Module 4 Posting

As we learned in this module, individuals form connections to acquire information from a variety of sources.  The ways individuals connect to these networks of information are as unique as the individual.  If you were to compare my network of connections to that of a younger or older person, or someone without technology in their lives, you would see vast differences.  To complete my mindmap of how I connect to networks, I divided my life into my main uses of time:  Social, professional, scholarly (or my work at Walden), news sources while on a computer, and news sources while on my iPad.  Since the original mindmap is quite large, I cropped the main sections so they would fit better for this format.  If you would like the original file of all of these areas, please click here Large MindMap.

One of the main ways I spend my time at work and at home is looking at the current news.  I look for local stories, national news, and sometimes international news of places I am interested in (e.g. Spain, Argentina, France, etc.). I stopped watching television news about five years ago due to the often obvious slant on many news stories.  Some news networks were clearly providing a liberal spin while others had very conservative views.  I never felt like I was getting the whole story without bias or sensationalization.  Take the current news of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, for example.  The media has put a spin on the story either by creative editing, showing pictures that are deliberately old, or presenting pictures that just are not the individuals.  I lost trust in many of the news outlets due to their reporting skills and lack of relevant news (e.g. The Kardashian wedding), so I search on my own for information about stories of interest to me.  The sources I use for my news fix while on a computer are Dallasnews.com, CNN.com, links from Yahoo.com's news section, and the Weather Channel.  While each source may have weaknesses, the combination of these helps me form a balanced view of local, national and international news.

When I don't have access to a traditional computer, I use my iPad to access news.  I have downloaded the USA Today, CNN.com, and Weather Channel apps to get my news when I don't want to visit traditional web sites.  I don't read the USA Today web site, but found that I enjoy the app because it allows me to view sections such as travel, world, sports, and money without having to search for specific items on a web site.  The apps for the CNN and the Weather Channel also provide an intuitive layout for the news I seek.  I can get just what I want, when I want it, without having to put forth a lot of effort through searching, typing, etc.

I have more variety in my connections with professional content.  As a Spanish teacher, I work with a department of 4 other teachers and we connect via email, text messages, and in person.  We often discuss lesson plans, student progress, and ideas for how to teach difficult content.  One teacher and I also use Facebook to connect with each other and with our students.  Don't worry, this Facebook page is just school-related and only is used to inform students of assignments, offer teacherly advice, etc.  I also access content from the Texas Education Agengy website for help with connecting my content to the content knowledge and skills required by the state.  I am a member of various listservs where other teachers connect for ideas and share how they teach.  My school website offers me information about schedules, testing events, and other daily operations knowledge I need as a teacher.  Finally, I am looking for a new career that combines my passion for teaching with corporate training or travel.  To that end, I am becoming more connected to sites like LinkedIn and Careerbuilder.  I am trying to connect with employers that have the desired jobs I seek.

The largest amount of diversity in my connections comes with my social group.  With a unique group of friends and family members, I cannot just use one or two methods of communication or connection.  For example, with my mother, I might use the phone to call her, text her, send her messages on Facebook, or have a face to face interaction.  With a specific friend, Jenifer, I only text her now because we no longer work together.  We rarely connect using phone coversations or have lunch like I do with my colleagues. I keep abreast of her life events (e.g. having a baby, moving, looking for a job) via Facebook and sometimes send her funny pictures via SMS messages.

Finally, my scholarly work with Walden has me connecting with mostly scholarly sites such as the Walden Library or the course pages for each of our classes.  Sure, I often go to other sites which have the resources or required readings, but when I map out how I access content, I usually go straight to the Walden site, access my couse information, and then seek out the resources via the library.  Something I noticed that is quite different is that I do not use the phone, text messages, or Facebook when seeking out information.  I do not socialize with most of the colleagues at Walden because I never seem to have the same people in my classes.  Often times, I feel we are stressed trying to get the work done that we do not participate in the social aspect you might find in a face to face class.  Sure, I see some people from time to time in classes, but I usually do not recognize names and do not make a concerted effort to mingle outside of the classroom.

So, how has my network changed the way I learn?--Well, in the past, I was reliant on newspapers and televised newscasts to get information pertinent to my local area.  Sometimes there were national and international stories, but not as often.  I had to get snippets of news that could fit into 30-60 minute broadcasts and did not go in-depth into the issues.  Now, with my network of websites both on the computer and iPad, I can find stories of interest to me and if I choose, dig deeper by searching on the internet.  With formal learning, I have a greater access of scholarly journals where I can draw information.  By having websites that compile all of the literature I need, I no longer spend hours looking for sources, I spend seconds or mere minutes.  I have gotten efficient at finding what I need, skimming the content for applicability, and storing the information for future use.  This comes at little or no expense, which is much different from the days of microfiche and copies that I could not afford.

What tools work best for me?--The digitial tools that work best for me are my iPad and my home computer.  The iPad provides all of the tools I need to connect with others.  I can chat, send messages, search for news, access coursework, and just about anything I need to acquire knowledge, without being tethered to a computer.  If I go outside and see something I don't know about (say a scary looking spider), I can immediately look up information and know if I need to run or just ignore it.  With the computer though, I can generate content based on what I searched for.  I use the traditional computer to apply, synthesize, and create material to make the content more meaningful for me.

How do I seek new knowledge?--I make no excuses, but when I want to find out information about a topic, I do a Google or Yahoo search.  Based on the results presented, and avoiding the paid placements, I find the information I need, or look deeper.  Two days ago a colleague mentioned the dangers of High Fructose Corn Syrup and that "research has shown...."  As soon as I hear, "research has shown," I get suspiscious and look up relevant information so that I can judge for myself the merits of the argument.  All of this investigation starts with a simple search engine query. 

I also do the same for some of my work at Walden.  If presented with a learning theory I know little about, the first thing I do is look it up for a summary.  Then, based on the little bit of information I found, I continue to look for more sources, including from our library website.  Sure, Wikipedia comes up, but I use it only to give me some basic knowledge before I try to get a deeper understanding.

Ray

Module 3 Responses

This week I replied to:

Melinda Schroeder
http://schroederedtech.blogspot.com/2012/04/do-you-believe-that-humans-have-basic.html?showComment=1334416705913#c2237552589765216976

and
Timothy Weaver
http://weave1-weave1.blogspot.com/2012/04/tweavermod-3-collaboration-instincts.html?showComment=1334427801552#c6079975151947307645

Module 3 Posting - Collaboration

As Rheingold (2005) stated, humans and other critters do interact and work as groups.  I think this happens when these groups share common goals, but not in every instance.  Society faces many challenges such as poverty in which certain groups work together to provide solutions.  When disasters hit countries like Haiti or Japan, those with the financial or human resources to help, provide these resources. An interesting aspect of this charity is that countries provide it even if the affected country does not play by the rules when times are good.  As humans we do have a sense of helping others, especially when times are bad.

Rheingold (2005) also mentioned the idea of altruistic punishment in financial games.  Although the world does extend a hand when needed to those in need, it is also very adept at doling out punishments when countries do not play fair.  Countries use sanctions, tariffs, and blockades to change the behavior of the offending country.  Sometimes these punishments stop the “cheating” that occurs, while sometimes these punishments push the affected country towards more sinister action.  Countries test the waters to see what types of punishments work and how much pressure they can put on a neighbor to get results and not cause even more harm to themselves.

As individuals we also work together when solving individual problems.  Before Wikipedia internet users faced challenges when trying to find reliable sources of information on the internet.  Academic journals were only accessible to those who subscribed, search engines led to bad information, and there just was no repository where almost all of the world’s knowledge was stored.  Wikipedia took the instinct of humans to share and created a portal where anyone could contribute to a topic on which they had information.  I know absolutely nothing about the book or movie “The Hunger Games.”  But, with the power of Wikipedia and the contributions of the fans of the book and movie, I can get all of the information I would ever need.  Individuals shared their passion of this series by providing their knowledge from which others can draw.  One of the underlying expectations of Wikipedia is that after getting this information, I would share my knowledge about items on which I am an expert.

All of that said, we have not reached a point in our societal evolution where we all collaborate on all aspects of our lives.  Unlike Star Trek where the accumulation of material wealth was shunned (except by the Ferengi), we still live in a society where monetary wealth is important and often an individual affair.  We still fight about individuals paying their fair share of the resources they use and giving all members within a society affordable health care.  What I think I see is that when society deals with resources of limited monetary value, say knowledge, we freely share this because we often seek out this resource as well.  However, when we work with material that could potentially generate income, we are less willing to share this information freely.  This might play into Maslow’s hierarchy where we try to meet our needs (e.g. money to pay our bills), before we move on to morality or creativity.

With collaborative tools such as Wikis, Google Docs, and Elluminate chat rooms, students have new avenues for collaboration.   No longer do they have to meet in the library for hours to generate a product; they can do so on line.  This social activity continues with constructivism’s idea that making connections with others is important for learning.  Also, through the use of these tools, learners work with language to communicate ideas to their peers.  The use of this language is another essential element of constructivism.  Finally, while working in these groups, learners work with contextual information.  These tools require learners to take what they know about topics to generate a final product.  They are not learning rote facts, but working with knowledge within disciplines they have knowledge in the context they would use them.

With applications like Google Docs, students can share their work with others and get feedback before final submission.  As our group did this week, students could also all work on the same document simultaneously to generate the final product.  When students work together using these collaborative tools, the idea of ownership (see material wealth discussion above) declines because multiple people shared the workload.  I would hypothesize though, that groups are still leery about sharing with others, until the work is graded, because they do not want others taking their ideas and “profiting” off of them. 

Blau and Caspi (2009) studied the effects of Google Docs on this idea of ownership on academic work of 180 Israeli students enrolled in the Open University of Israel.  They found that when individuals worked collaboratively, the idea of ownership declined while the perception of the quality of the document improved.  Simply put, when individuals work together, they think their work is better.  If you would like to read more about this study, here is the link: http://telem-pub.openu.ac.il/users/chais/2009/noon/1_1.pdf

References

Blau, I., & Caspi, A. (2009). What type of collaboration helps? Psychological ownership, perceived learning and outcome quality of collaboration using Google Docs. Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research 2009: Learning in the technological era, 48-54. Retrieved from http://telem-pub.openu.ac.il/users/chais/2009/noon/1_1.pdf

TED. (Producer). (2005, February). Howard Rheingold: The new power of collaboration [Video podcast]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Week 2 Responses

This week I responded to:

Timothy Weaver's Blog
http://weave1-weave1.blogspot.com/2012/03/tweavermod-2-cognitivism-as-learning.html#comment-form

and
Jessica Y. Green's Blog
http://jygreensblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/module-2-cognitivism-as-learning-theory.html#comment-form

Evolution of educational theory isms

Module 2 Blog Posting

While the idea of evolution of the human species might not appeal to certain populations, the idea that ideas or people evolve from earlier versions of themselves holds some truth.  We have seen sports and athletes evolve over the years and records smashed as technology and athleticism improve.  The same evolution process has occurred with the learning theories proposed over the year.  No matter who you think is the mother or father of a learning theory or how well you think it explains learning, future theories evolve from these foundations.  These foundation theories drop seeds that get planted and grow into other theories.

As Kerr (2007) noted, the different –isms that populate textbooks on learning theory do not stand still.  And while these ideas might have different bits and pieces that we disagree with, each idea does have merit and deserves consideration.  A good thing about the variety of these learning theories is that it makes sense that we all do not learn the same way.  Since individuals come from all different backgrounds with distinct experiences, how can we say that Behaviorism or Cognitivism is the best explanation for how these individuals learn?  If Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) is mainly focused on memory, is it possible to believe that those with memory issues cannot learn? 

I think Kapp (2007) summed it up best when he stated we should take bits and pieces from each of the learning theories.  As they evolve, we pick the strongest bits and get rid of those which are inadequate for explaining how we learn.  As we noted in a class discussion, we cannot get to Connectivism if students are not versed in how to make connections with nodes of information.  We have to teach them the skills on how to get that knowledge.  This teaching could take on a Behaviorist approach where learners are given a stimulus (problem to solve) and choose the best tool, technology or otherwise, and then are provided with the response to either strengthen that behavior or to weaken wrong choices.  We help these same students with memory skills through dual coding of lessons, providing practice, and helping them store knowledge in their long term memory.  These steps are not the functions of the main idea, Connectivism, but we use stepping stones of other learning theories to get to those which best help us solve educational problems we face.

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and about: Discussion on educational schools of thought [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kaplaneduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/

Module 1 Repsonses

This week I responded to Melinda and Sherri's postings.

Melinda's Blog:

http://schroederedtech.blogspot.com

Sherri's Blog:

http://theoryandeducationaltech.blogspot.com

EDUC 8845 Module 1 Post

When looking at how education has progressed over the years we can see how the internet has allowed for different styles of teaching. Long gone are the days of large group lectures and proctored exams where students had to physically show up to school. The digital classroom allows for students and teachers to play different roles than they used to play in the past. Instead of being a passive recipient of knowledge, the learner is often empowered to seek out knowledge and connect it with their experience. Even in the traditional classroom these changes of roles are becoming more evident.

Siemens (2008) identified five metaphors that other scholars labeled that explain the emerging roles of educators. He noted the following:

Educator as Master Artist: The educator affords an open and sharing workspace where learners observe the work of others. The educator also provides guidance to the learners by highlighting innovate/creative work of the learners’ peers.

Educator as Network Administrator: The educator connects the learners’ current knowledge and skills with areas in which the learners are novices. This knowledge base is connected to the outcomes of the course or job skills taught. The educator teaches learners how to critically evaluate information sources as to how it will help the learner accomplish the stated goals for their course or job.

Educator as Concierge: The educator provides resources and information to learners that the learner may not have known existed. As the educator has more experience in the field, he/she would know where to find pertinent information for the learners. The educator also provides background information as needed to enhance the resources provided.

Educator as Curator: The educator has a greater knowledge about their content area and provides this knowledge to learners by providing a map of sorts to the concepts taught. The educator does not just set the learner free on a road to discovery, but provides resources that would help guide the learner down their path.

The Instructivist/Constructivist: The educator focuses on having the learner make connections in their learning. This approach blends the four prior metaphors of educators: master artist, network administrator, concierge, and curator.

When analyzing each of these metaphors, I see each of them having a place in the digital classroom. For example, in our Walden classes we are always reading the work of our peers while crafting our own work. We assimilate what we learn from the writing of others and add that knowledge to our own. Our professors often mention exemplars of work and post those for us to review. The network administrator metaphor is also valid in that our professors help provide connections to areas in which our skills are not as strong. For example, I struggled with APA form for a while and my previous instructors not only taught me how to improve the skill but how the knowledge was beneficial for the bigger picture. The idea of the educator as a concierge is beneficial for students who need guidance on where to find learning opportunities. While students of the digital age might know certain sources of information (e.g. Google, Wikipedia, etc.), they also need exposure to better sources and places they can learn without just search engines. As concierges, educators can provide a better list of resources that are worthy of review and steer students clear of the “tourist traps” that offer little or no substance.

I think the educator as curator is a better metaphor for how I like to be taught and how I often teach. Many of our learners are digitally minded as they have been learning with technology just about all of their lives. Sometimes these students just want to be given a task and some basic guidance on the topic. The students want to be able to do work on their own and not be throttled by slow teachers or peers. Instead of working on a prescribed task everyone has to do, they want to go out and do something that matches their strengths and weaknesses. Through this process, the students would fill in the gaps of their knowledge with their searches and application of technology. That said, some teachers take the curator approach too far and just give an assignment and expect students to do all the rest without any help.

When I think of the best instructors in digital learning, I see superheroes. In order for online learning to be effective, especially for new students in this environment, instructors have to fulfill all of the roles Siemens (2008) mentioned. Instructors must individualize instruction for the distinct needs of the learners and cannot offer a cookie-cutter approach to their teaching. The reason I say superhero is that this is often hard to accomplish. Instructors cannot read minds or guess how students learn best, but are expected to tailor lessons for all. They have to not only master technology tools used in class, but also scour the land for resources that would benefit their classes. With twenty students in class, this could take inordinate amounts of time…and if they teach more than one section of a class, or topic…how could they do it all? With super powers, of course.


Reference:

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf