'911'
This is the content of the final assessment for EDGI911 – I.T in Education. It takes the form of a website (for reasons that slightly escape me other than perhaps for the fact that the Uni thinks it’s a good idea for us to have a basic knowledge of web-design) which you can find here
It’s a simple site but I a couple of nice things with it – the background image of Pacman is fixed so that he stays in place when you scroll and on the page of references, I provide anchored links to the ones that I in annotated form.
This is the initial spiel – it was meant to be longer but I didn’t have anything else to say and I ran out of time.
Games in Education – an overview
As the use of information and communications technology in education grows apace, it is only logical that teachers and educational designers will focus their attention increasingly on the world of computer games.
Computer games offer a rich and engaging environment that can cater to any educational approach, from the simplest drill and practice exercises to the development of high level problem solving and collaboration skills in sophisticated three dimensional worlds.
According to the TEEM Report (2002) on the educational use of games, they “provide a forum in which learning arises as a result of tasks stimulated by the content of the games, knowledge is developed through the content of the game and skills are developed as a result of playing the game.” (p.4)
Computer games have been shown to provide benefits ranging from dramatically enhancing the eye-hand coordination and spatial perception of surgeons undertaking laparoscopic procedures (Rosser, 2007) to sparking significant improvements in understanding of mathematical concepts among primary school students.
They offer a choice between purchasing off the shelf commercial games and building your own using any of a suite of game building software tools currently available, they allow for simulations of complex situations that are often impossible to replicate in a classroom – such as coping with a spill of dangerous chemicals in a large city.
Games also stimulate and motivate collaborative behaviour as a result of naturally occurring interactions in online environments such as Massively Multiplayer Online Games which emphasise an experiential model of learning which is favoured by many learners. (Steinkuehler, 2004)
Games are an intrinsic part of the Information revolution and their full impact on education is yet to be seen, however every piece of research points to a very interesting future.
From here, I wrote four annotated references for the following papers.
#1 The Impact of Video Games on Training Surgeons in the 21st Century.
Rosser, J., Lynch, P., Cuddihy, L., Gentile, D., Klonsky, J., Merrell, R., (2007) The Impact of video games on training surgeons in the 21st Century. The Archives of Surgery, 142. 181 – 186.
Central theme and scope:
This research examines the influence of playing video games – both immediately before a task as well as playing them regularly over longer periods of time prior to the task – in the development of a range of perceptual and motor skills useful in surgery.
It has a fairly narrow scope in comparison to a lot of the research into the impact of videogames on game players however this works to the researches advantage as it takes a highly focussed approach and makes excellent use of available medical technology used to assess performance and measure neurological activity.
Intended Audience:
This paper was published in the Archives of Surgery (Feb 2007), a respected medical journal published by the American Medical Association and aimed at surgeons and other medical professionals, including teachers of surgery.
Description:
The hypotheses being tested in this study were that “surgeons with past video game experience will peform better in a standardised laparoscopic skill and suturing program” and that “video games are correlated with better peformance in a standardised laparoscopic skill and suturing program”.
To test this, 33 surgeons participated in The Rosser “Top Gun” laparoscopic skills and suturing program. This measures their speed and accuracy in a simple surgical procedure, by making use of “an inanimate electronic proctor that controls for economy of movement errors in addition to time”.
The surgeons were all surveyed about their history of game playing, surgical experience and speciality. These factors as well as gender and hand dominance were all noted.
The surgeons then spent time playing games which emphasised non-dominant hand dexterity, two-handed choreography, targeting and 2-d depth perception skills. They then undertook practice drills which involved suturing and laparoscopic procedures.
The results of the study (after all factors were considered) showed that current video gamers scored 40% better in the Top Gun suturing course. Surgeons who have played video games in the past were 33% better at laparoscopic drills and suturing. Subjects who played video games for more than 3 hours per week had 37% few errors than those who had never played. If subjects played video games for more than 3 hours per week, they were 27% faster at laparoscopic drills and suturing tasks.
The researchers behind the study came to the conclusion that video game skill and past experience with video games are significant predictors of laparoscopic skills and suturing capability. They attributed this to several neurological processes that occur during game play. There are substantial increases in Dopamine release in the stratium and prefrontal cortex – areas associated with eye-hand coordination. Dopaminergic neurotransmission is also involved in learning, reinforcement of behaviour and attention.
Relevance:
This study provides evidence that playing videogames offers benefits in the development of eye-hand coordination and visual depth perception. It differs from the other studies that I have cited in that it focuses on these factors in relation to skill development and takes a particularly clinical approach.
#2. Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games
Steinkuehler, Constance A. (2004) “Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games” In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp.521-528). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Central theme and scope:
This study investigates the nature of learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOGs), networked 3D gaming environments that allow players to interact with objects and characters in the game as well as other (real) players.
Steinkuehler posits that players of MMOGs have rich learning experiences as a result of the “situated meanings people construct and the definitive role of communities in that meaning making process”.(p.4) She notes that it is the interactions of the members of the community in these types of games that promote learning far more than any embedded content might and that designers developing educational MMOGs need to give in-game social practice as much (if not more) attention as instructional content.
Intended audience:
This paper, which presents the preliminary findings of nearly two years research is targetted at educators interested in using games as well as developers of games for education.
Description:
Steinkuehler has taken an ethnographic approach to this research, immersing herself in an MMOG called Lineage for 19 months. Lineage is a game set during medieval times and is centred around guilds (a.k.a blood pledges) which vie for control of castles in a virtual kingdom.
She devised four key questions to structure her research, these being:
- What are the social and material practices of MMOGaming?
- What forms of participation mark community membership in such settings?
- What means for learning are embedded not in the game as designed but rather in the community practice of those who inhabit it?
- What import does participation in this community have for the situated (on and off screen) identities of its members? (p.2)
Her investigations involved participating overtly in the daily life of the game while taking “field” notes and screen capture video, noting conversations and asking questions. She interviewed other players informally in-game, through semi-structured topic specific phone interviews as well as in structured formats.
In addition to these primary resources, she also gathered data from community sources including player-authored user manuals, fan discussion boards, chatrooms and fan generated fiction.
Steinkuehler found that players learn primarily in collaboration with other, more experienced players. “During collaboration, the focus is on the activity, with information (e.g., manuals, guidebooks, websites) playing only a secondary and supporting role.”(p.7) Feedback comes from the game system (e.g., error-produced death) as well as other players and pushing yourself beyond the edge of your current competency is highly valued by the community.
Relevance:
This research is of a more qualitative focus than most of the other papers and it again focusses on a relatively specific area of the use of games in education. It’s inclusion emphasises the wide ranging benefits to be found in this field and the need to consider the existing strengths of games when applying educational goals to them.
#3 Computer games in education project
Central theme and scope:
Becta is an agency of the British Government with responsibility for providing advice on the use of information and communications technology (ICT) in education. This report offers an overview of the potential uses of computer games to support teaching and learning in schools.
Its scope is therefore necessarily quite broad and focuses on:
-
investigating what aspects of computer games are of value to education
-
investigating if and how existing games might be used productively in schools
-
encouraging the educational software industry to continue the development of high quality software which addresses the requirements of teachers and learners
-
developing a dialogue with the games sector.
Intended audience:
British Education Department, managers, school administrators, teachers, computer game industry
Description:
This is broadstroke report based on anecdotal evidence from the schools that participated in this national project. A pool of commercially available computer games (not specifically designed for education) previously reviewed by Becta was made available to teachers to use in class.
The teachers were provided with a study related template for each title which covered issues directly related to the National Curriculum, technical issues, language comprehension and content suitability for different ages/year levels. Teachers had to specify their intended learning outcomes but beyond this were free to use the software in the manner that they felt was most appropriate.
The games chosen (and their purposes) were:
- The Sims (building a simple model, describe how rules govern models)
- SimCity 3000 (building a simple model, describe how rules govern models)
- Championship Manager 2000/01 (databases and data manipulation)
- Age of Empires (thinking and essential skills)
- City Trader (trading of stocks and shares in business, modelling economic activity)
The report describes in some detail the experiences of the learners with the games software and the different applications derived by the teachers.
As a small pilot study, no particularly definitive data has come from this report however it is worth examining for the insights developed by the teachers and the learners in the process of introducing games into the classroom. These include:
- Simulation based games can be very useful for stimulating class discussions by providing authentic contexts
- Teachers need to frame the activity to ensure that learning objectives can be met.
- Teachers should be familiar with a game – both in terms of content and control before using it in class.
- The immediate feedback offered in games acts as a strong motivator for learners
- Games can offer activities with greater relevance to learner interests – such as football in the case of Championship Manager
- Games can act as “platforms for social interaction”(p.5) and stimulate collaboration
- The option for licensing games to use on a school network was considered important, given the limitations of running games on a single computer.
Relevance:
This report differs from the others listed here in that it looks at the issue of games in education from a more organisational level and considers issues of practical implementation in the classroom. As such, it makes an important contribution to this overview.
#4 Supporting Learners in a Remote CSCL Environment: The Importance of Task and Communication.
Graves, D. & Klawe, M. (1997). Supporting Learners in a Remote CSCL Environment: The Importance of Task and Communication. Proc. of CSCL ‘97, Toronto ONT
Central theme and scope:
This study looks at two important factors in the design of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) learning resources – the degree to which tasks are structured and the nature of the communication tools available to learners – and their impacts on learning and engagement with the material.
As an early instance of research in this particular field, the study is centred on the experiences of a relatively small (134 participants) sample of elementary school learners.
Intended Audience:
This paper is targeted at educators, instructional designers and other people with an interest in the use of I.T in distance education.
Description:
The researchers used an education computer game called Builder, which “allows two players to design a house using various 2-D layouts and view it in 3-D.”(p.4)
Builder is designed to improve understanding of a number of mathematical concepts including additive and subtractive areas and volumes, tiling of surfaces and the relationship between perimeter and area.
It can be set to provided structured tasks with clear goals or more open ended tasks with undefined goals. It also offers two systems for networked communication – a simple, text chat only version and a second which adds voice chat as well as personal avatars, creating a “virtual presence”.
Pre/Post tests were devised (differing only in numbers and words used in similar equations) to measure learning and a questionnaire developed to examine the socio-motivational effects of the game and the collaboration by distance model.
Additional data came from log files from the game (tasks undertaken and completed, times taken and scores) as well as anecdotal reports from teachers observing the students.
A control group of students who only took the Pre/Post tests was also established.
Learners were pre-tested during the week of the research and on the day worked in pairs in separate rooms. Each pair was given a 5 minute orientation to the system and then were allowed to play for 30 minutes. Some pairs were able to use the simple communication system and others the enhanced version. Some were given structured tasks and others the open tasks. After this the students were given the questionnaire to complete and after all learners had played Builder, they were given the post-test.
The research demonstrated significant improvements in the desired mathematical skills in the learners that had used the game. Learners preferred the enhanced communications tools however they didn’t increase academic gain. Learners did benefit more from the structured tasks than the unstructured ones. Anecdotal reports indicate that learners using the unstructured tasks struggled more with the concepts of the game.
Relevance:
This research complements that of Steinkuehler in some ways, offering a statistical counterpoint to her ethnographic approach. The value of collaboration in learning and particularly in learning through online and networked games is an important example of the benefits of games in education.
Here is the complete list of references – there is some interesting reading here if you are interested in the research going on into game use in schools.
# 1. The Impact of Video Games on Training Surgeons in the 21st Century. (annotated)
Rosser, J., Lynch, P., Cuddihy, L., Gentile, D., Klonsky, J., Merrell, R., (2007) The Impact of video games on training surgeons in the 21st Century. The Archives of Surgery, 142. 181 – 186.
#2. Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games (annotated)
Steinkuehler, Constance A. (2004) “Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games” In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp.521-528). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
#3.Computer games in education project (annotated)
BECTA (n.d), Computer games in education project: report Retrieved May 30th, 2007 from BECTA website : http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&rid=11207
#4 Supporting Learners in a Remote CSCL Environment: The Importance of Task and Communication. (annotated)
Graves, D. & Klawe, M. (1997). Supporting Learners in a Remote CSCL Environment: The Importance of Task and Communication. Proc. of CSCL ‘97, Toronto ONT
#5 Report on the educational use of games.
McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A., Heald, Y., (2002) Report on the educational use of games. Retrieved May 30th 2007 from TEEM website : http://www.teem.org.uk/publications/teem_gamesined_full.pdf
#6 Use of background music in electronic learning environments
Sedighian, K. & Sedighian, A. S. (1997). Use of Background Music in Electronic Learning Environments. ED-MEDIA 97: World Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Calgary, Canada.
#7 A classroom study : Electronic games engage children as researchers
Klawe, M. M. & Phillips, E. (1995). A classroom study: Electronic games engage children as researchers. Proceedings of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning ‘95 (CSCL), Bloomington, Indiana.
#8 Playing together beats playing apart, especially for girls
Inkpen, K., Booth, K. S., Klawe, M. & Upitis, R. (1995). Playing Together Beats Playing Apart, Especially for Girls. Proceedings of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning ‘95 (CSCL), Bloomington, Indiana.
#9 Environmental Detectives – The Development of an Augmented Reality Platform for Environmental Simulations
Klopfer, E. and K. Squire. 2005. Environmental Detectives – The Development of an Augmented Reality Platform for Environmental Simulations. In Press for Educational Technology Research and Development.
#10 Teaching with games – using commercial off-the-shelf computer games in formal education
Sandford, R., Ulicsak, M., Facer, K. & Rudd, T. (2006) Teaching with games – Using commercial off-the-shelf computer games in formal education Retrieved May 30th, 2007 from: http://www.futurelab.org.uk/research/teachingwithgames/findings.htm
June 4th, 2007
When trying to communicate new concepts to learners, it can often be helpful to represent these concepts as visual models or explain them through activities which give the concept a more tangible form.
Many elements of current Constructivist education theory centre around “procedures and operations for representing and reasoning about information” (Greeno, Collins & Resnick 1996). The use of non-verbal and non-textual representations of complex problems and concepts, often facilitated by visualisation tools made possible by advanced computer graphics (Driscoll 2002), is regarded by many as an effective way of presenting information as well as providing alternatives to learners with literacy problems. (Robyler 1997)
My team at the Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT), Flexible Learning Solutions (FLS), has been using modeling techniques to explain the practice of blogging and commenting to less tech-savvy CIT teachers.
In the course of a hands on, non-computer based workshop, participants are given a standard sheet of paper, a pen and a number of post-it notes. They write a “blog” post on the sheet of paper and stick it to a wall and then view “blog” posts from the other participants by roaming around the room. Using their post-it notes, they are able to attach comments to each others posts and also to each others comments.
This simple activity illustrates very effectively the reflective and collaborative nature of blogging and the value of feedback provided through the comments, all in an environment which removes the daunting aspects of the technology from the experience.
This is a useful heuristic as it highlights the fact that it is possibly to present new information to learners that is shaped in a way that allows you to emphasise that which is important and isolate it from less familiar factors that learners can find alienating.
Implementing this heuristic is really just a matter of examining the course content and looking for non-verbal means of expressing it. As mentioned, the ongoing evolution of software (particularly free and open-source software) and the boom in social-web tools offer any number of options but an effective model can just as easily take the form of a paper based simulation.
References:
Robyler, M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. (1997). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (pp. 54-79). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Driscoll, M.P. (2002). How People Learn (and What Technology Might Have To Do with It). ERIC Digest. ED470032
Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. (abstract)
Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15-46). New York: Macmillan.
May 3rd, 2007
Presenting information to learners in a way that reflects the situations and cultures in which they will use it makes the information more relevant to them and easier to recall.
Brown, Collins and Duguid (1989) strongly emphasise the idea that concepts exist in a particular context which helps to shape the concept into useful knowledge. Presenting this information in a form related to its use in the real world, ideally in a form which requires the learner to act as though they are also in that context (i.e. As a mathematician or historian) adds important layers of additional cultural meaning to the information being shared.
This allows the learner to form associations between the new information and their existing knowledge which according to cognitive theory makes it easier to store in and retrieve from long-term memory (Robyler, Edwards & Havriluk 2007).
I recently worked on a project with a teacher at the Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT) focusing on a competency called Practice within legal and ethical parameters. This teaches nurses about legal and ethical issues within nursing practice, the law and their responsibilities. In the past, it had been taught essentially as a list of laws and policies that nurses needed to be aware of.
We created a detailed case study simulation in which nurses make decisions based on developments in a particular patient’s case, consultation with colleagues and other available information.
This added hospital and nursing culture issues to the learning and allowed nurses to connect more personally with the course content.
As someone working in a Vocational Education and Training institution, the richness and relevance of information is of the highest importance as knowledge developed by learners is designed almost exclusively for practical use in specific settings. Finding new ways to contextualise even the simplest foundation skills and to make teachers aware of the importance of this therefore is crucial.
Practitioners wishing to enhance meaning with context might consider:
-
Using more collaborative problem based projects (Ertmer & Newby 1993)
-
Build skills through sequential exercises (Driscoll 2002)
-
Look for a balance between experiential learning, guided mentoring and collective reflection (Dede 2005)
References:
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, Jan/Feb, 32-42.
Colvin, Clark, R. & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Using rich media wisely. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (pp. 311-322). Upper Saddle Creek, NJ: Pearson Education.
Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillennial learning styles. Educause Quarterly, 28(1).
Driscoll, M.P. (2002). How People Learn (and What Technology Might Have To Do with It). ERIC Digest. ED470032
Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
Robyler, M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. (1997). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (pp. 54-79). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
May 3rd, 2007
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, Jan/Feb, 32-42.
I’m not sure whether these articles are making more sense to me now because I’m getting a stronger grasp on the underlying theories or if it’s just that they are better written. Probably a bit of both.
Brown, Collins and Duguid present their ideas about why content is more meaningful to learners when it is put into context in an easily understandable way, using plenty of examples as well as some very effective analogies. Their approach seems much more anchored in chalkface experience and constantly focusses on educational practice in schools, rather that making lofty prognostications about what approaches might be beneficial for learners.
Key points:
“Many methods of didactic education assume a separation between knowing and doing, treating knowledge as an integral, self-sufficient substance, theoretically independent of the situations in which it is learned and used.”
We should “embed learning in activity and make deliberate use of the social and physical context”
Learning vocabulary with a dictionary and a few example (but out of context) sentences is different to the way words are learnt in day to day life – through use in normal conversation and reading. “Experienced readers implicitly understand that words are situated. They, therefore, ask for the rest of the sentence or the context before committing themselves to an interpretation of a word”
“All knowledge is, we believe, like language. It’s constituent parts index the world and so are intextricably a product of the activity and situations in whch they are produced”
“A concept, like the meaning of a word, is always under construction”
“It may be more useful to consider conceptual knowledge as, in some ways, similar to a set of tools. Tools share several significant features with knowledge – They can only be fully understood with use and using them entails both changing the users view of the world and adopting the belief system in which they are used.”
“People who use tools actively rather than just acquire them, by contrast, build an increasingly rich implicit understanding of the world in which they use the tools and of the tools themselves. The understanding, both of the world and of the tool, continually changes as a result of their interaction”
“Learning how to use a tool involves far more than can be accounted for in any set of explicit rules. The occasions and conditions for use arise directly out of the context of activities of each community that uses the tool, framed by the way members of that community see the world… Thus carpenters and cabinet makers use chisels differently”
“Activity, concept and culture are interdependent. No one can be totally understood without the other two. Learning must involve all three”
“(Students) need to be exposed to the use of a domain’s conceptual tools in authentic activity – to teachers acting as practitioners and using these tools in wrestling with the problems of the world. Such activity can tease out the way a mathematician or historian looks at the world and solves emergent problems. (But maths is a tool used in different ways by different practitioners – eg mathematician vs statistician vs engineer – how do you apply context there – perhaps by looking at the content being covered and seeing who it is most applicable to?)
“Activity also provides experience, which is plainly important for subsequent action”
“Knowledge… indexes the situation in which it arises and is used. The embedding circumstances efficiently provide essential parts of its structure and meaning”
“By beginning with a task embedded in a familiar activity, it shows the students the legitimacy of their implicit knowledge and its availability as scaffolding in apparently unfamiliar tasks”
“By allowing students to generate their own solution paths, it helps make them conscious, creative members of the culture of problem-solving mathematicians. And, in enculturating though this activity, they acquire some of the cultures tools – a shared vocabulary and the means to discuss, reflect upon, evaluate and validate community procedures in a collaborative process”
“Collaboration also leads to the articulation of strategies, which can then be discussed and reflected on. This, in turn, fosters generalising, grounding in the students situated understanding”
“… teachers or coaches promote learning, firstly by making explicit their tacit knowledge or by modelling their strategies for students in authentic activity. Then, teachers and colleagues support student’s attempts at doing the task. And finally they empower the students to continue independently”
“An intriguing role in learning is played by ‘legitimate peripheral participation’, where people who are not taking part directly in a particular activity learn a great deal from their legitimate position on the periphery”
“This peripheral participation is particularly important for people entering the culture. They need to observe how practitioners at various levels behave and talk to get a sense of how expertise is manifest in conversation and other activities”
“Collective problem solving: Groups are not just a convenient way to accumulate the individual knowledge of their members. They give rise synergistically to insights and solutions that would not come about without them”
“Displaying multiple roles: Successful execution of most individual tasks requires students to understand the many different roles needed for carrying out any cognitive task. Getting one person to be able to play all the roles entailed by authentic activity and to reflect productively upon his or her performance is one of the monumental tasks of education. The group, however, permits different roles to be displayed and engenders reflective narratives and discussions about the aptness of those roles” – Is it enough for people to be able to discuss the tasks that someone else undertook in a group task for them to understand what is really involved without having done it?
“Groups can be efficient in drawing out, confronting and discussing both misconceptions and ineffective strategies”
Overall, a lot of interesting ideas here – it got a little more abstract as it continued and the concepts got more advanced but most of it makes sense.
April 25th, 2007
Driscoll, M.P. (2002). How People Learn (and What Technology Might Have To Do with It). ERIC Digest. ED470032
This is one of the best articles I’ve come across so far (and one of the shortest, which might help 
Driscoll provides a simple and effective overview of factors that influence learning and examines the ways in which technology can be used in each case. My comments appear in blue italics
Learning occurs in context:
- learners attempt to make sense of something new and unfamiliar by drawing upon their prior understandings and experiences
- offering new knowledge in some kind of context makes it easier for learners to apply appropriate prior knowledge
- real world contexts are generally the most widely shared and add relevance to content
- problem solving in the form of games, puzzles and simulations can be made engaging using multimedia technology
- adding complexity makes them challenging and even more engaging
- building skills through sequential exercises allows learners to transfer new knowledge to newer problems
Learning is active:
- Tell me, I forget. Show me, I remember. Involve me, I understand. (Chinese proverb)
- “When students become active participants in the knowledge construction process, the focus of learning shifts from covering the curriculum to working with ideas (Scarmadalia, 2002)”
- Technology tools provide “the means through which individuals engage and manipulate both resources and their own ideas (Hannafin, Land & Oliver 1999)” As opposed to pen and paper? Actually, computer tools would still be easier and more effective here, you’re right
- Other technology tools help to represent knowledge and facilitate communication – e.g. visualisation tools
- Simulations can enable learners to model complex ideas
Learning is social:
- Students benefit from hearing perspectives other than their own in group work. Importance of peer opinion - Just today the Beyond Blue foundation (for depression) was talking about teaching teens the skills to help depressed friends.
- Students may bring different strengths to a complex and lengthy activity
- Learning, then, amounts to increasing participation in and contribution to the practices of a social community
- Concepts such as knowledge building, apprenticeship, and mentoring become paramount, as learners are conceived to be under the tutelage of more experienced peers or instructors.
- A social view of learning focusses attention on making connections among students within a school and between students in the school and the broader community. What about quieter students though – shy ones and less literate ones?
- Students can use software to collaborate “by creating ‘notes’ to express their ideas or integrate outside information about a topic. Then they read and respond to the notes of others, all of which builds a communal database producing shared knowledge about the topic or problem” Like something between a blog and a wiki? More like a blog really
- This can provide opportunities for students to “improve their understanding and become more personally involved in explaining scientific phenomena”
Learning is reflective:
- “Learning is facilitated when students get feedback about their thinking whether that feedback comes from within, a teacher or a peer” Emphasis on source of feedback comes back to the material being taught to an extent
- “Then provided the opportunity for revision, students can achieve at higher levels and reach deeper understandings”
- “Many… technology examples… facilitate discussion in the dialogue that they promote among learners. Where dialogue or discussion is not inherent in the tool, teachers bear the responsibility of initiating and guiding it”
My general observations:
Driscoll has succeeded in helping me to get some key concepts of collaborative work – the usefulness of feedback from all sources mainly – that had been eluding me.
My personal feeling is still that group work is rarely shared evenly and can often cover up for learners who don’t understand everything by allowing them to emphasise their strengths in other parts of the project.
What about the use of competition in collaborative work /projects? Could be a motivator for some (possibly a turn off for others though)
Providing a structure for reflection (much like the one listed in my previous post here ) is important – and sadly I think that so is making it an assessable part of the work with clearly stated guidelines and expectations.
Great article though Marcy Driscoll, thanks heaps
April 22nd, 2007
Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillennial learning styles. Educause Quarterly, 28(1).
This article explores (in a slightly tech-evangelical but nonetheless interesting way) possible uses in education of emerging technologies including MUVEs (MultiUser Virtual Environments – ie Second Life), Wireless/Mobile devices and ongoing developments in online content.
It also looks at the way “neomillenials” – also referred to by some as digital natives – interact with current technology and ways that education may be able to (or indeed need t0) adapt to provide learners with more complete and satisfying learning experiences.
Emerging learning styles:
- Fluency in multiple media and in simulation-based virtual settings
- Communal learning involving diverse, tacit, situated experience, with knowledge distributed across a community and a context as well as within an individual
- A balance between experiential learning, guided mentoring and collective reflection
- Expression through nonlinear, associational webs of representations
- Co-design of learning experiences personalised to individual needs and preferences
Main points:
- Internet is reshaping information gathering/learning styles – more seeking, sieving, synthesising than before.
- Digital media encourages multitasking (instant messaging, websurfing, emailing, listening to music while reading)
- Too much multitasking might lead to cognitive overload
- New emphasis on customised, personalised environments – learners wanting to shape their own courses, decide what they learn and need for universities to cater to this
- Millenial students – those born after 1982
- Emerging media types foster deeper psychological immersion – particularly 3D spaces but also “augmented reality” created by the expanding use of mobile devices and networks
- Mobile Wireless devices (MWDs) can be used to access context specific information while out in the real world
- Potential for networked MWDs to create connections between people with common interests
- People have multifaceted identities – real world and online ones
- Enhances access to information across space and time
- Possible to create interactions in virtual space that are impossible in reality – eg dealing with a chemical spill in busy neighbourhood – scenario based learning
- MMOGs growing in popularity (apparently Second Life hasn’t quite hit the stands at the time of writing)
- Use of virtual interactive environments, modelling museums, labs, historical simulations
- Coming phenomena of ubiquitous computing – being networked everywhere
- Encouraging non-linear communication – e.g. authoring a simulation and creating a webpage to express understanding rather than writing a paper)
Suggested implications of these changes:
- need to redesign physical spaces – specialised spaces less necessary (e.g. library reading rooms)
- places and objects will have more information attached to them
- networked collaboration enhances accessibility
- new forms of assessment required – beyond written papers – which incorporate greater peer based assessment
- need for widespread wireless network infrastructure
- move to more personalisable learning experiences
- move towards more emphasis on knowledge sharing between students
- more “real-world”context based case studies in assessment
My thoughts:
Generally there are a lot of interesting ideas here and Dede is well aware that a number of the changes proposed would involve a significant reshaping of current educational practice and systems.
I often get the feeling when reading educational theory – particularly of a constructivist bent – that it is either somewhat divorced from chalkface reality (overly theoretical) or conceived with motivated post-graduate university students in mind, rather than secondary or early tertiary students.
In the VET context, we work with learners with more basic foundation skills in learning (adolescents fresh out of high school or workers reskilling themselves) and some of the principles about student directed learning and customised courses seem quite irrelevant to learners – and highly impractical for teachers.
I question the assumption that until now learners have only taken information from narrow channels such as a textbook or two or their teacher – this fails to give teachers any credit for ingenuity at all. Multimedia in one form or another has been used in classrooms for more than 100 years.
Information processing is definitely an important skill in this age – we have access to more of it than ever before. Neomillenials may well have more effective skills at processing this and this is something to consider in designing their learning – the dangers of cognitive overload should also be taken seriously as well though.
Do neomillenials really take in and comprehend all the information that they process or is it taken more superficially?
Do people (we) have shorter attention spans now and what does this mean to learning?
I appreciate the business imperatives of providing more personalised and customised content as well – this is certainly going to be appealing to learners – however I question the assumption that learners always know what they don’t know and also what they need to know.
Research has indicated that learners don’t always get in right when deciding what they need to know and that more often than not they get it wrong when determining the best way to learn things that they want to know. Sometimes that topics that seem the least interesting to a learner are the most important in terms of actually being able to use a set of skills or knowledge.
When courses and curricula are designed by “experts”, these are people who are able to bring valuable experience to the process and know better the things that learners need to focus on. It might be worth allowing learners to shape the order in which content is presented but the body of the content is probably something that they should be prepared to accept as coming from someone who knows more. If you don’t enter higher education to know more than you currently know, why go there at all?
The matter of administering and assessing such systems (unless we are dealing with chunks of knowledge) also seems to have been brushed aside but is a key consideration in making these changes actually happen. Teachers don’t want to do more work than they are already doing – often times they simply can’t – and will vote with their feet if a system is imposed on them. (Such as one revolving around personalised learning packages)
How can employers make considered assessments of a qualification if it’s significantly different to everyone elses?
Let’s not make learners too important in the process of figuring out what they have actually learnt – just because they feel as though they know enough about something doesn’t necessarily make it so. If a team of medical students successfully completes an operation, are we sure that each student can do it all?
Looking at education another way, if the knowledge of the world (the developed world at least) is at our fingertips, do we need to learn anything more than how to access it and understand it? (Of course, if the access to this info breaks, society could be in trouble)
Human adoption of technology systems that put people in contact with random strangers sharing common interests (in terms of mobile wireless devices) has been hyped for a few years now but really hasn’t taken off. People do make connections online more freely based on common interests – is this because it is a less threatening environment? I think that people are naturally cautious about strangers and prefer the online buffer. This may differ in a learning environment – I’d like to hear some ideas for ways that this might work though.
Notions of access are very powerful and encouraging – current technological developments certainly offer great promise for involving more people in education who have been disadvantaged. We shouldn’t forget those who are technologically disadvantaged as well (The One Laptop Per Child scheme is encouraging here) as this is a key divide.
Simulations that go beyond what is possible or practical in reality are very encouraging – one of the things I regularly discuss with teachers is that if using technology doesn’t add something to a learning experience that wasn’t already there, why use it? The possibility of developing resources and simulations that mean you can do something new – such as a massive chemical spill in a big city – are tremendous.
I suspect that many of Dede’s suggestions for implementations (particularly large scale ones) are designed as ambit claims – things like getting rid of computer labs and reading rooms in libraries work on an assumption that 100% of learners want to go down this path. If we are going to talk about providing personalised learning, what about these people?
This is more about provoking thought and discussion and is fair enough.
I read a comment recently (no idea where) which made the point that computers should simply be seen as another classroom resource and that we don’t talk about taking the students to the pencil lab. (Although isn’t that the Art room?). This is true, although I’d say that if pencils cost $1000 each, it might be a little different.
Personalisable learning – worth considering RSS feeds and related widgets, still not sure what personalised learning environments are or how they work but I guess this comes into the picture.
This article is definitely worth a read, I just wonder if it isn’t a little divorced from chalkface practice – or putting it more nicely, a little idealised.
April 22nd, 2007
Robyler, M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. (1997). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (pp. 54-79). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Ok well this is a slightly more sizable piece of writing, let’s see how I go here.
Again, essentially an overview of differences between behaviourist/cognitivist (here referred to as directed instruction) and constructivist theory and practice.
Chapter begins with a guide to what is to be covered, a nice “advanced organiser” approach which gives the learner a mental framework to hang the new knowledge on.
- Information age means that we are constantly playing catchup and learning to learn is seen by many as a key skill.
- Need to become more effective decision makers.
- Directed Instruction = Behaviourism + Information processing branch of cognitivism
- Constructivism = comes from other branches of cognitivism (mainly a reaction to directed instruction approaches)
- Both theories focus on what Gagne calls “the conditions of learning”
Strengths of Directed Instruction approach
- can allow for individual pacing (students can be busy while teacher supports slower students)
- efficient (skill practice through drills)
- provides foundation skills needed for higher level skills
- instruction is replicable, quality is consistent
- some students like a structured learning environment
Strengths of Constructivist approach
- encourages higher level skills – problem solving, teamwork/collaboration, critical thinking, research
- adds context/relevance as a motivator and to anchor learning to students experiences
- students pushed to figure out what they need to learn to solve problems
Tennyson (1990) claims that about 30% of learning time should be spent on “acquiring knowledge” (e.g. verbal info and procedural knowledge) and 70% spent on the “employment of knowledge” (e.g., contextual skills, cognitive strategies and creative processes)
More about Directed Instruction:
- learning as a sequence of stimulus and response (response is the best indicator that learning has occurred)
- teachers and resources are the stimuli, skills demonstrated are the response
- information processing theory – learning = input variables (info) + processor (attention + short/long term memory) + outputs (responses)
- inputs that receive attention go to short-term memory (stm) for 5-20 secs, then on to long term (ltm) (hopefully)
- teachers shape info to make it more likely to move from stm to ltm, give practice exercises to help it.
Gagne’s events of instruction
- Gaining attention
- Informing the learner of the objective
- Stimulating the recall of prerequisite info
- Presenting new material
- Providing learning guidance (cognitivist tools ?)
- Eliciting performance
- Providing feedback about correctness
- Assessing performance
- Enhancing retention and recall
Gagne’s learning hierarchy – build base skills first needed for more complex ones.
Systematic instructional design / Systems approaches – step by step process for preparing instructional materials
Problems with Directed Instruction approach
- leads to standardised testing => (teaching to the test)
- regimented
- weak support for higher level skills of problem solving etc
- more oriented to individuals, not group work (which is more prevalent in “the real world”)
More about Constructivism
The more I read about Constructivism, the more it annoys me. It’s ill defined, it seems to identify itself largely in terms of what it isn’t (i.e. directed instruction) and while some of it’s ideas are common sense – using real world examples to add motivation to content, using multimedia, developing problem solving and critical reflection skills – they seem fairly easy to apply to other approaches.
I’m also unconvinced about the obsession with collaborative group work (how do you ensure that all members of the group have digested the required knowledge and aren’t just coasting) as it seems oriented to creating happy little worker drones.
Some of the ideas about allowing learners all the time they want to discover things and also letting them learn things in the ways that they think are most suited seem completely divorced from the reality of a classroom. (Particularly in the VET sector).
I can see some use in a collaborative approach that encompasses students from a range of disciplines – for example, putting on a major music festival, with a student from design, p.r, public events, OHS etc I guess.
Anyway, this is what Robyler et al. have to say about it.
- focus on students motivation to learn and relevance to the real world
- activities meaningful to a student’s own experience
- provides scaffolding through supervised collaborative activities
According to Piaget: sometimes they fit new experiences into their existing schemes or patterns of behaviour, a process he called assimilation; sometimes they change their existing schemes to incorporate new experiences, which he called accommodation.
According to Lev Vygotsky: “children begin learning from the world around them, their social world, which is the source of all their concepts, ideas, facts, skills and attitudes”
According to Bruner: Discovery learning is an approach to instruction through which students interact with their environment – by exploring and manipulating objects, wrestling with questions and controversies or performing experiments
Teachers have found that discovery learning is most successful when students have prerequisite knowledge and undergo some structured experiences
According to Rand Spiro (et al.) :Cognitive Flexibility theory – calls for students to generate not only solutions to new problems but also the prior knowledge needed to solve the problems.
According to CTGV: Inert knowledge is “knowledge that can usually be recalled when people are explicitly asked to do so but is not used spontaneously in problem solving even though it is relevant”
Constructivist approaches:
- Problem oriented activities
- Visual mental models of problems to be solved
- Rich media environments
- Cooperative/collaborative group learning
- Learning through exploration
- Qualitative assessment – student portfolios, teacher narratives of student work habits, performance based assessments in combination with checklists of criteria for judging student performance
Problems with Constructivism:
- “Many teachers are still bound by the constraints of required curricula and they must ensure that their students accomplish existing district objectives as well as newer, more constructivist ones”
- Sometimes instructional activities based on constructivist models are more time-consuming, since they may call for teachers to organise and facilitate group work and to evaluate in authentic ways. By comparison, paper-and-pencil tests are both quicker to develop and easier to administer
- Papert feels that learning activities should be fairly unstructured and open-ended, frequently with no goal in mind other than discovery of “powerful ideas”
- How can one certify skill learning? – Just because a team of med students succeed in an operation, can all of them do it
- Are students able to find their own prior knowledge?
- Can students learn this knowledge in the best way?
- Little evidence that skills learnt this way do actually transfer to real world situations
- Minimal objective evidence to back it up.
Technology Integration Strategies
These are a few of the reasons that the writers offer to make more use of technology in the classroom.
Directed Models
- Self paced drills/tutorials allow lagging students to spend time catching up and make them feel less self-conscious
- Drill and practice help prerequisite skills become more automatic
- Advanced tutorials/resources can be made available to advanced students wishing to skip ahead
- I.T tools such as Word, CAD etc reduce some logistical tools – don’t teach skills in themselves but make production of student work easier
- I.T tools optimise scarce resources – stationery, teachers, simulations of lab experiments
Constructivist Models
- Add motivation
- Support creativity
- Allow for reflection
- Using more visual models of problems and creation of multimedia helps bypass literacy issues in some students
- Enhances cooperative work
Issues to consider in introducing technology to teaching
- Assessment for constructivist activities should be planned to occur over long time-frames
- Assessment should dovetail with the activities
- Flexibility is important – might need to change things as you are going
- Finding a balance between directed and constructivist approaches requires some experimentation.
Parts I’m unsure of
- Constructivists claim use of multimedia etc as relatively unique tool to overcome lack of base skills (eg literacy) but it can be used in any approach
- Simply accepting literacy problems and finding work-arounds feels wrong – literacy is a fundamental skill
- Critical reflection requires the ability to assess data and sources but more importantly the learner needs to care about it in the first place
April 21st, 2007
McGreal, R. & Elliott, M. (2004). Technologies of Online Learning
(E-Learning) In T. Anderson
& F. Elloumi (Eds.). Theory and practice of online learning. (pp115-135). Athabasca University.
After my last effort which clocked in at a fairly ridiculous 4000 words, I’ve decided to take a more sane approach and really just try to focus on the heart of these articles.
This article on possible uses of current technology was written in mid-2003 and while many aspects of it are still quite pertinent, some already seem a little quaint. There is a large focus on what might be done, less so on what is being done and it takes a slightly tech-evangelical bent at times – but it’s nice to see enthusiasm.
In short:
- Edutainment is the meshing of education with entertainment
- Audio and video files are large and accessibility issues should be considered
- Streaming’s advantage is that files begin to play while they are still being downloaded
- As chunk 1 of a file is playing, chunk 2 is being downloaded. When chunk 2 plays, chunk 1 is deleted and chunk 3 is downloaded (Funnily enough, I didn’t actually realise that chunks were deleted)
- Uses of audio – lectures, guest speakers, student projects, classroom interaction, audio files, music performances, readings of language pieces,
- Uses of video – lectures, demonstrations of how to do things, adding motivation/interest to content
- Push technology creates channels to put created content on desktops (This has been and gone and surpassed by pull technology such as RSS)
- Educators should be watchful that push technology is used in schools for educational, not commercial purposes in schools
- VOIP – it works and is cheap and good for distance learning and accessibility
- Uses of VOIP – supplement to classroom based e-mail pen pal programmes, good for language, cultural exchange
- Web Whiteboard tools – useful for collaboration, graphical display and brainstorming
- Instant messaging – useful for immediate communication between teachers and students
- Handheld/Wireless/Mobile technology – it’s coming and will be bigger than Ben Hur (It’s here, some uses but we’re still waiting for the oohh-ahhh moment I think)
- Uses of mobile learning – accessibility
- Peer to peer file sharing – good for exchanging files (well duh) and setting up repositories of learning objects
- Knowledge objects – discrete items which might be image, text, video, audio etc
- Learning objects – Knowledge objects with a lesson attached to them.
- Usefulness of learning/knowledge objects – breaking learning into digestible chunks.
Looks like they missed the whole Web 2.0 boat, as well as Learning Management Systems, Personal Learning Environments and a few other things.
Not a bad article for an overview of some things but definitely a reminder of how quickly things are changing.
April 19th, 2007
Ok so this is my first major attempt at a heuristic – I think it went ok – it certainly helped having a structure provided (which i now know is a cognitivist strategy).
1. Interactive multimedia makes Behaviourist learning strategies more engaging.
The use of simple online games and quizzes provides positive reinforcement to learners and adds interest to subjects which focus on fact based learning by bringing variety and heightened sensory experiences to repetitive tasks.
Robyler and Havriluk (1997) point out that among the “needs addressed by directed instruction” (their term for the Behaviourist approach) are “making learning paths more efficient… especially for instruction in skills that are prerequisite to higher-level skills” and “performing time-consuming and labor intensive tasks (e.g., skill practice), freeing teacher time for other, more complex student needs”.
This has been demonstrated in a project undertaken in the Learning Medical Terminology subject at the Canberra Institute of Technology (CIT). A range of vocabulary learning exercises have been turned into simple drill and practice online games, making them more fun and interactive.
Anecdotal evidence from the teacher of the subject indicates that students now learn and retain the words more quickly and complain less about the subject.
This heuristic is useful to me as a learning resource developer at CIT as we are part of the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector and many of the initial subjects in our courses require learners to acquire a certain base level of technical subject-specific knowledge. Many of these games can be produced easily by teachers with free or inexpensive software and require minimal technical ability to create and put online.
I chose to write about it as I am a firm believer in the educational possibilities of interactive multimedia, particularly in the form of games and quizzes. Games are a familiar, accessible and engaging medium which can be used in situations ranging from Behaviourist drill and practice exercises to more Constructivist problem based scenarios. There is currently a growing group of educational game producers – known as the Serious Games movement – focusing heavily on the possibilities of the latter.
Learning practitioners wishing to make use of interactive multimedia in the form of games and quizzes should allow themselves adequate time to become familiar with the game/quiz creating software that they wish to use. While most of it is designed with the less technically inclined user in mind (i.e. a wizard based approach), it can often still require the uploading of multiple supporting image and javascript files to your website or learning management system.
References:
Robyler, M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. (1997). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (pp. 54-79). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Simpson, C., (2005). Medical Terminology – Prefixes and Suffixes. Retrieved 23/7/2007 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTfs4axi1YU
Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. (abstract)
Oliver, R. & Herrington, J. (2001) Teaching and Learning Online (p.52) Western Australia, Edith Cowan University
March 23rd, 2007
Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72. (abstract)
This article discusses behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism from an adult learning/training perspective.
Ok, so a few pages in and I’m already really appreciating the attitude towards learning taken by the authors. Their emphasis is squarely on how to take learning theories – behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism – and translate them into concrete practical ideas and exercises for learning.
They’ve made it very clear that they see value in all of the theories and that the role of the instructional designer (I.D) is to understand all of the theories and be able to identify which learning situations they are best suited for. This comes down to the types of learners, the types of teachers presenting the material, the material itself and the context in which it is to be presented.
Understanding the theories allows the I.D to find the strategies and tactics in each for effective learning, know which ones to use, figure out how to integrate them into the learning environment and predict which will be most successful.
It offers a list of 7 questions that can be used to differentiate the theories.
- How does learning occur?
- Which factors influence learning?
- What is the role of memory?
- How does transfer* occur?
- What types of learning are best explained by this theory?
- What basic assumptions/principles of this theory are relevant to instructional design?
- How should instruction be structured to facilitate learning?
*Transfer refers to the application of learned knowledge in new ways or situations, as well as to how prior learning affects new learning. (e.g. A student learns how to recognise/classify elms trees and then applies the same methods to maple trees)
Two opposing theories on the origin of knowledge – empiricism vs rationalism. Empiricism posits that knowledge comes from sensory input and our experiences, which we mesh together to form more complex associations. Seems reasonable. The learning focus comes in controlling the environment to maximise the occurence of associations.
Rationalism on the other hand says that learners discover what is already in their minds and knowledge is developed by reflection on what they already know in combination with the observations that trigger or reveal this knowledge. (This seems a little harder to grasp imho. The rationalist approach focuses on the best ways to structure new information so it is effectively encoded and sparks recall of related things that are already known. )
Behaviourism – learning (knowledge) takes the form of a response to stimuli (eg teacher holds up a flash card that says 4 + 2 = and the student says 6) – the primary focus is how the association between the stimulus and response is made, strengthed and maintained. Responses followed by reinforcement are more likely to recur in the future.
Behaviourism seems more useful (to me) in fact based situations. (As opposed to analytical / creative ones)
Hey, what do you know, the next question says much the same thing -
“These prescriptions have generally been proven reliable and effective in facilitating learning that includes discriminations (recalling facts), generalisations (defining and illustrating concepts), assocations (applying explanations), and chaining (automatically performing a specified procedure). However it is generally agreed the behavioural principles cannot adequately explain the acquisition of higher level skills or those that require a greater depth of processing (e.g., language development, problem solving, inference generating, critical thinking)(Schunk,1991)”
How Behaviourism is relevant to instructional design:
- An emphasis on producing observable and measurable outcomes in students [behavioural objectives, task analysis, criterion-reference assessment]
- Pre-assessment of students to determine where instruction should begin [learner analysis]
- Emphasis on mastering early steps before progressing to more complex levels of performance [sequencing of instructional presentation, mastery learning]
- use of reinforcement to impact performance [tangible rewards, informative feedback]
- Use of cues, shaping and practice to ensure a strong stimulus-response assocation [simple to complex sequencing of practice, use of prompts]
Stimulus is about something that the learner needs to know – generally as a question or an instruction to complete a task, the response is the answer or the successful completion of the task. Cues can be presented to facilitate the learning needed to create the correct response – examples of the correct answer or way to do something and repetition and reinforcement lead to the correct response being provided without the learner needing to rely on cues.
Cognitivism – this focusses more on more complex cognitive processes such as thinking, problem solving, language, concept formation and information processing.
It seems to be about equipping learners with effective learning strategies to process the information that they are given – as well as factoring in the students own beliefs and thought processes in interpreting/measuring how well they understand the knowledge.
Much more emphasis on connecting prior knowledge (which might not be exactly the same but close) to new knowledge – use of analogy to make new concepts seem familiar more quickly.
Sort of about identifying patterns which could be useful in problem solving by showing the learner what information they need to access to deal with a new situation that may resemble something they already know.
More about how to learn than how to teach.
“Knowledge acquisition is described as a mental activity that entails internal coding and structuring by the learner. The learner is viewed as a very active participant in the learning process” – I have to say here that this strikes me as the way that knowledge is acquired under any system – even behaviourism. This kind of statement assumes that in a behaviourist model (where it is implied that knowledge is simply branded onto the brain through sheer repetition) the learner doesn’t make any effort to apply their own meaning to the instruction/information being imparted and that they don’t relate it to other things that they have learnt. This process may not be built into the learning experience by the teacher but I would be surprised if it didn’t happen in the learner regardless.
Cognitivism, like behaviourism, emphasises the role that environmental conditions play in facilitating learning. Instructional explanations, demonstrations, illustrative examples and matched non-examples are all considered to be instrumental in guiding student learning. Similarly, emphasis is placed on the role of practice with corrective feedback.
Cognitive theories contend that environmental “cues” and instructional components alone cannot account for all the learning that results from an instructional situation. Additional key elements include the way that learners attend to, code, transform, rehearse, store and retrieve information. Learners’ thoughts, beliefs, attitudes and values are also considered to be valuable in the learning process.
Learning results when information is stored in the memory in an organised, meaningful manner. Teachers/designers are responsible for assisting learners in organising that information in some optimal way. Designers use techniques such as advance organisers, analogies, hierarchical relationships and matrices to help learners relate new information to prior knowledge. - This seems to say that the brain is a big filing cabinet and it’s easier to find something when it’s organised alphabetically. If teachers present information in a way that is structured differently to the behaviourist approach of simply dealing with the facts, are they simply presenting more facts or are they facilitating greater understanding? I guess if it is able to create more meaning for the learner, then it will be more memorable.
Transfer in Cognitivism works in the same way as in Behaviourism – “when a learner understands how to apply knowledge in different contexts, then transfer has occurred.”
“Specific instructional or real-world events will trigger particular responses but the learner must believe that the knowledge is useful in a given situation before he will activate it” – This is just a matter of knowing what you know and why it is useful. It’s about being able to create associations with existing knowledge and new input.
Cognitive theories are usually considered more appropriate for explaining complex forms of learning (reasoning, problem-solving, information processing) than are those of a more behavioural perspective.
Two techniques used by both camps in achieving this effectiveness and efficiency of knowledge transfer are simplification and standardisation. That is, knowledge can be analysed, decomposed and simplified into basic building blocks. Knowledge transfer is expedited if irrelevant information is eliminated. Well duh.
Behaviourists would focus on the design of the environment to optimise that transfer while cognitivists would stress efficient processing strategies.
So essentially, cognitivists teach study skills or they present cues that are more psychologically oriented to understanding. (Taking understanding to equal knowledge that a learner can ascribe personal meaning to)
The actions undertaken by the teacher or instructional designer seem to be the same (aside from the emphasis given to creating links to prior knowledge) , it’s mainly the language that has changed. Behaviourism revolves around the teacher, cognitivism revolves around the learner.
Both use feedback – B’s for “reinforcement”, C’s to “guide and support mental connections”.
Both use learner/task analysis – B’s to see what the learner already knows (and thus where to begin) and what “reinforcers should be most effective”. C’s to determine the learners predisposition to learning and how to design the most effective learning experience.
I guess the cognitivist approach in this case seems a more compassionate one however ultimately they both dumb down or ramp up the material depending on the learners capacities.
Techiques in the Cognitivist approach
- Emphasis on the active involvement of the learner in the learning process [learner control, metacognitive training (e.g. self-planning, monitoring and revising techniques)]
- Use of hierarchical analyses to identify and illustrate prerequisite relationships [cognitive task analysis procedures]
- Emphasis on structuring, organising and sequencing information to facilitate optimal processing [use of cognitive strategies such as outlining, summaries, synthesisers, advance organisers]
- Creation of learning environments that allow and encourage students to make connections with previously learned material [ recall of prerequisite skills, use of relevant examples, analogies]
Cognitivism seems to be more about making knowledge more meaningful by helping learners link it to existing knowledge. Learning needs to be more tailored to the learners needs and abilities. Use of analogies and metaphors is one cognitive strategy. Other cognitive strategies include the use of framing, mnemonics, concept mapping, advance organisers and so forth.
If the teacher does the work in shaping the information so that it is more easily absorbed by the learner, the learner still seems like a fairly passive participant in this process, just a better taught one.
Let’s see if the Constructivist approach brings the learner into the process any more.
Constructivism
Knowledge “is a function of how the individual creates meaning from his or her experiences”
I’m not sure that I understand how knowledge can be a function – this implies a process rather than an outcome or something relatively concrete. Knowledge of something can evolve over time as contexts change but ultimately it seems like something that is fixed.
Most cognitive psychologists think of the mind as a reference tool to the real world; constructivists believe that the mind filters input from the world to produce it’s own unique reality.
Is this to suggest that cognitivists take a near solipsistic view of the world and assume that all knowledge is already held in the mind? My understanding of cognitivism from the earlier part of the article suggests nothing of the sort.
The evolution of educational philosophies here seems at best to be that greater attention is paid to the (probably ever-present) ability of the learner to filter received information and process it.
I get the distinct impression that the people putting forward one theory/philosophy tend to misrepresent that which came before in an attempt to make the new seem more enlightened and progressive. (Or it could just be the authors of this article and/or the people that they are referencing).
Of course people apply their own experiences to data that they take in and of course they make links to other similar knowledge that they have in the course of giving it meaning, which is unavoidably personal. Encouraging and stimulating this is a sound method for encouraging learning but it’s hardly been invented in the last 20 years.
Constructivists do not share with cognitivists and behaviourists the belief that knowledge is mind-independent and can be “mapped” onto a learner. Constructivists do not deny the existence of the real world but contend that what we know of the world stems from our own interpretations of our experiences. Humans create meaning as opposed to acquiring it. Since there are many possible meanings to acquire from any experience, we cannot achieve a predetermined “correct”meaning.
Again, I’m not sure that this fairly represents the views of behaviourists or cognitivists at all. Cs and Bs from my reading focus on methods of delivering instruction, not the philosophical vagueries of whether something exists because one person has had a different experience of it to another. A nutritionist sees a banana as a source of potassium, a creationist as evidence of God and a farmer as a source of income but none will deny that it is a piece of fruit. (But maybe this is a difference between meaning and truth/facts – I think meaning shapes a view of truth but can’t change it and just because something thinks something is so, doesn’t mean it is.)
Knowledge emerges in contexts within which it is relevant.
Fair enough.
Constructivists argue that knowledge is situationally determined (Jonassen, 1991a) Just as the learning of new vocabulary words is enhanced by exposure and subsequent interaction with those words in context (as opposed to learning their meanings from a dictionary), likewise it is essential that content knowledge be embedded in the situation in which it is used.
Again, makes a lot of sense
(I wonder if my work in the fact based, highly practically oriented VET sector is colouring my views on these philosophies to a degree. Some of this particularly meta stuff seems interesting but irrelevant at times). This bit is good though.
Just as shades of meaning of given words are constantly changing a learner’s “current” understanding of a word, so too will concepts continually evolve with each new use.
Again, in the VET sector this seems a little overstated. Things seem a little more static here. I see what they mean though.
For this reason, it is critical that learning occur in realistic settings and that the selected learning tasks be relevant to the student’s lived experience.
The goal of instruction is not to ensure that students know particular facts but rather that they elaborate on and interpret information.
This type of learning serves a different purpose to that in a behavioural model.
I’m finding that I’m quoting a lot more from this section of the article as it’s hard to summarise what the constructivists are about. Knowledge seems to be a dirty word though.
Representations of experiences are not formalised or structured into a single piece of declarative knowledge and then stored in the head. The emphasis is not on retrieving intact knowledge but on providing learners with the means to creat novel and situation-specific understandings by “assembling” prior knowledge from diverse sources appropriate to the problem at hand.
Isn’t this just association by another – ridiculously long – name? Taking a range of information that you have processed and added meaning to and applying it in a different situation. (After all, in any theory, you aren’t going to take prior knowledge from inappropriate sources, are you. )
I’m starting to actually appreciate heuristics now – any idea that you can’t express clearly in a handful of words is starting to feel like padding and technocrat-ese.
Constructivists emphasise the flexible use of pre-existing knowledge rather than the recall of pre-packaged schemas
Ok good, so it encourages problem solving – but doesn’t cognitivism
The point seems to be that constructivism offers an approach which is more about context than any system before.
There is no need for the mere acquisition of fixed, abstract, self-contained concepts or details. To be successful, meaningful and lasting, learning must include all three of these crucial factors : activity (practice), concept (knowledge) and culture (context). (Brown et al. 1989)
But I thought that “experiences are not… structured into a single piece of declarative knowledge and then stored in the head”?. And doesn’t the behaviourist and cognitivist approach make use of activity(practice) in reinforcement?
Context seems to be the big revelation of constructivism. (A worthwhile addition to the previous theories but not awe-inspiring).
Something else about the discussion of constructivism so far – I’m yet to see a single concrete example of how this is applied in the learning environment – but I’ll read on now.
Now I consider myself a good progressive lefty but the more I read about the underlying philosophy of constructivism, the more I am reminded of the words of Cartman, E (2001) – “It’s all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy crap”. There’s nothing new here that isn’t simple commonsense and there is a lot of touchy-feely-nobody -can-be-wrong-because-everyones-opinion-is-valid-but-come-assessment-time-this-is-out-the-window bullshit. (I like blogging, there is no way I could say this in an essay)
I’m also thinking of heuristics as I’m going here – my favourite so far is Constructivism is a bunch of tree hugging hippy crap.
Can you tell that it’s late and I”m getting tired – I’m sure that at the heart of the constructivist philosophy are some valuable and useful insights but the language surrounding it is horrendously obtuse, ideologically driven and seemingly irrelevant to the needs of actual learners.
The constructivist position assumes that transfer can be facilitated by involvement in authentic tasks anchored in meaningful contexts.
Yes, the context in which learning occurs adds to the learners ability to bring their other experiences to the fore in creating associations which help them to understand the things that they are being taught. (Oh, shouldn’t say taught, I think the point of constructivism is to remove teachers from the context entirely). This seems to be the only new thing so far.
Ooh, got another one – Hulk inspired this time. Constructivism make Col mad – Col smash.
Ok, this seems to be the crux of it all – the goal of instruction is to accurately portray tasks, not to define the structure of learning required to achieve a task
“introductory knowledge acquisition is better supported by more objectivistic approaches (behavioural and/or cognitive) but suggests a transition to constructivistic approaches as learners acquire more knowledge which provides them with the conceptual power needed to deal with complex and ill-structured problems”
Ok, now we are getting somewhere. It’s more about working at a higher level , not learning about things but learning how to apply the things that you would already know in the course of doing a particular job – say working as an Instructional Designer.
“For example, a typical constructivist’s goal would not be to teach novice I.D. students straight facts about Instructional Design but to prepare students to use ID facts as an ID might use them. As such, performance objectives are not related so much to the content as they are to the processes of construction.”
Ok, so that sheds new light on that other article I was – uh – less flattering about. The Tse-Kian one. Still, the whole emphasis on the use of multimedia there seemed way off track and I stand by that.
“Some of the specific strategies utilised by constructivists include situating tasks in real world contexts, use of cognitive apprenticeships (modeling and coaching a student toward expert performance), presentation of multiple perspectives (collaborative learning to develop and share alternative views), social negotiation (debate, discussion, evidence-giving), use of examples as real “slices of life”, reflective awareness and providing considerable guidance on the use of constructive processes”
The following are several specific assumptions or principles from the constructivist position that have direct relevance for the I.D
- An emphasis on the identification of the context in which the skills will be learned and subsequently applied [anchoring learning in meaningful contexts]
- An emphasis on learner control and the capability of the learner to manipulate information [actively using what is learnt]
- The need for information to be presented in a variety of different ways [revisiting content at different times, in rearranged contexts, for different purposes and from different conceptual perspectives]
- Supporting the use of problem-solving skills that allow learners to go “beyond the information given” [developing pattern-recognition skills, presenting alternative ways of representing problems]
- Assessment focused on the transfer of knowledge and skills [presenting new problems and situations that differ from the conditions of the initial instruction]
Ok,this is all making a lot more sense now. I guess the problem with summing up peoples opinions about a new field that they are quite invested in is that they will tend to couch the discussion in far more ideological and evangelical terms than others.
As one moves along the behaviourist-cognitivist-constructivist continuum, the focus of instruction shifts from teaching to learning, form the passive transfer of facts and routines to the active application of ideas to problems.
Meaning is created by the learner: learning objectives are not pre-specified nor is instruction pre-designed.
Are you sure this isn’t just a high-falutin way for teachers to get out of delivering instruction?
All that said, I think teachers still have a strong responsibility to facilitate this learning by providing adequate and timely support and feedback.
Ah, just like it says here I guess
Here the task of the designer are two-fold: 1) to instruct the student on how to construct meaning, as well as how to effectively monitor, evaluate and update those constructions; and 2) to align and design experiences for the learner so that authentic, relevant contexts can be experienced.
Ok, so in a nutshell – this is probably closer to an actual, usable heuristic – constructivist learning is contextually problem based. It’s all about already having a base level of knowledge and being put in a real world situation with a job to do where you have to work out how to use what you know and how to learn what you don’t know but need to finish it.
Not so hard after all.
Overall then,
What might be most effective for novice learners encountering a complex body of knowledge for the first time, would not be effective, efficient or stimulating for a learner who is more familiar with the content. Typically, one does not teach facts the same way that concepts or problem-solving are taught; likewise one teaches differently depending on the proficiency level of the learners involved.
(Holy crap – just did a quick word count – this weighs in at 3733 so far – no wonder it’s taken a while – I think I need to do this differently. Still, I feel like I’ve learnt a lot from this)
A behavioural approach can effectively facilitate mastery of the content of a profession (knowing what); cognitive strategies are useful in teaching problem-solving tactics where defined facts and rules are applied in unfamiliar situations (knowing how); and constructivist strategies are especially suited to dealing with ill-defined problems through reflection-in-action.
Well, why didn’t you say so in the first place.
Tasks requiring a low level of processing (eg basic paired associations, discriminations, rote memorisation) seem to be facilitated by… a behavioural outlook (eg stimulus-response, contiguity of feedback/response)
Tasks requiring an increased level of processing (eg classifications, rule or procedural executions) … have a stronger cognitive emphasis (eg schematic organisation, analogical reasoning, algorithmic problem solving)
Tasks demanding high levels of processing (eg heuristic problem solving, personal selection and monitoring of cognitive strategies) are frequently best learned with … the constructivist perspective (eg situated learning, cognitive apprenticeships, social negotiation)
The approach of cherry-picking the best strategies from the three, based on the complexity of the task and the knowledge level of the learners is known as “systematic eclecticism”
OK, that’s it.
Great article guys – some of the constructivism stuff drove me nuts but we got there in the end. (Maybe a few small case-studies might have been nice but that’s just me)
March 23rd, 2007
Previous Posts
