Ed Tech 498

Hmmm... what implications does this suggest for us as teachers? What decision-making processes do we see and learn from when it comes to determining what we decide to teach? What role can and/or should students play? How do their visions of what is important to know contrast against those of the teacher?

Teachers play the role of the facilitator, students make their own conncections based on what they feel is important??

Maybe I am just viewing this from an elementary mind, and not that, at this point, I think the role of the teacher can consist of much more (teacher/parent/counselor) but I do think that the role of the teacher in connectivism is just as, if not more, important. Teachers need to model how to build a network, they can still make the learning exciting, they need to be able to give guidance when there are questions and I think most importantly, they help the students be able to see the difference between wanted and unwanted information. And I think what the students bring to the table is their background, their opinions, and their feelings. Everyone views different things as important, but agreeing to disagree on opinions is a strong lesson to learn and I think connectivism can teach that.

Especially when you have to relearn processes and reconnect neurons/pathways for knowledge...very messy and not always from point A to point B!!

Wow! Good question...wing it, or questionable surface knowledge?

Been there, done that. How a person with two MAs ends up in a job researching abstracts is an interesting tale, and I am so glad I was able to stop doing that!

I think this is a main focus of connectivism. Yes, you need the tools to make this happen, but more importantly, the connections made will bring about new information and new points of view, therefore acquiring more knowledge.

What? Learning resides in non-human appliances or do facts? I have a bit of a problem with this. I know about artificial intelligence, but when we talk about learning aren't we talking about human learning? I just have to maintain a difference.

Interesting perspective, never really thought about how knowledge used to be more "long lived" - what we knew to be true would last years, decades, even a lifetime. Now it might change in a week.

That the half-life of knowledge is shrinking is very significant, especially for for those pushing the use of technology in education. Textbooks are becoming quickly outdated, prompting a more easily updated system.

I found that I related most to constructivism. Creating knowledge from experience and knowledge sought from individuals.

I agree, learning by doing

Learning that is stored and manipulated by technology - whose learning? Does this refer to "learning" as a collection of information, group moderated, such as wikipedia?

This is why Context is so important.

while an individuals knowledge grows in a topic or area related to thier job, it may not always mesh with the organizations needs, framework or goals.

Key: know-where - context and a general understanding of information are certainly still important, but we also need to become better researchers.

Love that potential is becoming discussed - just because we don't currently have the knowledge doesn't us out as potential learners. Giving students the ability to find the information is becoming just as important as giving them the information.

Chaos - realizing that knowledge and information can be garnered anywhere. The real goal should be to connect information to create knowledge and context.

Knowledge as on ongoing loop that is created by networking/conversation between individuals, etc.

The power of informal learning is that it can happen anywhere and at anytime. Many times we may not even realizing we are learning, and I believe the lack of pressure to learn in that situation can make the experience more meaningful.

But, informal learning is not a 'sure thing' for all students. Presuming or assuming that all students learn on their own is not true. Especially as it relates to core courses--aka, I don't know how many students pursue informal learning about math, history or science when not 'forced' to in school. For those that DO use informal learning and seek to improve themselves and their wealth of knowledge without direct instruction/orders, it is a great asset in class.

Observable behaviors help teachers design and implement intervention strategies, especially if a student is having difficulty. I think many times teachers try to infer what is going on with students without an observable behavior and their subjectiveness then limits the teacher's view and perspective on the potential issue.

While some of my students are outspoken, and almost speak every step of their thinking, others internalize everything and I have to pry to get any indication of their understanding. Behaviorism could create great insight in some situations, but certainly not in all. Knowing your students and what you need to get through to them is going to be the best bet in any situation.

I think the information age makes this claim less true.  

I agree, Robert, students who are not participating in class but then are active voices on blogs/web based assignments/discussions....this definitely makes this claim less true.

"Observable behavior" is what is key here. Inference can lead us as educators down a bad road and often leads to students being left behind when they can't properly grasp concepts, are too afraid to speak up, and teachers have no way of noticing.

How can connections be made if one cannot use critical thinking? If a person cannot discern fact from opinion, then the connections made are subject to falsehoods.

Won't there always be a "go-to person" who knows where to find what? This sounds like a librarian's position to me. Knowing how to find resources quickly may be the answer than having one person know everything.

Personally, I would rather hear about it from someone who was living it - rather than what it says in a 20 year old textbook.

I think that sometimes this feeling of reluctance can simply come from not being well informed. Perhaps if there was a networking or training session where people could share their experiences or learn about a new technology, they would be more comfortable with it, and more likely to use it.

Good suggestion, Carla, but I wonder how receptive teachers would be to a training session. Are there other options we can brainstorm that might be more persuasive?

You could have the teachers research a topic of interest to them...cooking, rock climbing, chess, knitting, scrapbooking, running, yoga, fishing, etc. When teachers see how reliable certain sites are, they may be more accepting.?

A network definitely can help with such an effort. For example, I often go to yelp.com if I'm interested in finding a restaurant than just doing random, arbitrary Google searches. More directly related to education and research is the book on Personal Learning Networks by Will Richardson & Rob Mancabelli http://www.centerforlearning.org/p-1775-personal-learning-networks.aspx

If training sessions don't work well, perhaps they could work with a "partner" on a project or research a new Web tool to share with the group. I know I did a two-day training session at the end of school (SMART Board) and I know for a fact 4 of the 12 were just there for the money. They will most likely never use this new knowledge in their classroom. Could districts go so far as to tie use of technology/Web tools to a teacher's evaluation? I know my school doesn't do that, but sometimes I think they should!

I like the idea of partnering with another teacher to implement Web 2.0 tools. Two heads are usually better than one. If you were collaborating with someone the pressure of "What happens if I fail?" will be lessened because of the collaboration. Working together and starting small- focus on one technology at a time- will help ease some of those reluctant teachers into the world of technology.

Comment to Lori: when I was in 5th grade we were learning about the different decades and part of our project was to interview someone who had been in WWII and Vietnam. You can read about little blurb here and there in textbook, but listening to live accounts is way more meaningful and entertaining.

I think this is so tru about Web 2.0 tools. Also I think it can be helpful, to keep students motivated. Sometimes, I think all of us, can get frustrated if we have to sift through to find the information that we want. But with the case of Google, we can be specific and direct.

Great analogy. Instead of mindlessly looking for information, we are more able to pinpoint exactly what we need with the help of search engines.

Agreed Casy. Sometimes I get frustrated when searching for info. and not finding what I need. i think I myself need to take a search engine class sometime. Teaching students to search effectively is a skill they will most definitely need in the 21st century workforce. We don't expect people to know every answer but we do expect them to figure out a way to get to the answers.

Being able to find the answers when needed will become more useful that having the knowledge. However, you will still need a certain level of knowledge to know what you are looking for.

This is where I can see the discussion on tagging useful. When things are tagged under certain headings, it would make them easier to find.

This is an interesting point - in the past, experts were people who held a wealth of information and understanding. This, I think, is still true. We can access all of the information on the internet, but it doesn't necessarily mean that we know the background or context needed to truly understand it. In order to be considered an expert, someone should be able to contextualize the things that they find on the internet.

This sounds similar to Sanger's thoughts"...the idea that the instant availability of information online makes the memorization of facts unnecessary or less necessary."

I immediately thought of Sanger's article when I read this too! Sounds very similar!

I agree, Madeleine, anyone can find information from google, but experts are able too apply the knowledge and decipher between the inaccurate and biased data.

Do many of your students go straight to Google during a research or search? As I mentioned in a previous post, we provide a set of research sites for the students to use and if they choose to go elsewhere they must fill out a website evaluation form taking a look at items such as author, date, spelling/grammar etc.

Agreed to all of the above. Student not only have to find information, but they must also decide whether they accept it as truth or not. We need to teach them to be critical thinkers- analyzing information and applying it. Teachers also must branch out in terms of search engines. I know personally, I rely on Google for convenience purposes- it's already on my toolbar so why not use it. I'd be interested in learning about other search engines that might have potential in the educational world.

An expert is still needed to assist learners with their learning, help break down barriers, connect and help solve complex problems or atleast point the learner in a direction for them to solve themselves. I see them as facilitators more than the providers of inforamtion.

Even here, the author uses the word "interpretations." We can never believe that we know every last thing as fact - our society is constantly learning new things and developing new ways to understand the world. In this sense, "Classical" knowledge is outdated - we need to be flexible and open to change.

Great point, but since we are "using elaborate methodolgies to generate findings and interpretations" shouldn't we have "truth" at various times? Classical perspective is still challenged...and changed.

Part of my mind tried really hard to play devils advocate while reading this section. I was thinkng about certain professions where the classical perspective can be valued and perhaps the "right path." I was thinking about the people we rely on heavily and want to be "right" all the time... doctors, dentists, weathermen, etc. However as I debated about each of these titles, the fact is that Madeleine put it nicely, "We can never believe that we know every last thing as fact." Doctors make mistakes, symptoms can mean more than one thing, we go for "second opinion"s all the time! I believe working together to make decisions and construct knowledge is a stronger way of learning.

Good thread here. Another detail I see that's interesting is while Dede's definition or description of Classical includes "evidence-based" as one of its characteristics, this is conspicously absent from his def of Web 2.0 What are people's thoughts on this?

Since Web 2.0 can be generated from literally anyone with access to the internet, it's not ALWAYS evidenced-based. Opinions are formed and can be backed up by other, evidenced-based research yet it doesn't necessarily mean they are correct. It was much harder to get a new idea printed in a book than it is to print it on the internet. This again goes back to the fact that we can't except everything we see, hear, or read about as truth.

I wonder if it is okay for students to come across opinions on topics, just as long as they are researching a variety of them, I think including several different perspectives/opinions is beneficial for research. According to so and so they believe.... On the other hand, this person points out ..... I guess it all depends on the situation!

Evidence definitely has a place in learning, yet we do need to instill in our students that we expect them to question everything they're told. One thing I hate about textbooks is their "voice" is one of an expert. Students who read a textbook believe that it's gospel, and don't dare to generate their own opinions.

The community, which may very well include experts, weighs in on topics - it is likely that the crowd will monitor and weed out any exaggerations or inaccuracies.

Yes, crowd-sourcing can bring benefits in that way, however, at the same time, the "crowd" has to remain wary of its susceptibility towards "group-think" and continue to push itself to remain open to dissenting views.

I agree. I think the key words here are "having unbiased perspectives." I think that everyone has to be open to people's opinions and thoughts on collaborative sites such as these. However, the best part is that there are plenty of people with such a great wealth of knowledge so that they can weed out inaccuracies.

I think that is the key, having diverse perspectives on topics. I am very pleased when students research all different angles on a topic and do not get stuck in one perspective. They search the Web and take a look at multiple sources. I need to do that more myself!

I can definitely see both sides of the coin on this one. On one side, having a group of people regulating one another can certainly lead to validity. On the other, those people need to be careful of keeping an open-mind and exploring all sides of a topic.

This is where introducing a peer-review community of thought is important. Community-created conclusions will hopefully represent most voices, and not just those politically driven or profit-oriented.

Yes, I'm thinkng of the role that social networks played in such crucial events as the political changes in Egypt and during the Katrina disaster in New Orleans where social networks proved more reliable for obtaining updated news, etc.

Case in point, yesterday's Supreme Court decision when CNN incorrectly reported the news and its own reporters were scrambling to read Twitter feeds and going "wait! wait!" and all manner of different interpretations ensued. A rush to report reigned in by collective minds.

Does anyone else in the group not use a textbook? I teach Heath so in my mind not a real subject in some ways, but I love not having a text book. I find myself using various types of ways to get information across and get to pull info from a variety of different sources.

Ashley, I have a textbook but rarely use it, they are never assigned to the students and stay in the class. I basically run my class through a Moodle page with links to resources, discussion forums, online journals, chats, etc. As you mentioned, providing information of various types is a great way to reach all learning styles.

Education should be for life-skills, not just about rote memorization of facts.

I agree with you, and I understand where this article is coming from, but I can't help but question with this specific statement that "MANY students who excel academically do not fare well late in life." Many?? or Some? I'd be interested in some statistics to back this statement up. Also, what/who defines what "well" looks like?

I agree with both of you. I was never a good test taker. I got too nervous and couldn't concentrate and remember all I studied for. However, I'd say I made out just fine in life. Tests need to consider more than just memorization of things we'll later forget. However, I do think that those who study for these test, come out on top with the life skill of preparation. So I would also be interested to know what defines "well".

Same here Stephanie--I'm not a good test taker. I took the SATs three times and each time my score got lower. I refused to take the ACT because I was too scared. I would like to think that even though I did not fair well on those particular tests that I am still a productive citizen that is doing "well". I agree that we need to be teaching life skills to our students, along with facts and figures. I should probably bite my tongue here but sometimes I feel as teachers we can only do so much. Some life skills need to be taught and then reinforced by parents and community members.

I would despute this as well. By what definition are they measuring success? I have read research about "success" of valedictorians later in life. They succeed within the structure of test taking and even how to choose courses but are often not very well-rounded. They are still successful but probably most do not end up at the top of the heap because they are not the risk takers or creative minds. They are the ones thinking always within the box. But is that a lack of success? We read of dropouts that become corporate and tech leaders- the great innovators and risktakers. They are held up as great successes. And we need these people, too, but don't a fair amount of people like that end up in an early grave?

I agree with everyone. we need to teach kids to take what they have learned and apply it- not just to a test. So many students ask, "Will I have to know this for the test?"- Such a sad question. They are only interested in learning something if they will be tested on it and even then after the test is done they don't remember it. Teachers need to encourage more meaningful learning- not just memorization. We also need to be careful of "baby-ing" kids. Sometimes its easier for us to just give them an answer instead of having them find out on their own. We need to encourage risk-taking and critical thinking- skills that most kids these days lack.

Interesting discussion, and I feel much the same as Lauren. We have gone too far with standards and test, and students are merely driven to pass the test. You have to make the topic meaningful to the students, not just mandatory. Not all students will be interested in all topics, but I think if in the early grades, K-2, a love of learning is fostered (rather than a skill of survival, ie pass the test, give the teacher what s/he wants) that will help moving forward. "Sometimes its easier for us to just give them an answer instead of having them find out on their own. " agree totally, but that takes time, and we pressure our teachers to accomplish so much in a short time, there is no lattitude for this.

some of the most successful people I know did not do well in school. Not necessarily because they were stupid - just didnt fit the mold that school puts us into.

This becomes the job of the school to provide more opportunities to equip students with more real-life skill sets that will benefit them later in life. Problem-solving, social interaction, etc..

Haven' students always wondered how what they learn is applicable in life outside of school? I really wondered this during geometry class.

I think that you are more likely to remember something if it is relatable outside of the learning for learning's sake.

Giving students the chance to do their own in-class research on their mobile phones will likely aid them and strengthen class discussion and debate. Also, it probably wouldn't be difficult to monitor those who are abusing the power - if an instructor sees someone on their mobile a lot who is not contributing anything to the conversation, it is likely that they are not using their mobile for class-related things.

I feel the same! Does your school district allow technology devises in the classroom? My district does not, but I can definitely see it strengthening discussion if/when used as a resource.

This is an intersting concept, and I can see it definitely being beneficial. I think it's something that should be explicitly discussed, and monitored. Personally, this couldn't be an all day thing for me... but I could see allowing learners to use personal devices at specific times throughout the day. Also we're coming froms ome different perspectives in age level, here... Currently, we have a no technology devices policy in the classroom. I'm intersted to see where this goes in the next five years. If I remember correctly, Mobile Devices, were on the Horizon Report for up and coming technologies for the classroom!

I agree and I think you make a good point in saying, Jaime, that we are coming from some different perspectives in age level. Obviously, we have no mobile devices at the elementary level, however we do have "clickers" which look and in ways, act like cell phones. The students love using them, and so I can imagine how enthralled high school students would be about getting to use their own cell phone in class.

My school has a no cell phone policy in the classroom. I think that will be changed in the future to more of a teacher preference type rule. As long as they are monitored and use them for educational purposes, I see no problem with students having phones in the classroom.

We tried to do a project where the students could use their phones, unfortunately my room only allowed service to certain providers. Next year we are going BYOD, where it is a good idea, our building is just not ready for it. Our teachers need educated on it first before throwing it out there. Should be interesting.

I agree with mobile tech in the classroom, but I fear that more easily distracted and even focused ones will have a hard time putting their full attention on any one thing.  

This is a problem Robert. With my iPads in the classroom I defintely have some less focused ones 'losing' their iPad for the day because they aren't paying attention or doing what they need to be doing.

While I understand that curriculums are based on multiple learnings, tests, and studies... I have always wondered who these "experts" were, who get to determine what all children should have learned after 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th, or 11th grade?!

Since we have Web 2.0 and the wealth of knowledge it provides, I think it's time for those "experts" to take another look at the standards and see if they are still applicable to todays generation. Do kids still need to know the things kids needed to know ten years ago? I think there has been a huge shift in our culture that education can't ignore. Those is charge need to reevaluate necessary skills and knowledge students need for future success.

I agree, and think it is evident in the face of the changes technology and the resources of the internet a radical change is needed to our educational system. However, change is painfully slow in large organizations, which is a shame becuase we all suffer - children's educations are shortchanged, their ability to create and solve rapidly developing world problems. etc.

I think this is exactly what needs to happen. We can't have a 180 in terms of education. We need to find a smooth way to mesh the two and blend them together first.

We should use a combination of methods of instruction.

Alternative assignments relating to the topics being studied might help. If students were allowed to pick a topic within the realm of what is being studied, that would help be a bridge, instead of everyone writing a paper about Hinduism (for example).

I think it is impossible to have a complete 180...nothing in education every occurs quickly, but the sooner we start meshing the two philosophies, the better chance we have implementing valuable skills for our students.

Perhaps the fact that there is a meshing of course formats (face-to-face and distance) increasing which means there are a meshing of learner types will act as a catalyst to building (and maintaining) this bridge :)

Doesn't bridging the gap between Classical and Web 2.0 mean you actually have to have Web 2.0? I hate to even say this, but what happens when a school district does not have the money for technology? Aren't they being "left behind?" If education is trending towards fully integrated classrooms, how do we as educators cross the bridge without connectivity? Technology upgrades are constant, but federal funding cannot keep up with these changes. Educators in poverty stricken areas of the US cannot mesh knowledge, expertise, or learning without funding and support.

Picking up from previous thread- Dede talks about Web 2.0 knowledge as a combination of facts and other dimensions. My thought is that *facts* are evidence based.

agreed... the facts are proven. But I think opinion and values and beliefs can also provide valid reference to the content. Real life experiences can often be a more valuable reference point to the average person.

I think that is what is great about Web 2.o tools. You have the facts, but the inclusion of opinions, experiences as well. Again, I think a key point is students pull from multiple perspectives so they can get multiple opinions and experiences. I see personal experiences, opinions, and values being a benefit to the researcher.

I have an issue with the example Dede uses to explain the differences between the classical and web 2.0 perspectives. The information found in Encyclopedias is still disputed in many cases, and has envolved greatly over time as technology allows people to gain greater insight. The Britannica has been published several times over, so according to Dede if we examine these volumes we should see no change whatsoever in the information that has been published. The problem with books, not so with Wikipedia, is that they can't be changed once they are printed until a new volume is printed (a very expensive undertaking). The business determines when it's time to print a new volume, and therefore we as learners are expected to believe nothing has changed in that time. My prediction is that in time online encyclopedias will be the way to go because as technology gives us tools with greater capacities we'll go deeper and deeper into topics. Their ability to be updated at any time at a much lower cost then publishing a book will satisify our thirst for knowledge.

The web 2.0 tools allow for sources to be constantly updated. Any time a new theory comes up about a topic, it can be brought up and debated.

A part of me feels like we can attribute this to the perception that a teacher is all knowing and the only source of information. Web 2.0 technologies can challenge this perception because so many perspectives are presented in the cyber world. Online, students are not limited to one textbook or a teacher's word. Exposing students to the online world is a great opportunity for students to explore their views and figure out which argument is best supported.

I was going to comment on this same quote in terms of its relation to the connectivist article, in the way that they describe formal, or in this case classical education. Teachers are certainly no longer the all-knowing beings that they may have been considered in the past when education was a limited commodity. The perspective of the teacher and their experiences is so limited, it seems almost unfair to allow students during their class time to explore the material from several points of view and resources.

I can see the argument that peer-reviewed material undergoes more critical review than perhaps a book published by an expert scholar. With the opportunity to add reviews, comments, and feedback, peer-reviewed sites like Wikipedia has the potential to distribute the most up to date information.

I see active learning as being one of the key successes in a classroom. Students don't learn by listening or being told facts. They need to take an active role in their own learning by exploring, challenging, reflecting, etc

Where I work we have moved away from traditional question and answer tests to behavioral assessments that are conducted via simulations and in live environments. We have also shifted the responsibility of assessment from the trainer to the supervisor of the new hire associate. They assess them on the actual skills and behaviors while they are performing the tasks and provide feedback immediately. This has helped learners connect with their leader earlier in their career and provides the supervisor more information regarding how their new hire associate is performing and helps them both build development plans much earlier.

This approach works for basic facts and figures and may be the most appealing to the hard sciences and certain maths where these facts are steadfast.

The social relevance of  education is incredibly important to consider in context of how students learn.

I wonder how different this part would be if we did this at the elementary level?

I was thinking the same thing as I read how easy it was/is for the teacher. I think it would be easier than I'm fearing:-)

I, too, wonder how this would work at the elementary level. It's so wonderful that these children have had a say in their learning.

I think that's a huge part of this as well... technology isn't going away, in fact, I can imagine how much it will grow in the coming years. We teach our students everything from manners, math facts, to world wars. Why not teach them these things through the technology they are going to be surrounded with outside of school?

I like this statement.  But I agree enough knowledge to drown is already at our finger tips.  The real push needs to be in processing it, internalizing it (and knowing what to internalize) and to predict a certain pursuit's future value in terms of employment and livelihood.

I brought up this point with my students in class the other day. Do we really need to learn information if we have it readily available on our smart phones through google? My argument is yes, because we are not merely fact machines...that is what google is for. We take that information, process it, integrate new information, and do something meaningful with it.

I can see this ringing true... it's not what you know, but if you're able to access information.

Which is a relief. One major fear I have is how the social skills you learn in school will not be replaced by technology.

I can't wait to use some "new" to me Web 2.0 tools this coming year to make my classroom walls thiner!

What new web 2.0 tools are you considering and what do you think has been successful for your college courses? I am currently designing my summer web course and am trying to incorporate some of these tools without overwhelming the student or using the technology just because it is cool.

This make me wish I could incorporate more. There must be a way to add new tech stuff to cookie cutter classes. I need to think on this. It would have to be an optional assignment.

I struggle to implement Web 2.0 tools because our classroom laptops (which we share with two other classrooms) are seven years old and take forever to boot up (and their battery life is nonexistent). In order to change my classroom to one where students can develop their own PLNs, I'm going to need better hardware...

Since many classrooms are not outfitted with current technology, using Web 2.0 is difficult (@Dee), but if educators were made aware of the technology grants available, we would definitely use more in Web 2.0 our classrooms. Grant writing is very difficult - unless you are trained - and it takes considerable time (which teachers lack). So, why hasn't someone developed a website geared to technology grants in the classroom? I would do it if someone would just point me in the right direction! "Thin walls" made easier by current technology would make everyone happier!

The ability to find like minded people to talk with is powerful - it can possibly dilute some social issues as students find others to connect wit

Connecting to like-minded people is powerful, although it is also important to expand one's horizons and experience different points of view.

Is this really true given the role state accreditation and assessment play, or is Richardson viewing control of learning from another perspective?