'multimedia'
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
Step 1: Take notice and describe the experience
The feedback I received on my first learning object was very encouraging. The broader understanding that I have already developed of strategies to add meaning to learning (e.g. visual analogies – Anglin et al. (2004)) and to enhance the learners ability to process information (e.g. text conventions – Hartley, J (2004)) have been particularly useful. It’s satisfying to feel that I’m on the right track.
After submitting the Learning Object, I did some further testing on it and found that I should have been more mindful of screen size. I tend to work at a relatively high resolution which means that everything fitted on my screen easily but on monitors at lower resolution this wasn’t the case and some scrolling was necessary. I decided that the pages were good enough as they are but will be more mindful of these issues in future design.
I also found that Microsoft has now released an update for the Windows Media Player plugin for Firefox which resolves some of the display issues that had been a problem previously. I was less worried about this as issues of cross-browser compatibility are important for learners to be aware of but will look for some way to incorporate this information into the object. (Probably by adding a resources page).
In looking at the first learning object (and considering the second), I thought for a while that it would be great to have a learning object that consisted of a video with a set of sliders beneath which can alter various qualities of the video (bitrate, codec and file type) in real time to offer a live model of how changes affect video directly but this seems far too difficult.
I’m still working on producing resources for training sessions on using video at this stage. I’d like something a little more active this time around – most likely something that provides more feedback to learners in terms of formative assessment. This would probably take the form of a quiz or game revolving around multiple choice questions as tasks that the learner needs to answer to move on to the next stage.
We currently offer several simple, wizard based tools for creating simple games at CIT. Most of these are essentially dressed up self marking multiple choice quizzes put into a more interesting context such as Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? I’d like to offer something that goes beyond this.
I’m interested in maximising the interactivity and exploring some principles of games in education theory (Prensky 2006) however time constraints may mean it’s a smaller project than I’d like.
Another area that I’m interested in focussing on is that of foundation I.T literacy skills. Apparently we have a small division of responsibility issue on this at CIT however (this area is regarded more as a task for the H.R department) so I need to tread carefully.
Step 2: Analyse the experience
My decision to leave the first learning object as it is was mainly on practical grounds – the time and effort required to make a change which is mainly aesthetic. My personal feeling is that scrolling should be avoided if possible but that most users are ok with it.
Adding a resources page to the first learning object seems like a useful approach to take in terms of providing support to learners. The majority of learners that I teach have low level technological skills and the complexity of video creation is challenging enough for them without being expected to figure out what else they need to know (and use) and where to find it.
I’m looking at the quiz/game idea as a resource to provide learners with reinforcement of their learning as this meshes well with my interest in the use of games in learning as motivational tools. The more I read about the development of higher level skills – particularly in regard to problem solving and the ability to transfer knowledge from one situation to another – the more a game based approach seems useful.
Step 3: Take action
I’ve learnt to be more thorough in my testing process and to try to empathise more with the likely needs of learners for easy access to resources.
I’ve also learnt that some technical issues can simply be beyond your control – the Firefox/WMP plugin compatibility issue namely – but it’s worth following I.T news as these are often the first sources for resolutions.
I need to focus some more attention specifically on game design principles and see what links I can make to educational strategies.
April 23rd, 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
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
I’m just going to try to cherry-pick the parts of this article (and the other ones as well I guess), taking interesting or useful quotes and ideas. There are points in here that I think are poorly argued or which tend to kowtow to conventional theory without being backed up but at this stage I’m more interested in the useful parts. I’ve separated quotes by alternating between italics and plain.
“Currently, modern education theory is moving from the traditional recall of facts, principles, or correct procedures into the areas of creative thinking, problem solving, analysis and evaluation.”
“the constructivist learning mode describes a learning process whereby students work individually or in small groups to explore, investigate and solve authentic problems and become actively engaged in seeking knowledge and information, rather than being passive recipients. In this process, the learners must play an active part in their learning process and be autonomous learners who are actively engaged in constructing new meaning within the context of their current knowledge, experiences and social environments.”
“Generally, constructivist learning places emphasis on the learners and proposes that learning is affected by their context, their beliefs and their attitudes. Learners are encouraged to find their own solutions and to build upon their prior knowledge and experiences. In a constructivist learning environment, students learn by fitting new information together with what they already know and actively construct their own understanding. In doing so, they gain a deeper understanding of the event and thereby constructing their own knowledge and solutions to the problems (Duffy & Jonassen, 1991; Jonassen, 1994).”
“Constructivist learning is categorised mainly into cognitive constructivism and social constructivism. Cognitive constructivism is based upon the works of pyschologist Jean Piaget (1952) and later, in educational computing, of Seymour Papert (1980).”
“It describes a theory of development whereby learners build their own knowledge by constructing mental models, or schemas, based on their own experiences. These schemas are then developed, modified and made more sophisticated over time. Cognitive constructivism focusses on the individual’s mental construction of knowledge, whilst social constructivism enlarges that view by placing more emphasis on the social context of the learning environment.”
“Based on the works by Lev Vygotsky (1978), social constructivism emphasises Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which argues that students can, with the help of adults or more advanced students, master concepts and ideas that they cannot understand on their own, and states that, “What the child is able to do in collaboration today, he will be able to do independently tomorrow” (Vygotsky, 1987; Hung, 2001). In other words, students learn by interacting with their more capable peers, teachers and experts in a collaborative learning community.”
“By incorporating digital media elements into the project, students are able to learn better since they use multiple sensory modalities, which would make them more motivated to pay more attention to the information presented and better retain the information.”
March 21st, 2007
Neo, K. (2003). Using multimedia in a constructivist learning environment in the Malaysian classroom. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(3), 293-310. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet19/neo.html
Extract: In recent years, the infusion of multimedia into teaching and learning has altered considerably the instructional strategy in our educational institutions and changed the way teachers teach and students learn.
The traditional teacher-centric method of teaching used for decades in our educational system has been modified and enhanced. Currently, modern education theory is moving from the traditional recall of facts, principles, or correct procedures into the areas of creative thinking, problem solving, analysis and evaluation. These are skills which are very much needed in today’s knowledge based economy.
This shift in focus on learning has presented Malaysian educators with serious challenges as well as opportunities in restructuring their curriculum to meet the rising demands of the knowledge based society, which is currently being initiated by the Malaysian Government.
In this paper, we focus on designing a course which is oriented towards a constructivist based paradigm by using multimedia as an instructional tool, and where students are active learners, involved in constructing their own knowledge in the learning process and determining how to reach their own learning outcomes.
A survey was carried out to ascertain the reactions of students enrolled in an interactive multimedia course in the Multimedia University, Malaysia towards this constructivist based learning mode. The results indicated that these students reacted positively towards this study mode and improved their interpersonal and collaborative learning skills.
My first response to this paper wasn’t a particularly positive one. As you can see from the extract, it is about the experiences of students in a constructivist situation (one where the learning is “built” by the student in a situation where they are presented with a problem as their assessment and make their own decisions about what they need to learn to solve it.)
It is also very much about how the use of multimedia is meant to slot into this constructivist model, with the students using audio, video, animation, interactive flash, images and more to create a final product that brings together everything that they have learnt.
The students then complete a questionnaire providing feedback on their enjoyment of the learning experience and how valuable they felt that using multimedia was in constructing their knowledge.
The problem here is that these are multimedia students at a multimedia school – this is a field that they want to work in and one which the Malaysian Government (and it seems the author of the paper) is very keen to develop in Malaysia.
Using students trained in the use of multimedia to determine the effectiveness of using multimedia as a learning tool seems an entirely questionable place to start in this instance. (Unsurprisingly, the students all felt that using multimedia helped them to learn).
In addition to this, the paper seems heavy on pro-constructivist rhetoric and light on concrete examples of how or why this practice actually supports learning.
Language such as “students obediently listen to the lecture” in describing conventional “chalk and talk” teaching seems slanted – the word “obediently“grates in particular as something regressive, something to be judged.
On the other hand, descriptions of the Constructivist model are all glowing and faultless – “students work individually or in small groups to explore, investigate and solve authentic problems and become actively engaged in seeking knowledge and information, rather than being passive recipients.”
(My personal belief is that a Constructivist approach can be highly effective and that learners will connect more strongly with knowledge that they have found – particularly after they have identified their own need to have it and found ways to relate it to their existing knowledge.)
The fact that learners were taught in a seemingly more conventional manner how to actually create the multimedia projects in the first place is quickly glossed over in a sentence – <blockquote> These students have no a priori knowledge in multimedia authoring and authoring tools and, therefore, were given lectures and tutorials to provide them with basic skills in multimedia application development. </blockquote>
I believe it is a rare occasion that an exclusively constructivist approach would be used in a classroom and while problem based learning is a great approach for autonomous learners and group-based learning, most students still expect a reasonable level of support from their teacher and for their teacher to be more knowledgable about the subject than they are.
Having students create multimedia resources to examine the usefulness of multimedia in a constructivist approach makes a lot of sense but seems to get too “meta” when the students are creating multimedia resources for the sake of creating multimedia resources. Their knowledge of the subject matter of the aforementioned multimedia resources apparently went up, which is certainly encouraging but given that the learning outcome was more focussed on the students developing product management and design skills, this seems somewhat irrelevant.
However
I’m meant to develop a Heuristic based on this article – not that I’m overly sure what a heuristic is meant to do – from the examples I’ve seen, it seems like a concise headline summary of a larger (400 words approx) summary of an idea contained in the article. The finer points of what a heuristic is, what it is for and so on appears to have been covered in the face to face classes of this subject -however as a distance student, I missed out. (The last time I asked a question about concept maps I was advised to google it on wikipedia – which I had already done incidentally – so I’m somewhat reluctant to ask again).
This leads me to the question – if I disagree with the approach to a subject that is covered in a paper, can I still pull a reasonable opinion/position from it which takes the shape of a heuristic.
The article has some interesting things to say about the purpose of the constructivist approach, I think this is the place to begin.
Update - ok, so there is actually a pretty reasonable looking guide to writing heuristics tucked away in the course content.
I might just post quickly about that too.
March 21st, 2007
Writing reflectively seems like it should be easier than digesting and regurgitating a swag of other people’s writings into a new and coherent form, but if you take it seriously it’s surprisingly in depth.
We’re working from a new template for the critical reflection process which is being tested as part of one of the PhD students studies. (Click on image for fullsized view)
In essence, assuming I have it right, it breaks down like this.
- Discuss what you are doing, how you feel about it and what you know
- Discuss why you made the decisions here that you did and how you felt about them
- Discuss what you have learnt from that.
So far this seems like a pretty strong system to use for reflection.
That said, the first one has been something of a challenge – this structure seems to work pretty well when you have actually begun work on something but for the first reflection we have been asked to consider our overall knowledge and skills in the area of designing multimedia and to look at what kind of projects we might undertake and what kind of skills we are going to try to build.
Fortunately I have a number of work projects coming up (particularly relating to training teachers in using audio and video in online learning) that this subject seems ideal for, so with a bit of luck, the two will cross over nicely.
March 18th, 2007
Next Posts
