Over the past 20 years teaching has taken on a new approach to educate the technological savvy learner. The days in which knowledge was passed from teacher to students and task based curriculum are the norm are slowly becoming “old school” (excuse the pun). Educators are finding innovative ways to assist the student in building their knowledge through understanding and applying concepts rather than memorizing and reproducing data.
The sixth grade teacher who introduced a Computer-Supported Intentional Learning Environment (CSILE) to change the way his students learned in the classroom should be commended even for his failures. He eventually found a technique that supported his “Knowledge Building Community” with his students and changed the technique of acquiring and applying knowledge. The six strategies and four guidelines he developed gave the student s the framework for the knowledge transformation to succeed. I particularly like the beginning in which the teacher would pose a question and before the students were allowed to research the topic students would post “My Theory” to the question. This gives the teacher the insight to a student’s mental connection and thought processes. His strategies also lend to scaffolding student’s knowledge. Through using the “type tags” (problem, my theory, I need to understand and new information) students could build upon previous posts and apply the knowledge thus promoting a better understanding of the subject. Earlier this week my son came home and said his science teacher wants them to blog. I had him show me what he meant. The science teacher set up a “seventh grade blog site” in which the students answered questions after visiting a posted website. Each of the students in his class could see what the other students posted and respond to their post. I was so excited to see this. Maybe it was because that was what we are discussing. I called the teacher the next day and thanked him for using an innovative teaching tool.
The second chapter of CSCL2 seemed outdated and somewhat incomparable in subject matter. The study was done in the late 1990’s. The internet was a fairly new concept. Traditional instruction of the teacher passing knowledge to students was the norm. The idea of using asynchronous and synchronous communication for delivering instruction was innovative for its time but I am not sure it addressed its research questions. Comparing asynchronous and asynchronous learning environments to traditional learning may have been premature in that the delivery of instruction of asynchronous was still being perfected. In addition comparing novice and expert learner to what? What were they the expert or novice to? The material? The computer? I am lost. If this same study was done today and there were more defined concepts if outcomes would be different?
Over all collaborative settings provide the learner and educator an opportunity to grow and redesign instruction. With the use of knowledge building communities educators are able to assist students with understanding and application of the knowledge they are acquiring rather than concepts and definitions dictated and memorized short-term only to be forgotten later. In addition the student develops skills to seek out knowledge rather than waiting to be spoon fed information.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I questioned whether the learning objectives were actually met. I think it is a great idea to make students more involved in the actual learning process, however, in this day and age of school testing, I am concened that they might not meet all of the educational goals placed on them by the Federal Government if we make them comletely responsible for their own education. I guess that is where the teacher comes in to guide learning.
ReplyDeleteI did not find that any of the chapters that I read talked about learning goals and objectives, and whether or not these goals and objectives were actually met. It seemed that the studies were more interested in the technology aspect and not the actual learning outcome. I would like to see how these students performed on State Testing after completing a course like the ones mentioned in the studies.
Tracy that is a great point. One of the chapters talked about at risk children and providing them an opportunity to work in the community. They discussed how their peers influenced and may have contributed to their success because of peer pressure. But there again they never mentioned if the outcome helped the kids progress or if it had any effect on them being at risk.
ReplyDeleteSharon my son is also starting to use the internet for school. I know the readings talked about the peer influence. Do you think that will be a factor in how they answer. I worry that my son won't ask questions or post truthfully because he will worry about what the others will think. I imagine that is probably just part of it and the cyber bully rules apply (I worry when I post and I'm old and don't see any of you on a daily basis). Just wandering what you thought.
ReplyDeleteNo I think the opposite. I think they may feel more comfortable posting questions versus asking questions in class because there is a degree of anonymity associated with posting. Also the student has had time to reflect on the material. Besides remember the saying "if you have a question chances are someone else has the same question."
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Sharon.
ReplyDeleteTo all: I agree that in assessing learning outcomes, it is important to examine whether the desirable objectives have been met.