I am very guilty of often seeing the growth of a "global village" to be a good thing, but there a lot of things that I have never considered.
I have only seen things from my own perspective, as a white woman from the culture that is to be the dominant one within the global village. I have never thought before about what it is destroying and what that really means for the world at large. I didn't really think about what it is doing to other cultures.
It just is more proof that I am not as open-minded as I think that I am. I need to think about a lot of these issues and try to bring them into my considerations.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Distance Learning (Reflection)
How is distance education reshaping education?
It is kind of making a lot of people rethink what education is in general. For example, do you need to be in a classroom with other students in order to have a meaningful education? The answer is still on the fence, but I think a lot more people are starting to say no. The article states that we may really start to see a change in the packaging of education and I think that we already are. Many schools are beginning to offer both face-to-face and online classes. It can really prove to make education more suited to individual needs. If an individual has the option to take either face-to-face or online class, this can help education cater to specific learning styles and schedules. I think that it will make education more widely spread and may help more students to successfully make it through the education system. I personally have already taken a lot of my credits online, but I have taken many face-to-face as well. I feel like both have been satisfying in different ways and I personally like to have an option.
How might distance education shape education of the future?
I feel like it might become more individual. I hope that physical schools never disappear, but I foresee the rise of many digital schools. I think that many students will have the option to take either face-to-face or online for nearly any class. That is how I personally envision things changing at any rate. I also feel that students could be able to be enrolled in both a face-to-face public school for some classes and perhaps an elite online school based in another country or someplace else far away for others. The article says that schools are going to start to see an influx of students that could not previously be reached when they start pulling in distance education. This is probably true, but I think the interest would be large enough in the online classes that whole online-only schools may form to accommodate them.
It is kind of making a lot of people rethink what education is in general. For example, do you need to be in a classroom with other students in order to have a meaningful education? The answer is still on the fence, but I think a lot more people are starting to say no. The article states that we may really start to see a change in the packaging of education and I think that we already are. Many schools are beginning to offer both face-to-face and online classes. It can really prove to make education more suited to individual needs. If an individual has the option to take either face-to-face or online class, this can help education cater to specific learning styles and schedules. I think that it will make education more widely spread and may help more students to successfully make it through the education system. I personally have already taken a lot of my credits online, but I have taken many face-to-face as well. I feel like both have been satisfying in different ways and I personally like to have an option.
How might distance education shape education of the future?
I feel like it might become more individual. I hope that physical schools never disappear, but I foresee the rise of many digital schools. I think that many students will have the option to take either face-to-face or online for nearly any class. That is how I personally envision things changing at any rate. I also feel that students could be able to be enrolled in both a face-to-face public school for some classes and perhaps an elite online school based in another country or someplace else far away for others. The article says that schools are going to start to see an influx of students that could not previously be reached when they start pulling in distance education. This is probably true, but I think the interest would be large enough in the online classes that whole online-only schools may form to accommodate them.
Globalization (Readings)
I have two readings associated with this topic.
The first reading is the Intro and Globalization in
Contemporary Social Theory sections of the larger topic Globalization found in
the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. This talked about the meaning of
globalization as far as social theory is concerned. This article discussed it
as being related to communication of ideas and the like at a speed that makes
distance and geographical area not a concern. It gives this to the high speed
technology and internet that has really started to connect the world. It is
very true that the world has become a much smaller place, in no small part
because of those very technologies which they were talking about. It is amazing
to think of how we can know in an instant something that happened on the other
side of the world. A hundred years ago, it took a long time for that news to
spread and there were many things that people on the other side of the world
never even heard of. It is because of that communication and flow of
instantaneous ideas that the world is starting to almost blend into a single
culture of information. That may be something that will happen in the future.
The second reading is titled Do We Really Want a Global
Village? It is the ninth chapter of a larger book called The Future Does Not
Compute: Transcending the Machines in our Midst by Stephen L. Talbott. This
chapter deals with a more critical view of what is happening when we are all
becoming essentially of one culture. It talks about how we are actually
communicating less and less as well as destroying cultures by forcing this
assimilation to internet connectivity and technology adoption. It is true that
there are negatives to the process. I also agree that it is silly to refer to
this as the “global village” when we do little more than share information and
amuse ourselves with knowledge and the access to it. It is hard to stop
sometimes and take a look at the concerns. I do believe that we are getting in
over our heads and a lot of unforeseen problems will begin to arise.
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Distance Learning (Readings)
I have two readings on this topic.
The first is a news article retrieved from usatoday.com. The article is titled College May Never Be the Same and it was written by Mary Beth Marklein. This article was talking about MOOCs and how many students are taking part in the cost-free education. The concern that has been emerging is whether or not these courses are for actual college credit and whether the online certificates that are received upon completion of the course. This is a very interesting concept. Personally, the idea of MOOCs is very fascinating and I would love to see what comes from these. For me, I view it as a way that I could possibly pursue a few of my interests that I passed over in order to follow my major. For others, I can see it being a very valuable opportunity to get an education that they could not afford or do not have access to otherwise. It marks a very interesting change in what we view as a college education. Honestly, I feel like it caters a little better to the outlook of this age, that being that knowledge is freely available to anyone with access to the internet. I want to be a part of a MOOC in order to see how it functions and get a better idea about what it is.
The second is an article from the journal Teachers College Record. The article is titled Modest Changes, Revolutionary Possibilities: Distance Learning and the Future of Education. It was written by Gary Natriello. This article discussed the effect that distance learning was likely to have on education from the perspective of 10 or so years ago. The education system really is on the cusp of revolution as predicted. I believe that by the end of my lifetime, the educational system will be virtually unrecognizable to the one that I grew up in. All of this is just based on the advent of technology and the internet, as well as changing views on what education is and how it can be delivered. It is happening very quickly and I anticipate it beginning to move even quicker still.
The first is a news article retrieved from usatoday.com. The article is titled College May Never Be the Same and it was written by Mary Beth Marklein. This article was talking about MOOCs and how many students are taking part in the cost-free education. The concern that has been emerging is whether or not these courses are for actual college credit and whether the online certificates that are received upon completion of the course. This is a very interesting concept. Personally, the idea of MOOCs is very fascinating and I would love to see what comes from these. For me, I view it as a way that I could possibly pursue a few of my interests that I passed over in order to follow my major. For others, I can see it being a very valuable opportunity to get an education that they could not afford or do not have access to otherwise. It marks a very interesting change in what we view as a college education. Honestly, I feel like it caters a little better to the outlook of this age, that being that knowledge is freely available to anyone with access to the internet. I want to be a part of a MOOC in order to see how it functions and get a better idea about what it is.
The second is an article from the journal Teachers College Record. The article is titled Modest Changes, Revolutionary Possibilities: Distance Learning and the Future of Education. It was written by Gary Natriello. This article discussed the effect that distance learning was likely to have on education from the perspective of 10 or so years ago. The education system really is on the cusp of revolution as predicted. I believe that by the end of my lifetime, the educational system will be virtually unrecognizable to the one that I grew up in. All of this is just based on the advent of technology and the internet, as well as changing views on what education is and how it can be delivered. It is happening very quickly and I anticipate it beginning to move even quicker still.
Establishing a Professional Learning Network Reflection
It was interesting to hear about how much certain forms of social media can help you grow in your professional life. I'm not sure how I feel about all of it at this point however. I can see the benefit of using Twitter and Facebook to follow interests, but I guess it is just something that I haven't done.
I use Facebook more as a way to connect with people and plan events, as well as keep track of important dates. Sometimes I use it to keep track of friends who are far away. I rarely use it it to post professional materials. I suppose that I sometimes do that, but no one really pays attention to it. I also find that my contacts rarely post professional information. The answer to that then is probably to create a more professional Facebook profile in addition to my casual one. The problem is that I find myself apathetic when I am thinking about that.
I don't do Twitter at all. I just have never found the idea appealing. My little sister does it and wastes endless hours just pointing useless and silly things. That was not something that I wanted to be a part of. I understood what Dennis said, however, about only posting important things or following people that you actually wanted to know something about. I am still skeptical, but perhaps I will someday change my mind.
I use certain forms of social media frequently, but I am probably still a newcomer compared to many others. I should really look into some of the things that were discussed and open my mind to these new outlets of information.
I use Facebook more as a way to connect with people and plan events, as well as keep track of important dates. Sometimes I use it to keep track of friends who are far away. I rarely use it it to post professional materials. I suppose that I sometimes do that, but no one really pays attention to it. I also find that my contacts rarely post professional information. The answer to that then is probably to create a more professional Facebook profile in addition to my casual one. The problem is that I find myself apathetic when I am thinking about that.
I don't do Twitter at all. I just have never found the idea appealing. My little sister does it and wastes endless hours just pointing useless and silly things. That was not something that I wanted to be a part of. I understood what Dennis said, however, about only posting important things or following people that you actually wanted to know something about. I am still skeptical, but perhaps I will someday change my mind.
I use certain forms of social media frequently, but I am probably still a newcomer compared to many others. I should really look into some of the things that were discussed and open my mind to these new outlets of information.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Digital Equity (Reflection)
I wanted to discuss something that I have been thinking about for a little bit since class ended last week.
Digital equity and equity in general is very hard to define. It almost seems like it should be conditional, but then again, equity means being fair. Is being fair a conditional thing? In that case, I'm not so sure. I find it somewhat hard to try to pursue equity and digital equity when it is hard to see for sure what that might mean.
Then there is the whole political argument within the country. How is it possible to pursue equity when it seems to be a middle ground in a very heated and controversial debate? Neither side ever is willing to give in a little and compromise, it seems. I feel like it almost causes more confrontation. Then again, is equity just dependent on your viewpoint?
It gets confusing and more than a little distressing.
Digital equity and equity in general is very hard to define. It almost seems like it should be conditional, but then again, equity means being fair. Is being fair a conditional thing? In that case, I'm not so sure. I find it somewhat hard to try to pursue equity and digital equity when it is hard to see for sure what that might mean.
Then there is the whole political argument within the country. How is it possible to pursue equity when it seems to be a middle ground in a very heated and controversial debate? Neither side ever is willing to give in a little and compromise, it seems. I feel like it almost causes more confrontation. Then again, is equity just dependent on your viewpoint?
It gets confusing and more than a little distressing.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Digital Equity (Readings)
I have three readings associated with this topic.
The first reading appears to be an introduction section to a book called Toward Digital Equity: Bridging the Divide in Education. The introduction is titled "Educational Technology and Equity". It was written by Gwen Solomon and Nancy J. Allen. This really introduced the concepts of digital equity and the digital divide by outlining what they look like. It is to answer many of these issues that I chose to pursue a Masters Degree in this particular program. However, it goes even a little further than first thought. I rarely remember that the education of the teacher and what they can offer to students does play into the issue of equity. Therefore, it is all the better that I am trying to become better educated.
The second reading appears to be an article from a journal called Technology & Learning. It is titled "Digital Equity: It's Not Just About Access Anymore" and is by Gwen Solomon. This does more about pointing out the ways in which digital equity is needed but is not being met. The more that I read about it, the more that I realize just how complex of an issue this is. However, it is something that demands to be addressed on many grounds, so we need to start taking some real steps in the direction of fixing things.
The third and final reading is an article from the journal Educational Policy. It is titled "Technology and Equity in Schooling: Deconstructing the Digital Divide" and was written by Mark Warschauer, Michele Knobel, and Leeann Stone. This article discusses a study where they looked at technology use in low and high economic areas in California. It helped to illustrate a main point for me. The problem anymore is less access than how effectively is technology used. It is really sad to see some of the things that can and do go wrong with it in schools. I have to believe that we can do better and that I'm going to do my part to help.
The first reading appears to be an introduction section to a book called Toward Digital Equity: Bridging the Divide in Education. The introduction is titled "Educational Technology and Equity". It was written by Gwen Solomon and Nancy J. Allen. This really introduced the concepts of digital equity and the digital divide by outlining what they look like. It is to answer many of these issues that I chose to pursue a Masters Degree in this particular program. However, it goes even a little further than first thought. I rarely remember that the education of the teacher and what they can offer to students does play into the issue of equity. Therefore, it is all the better that I am trying to become better educated.
The second reading appears to be an article from a journal called Technology & Learning. It is titled "Digital Equity: It's Not Just About Access Anymore" and is by Gwen Solomon. This does more about pointing out the ways in which digital equity is needed but is not being met. The more that I read about it, the more that I realize just how complex of an issue this is. However, it is something that demands to be addressed on many grounds, so we need to start taking some real steps in the direction of fixing things.
The third and final reading is an article from the journal Educational Policy. It is titled "Technology and Equity in Schooling: Deconstructing the Digital Divide" and was written by Mark Warschauer, Michele Knobel, and Leeann Stone. This article discusses a study where they looked at technology use in low and high economic areas in California. It helped to illustrate a main point for me. The problem anymore is less access than how effectively is technology used. It is really sad to see some of the things that can and do go wrong with it in schools. I have to believe that we can do better and that I'm going to do my part to help.
Critical Theory and Technology (Reflection)
There were two questions that my group came up with and focused on specifically. Here they are, along with the answers that we came up with as a team:
What is critical theory and why is it important?
Critical theory is a way of analyzing society with the ultimate goal of making a change, or evoking action. The focus of the change or action is generally on the benefit of society as a whole. Critical theory helps us question the status quo, addressing questions such as “Why is this the status quo?” and “What are we leaving out?” It helps us take responsibility for our actions and makes us question our decisions, as well as make us aware of our consequences. It opens up alternative solutions and ways of thinking.
If we do not think critically about technology, consequences could occur that could have been avoided. Such consequences include limiting students in their educational endeavors, further oppressing those who might not have access or have limited access, and overlooking the teaching of core values in the educational setting. It promotes the responsible use of technology.
How can we expect to teach core values to our students while using technology when it goes against many values teachers want to teach?
The core values that we have taught students in the past include independence, self-reliance, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, basic spelling and grammar, and societal expectations. With the introduction of technology, these skills have been hindered and are often overlooked. For example, the calculator has limited critical thinking and problem skills within the subject of math--students are oftentimes reliant on their calculator and cannot perform without them. Students rely so heavily on word processors and spell check that spelling, grammar, and vocabulary are not skills fully developed.
Manners and respect are skills that are also affected by technology, particularly on social media. Students approach social media as an impersonal communication method, and do not transfer their communication skills into their online communications. Digital citizenship is an essential focus in today’s educational system because of the integration of technology into our lives.
Because of the accessibility of online materials, cheating and plagiarism occurs more frequently with technology integrated into education. Sharing has also been a value that we teach our children in schools, and with the integration of technology students are less willing to share if there is not enough of one type of technology for everybody in the classroom. Along with this comes jealousy, greed, and bullying.
So, how do we address these disconnects? We must emphasize the responsible use of technology. For example, classroom time should be focused on teaching digital citizenship and addressing issues that are encountered while using technology. There should be scaffolding of children to utilize technology appropriately, starting at a very young age. We should emphasize the limitations and affordances of technology to students, and identify consequences of inappropriate use.
Other disconnects we feel have become the norm--there is no real way to address them except to embrace the changes. For example, with spellcheck, calculators, and Google, students do not necessarily need to approach spelling, math, and memorization the same way as we have in the past.
Now, there is the matter of my own feelings and answers regarding the topic.
1. What is critical theory and why is it important?
I agree with all that was said. Being critical about what you think and what you do is an important way of checking and limiting yourself. If ultimately your intentions are good, it is important that what is done with those intentions does the most good possible. Otherwise, it is not only a great waste of effort, but it can prove to be a serious detriment to those that you are trying to help. Therefore, critical theory holds an important place in helping us keep our feet on the ground.
2. How can we expect to teach core values to our students while using technology when it goes against many values that teachers want to teach?
In addition to what was said above, teachers need to keep the ultimate goal of what they want for their students in mind. Generally, the goal of education is to create adults that can effectively function in the world of work, government, and home. The world has changed, for good or bad. Technology is a major part of it, whether we agree with that or not. Not teaching students about or with technology just because you do not necessarily agree with their values can be very detrimental to the students. They need those skills to function in the workplace and the world. This may not be consistent with critical theory, but I believe that this is an important fact that goes perhaps beyond the philosophy of it all.
What is critical theory and why is it important?
Critical theory is a way of analyzing society with the ultimate goal of making a change, or evoking action. The focus of the change or action is generally on the benefit of society as a whole. Critical theory helps us question the status quo, addressing questions such as “Why is this the status quo?” and “What are we leaving out?” It helps us take responsibility for our actions and makes us question our decisions, as well as make us aware of our consequences. It opens up alternative solutions and ways of thinking.
If we do not think critically about technology, consequences could occur that could have been avoided. Such consequences include limiting students in their educational endeavors, further oppressing those who might not have access or have limited access, and overlooking the teaching of core values in the educational setting. It promotes the responsible use of technology.
How can we expect to teach core values to our students while using technology when it goes against many values teachers want to teach?
The core values that we have taught students in the past include independence, self-reliance, critical thinking, problem-solving skills, basic spelling and grammar, and societal expectations. With the introduction of technology, these skills have been hindered and are often overlooked. For example, the calculator has limited critical thinking and problem skills within the subject of math--students are oftentimes reliant on their calculator and cannot perform without them. Students rely so heavily on word processors and spell check that spelling, grammar, and vocabulary are not skills fully developed.
Manners and respect are skills that are also affected by technology, particularly on social media. Students approach social media as an impersonal communication method, and do not transfer their communication skills into their online communications. Digital citizenship is an essential focus in today’s educational system because of the integration of technology into our lives.
Because of the accessibility of online materials, cheating and plagiarism occurs more frequently with technology integrated into education. Sharing has also been a value that we teach our children in schools, and with the integration of technology students are less willing to share if there is not enough of one type of technology for everybody in the classroom. Along with this comes jealousy, greed, and bullying.
So, how do we address these disconnects? We must emphasize the responsible use of technology. For example, classroom time should be focused on teaching digital citizenship and addressing issues that are encountered while using technology. There should be scaffolding of children to utilize technology appropriately, starting at a very young age. We should emphasize the limitations and affordances of technology to students, and identify consequences of inappropriate use.
Other disconnects we feel have become the norm--there is no real way to address them except to embrace the changes. For example, with spellcheck, calculators, and Google, students do not necessarily need to approach spelling, math, and memorization the same way as we have in the past.
Now, there is the matter of my own feelings and answers regarding the topic.
1. What is critical theory and why is it important?
I agree with all that was said. Being critical about what you think and what you do is an important way of checking and limiting yourself. If ultimately your intentions are good, it is important that what is done with those intentions does the most good possible. Otherwise, it is not only a great waste of effort, but it can prove to be a serious detriment to those that you are trying to help. Therefore, critical theory holds an important place in helping us keep our feet on the ground.
2. How can we expect to teach core values to our students while using technology when it goes against many values that teachers want to teach?
In addition to what was said above, teachers need to keep the ultimate goal of what they want for their students in mind. Generally, the goal of education is to create adults that can effectively function in the world of work, government, and home. The world has changed, for good or bad. Technology is a major part of it, whether we agree with that or not. Not teaching students about or with technology just because you do not necessarily agree with their values can be very detrimental to the students. They need those skills to function in the workplace and the world. This may not be consistent with critical theory, but I believe that this is an important fact that goes perhaps beyond the philosophy of it all.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Critical Theory and Technology (Readings)
I have 3 readings associated with this topic.
The first is an entry in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy entitled "The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory" by Claudio Corradetti. This reading addresses the history and some of the key beliefs associated with critical theory. Most of it got to be a little much for me, but I sort of viewed as a philosophy for social critique and understandings of the working of the mind. It is a good background for heading into the topic, though some of the information was very heavy.
The second is titled "Critical Theory, Cultural Analysis, and the Ethics of Educational Technology as Social Responsibility". It is by Andrew R. J. Yeaman, J. Randall Koetting, and Randall G. Nichols. It is an article from the journal Educational Technology. This reading talked about the different theories that should be taken into consideration regarding educational technology. A good point is made when they state that advancement is not a bad thing, but it should have some amount of ethical consideration into it. There are a lot of ethical considerations to educational technology that I have never even thought of. Critical theory raises many of those important questions.
The third and final reading is called "The Promise of Civilizational Change". It is the 7th chapter of Andrew Feenberg's Critical Theory of Technology. This chapter discusses some tenets of socialism as a mechanism for cultural change. It also discusses what socialism has to say about a number of topics. It is interesting that this has many of the same ideas put forward in the other articles. I knew that there was a basis in Marxist principles, but I never really connected critical theory to socialism.
Discussion Questions:
1. Discuss the video shown in class from a critical theory perspective.
I almost feel that there is something in critical theory in this that already is pretty apparent. One of the general messages put forth is that life is simpler and better without technology and that technology only makes our lives more complicated. That is a pretty extreme statement, but it has a critical theory type of ring. That if it causes so many problems, why have it in the first place?
2. Generate 2 questions to discuss in class.
Why is it important that critical theory be applied in thought about educational technology?
Do you agree with the various ideas put forward as critical theory? Why or why not?
The first is an entry in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy entitled "The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory" by Claudio Corradetti. This reading addresses the history and some of the key beliefs associated with critical theory. Most of it got to be a little much for me, but I sort of viewed as a philosophy for social critique and understandings of the working of the mind. It is a good background for heading into the topic, though some of the information was very heavy.
The second is titled "Critical Theory, Cultural Analysis, and the Ethics of Educational Technology as Social Responsibility". It is by Andrew R. J. Yeaman, J. Randall Koetting, and Randall G. Nichols. It is an article from the journal Educational Technology. This reading talked about the different theories that should be taken into consideration regarding educational technology. A good point is made when they state that advancement is not a bad thing, but it should have some amount of ethical consideration into it. There are a lot of ethical considerations to educational technology that I have never even thought of. Critical theory raises many of those important questions.
The third and final reading is called "The Promise of Civilizational Change". It is the 7th chapter of Andrew Feenberg's Critical Theory of Technology. This chapter discusses some tenets of socialism as a mechanism for cultural change. It also discusses what socialism has to say about a number of topics. It is interesting that this has many of the same ideas put forward in the other articles. I knew that there was a basis in Marxist principles, but I never really connected critical theory to socialism.
Discussion Questions:
1. Discuss the video shown in class from a critical theory perspective.
I almost feel that there is something in critical theory in this that already is pretty apparent. One of the general messages put forth is that life is simpler and better without technology and that technology only makes our lives more complicated. That is a pretty extreme statement, but it has a critical theory type of ring. That if it causes so many problems, why have it in the first place?
2. Generate 2 questions to discuss in class.
Why is it important that critical theory be applied in thought about educational technology?
Do you agree with the various ideas put forward as critical theory? Why or why not?
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Moral Philosophy and IT (Reflection)
The question of the week: What does the rational-technical perspective have to do with morality in educational technology?
In my mind I took this to mean an over-dependence on our forms of "scientific logic" and belief in technologies as tools to be used for greater good. There is something very cold about the analytical and rational way of thinking that we have adopted and have applied to the world around us. We use that to assess the worth of educational technology as well. The technology is seen only as means to that end. The way I see it rationality and morality are two different things and they don't always agree with each other. It is the same in educational technology. Rationality argues that this is useful and good. Morality argues that this is harmful and bad. Most people do not take the morality side of the issue into consideration with everyday technology.
In my mind I took this to mean an over-dependence on our forms of "scientific logic" and belief in technologies as tools to be used for greater good. There is something very cold about the analytical and rational way of thinking that we have adopted and have applied to the world around us. We use that to assess the worth of educational technology as well. The technology is seen only as means to that end. The way I see it rationality and morality are two different things and they don't always agree with each other. It is the same in educational technology. Rationality argues that this is useful and good. Morality argues that this is harmful and bad. Most people do not take the morality side of the issue into consideration with everyday technology.
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Moral Philosophy and IT (Readings)
I have 3 readings associated with this topic.
The first is titled "What is Moral Philosophy" by Louis P. Pojman. The larger purpose of this reading is, of course, to explain what exactly moral philosophy and why it is important. Morals shape the lives of everyone beyond even religions and laws. It is important to have an understanding of it when you are creating, using, interacting, etc. It has some sort of play on any and every action. It has a different effect on each person as well, so those interplays can be very complex. It is important to remember that.
The second is an article called "Searching for Moral Guidance About Educational Technology" by Randall G. Nichols. It is from the journal Educational Technology. This article is a good illustration of what exactly morality has to do with IT. As outlined above, morality plays into all parts of life and technology is not immune to this condition. There are many moral considerations about technology. I will fully admit to not thinking to long and deeply about those issues often. About larger technology like stem cell research and cloning, yes, but not about educational technology. Then again, I was really raised to accept it without question, just based on all the technological changes just within my own lifetime.
The third and final reading is a paper titled "Augmented Reality: A Class of Displays on the Reality-Virtuality Continuum" by Paul Milgram, Haruo Takemura, Akira Utsumi, and Fumio Kishino. It appeared in an SPIE journal titled Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies. This outlines some specifications for a type of virtual reality known as augmented reality. This is basically taking the real world and blending it with virtual images, I believe. A lot of the article went over my head. However, this is definitely another moral issue. If you are allowing people to experience a virtual interactive world, will they become less grounded in this one? I have seen enough shows and movies dealing with this topic that I am made very skeptical.
The first is titled "What is Moral Philosophy" by Louis P. Pojman. The larger purpose of this reading is, of course, to explain what exactly moral philosophy and why it is important. Morals shape the lives of everyone beyond even religions and laws. It is important to have an understanding of it when you are creating, using, interacting, etc. It has some sort of play on any and every action. It has a different effect on each person as well, so those interplays can be very complex. It is important to remember that.
The second is an article called "Searching for Moral Guidance About Educational Technology" by Randall G. Nichols. It is from the journal Educational Technology. This article is a good illustration of what exactly morality has to do with IT. As outlined above, morality plays into all parts of life and technology is not immune to this condition. There are many moral considerations about technology. I will fully admit to not thinking to long and deeply about those issues often. About larger technology like stem cell research and cloning, yes, but not about educational technology. Then again, I was really raised to accept it without question, just based on all the technological changes just within my own lifetime.
The third and final reading is a paper titled "Augmented Reality: A Class of Displays on the Reality-Virtuality Continuum" by Paul Milgram, Haruo Takemura, Akira Utsumi, and Fumio Kishino. It appeared in an SPIE journal titled Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies. This outlines some specifications for a type of virtual reality known as augmented reality. This is basically taking the real world and blending it with virtual images, I believe. A lot of the article went over my head. However, this is definitely another moral issue. If you are allowing people to experience a virtual interactive world, will they become less grounded in this one? I have seen enough shows and movies dealing with this topic that I am made very skeptical.
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Paradigm Shifts (Reading)
We have 6 readings associated with this topic.
The first is called "What is a Paradigm Shift?" and it is from www.taketheleap.com. The next reading is called "What is Your Paradigm?" and it is from www.erm.ecs.soton.ac.uk. The third is "Critical Theory" from en.wikipedia.org. The fourth reading is called "Paradigm Shifts and Instructional Technology" by Timothy Koschmann. It is a chapter from a larger book called "CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm". The fifth reading is called "Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge" by Punya Mishra and Matthew J. Koehler. It appears to be from a journal called Teachers College Record. The final reading is a few pages from the first chapter of Andrew Feenberg's book "Critical Theory of Technology".
The answers to the following questions are all gleaned from the sources outlined above.
1. What is a paradigm?
Paradigms are essentially ways of thinking or schools of thought. It helps shape the approaches that we take to things and how we think about the world. They are subject to change and many different ones can be found based on the beliefs of people. In that sense a "paradigm shift" is the replacing of one way of thinking with another. One of the examples provided was the way that thinking and doing changed with the introduction of the personal computer and the Internet.
2. What is the shift in IT that Koschmann outlines?
The shift is discussing the usage of technology in education. The previous views discussed seem to be more about the process of the individual and technology likewise outlined the feelings of the philosophy as tools to help the individual. In this sense, the shift is the growing belief of learning to be a collaborative process. Following that, technology in education is becoming more the tools to support and enhance that collaboration in a variety of ways.
3. How does Koschmann's shift align with paradigm shift discussed in rapid prototyping?
Both are based in the emergence of different ways of thinking about learning. Rapid prototyping assumes that it is hard to follow a prescriptive method for design because learning is complicated. Things are learned due to a variety of factors and they affect each other. CSCL is similar in that it states learning is hard to outline in a scripted fashion, because it is affected by social factors, which can be very hard to predict.
4. Define and explain TPACK.
TPACK refers to an approach of looking at content, pedagogy, and technology as intricately connected skills, ideas, and thoughts that are essential to a teacher in order to make them effective. As stated in the article, TPACK:
"requires an understanding of the representation
of concepts using technologies; pedagogical techniques that use
technologies in constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what
makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help
redress some of the problems that students face; knowledge of students’
prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and knowledge of how
technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge and to develop
new epistemologies or strengthen old ones."
So it really is about the complex interplay of the three types, keeping many basic rules in mind. The approach is different between all teachers with no right answer. In that sense, it is ever changing and dynamic.
5. How does TPACK align with Koschmann's paradigm shift?
It is saying that teaching is much too complicated to be approached in a prescribed manner, in much the same way that Koschmann and Tripp talked about how learning was much too complicated to do the same. Koschmann also talked about his theory as being about viewing interactions (among people) as being integral to learning. TPACK is about interactions as well (though between content, pedagogy, and technology) being integral to teaching.
6. What is critical theory?
Critical theory is a school of thought that focuses on the examination and critique of society and culture, based on information gleaned from the studying of people. It's goal is generally the change of society for the benefit of it. It calls upon many other schools of thought and many of the sciences in order to do this.
The first is called "What is a Paradigm Shift?" and it is from www.taketheleap.com. The next reading is called "What is Your Paradigm?" and it is from www.erm.ecs.soton.ac.uk. The third is "Critical Theory" from en.wikipedia.org. The fourth reading is called "Paradigm Shifts and Instructional Technology" by Timothy Koschmann. It is a chapter from a larger book called "CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm". The fifth reading is called "Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge" by Punya Mishra and Matthew J. Koehler. It appears to be from a journal called Teachers College Record. The final reading is a few pages from the first chapter of Andrew Feenberg's book "Critical Theory of Technology".
The answers to the following questions are all gleaned from the sources outlined above.
1. What is a paradigm?
Paradigms are essentially ways of thinking or schools of thought. It helps shape the approaches that we take to things and how we think about the world. They are subject to change and many different ones can be found based on the beliefs of people. In that sense a "paradigm shift" is the replacing of one way of thinking with another. One of the examples provided was the way that thinking and doing changed with the introduction of the personal computer and the Internet.
2. What is the shift in IT that Koschmann outlines?
The shift is discussing the usage of technology in education. The previous views discussed seem to be more about the process of the individual and technology likewise outlined the feelings of the philosophy as tools to help the individual. In this sense, the shift is the growing belief of learning to be a collaborative process. Following that, technology in education is becoming more the tools to support and enhance that collaboration in a variety of ways.
3. How does Koschmann's shift align with paradigm shift discussed in rapid prototyping?
Both are based in the emergence of different ways of thinking about learning. Rapid prototyping assumes that it is hard to follow a prescriptive method for design because learning is complicated. Things are learned due to a variety of factors and they affect each other. CSCL is similar in that it states learning is hard to outline in a scripted fashion, because it is affected by social factors, which can be very hard to predict.
4. Define and explain TPACK.
TPACK refers to an approach of looking at content, pedagogy, and technology as intricately connected skills, ideas, and thoughts that are essential to a teacher in order to make them effective. As stated in the article, TPACK:
"requires an understanding of the representation
of concepts using technologies; pedagogical techniques that use
technologies in constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what
makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help
redress some of the problems that students face; knowledge of students’
prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and knowledge of how
technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge and to develop
new epistemologies or strengthen old ones."
So it really is about the complex interplay of the three types, keeping many basic rules in mind. The approach is different between all teachers with no right answer. In that sense, it is ever changing and dynamic.
5. How does TPACK align with Koschmann's paradigm shift?
It is saying that teaching is much too complicated to be approached in a prescribed manner, in much the same way that Koschmann and Tripp talked about how learning was much too complicated to do the same. Koschmann also talked about his theory as being about viewing interactions (among people) as being integral to learning. TPACK is about interactions as well (though between content, pedagogy, and technology) being integral to teaching.
6. What is critical theory?
Critical theory is a school of thought that focuses on the examination and critique of society and culture, based on information gleaned from the studying of people. It's goal is generally the change of society for the benefit of it. It calls upon many other schools of thought and many of the sciences in order to do this.
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Instructional Technology Professional Organizations (Readings)
There are 4 readings associated with this topic. They are mainly just about some different organizations.
The first organization highlighted is the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). The information comes from their official website: http://aect.site-ym.com/. The main focus of this organization seems to be gathering people who want to improve education through technology. The only thing I was able to find about conferences related to this organization is their upcoming AECT 2012 International Convention which is October 30-November 3 and is open to both members and nonmembers. The organization does have two journals that are released bimonthly: Educational Technology Research and Development and TechTrends. The mission that the organization represents is to provide a forum on an international levels for the exchange and dissemination of ideas related to the topic. The organization is meant to serve people who involved with designing better instruction using technology. They really seem to address the need to use technology to further education and learning, as well as represent and speak for it. They want members to share ideas and they want the target audiences to see and understand those same ideas.
The second organization highlighted is the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). The information comes from their official website: https://www.iste.org/. The main focus of the organization seems to be the importance of technology to education. They have two conferences: ISTE 2013 and ISTE Leadership Forum. They have two journals (Journal of Research on Technology in Education and Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education) and one magazine (Learning and Leading with Technology). The mission of the organization seems to be pushing for policy change and money grants to support technology in schools to be used for educational purposes. In this case, they are serving schools and students in term of tech support and teachers in terms of helping their opinions to be heard. They address problems of policy makers not necessarily supporting technology in education by exposing them to the ideas and thoughts of its members.
The third organization highlighted is the Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). The information comes from their official website: http://www.aace.org/. It's a little hard right off the bat to tell what their purpose is, though their name would suggest that they are focused on bringing, keeping, and using computers in education. They have a fairly large number of conferences attached to them: EdMedia, E-Learn, Global Learn, Global TIME, and SITE. They also have a number of journals attached to them: (International Journal on E-Learning Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Journal of Interactive Learning Research, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, AACE Journal, and Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. The mission seems to be about providing people a place to share information and ideas about using computers and technology in education. It seems to be there to serve teachers and others who want to use computers and digital learning. I'm not sure exactly what problems they address.
The fourth and final organization highlighted is the International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS). The information comes from their official website: http://www.isls.org/index.html. The focus of this group seems to be on enhancing learning with and without technology. They do not have any posted conferences, though it is obvious that they have them. They have two affiliated journals: Journal of the Learning Sciences and International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. Their mission is to enhance their field by providing dialogue about it. They serve professionals and students interested in the field. It answers the problem of needing a place to talk about ideas and share research.
The first organization highlighted is the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). The information comes from their official website: http://aect.site-ym.com/. The main focus of this organization seems to be gathering people who want to improve education through technology. The only thing I was able to find about conferences related to this organization is their upcoming AECT 2012 International Convention which is October 30-November 3 and is open to both members and nonmembers. The organization does have two journals that are released bimonthly: Educational Technology Research and Development and TechTrends. The mission that the organization represents is to provide a forum on an international levels for the exchange and dissemination of ideas related to the topic. The organization is meant to serve people who involved with designing better instruction using technology. They really seem to address the need to use technology to further education and learning, as well as represent and speak for it. They want members to share ideas and they want the target audiences to see and understand those same ideas.
The second organization highlighted is the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). The information comes from their official website: https://www.iste.org/. The main focus of the organization seems to be the importance of technology to education. They have two conferences: ISTE 2013 and ISTE Leadership Forum. They have two journals (Journal of Research on Technology in Education and Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education) and one magazine (Learning and Leading with Technology). The mission of the organization seems to be pushing for policy change and money grants to support technology in schools to be used for educational purposes. In this case, they are serving schools and students in term of tech support and teachers in terms of helping their opinions to be heard. They address problems of policy makers not necessarily supporting technology in education by exposing them to the ideas and thoughts of its members.
The third organization highlighted is the Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). The information comes from their official website: http://www.aace.org/. It's a little hard right off the bat to tell what their purpose is, though their name would suggest that they are focused on bringing, keeping, and using computers in education. They have a fairly large number of conferences attached to them: EdMedia, E-Learn, Global Learn, Global TIME, and SITE. They also have a number of journals attached to them: (International Journal on E-Learning Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Journal of Interactive Learning Research, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, AACE Journal, and Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. The mission seems to be about providing people a place to share information and ideas about using computers and technology in education. It seems to be there to serve teachers and others who want to use computers and digital learning. I'm not sure exactly what problems they address.
The fourth and final organization highlighted is the International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS). The information comes from their official website: http://www.isls.org/index.html. The focus of this group seems to be on enhancing learning with and without technology. They do not have any posted conferences, though it is obvious that they have them. They have two affiliated journals: Journal of the Learning Sciences and International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. Their mission is to enhance their field by providing dialogue about it. They serve professionals and students interested in the field. It answers the problem of needing a place to talk about ideas and share research.
Alternative ID Models (Reflection)
1. What is the paradigm shift that Tripp and Bichelmeyer (rapid prototyping) point out in instructional design? Ties in with some other models.
There are three assumptions that they point out as being significant in showing that rapid prototyping is a paradigm shift. The first is that there is a difference between science and design. The second is that it is possible to gain scientific knowledge by using materials developed by design science. The third is that validity means something different when applied to design theories than when it is used with educational psychology. This point really confused me, to be honest. Mainly I think it means that research should be based on finding out if a model works? I'm just not entirely sure how this relates exactly to paradigm shift. Anyway, the fourth assumption is that the human experience is a subjective thing and that perfect objectivity is not possible. These four things are some of the base beliefs underlying rapid prototyping and it's these things that make it a paradigm shift in thinking about design.
2. What is the correlation between the three theories? Similarities? Don't talk about surface level (ie. all have design component). Talk about fundamental assumptions. Are they equally dynamic?
The number one thing that I noticed as being in common between them all is the belief that linear models such as traditional ID are too confining to allow for real success. The other thing that I noted is that they all believe that learning is more complex than a system like traditional ID can account for. Personally, those are what I believed to be their most important similarities. It is what essentially puts them in their own category apart from traditional ID. Their similarities basically outline a different belief system as far as what learning is.
There are three assumptions that they point out as being significant in showing that rapid prototyping is a paradigm shift. The first is that there is a difference between science and design. The second is that it is possible to gain scientific knowledge by using materials developed by design science. The third is that validity means something different when applied to design theories than when it is used with educational psychology. This point really confused me, to be honest. Mainly I think it means that research should be based on finding out if a model works? I'm just not entirely sure how this relates exactly to paradigm shift. Anyway, the fourth assumption is that the human experience is a subjective thing and that perfect objectivity is not possible. These four things are some of the base beliefs underlying rapid prototyping and it's these things that make it a paradigm shift in thinking about design.
2. What is the correlation between the three theories? Similarities? Don't talk about surface level (ie. all have design component). Talk about fundamental assumptions. Are they equally dynamic?
The number one thing that I noticed as being in common between them all is the belief that linear models such as traditional ID are too confining to allow for real success. The other thing that I noted is that they all believe that learning is more complex than a system like traditional ID can account for. Personally, those are what I believed to be their most important similarities. It is what essentially puts them in their own category apart from traditional ID. Their similarities basically outline a different belief system as far as what learning is.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Alternative ID Models (Readings)
This week, I have three readings.
The first is one that I have actually already read for another class. It is called A General Set of Procedures for Constructivist Instructional Design: The New R2D2 Model. It is by Jerry Willis and Kristen Egeland Wright. It appears in a journal called Educational Technology.
1. Explain the principles of recursion, reflection, and participation.
The principle recursion refers to the idea that many things can be addressed at one time within the stages of the process. At that suggestion, there are not really stages because so many things are happening at the same time. Reflection refers to checking constantly for quality and consistency with the goals and aims. This means that at any time the process can be corrected. I believe participation is referred to as being the quality of the team-based nature of the ID development.
2. What are the central tenants of traditional ID that Willis and Wright argue against with constructivist ID?
It argues pretty heavily against the linearity and "set in stone" nature of traditional ID. Beyond that, I think it was more discussed in the previous article about R2D2.
3. According to the authors, what is the difference between procedures and guidelines?
Guidelines are more suggestions of what to do and how to think whereas procedures are thought of as being indicative of linearity and have to be followed. This article puts this in the section titled "procedures" but they make it evident that they really mean "guidelines".
4. What actions/activities make up the three focal points of R2D2?
In define, there are 4 actions that are listed. These are define focus, create and support participatory team, create progressive problem solution, and develop phronesis or contextual understanding. Under Design and Develop, there are 3 actions listed. These are select development environment, conduct cooperative inquiry, and design and develop product. Under Dissemination, there are 4 actions listed. These are conduct summative evaluation, create final package, diffuse, and adopt.
The second is titled What Can We Learn from Chaos Theory?: An Alternative Approach to Instructional Systems Design. It is by Yeongmahn You and is from a journal called Educational Technology Research and Development.
1. What does the author mean by "goodness of fit"?
In this sense, the author is referring to a goodness of fit between chaos theory and instructional design. The goal is to identify them with each other in terms of allied root disciplines and to show how they translate into the other.
2. Explain the key elements of Chaos Theory.
There are three key elements of Chaos Theory: sensitive dependence on initial conditions, fractals, and strange attractors. The idea behind sensitive dependence on initial conditions is that the slightest fluctuation or difference in one part can disproportionally effect other parts of the system. Fractals are geometric constructs that are irregular throughout with the same degree of irregularity on every scale. Strange attractors are elements that pull systems into unpredictable results.
3. Compare and contrast key assumptions of traditional ISD with dynamic non-linear systems.
Traditional ISD follows an inflexible, linear path while non-linear systems are more flexible, not following a given path in order to allow for unpredictable elements. Traditional ISD assumes that learning is predictable and can be controlled with manageable pieces while non-linear systems assumes it is impossible to control and predict a reaction. Traditional ISD considers learning and learners as a closed system where non-linear systems view them as open systems. Traditional ISD relies on a negative feedback loop in order to correct itself where non-linear systems rely on positive feedback in order to keep developing.
4. Describe how the author applies the key elements of Chaos Theory to ISD.
The elements of chaos eliminate the need for objectives and focuses instead on whole tasks with objectives emerging as further work is done. Design then becomes more about building learning environments. It also encourages looking at evaluation in an entirely new way since it is more about goals that individuals set for themselves.
The third and final reading is another reading that I have looked at in another class. This reading is titled Rapid Prototyping: An Alternative Instructional Design Strategy and is by Steven D. Tripp and Barbara Bichelmeyer. It is also from the journal called Educational Technology Research and Development.
1. Explain the key features of the design highlighted by the author.
The features that rapid prototyping, specifically as software design, exhibits are usage and testing of prototypes. This means that while the designers are planning, they also create and test a prototype of that plan or product to inform their further decisions.
2. What is rapid prototyping and what are its key components?
Officially, rapid prototyping is defined as system development methodology based on building and using a model of a system for designing, implementing, testing, and installing the system. The key components include , when applied to software design: determining feasibility, studying the present system, defining the prototype, building the prototype, exercising the prototype, converting, and installing. Many of these components occur at the same time within the process.
3. How do the key components of rapid prototyping apply to ID?
The ideas of creating computer programs and creating instructional designs is outlined to be similar and therefore helpful. Some of the same measures can be taken to greatly aid in the ID process. Taking the process and translating it into instructional design changes the components to the following: assess needs and analyze content, set objectives, construct prototype (design), construct prototype (research), and install and maintain system. Again, many of these components occur at the same time.
4. What ID problems does rapid prototyping address that traditional ISD does not?
It addresses the idea that complex situations exist, primarily. Regular patterns for ISD do not work in every situation and this is one of the models that try to address that.
5. What is the paradigm shift that rapid prototyping offers ID?
It offers a paradigm shift in how design takes place and how instructional designers can synthesize learning environments.
Challenging the Assumptions of Traditional ID (Reflection)
I wanted to talk about briefly the ideas of objective and subjective that were raised in last week's class.
For me, I learned about the terms objective and subjective in terms with how objectivists would think about them. I learned that objective means founded in fact and subjective means founded in opinion. It had not really occurred to me that there were two schools of thought there. It's hard for me to understand to an extent the way that interpretivists think of objective and subjective. There is definitely an appeal to it. I like the idea of objective being based in agreement and subjective being based in disagreement. To be honest, that is really how I view many things in the world already. The issue for me is not so much how to think of the terms, but simply how to define them. I would like to think a little bit more in terms of the interpretivist approach, but it is hard for me to change how I have always thought to define something.
For me, I learned about the terms objective and subjective in terms with how objectivists would think about them. I learned that objective means founded in fact and subjective means founded in opinion. It had not really occurred to me that there were two schools of thought there. It's hard for me to understand to an extent the way that interpretivists think of objective and subjective. There is definitely an appeal to it. I like the idea of objective being based in agreement and subjective being based in disagreement. To be honest, that is really how I view many things in the world already. The issue for me is not so much how to think of the terms, but simply how to define them. I would like to think a little bit more in terms of the interpretivist approach, but it is hard for me to change how I have always thought to define something.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Challenging the Assumptions of Traditional ID (Readings)
I have four readings for this week.
The first is the second chapter of an unknown book. The chapter is titled "What is Instructional Design?" and is by Kent L. Gustafson and Robert M. Branch. It is one of the readings that we had for last week as well. This is a good reminder of what the general view of ID is before we look at more abstract ones.
The second is an article from Educational Technology titled "A Recursive, Reflective Instructional Design Model Based on Constructivist-Interpretivist Theory" by Jerry Willis. It talks about different views on instructional design and how that shapes other systems. It really all comes down to your educational viewpoint and how you apply that to the tools that you have available.
The third was another article from Educational Technology titled "The Maturing of Constructivist Instructional Design: Some Basic Principles That Can Guide Practice." It was written by Jerry Willis as well. It expands upon the model introduced in the second reading as well as introduces some other constructivist models. It is an interest idea and seems like another flexible model. It all kind of depends on what is most suitable to your style.
The fourth is an report from Educational Technology & Society titled "Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations". It was written by Yiasemina Karagiorgi and Loizos Symeou. It talks more about the same topics, dealing with a model not previously discussed.
The first is the second chapter of an unknown book. The chapter is titled "What is Instructional Design?" and is by Kent L. Gustafson and Robert M. Branch. It is one of the readings that we had for last week as well. This is a good reminder of what the general view of ID is before we look at more abstract ones.
The second is an article from Educational Technology titled "A Recursive, Reflective Instructional Design Model Based on Constructivist-Interpretivist Theory" by Jerry Willis. It talks about different views on instructional design and how that shapes other systems. It really all comes down to your educational viewpoint and how you apply that to the tools that you have available.
The third was another article from Educational Technology titled "The Maturing of Constructivist Instructional Design: Some Basic Principles That Can Guide Practice." It was written by Jerry Willis as well. It expands upon the model introduced in the second reading as well as introduces some other constructivist models. It is an interest idea and seems like another flexible model. It all kind of depends on what is most suitable to your style.
The fourth is an report from Educational Technology & Society titled "Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations". It was written by Yiasemina Karagiorgi and Loizos Symeou. It talks more about the same topics, dealing with a model not previously discussed.
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Introduction to Instructional Design (Readings)
I have six readings associated with this topic.
The first reading is a chapter entitled "What is Instructional Design". I do not know what book it is from, but it appears to be the second chapter. The chapter was written by Kent L. Gustafson and Robert M. Branch. This reading essentially gave a definition for and outlined characteristics of instructional design. Since I am also enrolled in an instructional design class, this was more of a review of some of the things that we talked about on the first day of class.
The second reading is an article entitled "A Hard Look at ISD" from a magazine called Trainer. The article was written by Ron Zemke and Allison Rossett. This article addressed the complaints and possible shortcomings of the instructional design process. I was a little surprised at this view as I am generally new to instructional design. I had no idea it was so hotly contested. At this point, I agree with the view that it is more a framework than a process. It seems to be the best way to use it.
The third reading is "ADDIE Model" from raleighway.com. The site showed a representation of the ADDIE model of instructional design. It also described in more detail what could be viewed as part of each of the different pieces. This is, again, sort of a review of things that I have already learned in my instructional design class.
The fourth reading is from a list called "Instructional Design Models" from www.instructionaldesign.org. It lists many different kinds of instructional design models in addition to the ADDIE model. I looked at three models from this list: Dick & Carey, Kemp Model, and Iterative Design. The examples still really remind me of the ADDIE model. The same general needs are met with minor differences in approach.
The fifth reading is an article from a journal called Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. The article is titled "A Review of What Instructional Designers Do: Questions Answered and Questions Not Asked". It was written by Richard F. Kenny, Zuochen Zhang, Richard A. Schwier, and Katy Campbell. It looked at research directed at what instructional designers do. It really showed that ID models are just frameworks and that it's really all about finding what is the best match for the task at hand.
The sixth reading is the fifteenth chapter of a book called Handbook of Human Performance Technology. The chapter is titled "Instruction as an Intervention" and was written by Michael Molenda and James D. Russell. This chapter basically outlined educational ideas from a business perspective. It was an interesting look and a good review of some key concepts.
The first reading is a chapter entitled "What is Instructional Design". I do not know what book it is from, but it appears to be the second chapter. The chapter was written by Kent L. Gustafson and Robert M. Branch. This reading essentially gave a definition for and outlined characteristics of instructional design. Since I am also enrolled in an instructional design class, this was more of a review of some of the things that we talked about on the first day of class.
The second reading is an article entitled "A Hard Look at ISD" from a magazine called Trainer. The article was written by Ron Zemke and Allison Rossett. This article addressed the complaints and possible shortcomings of the instructional design process. I was a little surprised at this view as I am generally new to instructional design. I had no idea it was so hotly contested. At this point, I agree with the view that it is more a framework than a process. It seems to be the best way to use it.
The third reading is "ADDIE Model" from raleighway.com. The site showed a representation of the ADDIE model of instructional design. It also described in more detail what could be viewed as part of each of the different pieces. This is, again, sort of a review of things that I have already learned in my instructional design class.
The fourth reading is from a list called "Instructional Design Models" from www.instructionaldesign.org. It lists many different kinds of instructional design models in addition to the ADDIE model. I looked at three models from this list: Dick & Carey, Kemp Model, and Iterative Design. The examples still really remind me of the ADDIE model. The same general needs are met with minor differences in approach.
The fifth reading is an article from a journal called Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. The article is titled "A Review of What Instructional Designers Do: Questions Answered and Questions Not Asked". It was written by Richard F. Kenny, Zuochen Zhang, Richard A. Schwier, and Katy Campbell. It looked at research directed at what instructional designers do. It really showed that ID models are just frameworks and that it's really all about finding what is the best match for the task at hand.
The sixth reading is the fifteenth chapter of a book called Handbook of Human Performance Technology. The chapter is titled "Instruction as an Intervention" and was written by Michael Molenda and James D. Russell. This chapter basically outlined educational ideas from a business perspective. It was an interesting look and a good review of some key concepts.
Visual Literacy, Media Literacy, and New Media Literacies (Reflection)
Q1: How does efficiency influence your values of what is good, effective, and worthwhile?
I feel like, based on cultural cues, we are really taught to uphold efficiency as an indicator of quality. I get teased for having outdated products and it's generally seen as very backwards not to have the latest stuff. I never really thought about it before, but I tend to judge almost all of things I look at in terms of efficiency. I feel like I was brought up to equate it with success the way that many were taught to view it as success similar to the way it was viewed in the industrial age.
Q2: What does Scientific Management tell us about how we should use technology in teaching and learning as well as when and how we know it is good?
It's all based on efficiency. Technology should be used when it makes teaching and learning more efficient. If a technology is efficient in a given situation, it is good. If a technology is efficient in general, it is good. If it helps the 'factory' produce better, it has high value.
Q3: What are three things wrong with Laggards in Our Schools?
There are a number of things that are wrong with the book Laggards in Our Schools. The very first thing of course is the idea that children are "retards" for simply not being on par with standards of other children in a given grade. A second thing that is wrong with it is a failure to consider and acknowledge very important factors to "lagging" in the school system, such as economic factors and ability to speak English. The third thing that I have found to be wrong with the book is the endorsement and recommendation of treating schools as factories in order to get desired results. It is terrifying enough to see the results of the 'study' and even worse to turn around and say that they should be treated like machines being built to become unthinking machines when they are adults in the workplace. It is not helpful to anyway, especially in today's circumstances.
Q4: Why was it referred to as the "cult" of efficiency?
Cult is a word normally associated with a near religious devotion and worship of something. I can definitely see how that term can be applied to this country's relationship with efficiency. In the Industrial Age, efficiency was equated with the achievement of success so everyone wanted it. It became the answer to any and every question and was applied to all aspects of life. That certainly sounds like a near religious devotion to me. Even today, there are still a lot of places where efficiency is the application model and it is still tied to success, worth, and status.
I feel like, based on cultural cues, we are really taught to uphold efficiency as an indicator of quality. I get teased for having outdated products and it's generally seen as very backwards not to have the latest stuff. I never really thought about it before, but I tend to judge almost all of things I look at in terms of efficiency. I feel like I was brought up to equate it with success the way that many were taught to view it as success similar to the way it was viewed in the industrial age.
Q2: What does Scientific Management tell us about how we should use technology in teaching and learning as well as when and how we know it is good?
It's all based on efficiency. Technology should be used when it makes teaching and learning more efficient. If a technology is efficient in a given situation, it is good. If a technology is efficient in general, it is good. If it helps the 'factory' produce better, it has high value.
Q3: What are three things wrong with Laggards in Our Schools?
There are a number of things that are wrong with the book Laggards in Our Schools. The very first thing of course is the idea that children are "retards" for simply not being on par with standards of other children in a given grade. A second thing that is wrong with it is a failure to consider and acknowledge very important factors to "lagging" in the school system, such as economic factors and ability to speak English. The third thing that I have found to be wrong with the book is the endorsement and recommendation of treating schools as factories in order to get desired results. It is terrifying enough to see the results of the 'study' and even worse to turn around and say that they should be treated like machines being built to become unthinking machines when they are adults in the workplace. It is not helpful to anyway, especially in today's circumstances.
Q4: Why was it referred to as the "cult" of efficiency?
Cult is a word normally associated with a near religious devotion and worship of something. I can definitely see how that term can be applied to this country's relationship with efficiency. In the Industrial Age, efficiency was equated with the achievement of success so everyone wanted it. It became the answer to any and every question and was applied to all aspects of life. That certainly sounds like a near religious devotion to me. Even today, there are still a lot of places where efficiency is the application model and it is still tied to success, worth, and status.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Visual Literacy, Media Literacy, and New Media Literacies (Readings)
I have two readings this week to talk about.
The first reading is titled "Media Literacy - A National Priority for a Changing World". It is by Elizabeth Thoman and Tessa Jolls. It appears to be an article from a journal called American Behavioral Scientist. The article dealt with how important media messages have become in the world. It also talked about the need to develop media literacy in order to properly interact with this new world. This is a very important and often discussed issue anymore. It is thinking along this line, in fact, that lead to me pursuing my master's in this field. Kids need to be trained to survive in today's culture, not yesterday's. It marks a break in thinking about education, but it is a very important break.
The second reading is titled "Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century". It is by Henry Jenkins with assistance from Katie Clinton, Ravi Purushotma, Alice J. Robison, Margaret Weigel. The paper was published by the MacArthur Foundation. The paper addressed the addition of technology as a component of culture and the skills that children are going to need in order to be a part of the new technological culture. This is all very important and true information. I pursued technology knowledge in order to provide answers to some of these needs. It is a huge part of today's world and anyone who is missing out is facing huge challenges in being a part of culture.
The first reading is titled "Media Literacy - A National Priority for a Changing World". It is by Elizabeth Thoman and Tessa Jolls. It appears to be an article from a journal called American Behavioral Scientist. The article dealt with how important media messages have become in the world. It also talked about the need to develop media literacy in order to properly interact with this new world. This is a very important and often discussed issue anymore. It is thinking along this line, in fact, that lead to me pursuing my master's in this field. Kids need to be trained to survive in today's culture, not yesterday's. It marks a break in thinking about education, but it is a very important break.
The second reading is titled "Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century". It is by Henry Jenkins with assistance from Katie Clinton, Ravi Purushotma, Alice J. Robison, Margaret Weigel. The paper was published by the MacArthur Foundation. The paper addressed the addition of technology as a component of culture and the skills that children are going to need in order to be a part of the new technological culture. This is all very important and true information. I pursued technology knowledge in order to provide answers to some of these needs. It is a huge part of today's world and anyone who is missing out is facing huge challenges in being a part of culture.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Technology in Education: The Efficiency Factor (Reflections)
This week, we spent a lot of time thinking about theories of Instructional Technology and we talked quite a bit about theories of education two weeks ago. The challenge for reflection is to relate them to each other, to try to find theories of IT that fit with theories of education. This is a little difficult because they can be so distinct from each other.
To begin with, I'm going to talk briefly about my perspectives on each of them, starting with the theories of education. Perennialism is considered the most conservative of the viewpoints that we were presented with. It deals with the belief in teaching things that can proven as well as focusing on 'truths' present in great works of civilization and developing intellect. Essentialism is about civilizing through education with a focus on basic skill development and discipline. Progressivism is about teachers as guides, learning through children's interests, and using direct and authentic experiences for learning. Reconstructionism is about facilitating social change, developing internationalism, and questioning the status quo.
Next, I'm going to talk a little about the theories of IT. The Systems Theory deals with looking at natural systems to apply to man-made ones, rational procedures, and logical problem-solving. Communication Theory is focused on the components of communication. Behaviorism is about the production of observable outcomes. Constructivism is about building knowledge and the process of organizing information.
Now comes the part where they can be related. The first connection that I can see right off the bat is between Constructivism and Progressivism. Both have a focus on authentic activities and teachers as a guiding force as opposed to an authoritarian figure. The next connection that I can see is between Perennialism and Systems Theory because both are about using a greater model of comparison and focusing on logical processes. I can also associate Behaviorism with Essentialism because of the focus on standards, objectives, and behaviors. That may be a connection that isn't necessarily there, but it's what I am seeing at the moment. That leaves Reconstructionism and Communication Theory. The 'field of experience' concept has a connection to the idea of a more international types of education. Beyond that, I'm having a little trouble seeing the connection.
To begin with, I'm going to talk briefly about my perspectives on each of them, starting with the theories of education. Perennialism is considered the most conservative of the viewpoints that we were presented with. It deals with the belief in teaching things that can proven as well as focusing on 'truths' present in great works of civilization and developing intellect. Essentialism is about civilizing through education with a focus on basic skill development and discipline. Progressivism is about teachers as guides, learning through children's interests, and using direct and authentic experiences for learning. Reconstructionism is about facilitating social change, developing internationalism, and questioning the status quo.
Next, I'm going to talk a little about the theories of IT. The Systems Theory deals with looking at natural systems to apply to man-made ones, rational procedures, and logical problem-solving. Communication Theory is focused on the components of communication. Behaviorism is about the production of observable outcomes. Constructivism is about building knowledge and the process of organizing information.
Now comes the part where they can be related. The first connection that I can see right off the bat is between Constructivism and Progressivism. Both have a focus on authentic activities and teachers as a guiding force as opposed to an authoritarian figure. The next connection that I can see is between Perennialism and Systems Theory because both are about using a greater model of comparison and focusing on logical processes. I can also associate Behaviorism with Essentialism because of the focus on standards, objectives, and behaviors. That may be a connection that isn't necessarily there, but it's what I am seeing at the moment. That leaves Reconstructionism and Communication Theory. The 'field of experience' concept has a connection to the idea of a more international types of education. Beyond that, I'm having a little trouble seeing the connection.
Monday, September 3, 2012
Technology in Education: The Efficiency Factor (Readings)
I have two readings this week so I am going to do the same thing that I did earlier and take some notes on what I read. Mostly this is to help me review and reflect, so the Reading posts can be viewed as separate from the actual Reflection posts.
The first reading is titled Frederick Taylor in the Classroom: Standardized Testing and Scientific Management. It was written by Johnathan Rees and appears to be an article from a journal entitled Radical Pedagogy. The article began by talking about a man named Frederick Taylor at the turn of the century. He developed a model of efficiency to boost the production of factories. It involved a structuring of very simple tasks that factory workers were to do, decreasing skill requirements and time involved. Those ideologies have become a part of the education system in the form of high stakes testing, which lessons the meaningful learning of children and the ability of teachers to teach. No one benefits from the system. There is no mistake that high stakes testing is bad. I have seen that for awhile now, but this really shows how it affects everyone, with little to no good coming out of it. I remember hearing the truth about high stakes testing my freshman year of college and being so mad that I was put through that. In this case, "Taylorism" was a technology for efficiency that made everything worse and probably needs to change.
The second reading is titled Education and the Cult of Efficiency, though it really seems to be the first two chapters of a book by that name. It was written by Raymond E. Callahan. The first chapter details the history of American mindsets during the early 20th Century. Focus was on business models for everything, which included schools. The education system was being turned on and viewed as "inefficient" when compared to business models. They were searching for change and a way to make education fit the "American way" when Frederick Taylor came on the scene. The second chapter detailed more of his model itself and how America embraced it, as well as many other places around the world. It was a business model, but it was touted as being applicable to everything in life. Education became one of those things. America was ready for a model such as this and it fit as well as exemplified everything that America stood for. It has become outdated in the last hundred years, but it is still clung to. It is easier to understand that now, given how important the mindsets of business are to American identity. Still, it's a new world and we need to, as a country, move on.
The first reading is titled Frederick Taylor in the Classroom: Standardized Testing and Scientific Management. It was written by Johnathan Rees and appears to be an article from a journal entitled Radical Pedagogy. The article began by talking about a man named Frederick Taylor at the turn of the century. He developed a model of efficiency to boost the production of factories. It involved a structuring of very simple tasks that factory workers were to do, decreasing skill requirements and time involved. Those ideologies have become a part of the education system in the form of high stakes testing, which lessons the meaningful learning of children and the ability of teachers to teach. No one benefits from the system. There is no mistake that high stakes testing is bad. I have seen that for awhile now, but this really shows how it affects everyone, with little to no good coming out of it. I remember hearing the truth about high stakes testing my freshman year of college and being so mad that I was put through that. In this case, "Taylorism" was a technology for efficiency that made everything worse and probably needs to change.
The second reading is titled Education and the Cult of Efficiency, though it really seems to be the first two chapters of a book by that name. It was written by Raymond E. Callahan. The first chapter details the history of American mindsets during the early 20th Century. Focus was on business models for everything, which included schools. The education system was being turned on and viewed as "inefficient" when compared to business models. They were searching for change and a way to make education fit the "American way" when Frederick Taylor came on the scene. The second chapter detailed more of his model itself and how America embraced it, as well as many other places around the world. It was a business model, but it was touted as being applicable to everything in life. Education became one of those things. America was ready for a model such as this and it fit as well as exemplified everything that America stood for. It has become outdated in the last hundred years, but it is still clung to. It is easier to understand that now, given how important the mindsets of business are to American identity. Still, it's a new world and we need to, as a country, move on.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Philosophy of Education and Theories of IT Reflection
We began class with a lot of talk about theories of education. There are more, but we talked about four main ones. Those were perennialism, essentialism, progressivism, and reconstructionism. They rank from perennialism being the most conservative to reconstructionism being the most liberal. As I listened to their descriptions, I was struck with how I have experienced elements of all four within my public school and college days. It was very interesting because I had only ever thought of them as extremely separate and distinct elements. They can interplay and I just had never thought enough about it to notice that.
As for as my own view, I would have to say that I'm more often to agree with reconstructionism. Not only is that just generally the way my mind works, many of my college learning experiences seem to veer in that direction. None of the views actually make me that uncomfortable as I have had experiences with all of them. However, perennialism opposes the school as a social mechanism and trade school aspects. Perennialism and essentialism both oppose change unless absolutely necessary. Both of those individual oppositions do bother a bit. It seems that that sort of viewpoint would really hold schools back.
We also had a great discussion in class about what technology is, what media is, and how we compare the two. It was interesting and I really feel like all my previous viewpoints about them were very wrong. Technology being thought of as the application of knowledge to solve problems and make lives easier is a brand-new mindset for me. I am trying to retool my thinking however. Thinking of it as a process and a product is a bit more in line with what I thought, but it goes even a bit deeper. I have tried to look at processes and products as a teacher. I thought of a product being a smartboard and a process perhaps being the Madelyn Hunter Model of lesson planning. I'm a little shaky on whether that is a true statement for the last one however. I am still struggling with it. I also honestly have not thought in depth about what media was at all. Channels for transmitting information is as good a definition as any, though any might be new to me. This is a bit easier to wrap my head around, but is still difficult to think about what exactly that entails. When someone is writing on a whiteboard, what part is the media? The marker? The board? The words? It's a little confusing. It is a very interesting new way to look at things, however.
Philosophy of Education and Theories of IT Readings
I have four readings for this week. The first is titled Learning Theories - An Overview from www.infed.org. This reading primarily dealt with the different ideas about what learning is, how it is achieved, and for what purpose. As a former elementary education student, I am familiar with the different theories and ideas, but it was nice to take a look at them again. I have never been a person to subscribe to just one of those ideas. I admire and agree with the work of many researchers under all of the headings. In my opinion, learning is really some part of all of them, with no one of more importance than another. It is interesting how many people view learning as just an acquisition of facts however. I have always believed in learning as an application as opposed to an acquisition. It was actually the topic of a novel that I attempted to write in 2009.
The second reading is titled Systems Theory: An Overview from www.panarchy.com. It looks like it's a selection from a book called General System Theory by Ludwig von Bertalanffy. I will admit that I had some trouble understanding what a lot of this had to do with what we are learning. Generally, what I took away is that we are a complex organism operating under an "open system" and therefore there is no singular theory that can attest for or give answers to every little thing we do and think. We seek challenge, stress, and strife to give our lives meaning, which general theories should not be able to explain. This seems to work a bit in line with my views regarding the previous reading. The many theories about learning are good, but because we are complex, no single theory can account for everything.
The third reading is titled Shannon Model of Communication from www.exploratorium.com. It discusses a communication theory proposed by Claude Shannon about information, particularly transmission of information through telephone, but it can be applied to other areas as well. It is fairly simple and I can see it easily being applied to teaching and learning through technological means.
The fourth and final reading is titled Shannon-Weaver Model from communicationtheory.org. This dealt more with the same communication model. I can definitely see how it relates. I have heard about this model before, but I have not heard it called any given name. It is interesting, but very necessary to think about communication theories when it comes to education and technology.
The second reading is titled Systems Theory: An Overview from www.panarchy.com. It looks like it's a selection from a book called General System Theory by Ludwig von Bertalanffy. I will admit that I had some trouble understanding what a lot of this had to do with what we are learning. Generally, what I took away is that we are a complex organism operating under an "open system" and therefore there is no singular theory that can attest for or give answers to every little thing we do and think. We seek challenge, stress, and strife to give our lives meaning, which general theories should not be able to explain. This seems to work a bit in line with my views regarding the previous reading. The many theories about learning are good, but because we are complex, no single theory can account for everything.
The third reading is titled Shannon Model of Communication from www.exploratorium.com. It discusses a communication theory proposed by Claude Shannon about information, particularly transmission of information through telephone, but it can be applied to other areas as well. It is fairly simple and I can see it easily being applied to teaching and learning through technological means.
The fourth and final reading is titled Shannon-Weaver Model from communicationtheory.org. This dealt more with the same communication model. I can definitely see how it relates. I have heard about this model before, but I have not heard it called any given name. It is interesting, but very necessary to think about communication theories when it comes to education and technology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)