Group items tagged

A closer look might provide insight into how this experience will assist in Rachel's development: Positive emotions are created from the established lap reading routine that generates an intimate closeness and feeling of security. Interactive social dialogues between Rachel and her mother build on prior knowledge and provide immediate feedback as they discuss each animal as the story progresses. The language they use to label, compare, explain, and classify creates a supportive context for structuring the processes of thinking and concept formation. Each of the domains of development—linguistic, cognitive, social, and emotional—is affected during Rachel's experience, and all play an important role in her development

As Rachel began to internalize the actions and language of her mother, she began to use these tools to guide and monitor her own processing behavior until she is now able to take over much of the responsibility for reading the book (Dorn, French, & Jones, 1998)

A framework for understanding the interrelated nature of the cognitive, social, emotional, linguistic, and literacy development of children; social interaction; and literature selection in grades K-4 is provided in the appendix. The purpose of the framework is to provide a general guide for teachers, parents, and other caregivers in the appropriate selection of books that takes into consideration the importance of child development.

the quality of interaction is more important than the quantity

e socially and academically integrated in order to provide meaningful learning experiences

“relationships with cohorts”

hat interaction between peers is important to online students and suggests that “the psychological presence of peer students can also bring a positive effect on various aspects of distance learning”

The rubric does allow for that, but there is a strong sense that some of these dialogic purposes are not as highly valued as others, but I value them all as essential components to class community.

One online instructor (Alley 1996) has described this changing pedagogical consciousness as an �instructional epiphany�.� Alley tells of a personal transformation, stimulated by online instruction, marked by two "milestones". First, he had to totally redesign his course to fit and leverage the new learning environment. Second, he had to rethink what he calls his �basic approach�: �As long as I held on to the traditional �sage-on-stage� style of teaching, I would keep reinventing ways for students to be a passive audience� (1996:51).� Similar changes in pedagogical belief and practice have been reported by other faculty who have taught web-based courses (Brown 1998; Jaffee 1997; Cremer 1998) as well as researchers who have interviewed online instructors (Frank 2000).�� There are clearly some �structural constraints� built into the virtual classroom ecology that make it difficult to implement traditional modes of delivery and, in this sense, almost force instructors to entertain active learning strategies. As Frank (2000) discovered in her study of online instructors, "All of the participants saw online learning as empowering for students. The most valuable benefits were the facilitation of active learning, critical thinking, collaboration, confidence, and lifelong learning habits. A common theme was the way in which the teacher is forced to give up the control that one has in a face-to-face environment and re-examine the traditional role of content deliverer".� Just as the physical classroom architecture imposes constraints on, and opportunities for, particular pedagogical practices, so too does the virtual classroom. John Seely Brown (2000) has described the environment of the world-wide-web as a �learning ecology� that is a self-organized evolving collection of cross-pollinating overlapping communities of interest.� Asynchronous web-based courses that include a discussion forum possess many of the same ecological features. All members of the class can receive and broadcast information at any time. This critical communication feature distinguishes the virtual classroom from prior forms of instructional technology.�� While instructors can mediate and guide, they cannot entirely control the flow of communication. Thus, instructor and student roles and relations are less hierarchical and more overlapping and interactive. These greater opportunities for participation can contribute to a greater diversity of opinion and perspective. It is hard work to establish these social dynamics in a physical classroom constrained by a fixed space, a designated time block, and trained inhibitions. The virtual classroom, in contrast, has the potential to establish new patterns of instructor and student interaction and, accordingly, different teaching and learning roles and practices (Girod and Cavanaugh 2001; Becker and Ravitz 1999). ��������� In making comparisons between the physical and virtual classroom, it is important to emphasize a cautionary caveat. The pedagogical ecology, be it a physical classroom or a virtual interface, cannot entirely determine a particular pedagogical practice or learning outcome. The pedagogical ecology offers opportunities and constraints that will shape and influence classroom dynamics and learning outcomes, but much will also depend on the principles informing, and the actual design of, the teaching and learning process (see Chamberlin 2001). The various practices that are employed in both a physical and a virtual classroom indicate the range of possibilities. However, if we believe that, for the purpose of student learning, active student engagement and interaction is preferable to the passive reception of information, we should consider the degree to which this principle is advanced or facilitated by the expanding virtual learning ecology.�

Sociological theories and concepts have an important role to play in analyzing and interpreting these developments. A central sociological proposition is that structural environments influence the social perceptions, roles, and relations of human actors.� As increasing numbers of students and faculty find themselves operating in virtual learning environments, we might also expect to find some changing instructional dynamics. More specifically, there are a number of questions worth exploring. What are the relationships between the technical, the social, and the pedagogical infrastructures?� How has the introduction of new instructional technologies influenced established pedagogical practices? How does the shift from a physical classroom to a virtual learning environment shape and reconfigure the social roles and relations among faculty and students? What consequences will these technologies have for developing pedagogical practices?

have less to do with the proven effectiveness of the particular practice than the desire to appear legitimate or conform to normative expectations.�

perience with SMART Boards running Notebook software, so I convinced the principal to invest in SMART technology."

"We've seen nearly a 10 percent improvement in TAKS pass rates in just two years, as well as an 11 percent increase in math scores on the junior high campus," says Franklin. "These improvements show that the kids are more involved in the learning process. And I believe their increased involvement is directly attributable to the fact that they can interact with the information that is being presented to them on the SMART Boards."

"We've seen nearly a 10 percent improvement in TAKS pass rates in just two years, as well as an 11 percent increase in math scores on the junior high campus," says Franklin. "These improvements show that the kids are more involved in the learning process. And I believe their increased involvement is directly attributable to the fact that they can interact with the information that is being presented to them on the SMART Boards."

hamper classroom relationships

students can easily disengage, looking at other apps (some for school and others surely for entertainment), perusing websites, and checking email

The focus in a technological classroom changes from student-to-student and/or student-to-teacher to a student-computer relationship, with the teacher occasionally breaking into this primary bond.

Interactivity—whether it is with a computer, a professor, or a classmate.

They want it; they crave it.

cond, studen