During an extremely challenging first three weeks in the ICT course, I have diligently participated in all the activities in a timely fashion. With the highly scaffolded learning experiences, I have begun to develop a schema around learning theories as I have experienced them in action. The activities set for us have been well scaffolded in most cases and the biggest challenge has been the amount of material we have had to cover in the timeframe in terms of reading and understanding the concepts and then evaluating and reflecting on them. Interacting with unfamiliar technologies of blogs, Wikis and Moodle have just added an extra complication. However, working with fellow students has accelerated learning with far more being achieved than in isolation.
"Engagement theory is based upon the idea of creating successful collaborative teams that work on ambitious projects that are meaningful to someone outside the classroom." (Kearsley and Shneiderman, 1999, para. 4)
By using Learning Engagement Theory, the ICT course has covered the basic theories of Behaviourism, Cognitivism, Constructivism and Multiple Intelligences through not only research/readings but through learning activities that have been scaffolded to achieve the desired learning outcomes. Of course, the basic theories of Behaviorism, Constructivism and Cognitivism are intertwined into Learning Engagement Theory to make it an effective learning style. Step by step, through these learning activities and scaffolding, new information/theories and techniques have been unveiled, slowly constructing a rich and complex understanding of learning theories and pedagogies whilst incorporating ICT seamlessly into this process.
Using a blog to facilitate, we participated and reflected on a Profile Wiki (individual), the Learning Theories Wiki (partnering up with a colleague) and a Mobile Phone Wiki (group work). Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles were investigated as well as the beginnings of designing our own Learning Design Framework. Through use of scaffolding, we have been responding to the stimuli set for us and have reacted in the appropriate ways. We have experienced working as an individual, with a partner and as a group as well as through the full range of Bloom's Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956) from knowledge (readings/research) to the higher order thinking skills of creating and evaluating (designing our learning design framework).
The Profile Wiki was the first set task and was an effective introduction to Wikis and their possible uses. This activity was an easy ICT introduction and one that highlighted the dangers of technology. Technical issues seemed to be a regular occurrence and the system did not appear to be very robust. This was also an introduction to constructivism and to scaffolding. I had not encountered these concepts before and did not recognise them as such at the time. For me, this was the beginnings of a new schema built around learning and teaching and so the start of cognitivism. The meaningful task (apart from learning how to Wiki and blog) was to inform our colleagues about ourselves and thus authenticate the activity and prepare the students for further collaboration in the coming days. The blog and discussion forum also supported communication between students and proficiencies with new ICTs.
This starting activity was quickly followed by readings/testing activities and blogging on Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1985). This stimulated much thought, provoked discussion both internally and with other students and forced students to look at their individual tests and relate them to themselves in real life. Again, a strong element of constructivism is present with learning in an authentic setting where meaning is drawn from personal experience/perspective. This was our second blog, so an element of behavourism is being developed with on going blogging a desired result. This activity extended knowledge of producing a blog with embedded images and introduced students to the diverse range of Intelligences and learning styles. This stimulated interaction between students and facilitated collaboration as discussion was needed with some aspects of the task.
The Learning Theories Wiki involved collaborating with a partner. Being highly motivated, I found a partner in week 0 with whom I had common interests and proximity. Knowing that I work best by verbalising, this was ideal for me and proved to be an enriching experience. Simply by interacting with my partner, I experienced an exponential increase in understanding of complex ideas and tasks. This is consistent with the idea that in a group you can achieve much more than would be possible as an individual. At about this time, (for me) the penny dropped, we are learning by experiencing constructivism (as well as reading/researching about it). It was a pivotal moment, and from this point I started to really understand. Interestingly, I was certainly engaged but I was also feeling anxious and out of control. I didn't enjoy being blindly pushed in the desired direction. The Learning Theory Wiki was scaffolded such that we used a PMI to analyse our selected reading then uploaded our findings to a Wiki to share. Using the PMI to analyse the reading was a very effective method in clarifying thoughts and drawing out the positive, negative and interesting facts. Our learning in this task was facilitated by more than one learning theory. Behaviourism and cognitivism was found in creating the PMI analysis from the readings and then uploading them into the Wiki. Constructivism by collaborating and exchanging ideas with each other. Connectivism by understanding where we can get further information and readings if we want more in depth knowledge (Siemans, 2004).
The Mobile Phone Wiki was the most enjoyable for me as I was finally developing a schema and was thinking about thinking, my rage/anxiety was replaced by understanding. De Bono's Hats (de Bono, 1985) was very effective way of drawing out different ways of looking at a topic, certainly an emotive one like mobile phones where opinion could be quite polarised. This was a full group activity and was perfectly matched with the scaffold of de Bono's Hats which is designed for a collaborative approach. It is also a meta-cognitive approach, using higher order thinking skills, as this strategy is encouraging thinking about thinking. A deep understanding of the issues was gained through a diverse range of people's perspectives. This is authentic work and uses the learning styles of contructivism, cognitivism, connectivism and also Learning Engagement theory. Cognitivism is strongly present as this activity has a strong emphasis on thinking about your thinking as you are exploring from different perspectives.
The ICT course has worked its way through a wide range of strategies to supports different learning preferences. It has been highly scaffolded and has closely followed the learning theories. However, it has seemed to confuse and infuriate many of its students. Where did it fall short and how can I modify these strategies for my own learning design?
As in life, it is the small things that count. I believe the course got the big picture right but fell short because of some of the detail. The use of scaffolding to direct learning to desired outcomes was for the most part well designed but the execution had problems. The Wikis were unreliable and instead of making people feel connected, they made them feel isolated. Technical issues, perhaps, but ICT is not good for learning if you alienate your learners. The information and activities covered in the first two weeks was excellent but the amount was not appropriate and caused a sensory overload. We experienced working as an individual, in a partnership and as a group and the use of PMIs and de Bono's hats was excellent. The blogs were a great way of viewing others thoughts but more discussion and feedback was needed so that the writer felt validated and affirmed. An online course needs to be easily followed, however some information was not easily discovered which created anxiety amongst users.
In conclusion, for my own learning design, I would hope to make the following adjustments
- make sure that the technology used was robust
- provide timely feedback to individuals
- ensure that your learners know where they are going (desired learning outcome)
- make sure the workload was appropriate
and keep the following ideas which worked well
- use scaffolding to direct learning to planned outcomes including the use of tools such as PMIs and de Bono's hats
- use varied styles of learning including individual, partnerships and group work
- make sure to work through the full range of Bloom's Taxonomy including higher order thinking
- use authentic tasks to make meaning.
For further elaboration on pedagogy and TPCK by Mishra and Koehler (2006), please read my blog on
Learning Design Framework.
References
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.
De Bono, E. (1992). Six thinking hats for schools (Books 1-4) resource book. Cheltenham, Vic.: Hawker Brownlow.
Gardner, H. (1985). The theory of multiple intelligences. London: Paladin.
Kearsley, G., and Shneiderman, B. (1999). Engagement theory: A framework for technology based teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm
Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108(6), 1017-1054.
Siemans, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. December 12, 2004. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
