Friday, October 28, 2011

Note for Dr. Moller on Module 4 Blog Assignment

Please note: The following blog posts are for Module 4.  I have posted on the following two blogs for this module: Tabitha Wright’s blog http://twrighteduc.blogspot.com and Rachel Bell’s blog http://rachelbell33.blogspot.com/. I also responded to one of my class mates on this blog-site.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

EDUC-7105-1/EDUC-8845-1 Module 4 Blog Post

My MindMap of Network Connections (Click to Enlarge)



Connectivism
            Behaviorists and cognitivists theories emerge from objectivist tradition, believing that knowledge is “out there” to be transferred into the learner (Driscoll, 2005, page 387). In contrast to objectivists’ viewpoints, constructivist theorists assume that knowledge is constructed by learners as they attempt to make sense of their experiences (p. 387).  Now, connectivists claimed to provide new opportunities for learning that are not met by behaviorist, cognitivists, and constructivists learning theories.  Siemens declared that the demands of the digital age cannot be met by employing the three traditional learning theories and demonstrates how connections and networks are more relevant in a digital age. In a video segment shown by Laureate Education Inc., Siemens stated that in this complex world in which people are swamped with information and digital resources, the role of educators have changed (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011a).  Yes, my connections facilitate my learning in the sense that these connections do affect how much and what type of information I am able to gather (though I would not say it changes how I learn).  How my connections facilitate learning is as follows.

How Has My Network Changed The Way I Learn?
As shown in my mindmap above, without thinking, over the years I had formed diverse networks in my pursuit of information. However, information is useless to me if I cannot apply such findings to real life issues. In short, I am always seeking information that I can use to help me to build on top of what I already know. So in essence, I am actually seeking knowledge.  These networks are separated into two main categories, 1) resources found through digitized technologies; and 2) digital resources that are connected to people.  Importantly, these connections that I have formed do not change how I learn, though they might affect the type of information I gather.  As a learner, I should make sure that I am not only involving persons who are always in agreement with what I have to say.  As an educator, from the connectivists perspective, my primary role is to validate and assist learners in forming diverse networks, ensuring that such networks are diverse and include a broad range of sources of information (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011b).  In other words, as educators, we have to encourage students to not only include readers who are always in agreement with their ideas.  Educators should encourage learners to include a broad range of sources of information, information that are also contradictory to their concepts.
Which Digital Tools Best Facilitate My Learning? 
According to Siemens in the video segment, connectivists teaching and learning must utilize the ability for learners to form effective networks. Siemens described practical technologies as any platform that has the ability for people to express ideas and have the ability for others to come back and comment on these ideas. In short, educators who seek to employ connectivists approach would need open spaces for users to communicate (Laureate Education, Inc., 2011c).  This seemed to have echoed constructivism where learners are not simply empty vessels waiting to be filled, but instead are active organisms seeking meaning and trying to make sense of their experiences (Perkins, 1991).  As shown in my mindmap, I do have multiple open spaces for communicating with family, friends within my learning community and with persons outside my field of study.  I find that the following tools work best to facilitate my learning. For example, this blog, my emails (including, instant messaging, video chats, document sharing), my twitter account, my Skype account, my wiki account, my Facebook and MySpace accounts.
How Do I Learn New Knowledge When I Have Questions?
Instructional designers have had to adapt to the changes as they occur in this digital age wherein the internet has caused a power shift in classrooms (Siemens, 2008, p. 19).  When I have questions, without much thought I have always make full use of resources that resides in a distributed manner across networks, as described by Siemens in 2008 when he stated, “knowledge does not only reside in the mind of an individual, knowledge resides in a distributed manner across a network . . . learning is the act of recognizing patterns shaped by complex networks.”  According to Siemens, these networks are internal, as neural networks, and external, as networks in which we adapt to the world around us (Siemens 2006, p. 10).  In other words, whenever I am learning new information and have questions, the first thing that I would do is go to a search engines such as Google to scan the internet for clues.  Second, I would go to a database system (for instance ProQuest) to find reliable sources of information based on what I had uncovered from search engines.  If I still need clarity, I would search for webinars or presentations that relate to that topic.  In my final attempt for lucidity, I would dig through my contact lists on my phone and emails to connect with professors or individuals who specialize in that area. However, like Dr. Moller, I also have a slight problem with Siemen's idea that knowledge does not only reside in the mind of an individual, believing that knowledge resides in a distributed manner across a network! If that is the case, knowlege would be an item auctioned off to the rich and famous like most precious commodities!
Technological developments over the years have significantly altered how learners access information and knowledge, and how learners dialogue with the instructor and each other (Siemens, 2008, p. 3).  I agree with Siemens when he stated that prior to this technological era, access and interaction was mainly under the control of teachers (p. 3).  So yes, there is now a shift in power within classrooms.  In fact, most of the students at the college where I teach do make use of the same available networked resources I turn to whenever I am seeking out new information and have questions. Knowing this, I have to make sure to keep up with the changes in this new age, especially since often information might become invalid in a short period of time.

References

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 9(3), 1-13. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Perkins, D. (1991). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? Educational Technology 31, 5 (May), 18-23.

Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. Copyright 2006 by George Siemens. Used by permission.

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper 105: University of Georgia IT Forum. http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Verhagen, P. (2006). Connectivism: A new learning theory? Surf e-learning themasite,
http://elearning.surf.nl/e-learning/english/3793

Thursday, October 20, 2011

River IQ Test/Math Logic Challenges

River IQ Test - Laughter HELL!  The first image shown will be in Chinese. To begin, press the blue circle at the bottom right.

Here is a another similar link from hoodamath.com called "Goat Crossing." http://hoodamath.com/games/goatcrossing.php

Here is yet another challenge: http://www.mathcats.com/explore/river/crossing.html

Have you given up? Here is the River IQ test solution:

Have you given up? Here is the Goat Crossing Solution:


Friday, October 14, 2011

Note for Dr. Moller on Module 3 Blog Assignment


The following blog post is for Module 3.  I have posted on the following two blogs for this module: Andres Anzaldua’ blog http://learningtheoryaanzaldua.blogspot.com/  and Jennifer Robinson’ blog http://www.jenniferbethrobinson.blogspot.com/. 

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

EDUC-7105-1/EDUC-8845-1 Module 3 Blog Post

Collaboration
            Behaviorists and cognitivists theories emerge from objectivist tradition.  Both set of theorists appear to assume that knowledge is “out there” to be transferred into the learner (Driscoll, 2005, page 387). In contrast to objectivists’ viewpoints, constructivist theorists assume that knowledge is constructed by learners as they attempt to make sense of their experiences (p. 387).  Based on this principle, learners are not simply empty vessels waiting to be filled, but instead are active organisms seeking meaning and trying to make sense of their experiences (Perkins, 1991). Regarding collaboration from a constructivist’s standpoint, we saw where both Bruner and Vygotsky emphasized the need for cooperation in learning in Driscoll’s text (chapter 7). These constructivists, believed that children must work out their social differences and develop cooperative behaviors that enable them to reach their goals (Driscoll, 2005, p. 276).  
Howard Rheingold on collaboration
Do humans have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group”?  Bernhard in 1988 stated that one impact of a rapidly changing environment in schools has been the neglect of children’s biologically based needs for belonging to and working within a group (as cited in Driscoll, 2005, p. 276).  I agree with this notion.  Humans in this era are continuously connecting with each other on social networking sites, forming all sorts of groups (some productive and some quite the opposite).  Nonetheless, this goes to show that humans do have a basic instinct to interact and work in groups.  Quite often at the college where I currently teach, students are constantly reprimanded for logging onto social networking sites during class time.  I believe that it would be prudent for educators to go with learners’ natural tendencies than to resist them.  As mentioned previously, both Bruner and Vygotsky emphasized the need for cooperation in learning, but this appears to be geared towards children working within the same age groups. However, Bernhard argued for multi-age groups, as well, believing that mixed-age groupings occurred naturally in foraging societies and occur naturally in today’s world.  Bernard believed that younger children can learn much from observing and imitating their older peers, and older children gain valuable information about parenting when they interact with younger children (Bernhard, 1988).
How can technology facilitate collaboration among learners based on constructivist principles? First, the goals of constructivist instruction are problem solving, reasoning, critical thinking, active and reflective use of knowledge (Driscoll, 2005, p. 393).  I believe that technologies that effectively facilitate collaboration among learners based on constructivist principles are those that learners are comfortable with.  This is where the old cliché comes in; do not fix something that has not been broken!  In other words, educators should make use of existing technologies, for example, social networking sites, blogs and multi-player online gaming.  Most learners have already mastered operating these tools and this would help in encouraging working in teams and help in setting the stage for positive results.
A Research Study That Supports Collaboration as an Effective Learning Tool
Earlier this year, Hong, Yu, and Chen established their powertech contest in Taiwan in an effort to promote inventiveness and technology to elementary students. The powertech contest was designed as a collaborative learning atmosphere for a project design which is comprised of technical processes that included first, the construction of an artifact followed by improvement of its functions (Hong et al., 2011).  In short, the aim was for students to learn scientific and technical knowledge through this collaborative design project.  The purpose of the study was to explore how collaborative learning could make working on a technological project easier and whether and how pupils working collaboratively were able to share their design ideas. The research was conducted by first, analyzing the design portfolio that was put together by a team of four elementary students. These students worked collaboratively to create a robot rat for the powertech contest.  In turn, the researchers assessed the actual collaboration process among the team members.  Results of the study indicated that collaborative learning in the contest had made the sharing of knowledge and resources among the team members easier than if students had worked alone.  Results also showed that reflections essential for problem-solving among the team members were often raised during the design process.
My personal view on this collaborative learning experience was that it seems as though team members had truly collaborated and not just cooperated as they designed their robot rat.  I say this based on one of the findings mentioned above where reflections essential for problem-solving among the team members were often raised during the design process.  Dr. Moller brought up in our class threads that there is a difference between cooperation and collaboration. Cooperative teams usually have a firm mode of operation with specific goals and most of all, all members’ roles are specified. Unlike collaborative teams, whose roles are flexible and may change throughout the project (Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A.,and Claire O'Malley ,1995).  The idea of collaboration should be taken seriously, since in this atmosphere everyone has a voice in which ideas are not quickly dismissed, but are considered and tested for validity.

References

Bernhard, J.G. (1988). Primates in the classroom: An evolutionary perspective on children’s education. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.

Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & Claire O'Malley (1995) The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds). Learning in humans and machines. Towards an interdisciplinary learning science, 189- 211. London: Pergamon. Retrieved from http://performancepyramid.muohio.edu/pyramid/shared-best-practices/Collaberation-Strategies/mainColumnParagraphs/0/document/Collaboration%20Strategies.pdf


Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Hong, J., Yu, K., & Chen, M.(2011). Collaborative learning in technological project design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(3), 335-347.  Retrieved October 12, 2011, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 2427014381).

Perkins, D. (1991) Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? Educational Technology 31, 5 (May), 18-23.

Rheingold, H. (2008). Howard Rheingold on collaboration [Video file]. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Howard Rheingold’s Video


Reference

Rheingold, H. (2008, February). Howard Rheingold on collaboration [Video file]. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Saturday, October 1, 2011

Note for Dr. Moller on Module 2 Blog Assignment

The following blog post is for Module 2.  I posted on the following two blogs for this module: Vaughn Bradley’ blog http://vaughnswalden.blogspot.com/  and Sarah Dillahunt’s blog http://sarahdwaldenu.blogspot.com .  I also responded to additional class mates on this blog: http://ena-spoonfulofsugar.blogspot.com/.