I particularly enjoyed chapter 2 of CSCL 2, which discussed collaborative learning via “computer-supported learning environments.” ( Oshima & Oshima, 2002). According to the writings of several authors including, Scardamalia, Berteiter, and others, learners can externalize their thoughts by the use of texts or graphics (notes) in order to proceed through their own knowledge as a communal effort and utilize the expertise of others for personal advancement. Research provides the means to discern the favorability of communal learning by means of discussion groups for learner advancement which can build further discourse by extending its use to other cultures.
Relationship between the use of technology and instructional strategies/scaffolds between the role of technology and the role of a teacher/instructor/facilitator for this particular study includes:
As described in the study, group A and group B, were expert learners tested in a synchronous and asynchronous style of learning with the introduction of WEB based CSILE as the backdrop for learning activities. According to Keegan, 1996, learning by asynchronous technology was introduced to correspondence schools and does not require that student and facilitator participate together; on the other hand, synchronous instruction requires the student and facilitator join together in “real time” to facilitate student progression (Johnson, 2006).
The use of technology for instructional strategies is supported by Jong & Joolingen, 1998, as an aid for the learner to become an active participant in the process of knowledge attainment by computer based learning environments. Theories mentioned by Reil & Polin suggest that knowledge development is associated with the changing role in the community and should be a socially managed experience. Technology used in this study is based on scientific discourse known as WEBCSILE, in order to challenge the learner and prompt a higher level of understanding.
A teacher strategy for both groups concentrated on placing a greater focus on solving problems in a collaborative manner. Even as, group A, began with note cards to record their thoughts and share with other students, the transition to doing the same via discussion groups worked seamlessly, supporting the advantage of allowing students to view others in the same window and focusing students on the same problems (Koschmann, Hall, & Miyake, 2002).
Another teacher strategy for group A and B provided that the student think focally. Graduate students in the study communicated readily via WEBCSILE that previously was generated in the face to face instructor/student genre. The student’s main goal was for knowledge advancement and could project learning from a different method, as long as, the method fulfilled the learning objective. According to Bonk and Zhang, 2006, online learning increases internalization of the student knowledge base and expands their learning “pursuit.” Dewey projected that learning from active participation with focal direction occurred more often than for those who choose to sit on the side lines and not participate (Koschmann, et al., 2002).
*The instructor was present and accessible for community A, but refrained from furthering the teacher responsibilities, such as analyzing student progression, giving clear instruction, or providing teacher reflections. Without teacher presence, community group B, progressed without clear understanding or guidance.
Group C, the novice learner, was privy to the teacher strategy, which placed the greatest focus on problem-centered collaboration (Koschmann, et. al., 2002).
Question 2: Design of virtual community
I would need the tools such as, PBWIKI, in order to provide the discourse for case studies for the initial set-up. After the researching the success of this site, further options, such as DL2 or ANGEL, could be purchased by the community college to broaden the capabilities of online learning. According to Seely Brown (2007), knowledge has two sides, the explicit which is the concept side and the action side; termed tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge develops between the student and the instructor as shared understanding slowly emerges.
The goals consist of presenting case study questions on PBWIKI that require critical thinking and reasoning. Postings for the studies would correspond to the theory class taught the first of the week and would be due by Friday of the same week. Other exercises could be initiated, which can a self grading system, such as hangman, word puzzles, and quizzes to enhance the understanding of anatomy and physiology and serve as a backdrop for critical thinking. This is a shift from the conventional face-to-face instruction that blends a variety of learning formats and gives the opportunity for an assortment of different learning options (Bonk & Zhang, 2008).
The instructor will design the case studies in accordance with the asynchronous theory content, game activities, and theory definitions and provide student guidance throughout the case study scenarios. Also, the instructor will provide the case study, for example: A 52-year old, with a history of a myocardial infarction is 2 days post op from a coronary bypass. Students will be asked what the initial assessment should focus on, what are the risk factors associated with his past history and his current surgery, what are the educational components for this type of surgery, what are the lab values and medications associated with this type of illness/surgery, and what should be the highest priority nursing diagnosis. With this scenario the student must know the anatomy and physiologies of the heart, read sections in their text book, and listen to theory presented first part of the week. The instructor will guide the discussion online via PBWIKI, to make sure the students stay on task. Dewey (1984) sums up the process of “real” knowledge attainment by discussing the fact that students learn by social involvement with others, adding the thought, “human nature is part of nature (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). Dewey articulated that teachers should not wait for “children” to stumble into experiences that educate them, but instead, the educator should be responsible to create educating experiences for the student (Koschmann, et. al, 2002).
The Read, reflect, display, and do (R2D2) model is described by, Bonk and Zhang (2008), as an educator’s tool to delineate age differences, learning preferences and cultural influences of the students allowing for a successful learning environment (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). This design suggests giving reading materials to the auditory and verbal learner and display for the visual learner. To accommodate the observational learner, short reflective paragraphs can be written in class, after theory, to assist the student through the week with their case studies and provide them with what they know and what they need to study.
References
Bonk, C. & Zhang, K. (2008) Empowering online learning: 100+ Activities for reading, reflection, displaying, & doing. Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint. San Francisco, Ca. 3-7.
Bonk, C. & Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 model: Online learning for the diverse learners of this world. Distance Education. 27(2) 258.
Brown, J. (2007). Learning, working & playing in the digital age. 1999 Conference of American Association for Higher Education. 1-6.
Johnson, G. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. Techtrends.50(4), 46-51.
Jong, T. & Joolingen, W. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Education Research. 68, 1-3.
Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (2002), Carrying forward the conversation: CSCL2. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, New Jersey. 259-262.
Oshima, J. & Oshima, R. (2002). Coordination of Asynchronous and synchronous communication: Coordination of asynchronous and synchronous communication: Differences in qualities of knowledge advancement discourse between experts and novices. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation. (pp. 55-77). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reil, M. & Polin, L. (2004). Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In S. Barab R., Kling & J. Gray (Eds.) (pp.16-22).
Friday, March 27, 2009
Thursday, March 5, 2009
3-D Technologies
Technologies can support and create online social environments by:
1. Interfacing learning environments- the student and instructor can communicate via contextual 3-D formats
2. Creating an environment that allows learning to be informal and formal depending on topic
3. Bringing the instructor and student to the forefront of interactions
4. Promoting learners to be active in the learning process
5. Providing a scaffolding affect with apprenticeship opportunities
6. Allowing for realism in special effects that creates interest and connection for the student learner.
Theoretical Rationales:
1. Education consists of interactions with others that are both, psychological and sociological (Dewey 1897).
2. Maturation of the learner occurs in steps-from a social concept progressing to individual scholarship. (Vygotsky 1978).
3. Learning is natural social process (Premack 1984)
4. Learners are active and not passive in a 3-D on-line discourse (Bredo 1994),
5. Scaffolding for the learner is accomplished by constructivist learning environments, such as those created by a 3-D on-line format (Bruner 1961, 1997).
6. New knowledge promotes new interests and thus promotes the addition of innovative understanding by the learner (Jones, 2003).
Parts of these theories have been in use for quite some time to enhance the need for supported outcome measures in web based learning and avenues of invention that require a theoretical basis. Research has proven efficacy concerning how individuals learn and is the base for educational models when the material is authentic. Too often new technologies promote their goods without the theory base required and are devoid of an effective learning environment, causing a pseudo sense of learning.
Simulations of Conceptual Domains
The article by Jong and Joolingen discuss Scientific Discovery Learning simulation and associated problems with on-line educational knowledge (per review of original studies). The basis of this type of learning stems from De Jong and Njoo and consists of the definition of the scientific problem, a hypothesis statement, experimental design, data collection, application, and predictors. The specific problems the authors cited are:
Incorrect hypothesis statements can skew result of the research by student learners
Inaccurate interpretations of data (whether from incorrectly written hypothesis or inadequate knowledge of graphing, both present interpretation problems)
Students who were disorganized and practiced in a random order were less successful and had poorer outcomes
Less success if student has no prior knowledge of educational material
Combining the simulation material with support from instructors is discussed by Jong and Joolingen to assist the promotion of simulated education. The heuristic design suggestions offered by the authors include:
Supportive knowledge on the web site to encourage the memory of prior information
Scaffold information pertinent to current studied only and introduce new studies as course progresses
Creating a hypothesis menu, recommend predefined hypothesis, or offer hypothesis complete with variables, verbs to change if needed, and connectors. Also providing tools for data analysis and graphing designs with training.
Monitoring research planning and order approach, (I.E. use of a tool similar to QUEST for assistance to work through problems) that have some control over the variables.
Supporting and monitoring the student’s progress via journaling with expert collaboration to focus the student’s goals.
Giving the student a step by step method (per simulation) to complete an experiment or providing a preset sequence that allows student participation may improve success.( although the Smithtown exercise proved otherwise-sequential methods do not work as well).
Overall, scientific achievement via on-line simulations, alone, was less effective than those with synchronous instruction. Other methods for a more complete success are provided as:
Providing concurrent information as the experiment progresses
Induction of questions, games, and exercises that correlate with the assignment
Scaffolding educational materials to meet the needs of the study
Simulation does not equate to learning as the student needs initiative with implicit application for better success. All in all, the induction of supportive tools pertaining to the educational materials simulated, can prove a better outcome for the student learner and provide a richer learning environment.
1. Interfacing learning environments- the student and instructor can communicate via contextual 3-D formats
2. Creating an environment that allows learning to be informal and formal depending on topic
3. Bringing the instructor and student to the forefront of interactions
4. Promoting learners to be active in the learning process
5. Providing a scaffolding affect with apprenticeship opportunities
6. Allowing for realism in special effects that creates interest and connection for the student learner.
Theoretical Rationales:
1. Education consists of interactions with others that are both, psychological and sociological (Dewey 1897).
2. Maturation of the learner occurs in steps-from a social concept progressing to individual scholarship. (Vygotsky 1978).
3. Learning is natural social process (Premack 1984)
4. Learners are active and not passive in a 3-D on-line discourse (Bredo 1994),
5. Scaffolding for the learner is accomplished by constructivist learning environments, such as those created by a 3-D on-line format (Bruner 1961, 1997).
6. New knowledge promotes new interests and thus promotes the addition of innovative understanding by the learner (Jones, 2003).
Parts of these theories have been in use for quite some time to enhance the need for supported outcome measures in web based learning and avenues of invention that require a theoretical basis. Research has proven efficacy concerning how individuals learn and is the base for educational models when the material is authentic. Too often new technologies promote their goods without the theory base required and are devoid of an effective learning environment, causing a pseudo sense of learning.
Simulations of Conceptual Domains
The article by Jong and Joolingen discuss Scientific Discovery Learning simulation and associated problems with on-line educational knowledge (per review of original studies). The basis of this type of learning stems from De Jong and Njoo and consists of the definition of the scientific problem, a hypothesis statement, experimental design, data collection, application, and predictors. The specific problems the authors cited are:
Incorrect hypothesis statements can skew result of the research by student learners
Inaccurate interpretations of data (whether from incorrectly written hypothesis or inadequate knowledge of graphing, both present interpretation problems)
Students who were disorganized and practiced in a random order were less successful and had poorer outcomes
Less success if student has no prior knowledge of educational material
Combining the simulation material with support from instructors is discussed by Jong and Joolingen to assist the promotion of simulated education. The heuristic design suggestions offered by the authors include:
Supportive knowledge on the web site to encourage the memory of prior information
Scaffold information pertinent to current studied only and introduce new studies as course progresses
Creating a hypothesis menu, recommend predefined hypothesis, or offer hypothesis complete with variables, verbs to change if needed, and connectors. Also providing tools for data analysis and graphing designs with training.
Monitoring research planning and order approach, (I.E. use of a tool similar to QUEST for assistance to work through problems) that have some control over the variables.
Supporting and monitoring the student’s progress via journaling with expert collaboration to focus the student’s goals.
Giving the student a step by step method (per simulation) to complete an experiment or providing a preset sequence that allows student participation may improve success.( although the Smithtown exercise proved otherwise-sequential methods do not work as well).
Overall, scientific achievement via on-line simulations, alone, was less effective than those with synchronous instruction. Other methods for a more complete success are provided as:
Providing concurrent information as the experiment progresses
Induction of questions, games, and exercises that correlate with the assignment
Scaffolding educational materials to meet the needs of the study
Simulation does not equate to learning as the student needs initiative with implicit application for better success. All in all, the induction of supportive tools pertaining to the educational materials simulated, can prove a better outcome for the student learner and provide a richer learning environment.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
