so please excuse the length of this entry.  I do not believe behaviourism informed/underpinned this particular learning activity, either the wiki or the reflection, to any significant degree)

Behaviourism is a theory of human behaviour pioneered by behavioural scientists Pavlov, Skinner & Watson.  The idea is that behaviour can be observed and researched, occurring regardless of neuro-physical states.  Essentially this theory asserts that (so-called) 'normal' and 'abnormal' behaviour can be learned and, conversely, unlearned.

Pavlov established this theory with his landmark dog feeding and bell experiment, with the bell being a stimulus which provoked a physiological response in his dog to salivate in expectation that food would soon be forthcoming.  He described classical conditioning as: '...a type of learning in which a stimulus to evoke a response that was originally evoked by another stimulus.' (Weiten, 2001, p222) Pavlov's dog would salivate even before food was presented, and was conditioned to react to the bell as a cue.  Skinner developed behaviourism further by studying and describing operant conditioning which is: '...is a form of learning in which responses come to be controlled by their consequences.' (Weiten, 2001, p.232).

But the challenge here in this course, in reflection on this theory, is 'How do teachers establish the right kinds and amounts of external stimuli in order to elicit desirable student behaviour?'.  Behaviourism in the classroom places the power in the hands of the teacher to evoke desired behaviour and has huge implications for teachers in areas of behaviour management.  For example, hearing the recess bell, school students would be ready to eat and then play, which is a routine positive reinforcement.  Yet a negative reinforcement would a detention for undesirable behaviour.  A positive remark from the teacher for doing good work also conditions students when they do well, yet a reprimand for incomplete task work would be a negative reinforcement.  All of these are conditioning stimuli.  Another suggestion is that if you ignore undesirable behaviour, you will not reinforce it.  I tend to disagree as I find that if you allow children to misbehave without at least some degree of consternation or reprimand, then the freedom to do as they please is a positive reinforcement in & of itself!

In my opinion, a criticism of this theory lies in its generalized interpretations of 'desired' behaviour and what is definitively 'normal'.  For example, some teachers accept a degree of rowdiness in their class and some do not (Have you ever observed a perfectly quiet class? I have!) For some students, other factors may be in play.  Not only neuro-physical limitations (such as an impairment), but also potentially other sociocultural factors (such as difference between genders, people of different socioeconomic strata, inter-cultural differences such as body language, eye contact, facial expressions or personal-spatial awareness).

For example, I have heard reports of Pakistani airport staff getting into trouble for being 'surely' when replying to offers of gravy from cafeteria staff (even though this is not a school context, it perfectly describes the issue of defining 'normal').  The cultural diversity is such that in the place of origin within Pakistan of those staff, the inflection of a question is tonally downwards, yet in Anglo culture the inflection of a question is tonally upwards, which is the cause of the misinterpretation of the response (Gumperz, 1982, p.185).  This is merely a cultural linguistic difference, so what is the norm here?.

Those unfamiliar with many Australian Indigenous cultures, as well as South Sea Island or Torres Strait cultures, direct eye contact is considered confronting and offensive to elders (authority figures).  Although these above mentioned behaviours are certainly born of social habit and culturally founded reinforcements, within the diversity of students cohorts, teachers must consider the scope of the behaviour that is desirable amongst the cohort and their strategy for conditioning learning behaviour.  To summarise the main point here, sometimes individual or inter-ethnic considerations must be taken into account before teachers assume a behaviour is non-conforming or undesirable.

Back to teaching & learning...I have heard teachers speak of conditioning behaviours for learning and creating calm in the classroom.  For example, the students ability to sit quietly and listen without interfering with the learning of others is a conformity taught from Prep age at school so they perform the '5 L's' by conditioned instinct (Looking with your eyes, Listening with your ears, Legs crossed, hands in Lap, Lips closed).  By using a raised open hand gesture from an early age, the students are conditioned into quiet and lesson readiness to the degree that even at high school, when they see a teacher/Principal hold up their hand, the students respond by becoming quiet and attentive.

(Source for above diagrams: Barnes, et al, amended from Prabhu, 2011)

To be honest, a right hand raised is reminiscent of the infamous Nazi salute, however that is my own conditioned response which is an evoked sense of revulsion.  But it should not be overlooked that if a teacher in Germany started using this stimulus to evoke calm, then you might run into some problems!

Conditioning in the classroom occurs in so many ways, effective pedagogy cannot exist without it in one form or other.  Yet behavourism seems to ignore the intellectual development of the student (it is a action-consequence based theory, which does not help, for example, high school SOSE/Geography/History students absorb and develop abstract concepts).  But it is useful theory in dealing with chaining behaviour towards better preparedness for learning, perhaps more so in primary cohorts.  However, I have a hunch that the desire for positive reinforcement can turn the teacher to towards a 'carrot & stick' approach to conditioning habits and behaviours of pupils.  Students motivations to conform to teacher expectations are not founded in their own desire to learn and deeply absorb new information.

As far as ICTs for learning design goes, for example, students can actually see use of certain ICTs (such as use of interactive educational computer software) as a reward in themselves.  Yet, the teacher might actually desire this response from the students as they engage in the learning experiences supported by the use of that particular software.

Another ICT that is in use at my current employers school is a classroom PA system known as a 'Sound Field' in an upper primary class.  The manufacturer claims it improves student comprehension, grades and behaviour, yet it is assigned to the class because one student is hearing impaired, coinciding with a condition within the autism spectrum.  If all students can hear the teachers voice cut through the space & noise without the need for teacher to yell, then it is plausible that the students responses and results may well be encouraging (this teacher loves the sound field!).  If the teacher is happy that the class responds more positively with the sound field, does that imply the students are happily learning too?  I am not sure as behaviour issues are not truly eliminated.

However, the hearing impaired child may move away from the school, & then the sound field will go with them.  My question to consider then, in behaviourist terms, is: 'What happens to the conditioned students that remain who now associate the clarity of the sound field with the teachers authority in the class?'.  I do believe a similar conundrum exists for mathematics teachers whose students have been conditioned using scientific calculators as opposed to manual calculations, i.e. 'what happens to the work of these conditioned students if the calculators are left at home or have flat batteries?'.  This reminds me of the old adage: 'If you don't use it, you lose it!'.

There are many other issues for the 21st century learner and conditioning of ICTs.  In music, a scenario similar to the above exists in the conditioning of students to tune instruments or voices using digital tuners vs. the important skill (an auditory literacy) of acoustic tuning, which provides much needed ear-pitch training.  So too, in geography, the skills of orienteering by use of magnetic compass, paper maps and even signs from nature (solar positioning, moss on trees etc) seem to have been made redundant by the onset of GPS systems and geographic information systems such as Google-Earth, among others.  Yet, I sit here writing using a blog based word-processor and I can feel myself forgetting how to write by hand!  And no....I am not a technophobe, however, reflecting on behavourism in the classroom prompts me to ask that if the technology fails or is unavailable, 'How would the teacher revert to the "old school" way of operation?'  Even this blog failed me last night and I had to retype a great deal of work to re-post!  Let me assure you that my own behaviour changed when I realized this ICT was causing me problems and so much extra work!

Above: Some ICT choices for learning design - How does using them condition student's learning?

(Source: Microsoft ClipArt)

Constructivism

Among the learning theories discussed in this course, constructivism caught my attention.

'In the classroom, the constructivist view of learning can point towards a number of different teaching practices. In the most general sense, it usually means encouraging students to use active techniques (experiments, real-world problem solving) to create more knowledge and then to reflect on and talk about what they are doing and how their understanding is changing. The teacher makes sure she understands the students' preexisting conceptions, and guides the activity to address them and then build on them.' (Educational Broadcasting Corporation, 2004)

Students in constructivist class settings are encouraged to constantly assess their own learning.  This brings their attention to consider the experience and then transfer the learning into real world settings because their own what they learn.  This is authentic learning as the natural curiosity of children is tapped and channeled towards the new ideas and information.  It is incumbent upon the constructivist teacher to really get to know their student pre-existing knowledge and understandings, although this may take some time.  Also, if the new information is in conflict with pre-existing knowledge, the new knowledge may be discarded.  Assessment is difficult as learning may not fit traditional reporting standards.  But the role of the teacher becomes more a guide/shepherd/facilitator/negotiator to the students learning, rather than a instructor or director of knowledge and ideas.

There is a risk I see in that during group activities (which are emphasized by constructivism) that the learning experience will become dominated by group thinking and will be translated by the alpha minds of the cohort.  The students who determine their opinion is to dissent from the majority or strike out in some kind of independent thought or action may forced towards conforming with the greater majority or risk being alienated or marginalized as learning outcasts. 

Constructivism, I believe is the learning theory that most informed/underpinned this particular learning activity, at least to a more significant degree than the others.  With the drawing of knowledge from my own understandings, and relating the theory to my own experiences of teaching & learning in the real world, I am given insight into a better appreciation of constructivism in action.  This learning will have meaning and better retention of the ideas presented to me and enable me to put active learning into practice in the future.  I have noticed that when our lecturers and tutors observe us drawing too much on our own experiences, they then step to guide us and develop our knowledge beyond what we already understand.

An example ICTs that relate to constructivism would definitely be the use of interactive whiteboards, particularly with software in which each student can take a turn at the board activity, even as the group class group and discussion/reflection afterward.  Another would be a computer lab exercise in which the class all participate in a web quest or a networked computer activity (even if each student has an individual console, a network can still support a group activity, just as the paired wikis here).

I'd like to now briefly link constructivism to both Felder's and Solomon's Learning Styles as well as Gardner's Multiple Intelligences (see previous posts).  In my opinion, constructivist learning caters heavily for the kinesthetic learners among a student cohort as their learning is of and through the actual experience of the lesson. Group activities cater towards those with higher interpersonal smarts.  The extension for the students occurs through reflection of the experience, and this aspect probably caters more for the intra-personally smart and promotes development of linguistic smarts.  And then perhaps too, those who lean towards intuitive learning are catered for (as opposed to sensing learners), as concrete details are less important than the experience of the learning journey in the intuitive learners roundabout way to arriving at the learning outcome (new skills and broader knowledge of the core topic and usable in related areas).  However, the 'non-spoon-feed' style of teaching that constructivism promotes allows a teacher to assess responses/outcomes to their questions/challenging activities and correct students if they provide incorrect answer or go off on tangents etc.

At my school (my employer that is, not my EPL) I have observed many examples of constructivism in practice by teachers.  The other day a maths teacher decided to pimp up a lesson on scale and ratios, so he asked if I had any school plans (I am the School Facilities Officer) and I provided him with the plan, elevation and side view etc on the new school hall.  He realized the drawings were not perfect A3 photocopies because he calculated the ratio to be 1 : 214, where normally construction plans on A3 are 1 : 200 (he checked this by measuring back calculating out the scale).  I suggested that maybe the students first task could be to check the accuracy of the scale...and he said 'Oh yes, we are going to do that for sure!' :-) 


Connectivism

This theory asserts that knowledge grows exponentially and time until particular knowledge becomes obsolete is becoming shorter.  Connectivism emphasizes that we are constantly learning new information and learner decisions are based on foundations which are constantly altering.  It is based on the understanding that; huge shifts in society are occurring, individual learning is not internal, yet the ability to access knowledge is of high importance.

The use of modern technologies that students already use in order to learn is engaging for them.  Most kids today use google, but add in Skype/Facebook/Twitter etc and you have some powerful options.  Today school are struggling with the ethical dilemmas of using public domain applications such as Facebook and Twitter (eg. Ed Qld blocks Facebook on their servers), but the potential for these as learning platforms is definitely strong.

If a student of history has to demonstrate his/her knowledge of a topic, a good connectivist (& ICT) tactic would be to set a task to study new content by setting up a Facebook group covering the topic or even tweet a discussion.  I have seen many Facebook groups which basically set up multiple choice online quizzes and each Q&A is a piece of declarative knowledge (eg. test your knowledge).  It can even be more complex by asking the student to set up the quiz so participants have to show procedural knowledge (eg. hypothetically asking 'What type of Dictator are you?' or 'What is your political orientation?') and as such gets students to advance from basic concepts to more complex.

So a Facebook quiz about Hitler isn't just about dates he came to power or invaded Poland etc, it gets students to respond to deeper complex issues such as value of human rights, dynamics of power in society, democracy vs. totalitarianism, racism and propaganda in society, etc.  A funny joke my daughter Facebooked which reflected some history learnings when she says she doesn't like history much: "Hey Hitler, I think you lost something....World War Two!!" A bit of advancing English literacy in that simple joke as well I thought.   

The problem I have with connectivism as a theory is in the statement about knowledge becoming 'obsolete'.  Spelling, grammar, written and oral discourse, numeracy, mathematical skills, oratory and good cadence in speech, etc etc etc there are umpteen dozen examples of procedural knowledge that in my opinion will evolve but never become obsolete.  If a nuclear holocaust happens tomorrow, how will we survive without language skills or the ability to build and maintain shelter and survive in the elements?  If people have evolved into couch potatoes with enormous texting thumbs it would not help us survive the reality.  The connectivist learning experience I believe should always hold some relevance to the context of the real world.  A significant dangers lies in the technologies becoming the outcome (student thinks 'I learnt how to use Facebook today'), rather than as a learning platform (student recalls the new information that the Facebook experience brought them to understand).  


Cognitive Constructivism

Piaget's theory of development underpins this theoretical interpretation of constructivism.  (Note: I will not spend a lot of time reflecting/analyzing this theory as I believe it is a fairly easily understood concept.)  Constructivism's active learning experiences are still the main thrust, but the other element of cognitive constructivism is that human of different ages cannot be given information, but rather they must construct their own knowledge and build it through experience.  Piaget's emphasizes the role of the teacher to make a rich learning environment for the spontaneous learning of children.

An example of this at my work was with my sons Prep teacher.  The kids all went 'camping' via a role play in the corner of the classroom and my son Ethan had built a 'torch' made out of an old water bottle, with 'batteries' and 'light' made out of bits of coloured paper... it all looked very cute as the kids made pretend fires and marshmallows, built a tent and generally had a great time.  For an experienced person (most adults) know that stick and cotton wool aren't really yummy marshmallows for toasting, but with suspension of disbelief, the real world concept is there.  This learning experience emerged from a discussion with the teacher about camping, even suggested by the kids and initiated by them with teachers permission and guidance.  The role play was facilitated by the teacher (using resources from their box of old boxes and whatever they needed they found) who saw an opportunity for an activity through the kids to learn skills (planning, problem solving, interpersonal communications, good neighbourly conduct, organisation, etc).  What a great way to learn! Very inspirational to see cognitive constructivism in practice.  (I really hope that high school teaching experience provides just as much inspiration for my students and my teaching)

Vygotsky’s Theories of Learning

Essential Vygotsky's theory of learning is a theory that uses supportive learning structures otherwise known as scaffolding.  Centred on MKO (More Knowledge Other) which means the teacher has more knowledge than the student, and suitable tools can be used which can be virtual, physical or cultural, and the 'teacher' may even be a peer or a computer.  Learning occurs in a collaborative settings between students and teacher.   A key preamble is the ZPD (Zone of Proximal development); the distance between a pupils ability to perform a task under guidance vs. solving problems independently.

Vygotsky penned a great deal of monumental writings about the development of cognition with insights into psychology, and how cognition develops within a social and cultural setting.  He developed eight theories on: value, knowledge, human nature, learning, transmission, society, opportunity, consensus.  Inter-personal and intra-personal dimensions of learners psychology are important, as past experiences are involved in the understanding developed by students of the present.

His writings & theory is comprehensive, so much can be applied in the class setting.  One of the most notable points is the role of language is central to cognitive development (thought processes and therefore understanding).  This in reinforced by many teachers (in my experience) who seek to teach literacy across subject areas.  I saw the other day a poor example of an online modern history distance education exam, but the exam was riddled with spelling errors!  This is a problem where one subject area (one I will teach) is sorely affected by deficient language skills.  (Poor form I thought)  Anyway, despite him being a Marxist (he only believes in Marxist psychology), his observations about the intra-personal psychological tools are correct in that language is the primary means of access to information and developing cognition. The socialization of thought and language development is key.  (It is difficult to fault Vygotsky there).

The limits of cognition in different ages are asserted by this theory, and I find that another true point, but for gifted children, the limits are exceeded.  We have all heard teachers say a Yr 'X' child should be able to read this or write that and it may be said that this is limiting potential for extensive beyond that.  Yet a Yr 1 child at our school has learnt how to spell the word 'picturesque' which I find remarkable, so the child has developed an advanced degree of independent problem solving and can trace the root word 'picture' and develop it into a complex adjective!  A challenge would be for a teacher in not blunting the extension for advanced students by adhering too religiously to notional limits in stages of development or allowing the less smart children of the collective cohort to be the focus of the work  I can see potential for the smarter and less so students to be working together in tasks to produce a enhanced learning outcome for both.

A criticism might lay in his assertion that mental processes can only be fully understood if the student understands the tools and signs to mediate them....I am not sure that even advanced students are gifted enough to consciously understand the psychological tools (eg. developing language) and cognition they experience during lessons. 


References
Barnes, A, Cheung, J, Moore, J, Nguyen, L, & Swift, G, amended from Prabhu, S, Clinical Supervisor, 2011, La Trobe University, date viewed: 8/3/2011, accessed:
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/hcs/projects/CALM/CALM/pdf%20links/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20Hand-listening.pdf
&
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/hcs/projects/CALM/CALM/pdf%20links/Microsoft%20Word%20-%205%20Ls%20of%20listening.pdf

Educational Broadcast Online, 2004, Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning: Concept to Classroom, Thirteen Ed Online, viewed: 7/3/2011, accessed: http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/credit.html 

Gumperz, J, 1982, Discourse strategies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Weiten, W, 2001, Psychology - Themes & Variations, 5th Edition, Wadsworth - Thompson Learning, Stamford, USA.

Profile Wiki Learning Activity

What is a 'wiki'? Well, as suggested in the course guide to Assignment 1, I found a great summary answer by googling 'wiki':
'A wiki is a type of website that allows visitors themselves to easily add, remove and otherwise edit and change some available content, sometimes without the need for registration.
Wikipedia
Ward Cunningham created the first wiki in 1995. The name "Wiki" was inspired by the Hawaiian word wiki or wiki-wiki, which means "quick".
Wikipedia is probably the most well known example of a public wiki. Many wikis are private: existing on intranets or behind firewalls with access restricted to registered users. '
(West Australian Government-Department of Education & Training, 2011)

Although lecturers often warn against using Wikipedia as a reference, citing credibility issues based on the fact the ‘anyone can change or contribute to the information’, it is apt to draw from this definition. By their very nature wikis are shared media and repositories of information, and public wikis potentially have a limitless number of contributors. The restrictions of private wikis limit this factor somewhat, but the intent of sharing is still there amongst the restricted group. But then perhaps, the less people who contribute, the less facts and opinions are distorted? Also, one assumes that credibility exists in the WA-DET as a source of information, which also makes this definition apt for this reflection.

In the short term, ideally, the profile wiki sets the scene for an exchange of ideas within student partnerships to cover the learning theory wiki exercise, a shared learning objective.  The profile wiki is essentially a repository of information (a list of GDLT student profiles enrolled in this course) which ideally enables the formation of study partnerships (a pairing, a group, a small network of learners) which would then go onto to collectively tackle the later related learning theories wiki exercise.

However, in my case, I have experienced many delays in completing this profile wiki task. I completed my profile wiki but have had no luck in finding a partner for the learning theories wiki task. My delays were in part due to my family & I being ill over the past week or so, as well as technical glitches I have been having with my PC and internet connections. I believe I may have ‘missed the boat’ as it appears most people had already partnered up and completed their learning theory wiki task before I have even found a study partner to pair up with for the exercise. Obviously sending out a message/information/invitiation does not guarentee a reply let alone a partnership  (I hope my cohorts all had better luck at pairing up than I did!)  I know many teachers who regularly feel the frustration of their students 'not getting the message', so I guess that adaptation is the answer.

Broadly speaking, partnering up for a purpose (whether over distance or over face to face situations) is not always a straight forward exercise as individual circumstances and even personalities come into play a factor as to whether a partnership is established or not. Sometimes conflicts occur whether a partnership exists or not.  But another problem is that I held a serious fear of the unknown in that despite being familiar with Wikipedia, I really had no idea what a wiki was! But I feel now I need to not just understand the task, but also demonstrate how I do so, and then later move on to the learning theory wiki task. Essentially, in my opinion, the profile wiki demonstrates how such ICTs can assist us in forming learning partnerships and educating networks over significant distances.

In my view, human communication is a social exercise of needs and wants, and the profile wiki establishes who we think we might need/want to link up with to tackle the learning theory wiki task. The entire history of humanity (& communication) is the story of the evolution of shared ideas for shared objectives. From early human’s need to communicate ideas for survival such as hunting and gathering activities and tactics, to modern day exchange of ideas in high academia or even world politics is indicative of how ideas are communal. Otherwise an idea unshared is a mere thought or private musing.  Even though I have not found a wiki partner, my blog postings are still shared reflections and ideas which others can read and comment upon. 

Communication is, by definition a shared process, and it is notworthy that communication, community, communal all have the same linguistic root meaning. Therefore if learning is, in one sense, the acquisition of new information and ideas by students from a teacher (or such), then so too teaching and learning are shared experiences.  In the long term, I can see how wikis, as a communal ICT far beyond this profile task, could very well be used in classroom to engage students in shared learning experiences. But in this first instance, this reflection is teaching me how learning can be enhanced through a previously undiscovered (to myself at least) modern ICT.

Another point reflected from the abovementioned wiki definition (and this profile exercise) comes from the Hawaiian root meaning of ‘wiki’ (‘quick’). This prompted me to think: How often do we experience in life the need to quickly ask another person what they think or for some help or guidance? Often in my experience, and so wiki partnerships/experiences simply set us up for that basic communication. Even in the non-cyberworld, examples real world learning occurs with questions and answers e.g. ‘Mum, what are you doing?’, ‘Dad, can you help me with my homework assignment?’, ‘Good neighbour, may I borrow a cup of castor sugar and have your fruitcake recipe?’ or even most relevantly, ‘Miss/Sir, what does “hypothetical” mean? And did I get my homework right?’ So, a wiki, in my opinion, is simply an ICT refining the ‘Q & A’ of life’s learning.

References:

West Australian Government-Department of Education & Training, 2011, ‘Resourcing the Classroom- Wikis in the Classroom’, date viewed: 7/3/2011, accessed: http://www.det.wa.edu.au/education/cmis/eval/curriculum/ict/wikis/

Welcome to the world of Teaching & Learning!

What an overwhelming introduction to ICTs & learning design!  The concept of learning (to be completely honest) has never really been something I have thought deeply about, despite a long-held dream of becoming a teacher.  So 'learning theory' kind of scares me somewhat.  I think I have always thought & felt teaching was a 'calling', that only special people had the knack...and perhaps that is still the case.  But perhaps what has changed is my appreciation for the sheer depth of concepts within the study of learning itself.

21st Century Learners (vs. 20th Century Learners) 
My recollections of my favourite (& least favourite) teachers is the experiences they provided me in exploring new ideas as I progressed through my education.  Yet, huge changes have occurred since when I went to school and the experiences of todays learners, particularly in the area of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs).

I remember when my school bought its first computers (old black and white screened Tandys) for the library and playing 'Snake' games at recess (learning does not stop at the end of class bell?).  I remember buying my first Commodore64 and being part of the students who lobbied the school to get a computer lab of the same brand.  No such thing as whiteboards, only chalk boards, let alone 'virtual' whiteboards.  Before Xerox machines I remember copies of handouts and worksheets where made using a tumble printer and teachers/admin had to use some kind of methylated spirit to print smelly purple prints.  Teachers would never have dreamed considered using a classroom P.A system and microphones (such as the modern 'sound fields' in use at my current employer where I work as a Schools Officer -Facilities).  

Back in my schooling days, the internet was only in its germination phase as a military communication system and was not in the public domain.  If you had a modem for your C64, that meant your parents were very rich, socially upwardly mobile and pioneering new territory.  Students would try to 'crack' games and other programs that were data stored on tapes.  I was so proud when I purchased my own 5&1/2" floppy disk drive with my cash I'd earnt working at Big W.  Although I was on my computer regularly, I never got the hang of computer programming languages like 'basic', so computers became predominantly game systems to me and I only just started using word processors before my senior year. 

Until a few years ago avatars, Skype and Facebook did not exist, although now I do use them from time to time, though by far not an 'expert'.  Setting up this blog has really been a bit of a challenge as it has coincided with some technical and hardware glitches I have had with my laptop and internet access.  But that in itself has been a learning curve and experience that I will take on board for the future.

I am an adult learner in the array of 21st century learners.  I feel I have some attributes of both of Prensky's 'digital natives' and 'digital immigrants' (2011, cited in CQU-GDLT Moodle site, 2011).  In some ways I am comfortable with computers (I have grown up with them), yet there is probably much that a computer-literate child could do and faster than I can do (at this stage) in modern computer software and other ICTs.  Therefore, I am inclined to agree more with Margaryan and Littlejohn (2008, cited in CQU-GDLT Moodle site, 2011) and Thrupp (2009, cited in CQU-GDLT Moodle site, 2011) in that you cannot stereotype a learner as one or the other.  But the when Prenksy (2011, cited in CQU-GDLT Moodle site, 2011) claims that teachers can either 'engage' students or 'enrage' them, I find that a little bit of a generalistion and it does not seem to take into account the desire of the students to listen/observe/question/think etc.  Sometimes choice will defy much of a teacher's good intent.  (Stay tuned for future posts exploring learning theories) 

The idea that I am one or some other type of learner is a little confusing, as I can see I have some qualities in most learing styles.   However the idea that students have preferred styles of learning is not surprising, for example:
Pupil: 'Sir/Miss, I hate maths!'
Teacher: 'Why is that Johnny?'
Pupil: 'I like PE!'
Teacher: 'Well, did you know that you use maths in PE?'
Pupil: 'But I hate maths!'

Now while I am not training to become a mathematics teacher, any subject could be inserted for either the maths or the PE in the above scenario. Why?  Perhaps as I have now begun my fifth decade, I have experienced and made many connections through inter-disciplinary approaches to studies.  I think most other humanities majors, and many music teachers would understand this interdependence between the different study subjects and disciplines.  I expect learning theories, understanding them and their practical applications in a class setting for young learners, will provide a similar experience.
_____
LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

Felder (1996, cited in Centre of teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo, 2011) describes learning style preferences as “characteristic strengths and preferences in the ways [people] take in and process information”. 

How these learning style preferences were discovered I do not know, but the idea that there are two opposing dynamics in each of the learning style preference continuums is certainly plausible to me.  I like to learn some ways, and so too young learners will have their preferences...and I look forward to seeing them in EPL contexts.

Here is my results for the Solomon & Felder Learning Styles questionaire:
Results for: Paul Hilder
      ACT                         X                                REF
           11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11
                                     <-- -->

      SEN                                                  X       INT
           11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11
                                     <-- -->

      VIS                          X                                VRB
           11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11
                                     <-- -->

      SEQ                                        X                GLO
           11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11
                                     <-- -->
Results reflection:  It appears I have a balance between Active and Reflective learning style preference, so I guess I like to think & do something with new information.  Perhaps this is why I have been engaging in these learning activities (doing them), but also heavily reflecting (thinking) on what they mean to me.  I also appear to be balanced between a Visual & Verbal learner, so I like pictures/graphs, but also enjoy listening to new information. both of these results came as no surprise to me. 

However, I seem to have a bias towards Intuitive learning (being comfortable with abstracts and theories relating to the big picture, overall patterns, possibilities, relationships, ideas), as opposed to Sensing learning style preference (concentrating on concrete and practical, the details, proven procedures, realism and pracitical applications).  I guess thats why I enjoy the emotional reaction to musical experiences, the scientific conjectures and explorations of geography, the world views and the change vs. continuity continuum of history, the pathos and protaganism of plots and themes within theatre and films, etc, etc....Though this, on the other hand, did surprise me a little as I have always thought of myself as cerebral yet practical.
These results also I am a little less biased on the Global-Sequential learning continuum, scoring a 5, leaning a little towards the Global style. I occasional enjoy sequential learning such as using lists and reading graphic organisers (Moodle and the course scaffolding helps me with this style), and I see will be helping my own future students by applying similar techniques.  However, I sometimes jump all over the place on the road to arriving at the right conclusion.  No surprise there!

But where in these learning styles does musicianship exist?  Perhaps the auditory processes of musicianship such one would use in playing along with a song or even transcription of a song onto a music lead sheet draws from both Sensing and Intuitive learning styles.  My bias towards Intuitive learning is probably reflected in my preference for more improvised and ever-changing interpretations of jazz music, versus the 'respect for the composers written work' of classical music and performance.  (Note: my wife is an accomplished classical musician and we often have to meet halfway, yet we have strong appreciation for each others musical background and alternative genres)
____
MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES

Armstrong (2009) provides a great description and background of Gardener's theory of Multiple Intelligences:
      'Dr. Gardner says that our schools and culture focus most of their attention on linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligence. We esteem the highly articulate or logical people of our culture. However, Dr. Gardner says that we should also place equal attention on individuals who show gifts in the other intelligences: the artists, architects, musicians, naturalists, designers, dancers, therapists, entrepreneurs, and others who enrich the world in which we live. Unfortunately, many children who have these gifts don’t receive much reinforcement for them in school. Many of these kids, in fact, end up being labeled "learning disabled," "ADD (attention deficit disorder)," or simply underachievers, when their unique ways of thinking and learning aren’t addressed by a heavily linguistic or logical-mathematical classroom. The theory of multiple intelligences proposes a major transformation in the way our schools are run. It suggests that teachers be trained to present their lessons in a wide variety of ways using music, cooperative learning, art activities, role play, multimedia, field trips, inner reflection, and much more...'

Gardener's theory makes perfect sense to me as I was not typically strong at school in maths, 'okay' at english until 'blooming late' and extending this into good essay writing in history, yet I thrived in drama classes (Note:  Music was not offered at my school back then.  I had no formal music training until I went to CQCM (the 'Con') to study Jazz vocals after evolved into an adult muso and teaching myself guitar/singing for nearly three decades.  So...What type of learner was I? Was I, partially at least, a kinesthetic learner by way of self-education?)

My results for the Birmingham Primary website Mulitple Intelligence test are as follows:

 It appears the areas I have high degrees of 'smarts' area: Musical, Interpersonal, Visual/Spatial, Linguistic, & Naturalistic.  This conforms with my self perceptions of being (respectively); a singer and musician, a harmonious type in relationships, artistic and spatially aware, having a broad vocabulary, and environmentally aware with a strong aversion to 'deep browns' (anti-green folk such as Andrew Bolt). 

The slightly lower (medium?) score on Intrapersonal scale is no surprise as I usually look outward for solutions rather than inwardly, however not to the degree that I completely ignore my role in my lessons/situations/relationships.  Other non-surprises were lower scores in the Kinesthetic and lower again in the Logical dimension.

As I have mentioned earlier, I have occasionally learned by jumping into experiences, such as Rugby training and playing (about 20 of my 40 years), which is all about learning through the consequences of say 'this' play/move/kick/ruck/maul/scrum/lineout etc. or 'that' tackle or some other such on field tactic.  Having studied acting and drama in the past (two years at QUT, an epoch ago) and performed in many shows, I have found that examples kinesthetic learning occured during rehearsals and live plays (you can never deny the unpredicatble or spontaneous, no matter how scripted the performance). 

Also I believe there is a kinesthetic learning experience everytime you improvise in music, such as doing an 'improv' lead guitar solo or vocalist 'scat' solo.  Doesn't matter if the note at any one beat or back-beat is a true note or a bum-note outside the mode of the moment, the learning occurs by 'that worked/didn't work!'.  Actually, both performing and listening to jazz music is a kinesthetic experience in itself as you relate to other musos performance and follow their contributions to the overall musical sounds produced.   Perhaps this is why I find jazz music extends and stimulates my thoughts?  Funnily enough I enjoy listening to jazz while studying and am listening to ABCJazz as I type this!
________

Until next post...Happy learning! 


References: 

Armstrong, T (Dr), 2009, Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, 3rd edition, Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, accessed: 1/3/2011, cited from:
http://www.thomasarmstrong.com/multiple_intelligences.php

Centre for Teaching Excellence, 2011, University of Waterloo, date viewed: 1/3/2011, accessed: http://cte.uwaterloo.ca/teaching_resources/tips/understanding_your_learning_style.html

CQU-GDLT program, 2011, Moodle site, 'ICTs for Learning Design', CQUniversity, date viewed 1/3/2011, cited from: http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/mod/resource/view.php?id=163840