Conclusion and Reflections weeks 1-3 ( assignment I)

                                                          and Conclusion.....

Over the last 3 weeks I have participated as an active learner and student in a range of scaffolded activities centred on e-learning theory and design.  The following blog entry provides a summary and evaluation of my experience and an overview of the prominent themes and concepts within this learning journey.

One of the early concepts introduced was learning styles and Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences.  Multiple Intelligences theory recognising eight different styles of intelligences that allow for broader recognition of students potential (Armstrong, 2009).  The activities allowed exploration of one’s own learning styles preferences, an important process to undertake as a teacher as teachers tend to teach to their own learning style.  As such, understanding and awareness of your own bias in learning styles allows for a more conscious development of strategies that can attend to the multiple learning styles of students (Reinhold, 2011).   The e-learning design provided for various learning styles as evidenced in the provision of text, video, online tutorials, individual and group work.    

 Another key concept I have explored is learning theory.   Throughout the activities we have been encouraged to recognise and evaluate what have been the dominant learning theories underpinning the activities. Behavioural, cognitivism, constructivsim, Connectivism and multiple intelligences were the main learning theories explored, and were all evident within the activities.  However, it is my assessment that the e-learning design approach for these activities was underpinned largely by connectivism learning theory.  "In connectivism, the starting point for learning occurs when knowledge is actuated through the process of a learner connecting to and feeding information into a learning community.  Siemens (2004) states, “A community is the clustering of similar areas of interest that allows for interaction, sharing, dialoguing, and thinking together.” Kop & Hill (2008).

Many of the activities within the first 3 weeks relied on students working  as a part of a team.  The design provided various means for this to occur such as wiki’s, online tutorials and forums.  The endless forum discussions in relation to the tasks highlighted students ease at utilising the digital world to enhance their learning.   This followed Kearsley & Shneiderman (1999) assessment that   “The fundamental idea underlying engagement theory is that students must be meaningfully engaged in learning activities through interaction with others and worthwhile tasks “.  Without the goal orientated and collaboratively focused activities, it is very likely  my engagement and participation with the material would have been reduced.    

 Constructionist, cognitivist and behavioural learning theory influences were also apparent as discussed in learning theories blog.   Despite the scaffolding provided, it was clear that the design of the activities challenged students to work in the higher range of Blooms Taxonomy.  For the digital immigrants, it is my observation that this caused a level of stress for a number of students; however I suspect the learning outcomes resulting from this challenge were significant.   Reflecting on my own experience of this design, I found the online environment difficult to adjust to, and often felt isolated from my peers despite the many online opportunities for connection.  In addition, the technological issues such as wiki and blog addresses continually being removed added to my frustration.   This feeling was supported by broader research in relation e-learning experience stating  “ Current research in adult education shows that the levels of confidence and learner autonomy, in addition to discipline, are of crucial importance to the level of engagement by the learner in a personalized learning environment, as lack of these in the majority of participants hampered their learning online.  Nearly all students preferred the help and support of the local or online tutor to guide them through resources and activities, to validate information, and to critically engage them in the course content (Kop, 2008), which would indicate the need for a localized tutor presence” Kop & Hill (2008).  

Reflecting on other student’s participation it was apparent that patterns replicated any other learning environment that I had attended, in that there were some students that had high participation, and core group with mid-ranged participation, and some those that contributed in a limited manner.  It was also evident that contribution increase or was often centred on assessment, highlighting students motivation to do well.  Reflecting on how this may influence my own e-learning design I would be interested in exploring further how participation/contribution reflects learning outcomes; i.e is there any difference in the learning outcomes of those students who participated in forums etc to those that were the ‘quiet participants?’.

Another concept that was introduced related to e-learning design and Blooms Taxonomy.  It was evident that the design of the activities demonstrated an alignment with Bloom’s Taxonomy, moving through knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.   

“ Each category entails more intricate thinking than the one preceding it and integrates the previous levels of thought to advance to higher levels” ( Journal of Education for Business , 2009).  This design has relied on scaffolding to ensure as students progress through the activities they are building on prior knowledge and skills, with the early weeks introducing new concepts skills at a basic level, with the intention to build on knowledge and application each week.  Reflecting on the last 3 weeks in my own learning journey it was apparent I was moving through this taxonomy, as evidence in initially not knowing what a wiki was, to contributing to a wiki and evaluating its impact on my learning.

 University of Tasmania (nd) state Effective scaffolding makes two major contributions

·         makes it easier for the learner to undertake a task successfully and thus expands the possible learning activities and experiences

·         increases the rate at which learning may be achieved, and extends what is possible for a learner to perform.

In the online environments such as wikis and blogs, scaffolding occurred with the aid of tools such as  PMI and De Bono’s Hats.  These tools assisted students to clarify and organise their thoughts and analysis of the text/issue enabling higher order thinking .  Using the blogs and wikis as a space to house these higher order thoughts provided a comprehensive and holistic representation of the issue which further enabled learning.   “ Encouraging a learner to follow through a defined pattern of thinking steps represents a reflective process that may also be explained as a creativity heuristic. The thinking steps underpinning a reflective tool can be designed as content-free ' empty' templates. The learner can use these generic reflective tools as a self-coaching device, developing an ability to focus thoughts and ideas and turn them into useful concepts and knowledge” (Coombs, 1999).

In reflecting on the implications for my own learning design, the risk would be to focus on the knowing; the ascertainment of knowledge, rather than the skill to critic and evaluate knowledge.  Ensuring  a focus on teaching  ‘thinking steps’ reduces these risks, and provides for lifelong critical analysis skills and as such must be a part of any learning design. . 

Reflecting on my overall experience of ICTs as a learning tool, I am able to recognise the significant potential for enhancing learning.  “ IT is a particularly powerful teaching tool because it opens up access to a rich variety of resources, it enables flexible thinking to flourish, and because of its infinite patience IT can operate as an inexhaustible learning coach”  Coombs (1999) .  I have observed more closely my own children’s engagement with technology in their learning, and started to think more critically about how concepts of TPACK are crucial in any curriculum.  

I have broader structural concerns about equal distribution of resources and the impact of issues such as class and culture on learning outcomes specific to ICT.   As the divide between rich and poor expands, and we become more aware of the impact of psychosocial issues on students, such as mental health, parental drug dependence and domestic violence, any push for ICTs at the institutional level must take into account these inequities, and not further disadvantage at risk children.  

Although early days, I can recognise my own learning experience in this digital world has been valuable and I feel I have challenged and engaged in the material and can recognise a significant leaning growth.

References:

Armstrong, T (2009).   Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom 3rd ed. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved from  http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109007.aspx

Coombs, S J., Smith, I. (1999). Integration of critical and creative thinking skills into Singapore's IT postgraduate teacher education programme.  Change .2(2),  80-92. Retrieved from http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/4356/1/Vol2No2Article6.pdf

Kop, R., &  Hill, A. (2008)  Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? The International Review of Learning in Open and Distance Learning. 9(3).  Retrieved from http://irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1103.

Halawi, L., McCarthy, R., Pires, S.,(2009).  An Evaluation of E-Learning on the Basis of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Education for Business  84 (6), p374-380.

Reinhold ,R. ( 2011).  Career Choice and Career Development: Using the MBTI ^® and Personality Type. Retrieved from  http://www.personalitypathways.com/article/career-plan2.html. 

University of Tasmania. (nd)  Children, on-line learning and authentic teaching skills
in primary education. Retrieved from http://www.educ.utas.edu.au/users/ilwebb/Research/scaffolding.htm