Week 5: Guest Speaker Yeah!!!

Edison Learning Presentation:

We had three guest speakers come in to speak with us in regard to web-based learning aids. It was interesting to hear them speak about their experience as teachers and how it led them to work with this particular company. The history of the company is quite interesting as, they ran in to some difficulties with regard to Blackboard and using it to assist the teachers and classes they were working with. Apparently the model did not fit the population they were working with. They needed to engage students, organize information and track students in a less complicated and more efficient way.

The Provos Learning Management System is something that they started working with, which catered to what they were trying to do. Student’s perspectives were considered. Textbooks were customized to work with their curriculum. It came in various modes of media (audio, video, gaming, ect…) and it was placed in a depository (to accompany the lessons they already had on-line) so to later be selected to work within the different learning modalities. They are now able to build course modules anyway that they want. This lends them to flex with multiple markets (across state lines). They are able to be as broad or as focused as they want with their services and product. This is a lot of scaling and filtering, to draw on all sorts of resources on the web, that may work with their students. They were looking to be more efficient in such a way where they reached a massive amount of students simultaneously.

COMMENTS AND CONCERNS:

This service reminds me of one of many e-learning web-based technologies that are out there. It is intensely scaffolded which is nice, but with regard to teacher feedback? I am curious. What variations can a teacher make (or student) to customize the software so that it fits not only the curriculum, but also individual learning needs (besides assessment, tutoring, and media)? I like that there’s a forum to discuss and share out information and there is an online tutor who is live and ready to assist students. I also like that the educator is able to monitor the discussions happening on the forum board. What I would like to know is if they have more manipulative devices. Other than the forum, and the chat-room, students aren’t able to customize their learning. While there is a feeling of empowerment because there are multiple options available to the student to explore a concept, there is still a restrictive and dictative nature to the software. Exploration is limited and depth of investigation is lost to searching for an alternative way of teaching the curriculum. This a great teacher aid and would most definitely be an asset in the classroom, to the teacher who needs supplemental aids for their students.

Does this piece of technology foster motivation? Possibly, by the sheer fact that technology is being implemented and there are a variety of choices. However, I still believe that my students (from my previous employment as a 5^th grade teacher) would probably be bored. They often look for ways to use technology to socialize and build relationships around learning. They want to interact simultaneously and they want immediate feedback from each other, with options to manipulate information and see the effects of their actions with an opportunity for in depth analysis and reasoning. They want something of their own. They want to investigate. They aren’t as concerned with whether their answers are right or wrong. They are looking for stimulating feedback. So, with all this said, I was disappointed by the minimal amount of collaboration that their service allowed. As a science teacher, I was disturbed by how they conducted scientific experiments ;-p. Can you say “Boring”? Science provokes the use of all five of our senses and doing science on the computer is limiting. The only thing that saved them on this was their hybrid program. It is more classroom-friendly but still does not cater to collaborative group learning.

On a positive note, I could definitely see me using this service to offer my students further enrichment opportunities during Independent Work Time, or afterschool tutoring.

Week 4: Artifact 1 Presentations

This week in Web-based Technologies the class did their first digital artifact presentation. I could really appreciate the variety of underserved populations that were being addressed in class. My classmates did a great job of creatively presenting these populations and the technological resources that they were using to promote learning.

Anthony did a phenomenal job using audio to bring to life his research on youth career radio. I was also impressed by the passion Yaa displayed in her iMovie for Street Kids. Jacob also did and iMovie which displayed how people living in war zone areas within the Middle East were being educated in order to bring about peace and communication. I would love for Jacob to follow up on the research being done on this topic.

Katy was another class member whose artifact made an impression on me. She placed emphasis on a rural population I wouldn’t normally consider and made their obstacles for advancement real. I can tend to leave people who deal with agriculture on the farm and fail to see that they need to be acclimated to a mainstream network of education.

I was tickled by Paul’s website presentation, as it was simple, but full of cultural topics of concern to that population. Paul’s presentation displayed influential Hawaiian figures and the technological efforts that they were making to motivate and educate there at risk population. It is great that Paul caught a passion for the culture and built such a wonderful repor with influential Hawaiian natives in his travel and work with the community.

I also enjoyed Christopher’s use of a simple data table to communicate the characteristics of bullies, in comparison to the bullied and spectators. He has done a lot with his previous elementary school to advocate against bullying. Catherine also kept things simple, by using a concept map, to illustrate the major effects of childhood depression. I could tell she put a lot of thought and consideration into her presentation. I also like that she was able to draw comparisons between her topic and Christopher’s, with regard to powerlessness and self-esteem.

By the end of the presentations, you could see that there was not a lot of technology being used to service these populations effectively and what was being used was on a small scale and lent itself to further investigation and testing for large scale cultural impact. This is rather unfortunate, but it lets us know that there is a lot we have to offer to these marginalized communities. Overall, I appreciate the novelty of my peers and they addressed their topics of deep interest. They appealed to the viewer in me, while dignifying their subject.

Two Thumbs Up!!

Week #3

This past week, in class, we focused on distance-learning. We discussed the motivation behind developing online learning communities like The University of Phoenix and other organizations like it. It was interesting to here the stats and discuss what type of people were more disposed to participate in distance learning. I have always been one that has appreciated the classroom environment, so online classrooms can be difficult as they don't allow me the full interaction of a classroom setting. For some, this is much appreciated as it is more convenient to their lifestyle needs.

Needs are things that we are being called to address as we move forward into designing an artifact for the underserved population we are addressing. In an effort to support an under served, Professor Kim has noted, we are to pay attention to the population needs. Topics like ease vs. difficulty level and zone of proximal development were addressed. Designing an efficient artifact requires careful thought, with regard to a calculated effort not to make the device to easy or to difficult in its use. An application that is to easy or difficulty may cause your audience to lose interest. Even if your desired effect should be a progressive one, where the user is encouraged to participate leu of a learning gap, by initiating a (ZPD) zone of proximal development, students are able to achieve their learning potential by engaging in collective intelligence practices.

We were then given an opportunity to use this in a real world senerio. As an design team, we were to construct a learning program for a business seeking to empower its employees. Taking into account the assets and needs of the organization, a plan was devised so as to help the company reach their goal. Different web-based modalities needed to be implemented to instruct, assess, and enrich the learning process. Technology was used to perform as many functions necessary to educate, motivate and accommodate the company participants. There were some limitations as it addressed the quality of learning experience and making sure that the technology that was being used was effective in its teach practice. Some technology was on point as it was the perfect medium for the information being presented. Others fell flat in their inability to properly support the learning experience. Overall, it is important to consider the type of media being used to effectively illustrate particular learning concepts.

Week 2

So I have completed week two in 391X “Web-Based Technologies in Education” and I am still trying to piece the class together in such a way that it will prove beneficial to my final project. I hope to design a piece of technology that will empower students to become life long learners as they develop a sense of autonomy around technology. It is my belief that technology should allow for more creative expression as it infuses a ridiculous amount of information into the classroom environment. Such capabilities should permit teachers to play more of a supportive role and less of a dictator role in the classroom. While this is my ambition, the classroom is not what this course focuses on, as much as transcending beyond the four-wall institution and I can really appreciate that.

Professor Kim settled us into a discussion on web-based aids that are creating a global tech culture. Undoubtedly, these aids (like GLORIAD) are revolutionizing the way things are being done in scientifically and politically. People have access to a high volume of information, in a variety of ways, over a high-speed network, from all over the globe. Although, access to such devices are limited to the highly affluent, Professor Kim makes no differentiation between social classes; as all people (having some technological device) can be privy to an affluent education; with the right enabled body resources. This is all possible through what is called “cloud computing”, which enables any hardware-limited device to connect with a more powerful computer and perform the task for it. While not noted in the discussion, I wonder if Kim has any desire to optimize the use of such a source, in the use of his Learning Mobile System or what could also be called Pocket School (applications downloaded onto old generation Nokia phones used to engage students in a number of academic lessons that span from reading to math).

While I was impressed by the limitless possibilities of these high functioning systems, I was most curious about the concept mappings that teachers were being asked to construct as a means documenting what they were learning. As I have been told, these reflectionary aids are being used to cross-reference data and support finding in a variety of academic fields. This is all well and good, but this device poses another use that would serve me more beneficially as a teacher; which would be to align student work to content standards. Now my head may be stuck in the classroom, but the level of impact could be global. Imagine a kid in India getting a high school diploma in New York, because the work he put out aligned with the New York State Standards. In my class, students are always being asked to construct concept maps across a multiple academic disciplines. What if teachers didn’t have to fit students into the small confides of the state standards, but the standards where brought to life in the vast creativity of student inquiry and creativity. I LOVE IT!!! Total paradigm shift and much needed (though a small step in the right direction). I could see us being more of a portfolio-based society; empowering students to take hold of their own learning.

Professor Kim’s research (as shared in his class) alluded to the new trends in how children work around the use of technology. Although we did not get into deep discussion on this topic (as I don’t know if he necessarily understood what I was asking him) the whole concept strikes me as being an evolutionary movement towards teachers being less hands-on and allowing children to explore devices and make their own connections in learning. I have seen the progression of things happening in my own household. My mother knows little to nothing about computers and yet my younger sister is maximizing the use of it on a daily basis; so much that my sister has become a reference source of information for my mother. Children are no longer dependent on adults’ educational capacities. They functions independently more and more everyday; accessing and utilizing information in a variety of ways; that I must say can be productive or unproductive (this still needs to be watched and governed). I have a great deal of interest in observing any new trends in how children work collaboratively around the use of academic based technology.