Group items tagged

learners in employment bring a different set of needs, strategies and motivations to the learning process.

frequently geographically removed from the learning resources, information sources, learner peers and Tutors compared to their on-campus peers

One of the strengths of gamification is that it provides visible milestones of the student’s mastery of content in real time (when it is well designed). Too often in an instructional setting, the learner doesn’t know whether or not he or she really understands or can apply the knowledge they are learning. There is often no visible sign of mastery of the content or application of the content.

Gamification should orient the learner to where they are in the instructional process, where they are going, and how much further they have to go until the end. The concept is that the learner is able to “see” progress. The progress might be in the form of a character moving up a mountain or an image of how close the learner is to the next level (Kapp, 2013).

Gamification uses criterion and mastery to advance the learner from one element of the instruction to the next.

Pedagogically and research-based intelligent adaptive learning technology accesses and stays in the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) for each learner. That means it provides the right next lesson at the right level of difficulty at the right time. When work is easy, learners can do the work on their own without any help. It’s in their "comfort zone." If all the work a learner is asked to do is always in the comfort zone, no real learning will take place and the learner will eventually lose interest. Conversely, when the work is too hard, the learner becomes frustrated and will likely give up. The area between the comfort zone and the frustration zone is the one where true learning will take place – the optimal learning zone. It’s the area where a learner will need some help or will need to work hard to understand a concept or complete a task. By keeping the challenge appropriate, the learner is guided to be a mathematical ‘doer’ — someone who thinks and strategizes in ways they can apply in school and in their real life experience. This is optimal teaching and optimal learning.

The following assumptions underlie Knowles' (1984) andragogical model: o Adults tend to be self-directing. o Adults have a rich reservoir of experience that can serve as a resource for learning. o Since adults' readiness to learn is frequently affected by their need to know or do something, they tend to have a life-, task-, or problem-centered orientation to learning as contrasted to a subject-matter orientation. o Adults are generally motivated to learn due to internal or intrinsic factors as opposed to external or extrinsic forces.

Knowles has gradually modified his position regarding the contrast between how preadults learn (pedagogy) and how adults learn (andragogy). According to Feuer and Geber (1988), "[w]hat he once envisioned as unique characteristics of adult learners, he now sees as innate tendencies of all human beings, tendencies that emerge as people mature" (p. 33). Nevertheless, the andragogical model has strongly influenced the adult education field, with one result being the assumption teaching adults should differ from teaching children and adolescents.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR PRACTICE Is teaching adults different? Based on the literature discussed here, the answer is both yes and no. Although teachers perceive adults as being different, these perceptions do not automatically translate into differences in approaches to teaching. Perhaps a better way to frame the question is to ask "Should teaching adults be different?" According to Darkenwald and Beder (1982), "the real issue is not whether learner-centered methods are universally applied by teachers of adults, but rather for what purposes and under what conditions such methods, and others are most appropriate and effective and in fact used by teachers" (p. 153). Gorham (1985), in citing studies that identified interaction patterns of "master" preadult teachers as being less directive and more student-centered than those of "average" preadult teachers, suggests that "the most cogent prescription might be to define responsive teaching techniques as the approved practice for educators at all levels..." (p. 207). Based on these observations, some considerations for practice emerge. 1. Determine the purpose of the teaching-learning situation. The andragogical or learner-centered approach is not appropriate in all adult education settings (Feuer and Geber 1988). The decision about which approach to use is contextual and is based upon such things as the goals of the learners, the material to be covered, and so forth. 2. Provide opportunities for teachers to practice learner-centered methods. Gorham (1984) suggests training teachers in techniques especially suitable for adult students, such as small-group discussion methods, effective use of nontraditional room arrangements, and so forth. 3. Select teachers on the basis of their potential to provide learner-centered instructional settings. Gorham's (1984, 1985) study identified some characteristics of teachers who seemed to be more flexible and responsive in adult settings. However, she also suggests that more research is needed.