Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
With the vast improving technologies in the classroom there is no question that social learning, collaborative learning, and connectivism go hand in hand. The classroom these days seem to be constructed of allowing students to derive to their own conclusions by independent completion of tasks. Allowing students to cooperate together in some manageable group allows, not only the educator to deliver more direct instruction, but also develops multiple life skill traits and content knowledge at the same time of interaction for students. As an educator’s main goal is to prepare students for future success in the real world, cooperative learning strategies help prepare students for the fast-paced, virtual workplace that they will encounter (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007).
The instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources can be directly beneficial in the proper structure of this style of learning within the classroom. Technology can play a unique and vital role in cooperative learning by giving structure to groups and allowing students to communicate without being face to face (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). In my special education classroom I tend to use cooperative learning quite often, but it is more in the traditional way rather than what I have discovered through this week’s learning resources. My classroom has used such multimedia tools to complete research for projects, development of power points, and organization of rubrics or group responsibilities. One collaborative project, using multimedia tools that I would like to complete in my classroom is the creating of a video. I understand that the preparation, up-front, has to be adequate. I believe that allowing my special education students to use visual displays and their own verbal input in the video, instead of written input, to direct the task would allow them to be more accommodated. This type of social learning project would not only develop responsibility skills within the group but also develop leadership skills, keep an active learner, and improve interpersonal skills.
The final collaborative technological tool that I would like to incorporate into my classroom that directly relates to the social learning theory is the use of key pals. Keypals is a way, similar to e-mail, for students to communicate in other cities, states and even countries (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Many of students would benefit from this strategy of learning due to the fact that it would broaden the perspective of others and challenge them to learn (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). I believe that this style of project would be one that would motivate my special education students to push themselves to learn. It also would hide some of their physical disabilities, that some other students cannot get past, to create a more comfortable atmosphere. This strategy allows the cooperating students to not only develop proper internet communication skills but also learn content in a different way or style from a distant student trying to achieve the same objective.
Overall technology can be adapted in many ways to fit into the collaborative, social style of learning. This style of learning seems to be the most needed during this day in age where employees are expected to be able to work cooperatively, even if they never see there peers face to face. Educators are responsible for developing this “etiquette” in our students so their future has the opportunity to become successful.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Constructivism in Practice
Blog Post: Constructivism in Practice
The key component to constructionism/constructivism is an actively engaged learner. This approach to learning focuses solely on the individual learner building their own meaning on an individual topic (Laureate 2009). With the strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources I have drawn my own conclusion that they can be directly related to constructionism/constructivism’s learning style. Generating and testing hypotheses allow students to develop their own conclusions by building off of content knowledge, vocabulary, and facts (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Developing these conclusions is done many times by the trial and error method, in which directly relates to Dr. Orey’s vision of what constructionism involves. Allowing students to perform tasks to create their own conclusions or develop their own meaning of a topic through first hand experience seems to be such an efficient way of learning.
With today’s fluent technology base that our students come into the classroom with, educators are able open the classroom, more often, to this style of learning. Instructional strategies such as generating and testing hypotheses becomes effective because the students are able to teach themselves. Educators are responsible for setting the structure and boundaries of testing the hypotheses and with today’s speedy technological software (spreadsheets, data collection tools, and other web resources) students are able to spend more time interpreting the data rather than gathering the data (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This interpretation, spoken of earlier, is exactly what constructivism entitles. The interpretation allows students to create their own developments of the topic and proves or disproves their prior beliefs.
Keeping students engaged, creative, and building information creates a positive classroom environment and often leads to a boost of self-esteem in the students along with the educator (Laureate 2009). Boosting self-esteem, especially in special education, can be such a positive attribute to instill in the students. Having first hand experience in their own learning allows student to gain confidence in their learning style, which, in return also may boost their learning. Educators that provide a positive, interactive, engaged classroom will also watch students develop educationally and this may all be provided by the proper use of constructivism/constructionism.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
The key component to constructionism/constructivism is an actively engaged learner. This approach to learning focuses solely on the individual learner building their own meaning on an individual topic (Laureate 2009). With the strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources I have drawn my own conclusion that they can be directly related to constructionism/constructivism’s learning style. Generating and testing hypotheses allow students to develop their own conclusions by building off of content knowledge, vocabulary, and facts (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Developing these conclusions is done many times by the trial and error method, in which directly relates to Dr. Orey’s vision of what constructionism involves. Allowing students to perform tasks to create their own conclusions or develop their own meaning of a topic through first hand experience seems to be such an efficient way of learning.
With today’s fluent technology base that our students come into the classroom with, educators are able open the classroom, more often, to this style of learning. Instructional strategies such as generating and testing hypotheses becomes effective because the students are able to teach themselves. Educators are responsible for setting the structure and boundaries of testing the hypotheses and with today’s speedy technological software (spreadsheets, data collection tools, and other web resources) students are able to spend more time interpreting the data rather than gathering the data (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This interpretation, spoken of earlier, is exactly what constructivism entitles. The interpretation allows students to create their own developments of the topic and proves or disproves their prior beliefs.
Keeping students engaged, creative, and building information creates a positive classroom environment and often leads to a boost of self-esteem in the students along with the educator (Laureate 2009). Boosting self-esteem, especially in special education, can be such a positive attribute to instill in the students. Having first hand experience in their own learning allows student to gain confidence in their learning style, which, in return also may boost their learning. Educators that provide a positive, interactive, engaged classroom will also watch students develop educationally and this may all be provided by the proper use of constructivism/constructionism.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Blog Post: Relationship of Instructional Strategies with the Cognitive Learning Theory
When thinking of Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory I seem to sum it up as a way to trigger students memories to retrieve already learned data through the use of auditory and visual learning methods. Conducting instruction in a way that students can relate to the materials introduced to something in their own life allows students to create a file, of some sort, that when that object of their own life is remembered, so is the content. Dr. Orey states that it is like a network and each idea is related or connected to other ideas (Laureate 2009). The instructional strategies presented in this week’s reading resources align perfectly with Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory.
The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to provide a well rounded structure for students to create a foundation of knowledge that they may use to retrieve, use, or organize data. All three of the strategies to promote learning touch base with Dr. Orey’s Cognitive Learning Theory by providing a well balanced use of auditory and visual learning components. Technology is readily available in these strategies also by allowing teachers and students to use a variety of technology tools to create visually appealing organizers (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to have a way to reinforce learning and keep the task manageable to students, in which, Dr. Orey says is one of the key components to success with this theory. For example, the use of multimedia tools allow educators to make a topic more relatable to students, which in return allows the students to make more connections in their own “network”.
The summarizing and note taking instructional strategy focuses on improving student’s ability to put new information into their own words (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This instructional strategy also relates to the Cognitive Learning Theory by allowing students to input extraneous information into their “network” in their own way, so it may be retrieved later down the road. It seems that a lot of the Cognitive Learning Theory is built upon how students organize information and this instructional strategy aids in the structure that it is organized in. For example, note taking has many different looks, as to how it is presented in the classroom, but it may use the presence of text along with pictographs that produce a strong impact on students (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). When note taking is presented in this form is goes along with Paivios’s Dual Coding Hypothesis, where students are believed to learn better with the aid of images instead of just text. Note taking and summarization go hand in hand with the Cognitive Learning Theory due to the fact that they allow students to store information in their own words and when presented correctly, images aid text so students can label the topic in their “network”.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
When thinking of Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory I seem to sum it up as a way to trigger students memories to retrieve already learned data through the use of auditory and visual learning methods. Conducting instruction in a way that students can relate to the materials introduced to something in their own life allows students to create a file, of some sort, that when that object of their own life is remembered, so is the content. Dr. Orey states that it is like a network and each idea is related or connected to other ideas (Laureate 2009). The instructional strategies presented in this week’s reading resources align perfectly with Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory.
The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to provide a well rounded structure for students to create a foundation of knowledge that they may use to retrieve, use, or organize data. All three of the strategies to promote learning touch base with Dr. Orey’s Cognitive Learning Theory by providing a well balanced use of auditory and visual learning components. Technology is readily available in these strategies also by allowing teachers and students to use a variety of technology tools to create visually appealing organizers (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to have a way to reinforce learning and keep the task manageable to students, in which, Dr. Orey says is one of the key components to success with this theory. For example, the use of multimedia tools allow educators to make a topic more relatable to students, which in return allows the students to make more connections in their own “network”.
The summarizing and note taking instructional strategy focuses on improving student’s ability to put new information into their own words (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This instructional strategy also relates to the Cognitive Learning Theory by allowing students to input extraneous information into their “network” in their own way, so it may be retrieved later down the road. It seems that a lot of the Cognitive Learning Theory is built upon how students organize information and this instructional strategy aids in the structure that it is organized in. For example, note taking has many different looks, as to how it is presented in the classroom, but it may use the presence of text along with pictographs that produce a strong impact on students (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). When note taking is presented in this form is goes along with Paivios’s Dual Coding Hypothesis, where students are believed to learn better with the aid of images instead of just text. Note taking and summarization go hand in hand with the Cognitive Learning Theory due to the fact that they allow students to store information in their own words and when presented correctly, images aid text so students can label the topic in their “network”.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Instructional Strategies Correlation with Behaviorist Learning Theory
Blog Post: Instructional Strategies Correlation with Behaviorist Theory
Both instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources seem to line up accordingly to the behaviorist learning theory. As Dr. Orey stated, in his brief presentation, that operant conditioning, or the use of reinforcements and punishments, is the most powerful way of reaching academic goals when delivering instruction through the behaviorist learning theory, it directly relates to this week’s instructional strategies of reinforcing effort and homework/practice. One of our goals as educators is to prepare our students for a successful transition into the real world. I have always been taught that hard work, which directly relates to effort, is the key to success. Educators must influence and model great effort for students to realize its importance. When intended effort is exhibited by our students it needs prompt reinforcement to show its importance in both the classroom and real life situations. Teachers need to explicitly teach students the importance of effort and have students keep track of their own effort (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Collecting data is easily conducted in this day and age where teachers can integrate technology into the classroom, by using spreadsheets software and data collection tools to aide students in the direct feedback of their given effort.
Even the use of homework or additional practice of a specific skill taught in the classroom directly aligns with the behaviorist learning theory. Whether you would like to call it punishment or not is up to you. Just don’t ask our students; but the repetition of this certain task or skill allows our students learn and make correlations on their own by independently finding ways to successfully complete the given task. The use of homework, although wonderful for students to get extra work in a certain area can also cause some students to become frustrated with a task when it is complicated in their own eyes. This is why it is imperative that educators leave time during class for students to increase their conceptual understanding of the skills and practices (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). With the instantaneous ability to communicate and retrieve data through technology educators are able to expand their boundaries with creativeness to motivate students to complete the additional practice or homework. The repetitious reinforcements and punishments that students receive through completion or non-completion of doing homework actually correlates with the previous instructional strategy of reinforcing effort. The tracking of data on both instructional strategies can prove to be a worthy eye opener for many students to show the direct relationship of their effort to the current academic grade.
Both instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources seem to line up accordingly to the behaviorist learning theory. As Dr. Orey stated, in his brief presentation, that operant conditioning, or the use of reinforcements and punishments, is the most powerful way of reaching academic goals when delivering instruction through the behaviorist learning theory, it directly relates to this week’s instructional strategies of reinforcing effort and homework/practice. One of our goals as educators is to prepare our students for a successful transition into the real world. I have always been taught that hard work, which directly relates to effort, is the key to success. Educators must influence and model great effort for students to realize its importance. When intended effort is exhibited by our students it needs prompt reinforcement to show its importance in both the classroom and real life situations. Teachers need to explicitly teach students the importance of effort and have students keep track of their own effort (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Collecting data is easily conducted in this day and age where teachers can integrate technology into the classroom, by using spreadsheets software and data collection tools to aide students in the direct feedback of their given effort.
Even the use of homework or additional practice of a specific skill taught in the classroom directly aligns with the behaviorist learning theory. Whether you would like to call it punishment or not is up to you. Just don’t ask our students; but the repetition of this certain task or skill allows our students learn and make correlations on their own by independently finding ways to successfully complete the given task. The use of homework, although wonderful for students to get extra work in a certain area can also cause some students to become frustrated with a task when it is complicated in their own eyes. This is why it is imperative that educators leave time during class for students to increase their conceptual understanding of the skills and practices (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). With the instantaneous ability to communicate and retrieve data through technology educators are able to expand their boundaries with creativeness to motivate students to complete the additional practice or homework. The repetitious reinforcements and punishments that students receive through completion or non-completion of doing homework actually correlates with the previous instructional strategy of reinforcing effort. The tracking of data on both instructional strategies can prove to be a worthy eye opener for many students to show the direct relationship of their effort to the current academic grade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
