Musings on the Many Metaphors for Educators…

So what metaphor would you use to describe how you view teaching and learning? This discussion is cliché in many educator circles and can be envisioned in conversations for pre-service teacher candidates in an introductory educational methods course as well as teacher interviews. As a matter of fact I posed this question to my graduate pre-service M.A.T. students this week in my social studies methods course. One particularly enthusiastic student brought up the teacher as a gardener metaphor, which comes up frequently in education. Each metaphor that teachers and teacher candidates come up with reveal an approach, or philosophy, of education. It can provide a snapshot for how an educator will approach teaching and learning. It provides a definition of learning and the role the teacher plays in the learning process. Driscoll (2005) highlights two important aspects of the definition of learning. The first is, “they refer to learning as a persisting change in human performance or performance potential” (Driscoll, 2005, p. 9), which leads to how do students demonstrate a change in performance. The second aspect of learning according to Driscoll (2007) is that, “…a change in performance or performance potential must come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the world” (p. 9).

Regardless of what metaphor educators and researchers use to describe the learning process it is important to understand that the learning process is complex. No metaphor is able to truly encapsulate teaching and learning, after all even researchers and educators are still attempting to understand and measure the learning process. Siemens (2008) highlights Brown’s idea of Educator as a Master Artist, Fisher’s view of Educator as a Network Administrator, Bonk’s description of a Educator as a Concierge, his own understanding of Educator as a Curator (p. 15-17). All of these metaphors are informed by “a common attribute of blending the concept of educator expertise with learner construction” which includes both “instructivist/constructivist” ideas (Siemens, 2008, p. 17). All of these metaphors have inherently theoretical orientations based on current educational philosophies that are connected to the increasingly important role technology is playing in our educational process. These metaphors also lend themselves to a student-centered educational process, particularly Bonk’s Educator as a Concierge and Educator as a Network Administrator. Fisher’s Educator as a Master Artist and Siemens’ Educator as a Curator also highlight the idea of an educator creating and/or selecting displays for the audience, or students.

All of the metaphors are shaped by two important forces in our current educational milieu, technology and student-centered instruction. Are any of these metaphors better than the other? Well, it depends on what your educational philosophy. I like the idea of an educator as a curator by Siemens because I spend a lot of my instructional planning time finding digital resources that are relevant to my instructional unit that introduce and reinforce my essential questions and daily instructional goals. I select, create, display, and revisit important media selections in a certain order to drive instruction so that my students are exposed as many times as possible and in different ways to maximize learning. The students demonstrate knowledge through carefully selected activities that introduce and reinforce the essential questions and daily instructional goals so that they can be assessed. My idea of the learning process based on my current teaching context and my educational philosophy lead me to agree more with Siemens Educator as Curator metaphor. Others may reflect on their current teaching and learning process and agree with another metaphor that Siemens introduced, or create another metaphor that more closely describes their teaching. Is there a right or wrong answer? Of course not, it is merely a difference of educational philosophy. Researchers and theorists will always explore which educational philosophy works better than others, but there will always be different opinions in education. I can say that confidently because in the history of education, educational theory, and educational technology there always has been different opinions. What do you think?

References:
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Wikis in Online/Distance Education Presentation...

Static & Dynamic Learning Technologies Continuum…

There is a range of learning technologies within the areas of communication, collaboration, and content in education. The spectrum includes dynamic, middle, and static technologies. Technologies that are included in these areas are found in the concept map on the previous posting. Both types of technologies are used and needed in education, the important choice from a pedagogical perspective is what type of technology is appropriate for the learning outcomes of the learning activity or series of activities. A balance must be struck between the purpose and uses of the static and dynamic learning technologies and their instructional benefit for what needs to be learned.

Static technology examples for the area of communication include web pages, emails, podcasts, videocasts, screencasts, and other forms of static text. Collaboration in static learning technologies are not interactive and include email and text as examples. Content is disseminated through static learning technologies such as web pages, eBooks, and podcasts or videocasts to name a few. These technologies are used to disseminate information and are not easily adapted towards constructing new knowledge for students but rather are ways to disseminate knowledge. Dynamic learning technologies for the area of communication, collaboration, and content exchange include blogs, wikis, voicethreads, and discussion boards. By design these technology tools are intended to be shared, interacted with, created and co-created. In other words these technologies enable students to use, manipulate, and add to so that individuals can collectively create, share, and construct knowledge. Middle technologies between these two areas include the limited ability to use, remix, or expand in a limited way.

Since the goal of education is for students to construct their own knowledge dynamic technologies provide ways for meaningful interactions of content, collaboration, and communication. However static technologies are necessary to provide a basis for knowledge construction that is guided by and anchored in accepted knowledge. Without this background subjective and potentially useless knowledge could be generated that cannot be used for any industry or learning community. Both ranges in the continuum are necessary and should be considered components in the overall learning process.

References:

Fahy, J. (2008). Characteristics of interactive online learning media, (pp. 143-166). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

McGreal, R., & Elliott, M.(2008). In Anderson, T. (2nd ed.), Technologies of online learning (e-learning), (pp. 167-200). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].

Static vs Dynamic Technologies Concept Map

Final Wikis in Distance Online Education Video Presentation

Click on this link or look above to view this presentation.

http://voicethread.com/share/1760665/

Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools…

New tools and strategies must be used to ensure that the quality of online distance education continually improves and provides for the needs of the learner. The mind map in the previous post provides a visual that demonstrates the tools that can be utilized to engage online learners and maximize the learning that takes place within the online learning environment. Content, communication, and collaboration provide the basic framework for online learning. The tools and how they are used provide the strategies for increasing learning outcomes for students. Asynchronous communication tools are necessary for anyone to participate in online learning. Examples are included in the mind map below but include discussion boards, ideas exchange via blogs and wikis, and taking advantage of the many web 2.0 tools that do not necessitate synchronous communication and collaboration. However it is important to provide the opportunity to interact synchronously through video conferencing with tools such as Skype, texting, and real-time collaboration via GoogleDocs or a similar read-write-web tool that provides chatting and collaborating at the same time. I want to emphasize that the tools for engagement on the mind map are purposely as broad as possible to the actual software that can be used as the tools. For example, Skype is one way to interact and have a video conference live through the webcam, however other tools such as Google’s video chat provide the same type of interaction. The web tools can be more useful than specific applications that meet the needs of the tools.

Durrington, Berryhill, and Swafford (2006) highlight three important strategies in online teaching which include a learning environment that is set up to be supportive and open with clear learning tasks and assessments communicated effectively, asynchronous learning tasks such as discussion boards that are clear and designed to create virtual conversations that are connected with the learning  objectives for the course, and creating a series of learning tasks that are problem-based and can be displayed and communicated within the online classroom environment. Palloff & Pratt (2007) state that, “collaboration and the ability to promote interdependence is a critical element in the formation of an online learning community…it is important that the instructor in an online course pay close attention to ways collaboration can be incorporated and facilitated throughout the course” (p. 183). It is essential that the e-teacher must be technically competent and capable of learning new technologies as well as resilient and adaptive to the new and emerging technology tools in online distance learning (Anderson, 2008).

All of these ideas convey two important things about the online learning environment. One is that despite the context of learning, whether face-to-face synchronously or virtual asynchronously, that the students must be set up to include idea exchange, collaboration, communication, and adequate ways of demonstrating and assessing knowledge that is connected to the learning outcomes of the course. Second, good teaching is necessary in both face-to-face and virtual learning environments but the strategies and learning tasks that make up good teaching must be modified to meet the needs of the learning communities in the two different contexts. Each learning environment must include a different set of teaching and learning tools that meet the needs of the classroom community in its context.

References:

Anderson, T. (2008). In Anderson, T. (2nd ed.), Teaching in an online context, (pp. 343-365). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190−193. 

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (2008, January). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. ITForum.

Distance Education: Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools