Group items tagged

Is adult education Is learner centered Is transformative learning Needs to address motivation Needs to address technology learning

Theories related to Adult Learning. They are Action Learning, Experiential Learning, Self-Directed Learning, and Project-Based Learning

"Action learning is defined as an approach to working with, and developing people, which uses work on a real project or problem as the way to learn. Participants work in small groups or teams to take action to solve their project or problem, and learn how to learn from that action. A learning coach works with the group in order to help them learn how to balance their work, with the learning from that work (O'Neil, 2000, p.44)."

Advantages/Strengths: Process used in forming groups Balanced and diverse groups enhance the learning process and allow significant contributions to the learning community Utilization of group dynamics Disadvantages/Weaknesses: Struggle constantly with the balance between accomplishing their task and learning from it Difficult to ensure consistency across groups and across sessions of any program Challenge of group dynamics

"Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Involve me, and I will understand." Confucius, circa 450 BC

Experiential learning is a learning theory that is learner-centered and operates on the premise that individuals learn best by experience. A good way to describe this theory is "learning by doing". Experiential learning thus has the learner directly involved with the material being studied instead of just thinking and talking about that material.

Experiential learning theory builds on experience. This is especially important in adult learning because simply by living, adults bring a wealth of experience to every learning situtation they face. Experiential learning theory is a holistic learning approach Experiential learning theory is most effective when the learning has intrinsic motivation which is a common characteristic in adult learning

In Project Based Learning, students work in groups to solve challenging problems that are authentic and often interdisciplinary. Learners decide how to approach a problem and what activities to pursue.

Throughout this process, the teacher's role is to guide and advise, rather than to direct and manage student work.

It is defined as the process in which individuals take on the responsibility for their own learning process by diagnosing their personal learning needs, setting goals, identifying resources, implementing strategies and evaluating the outcomes.

goals, the process, and the learner

Advantages/Strengths: Integrated with daily routines Triggered by an internal or external motivation An inductive process of reflection and action Linked to learning of others

The need for affection is also present in a virtual discussion forum. This need is characterized by trust, self-disclosure and willingness to reveal experiences, thoughts and interpretations.

challenging deeply held beliefs

These "getting-to-know-you" scenarios are as important as course content in reaching the goal of a collaborative community of learners. The instructor needs to be sensitive to this need and find a balance within the discourse.

If they are left dangling for days on end, they lose a feeling of connection and begin to feel lost in Cyberspace.

Figure 1: The Networked Teacher (Couros, 2008)

ouros (2008) developed a model of the networked teacher that represents an educator's professional personal learning environment (PLE). A teacher is better equipped to facilitate networked learning if he or she has experienced the construction of such a model first hand. The significant connections in Couros' view of the network include colleagues, popular media, print and digital resources, the local community, blogs, wikis, video conferencing, chat/IRC, social networking services, online communities, social bookmarking, digital photo sharing, and content development communities (Couros, 2008).

Networked teacher model

Developing a model of the networked student The Networked Student Model adapts Couros' vision for teacher professional development in a format that is applicable to the K-12 student. It includes four primary categories, each with many components evident in the networked teacher version (Figure 2).

Figure 2: The Networked Student

The networked student follows a constructivist approach to learning. He or she constructs knowledge based on experiences and social interactions (Jonassen et al., 2003). Constructivism encourages "greater participation by students in their appropriation of scholarly knowledge" (Larochelle et al., 1998).

Technology supports this appropriation as a collection of tools that promote knowledge construction, an information vehicle for exploring knowledge, an active learning tool, a social medium to promote conversing, and an intellectual partner to facilitate reflection (Jonassen et al., 2003)

In a traditional classroom setting, the teacher has primary control over the content. He or she selects or designs the curriculum. Networked learning gives students the ability and the control to connect with subject matter experts in virtually any field.

That connection expands to include access to resources and creative artifacts. Computers and mobile devices continue to broaden access to all types of information and learning sources. As quickly as content becomes available, web applications are released to assist in the management of that content

The networked student constructs a personal learning environment one node at a time. Once these connections are formed, they must be revisited and built upon to facilitate further learning. The personal learning environment lives beyond time spent in a classroom

With so much information to manage, it is increasingly difficult to stay abreast of changes in a given field, much less track implications arising from related fields. Really Simple Syndication (RSS) allows learners to subscribe to changing content and makes tracking changes easier.

Ultimately, meaningful learning occurs with knowledge construction, not reproduction; conversation, not reception; articulation, not repetition; collaboration, not competition; and reflection, not prescription (Jonassen et al., 2003).

Construction of a personal learning environment does not necessarily facilitate comprehension or deep understanding. Learning potential exists in what the student does with the compilation of content and how it is synthesised. The networked student model is one of inquiry, or the process of "exploring problems, asking questions, making discoveries, achieving new understanding and fulfilling personal curiosity" (National Science Foundation, as quoted by Chang & Wang, 2009, p. 169).

Principles of connectivism equate to fundamentals of learning in a networked world. The design of the teacher-facilitated, student-created personal learning environment in this study adheres to constructivist and connectivist principles with the goal of developing a networked student who will take more responsibility for his or her learning while navigating an increasingly complex content base.

Nine out of 15 students indicated that time management was the most difficult aspect of the course. Yet, of the fifteen students participating in the project, thirteen were able to manage weekly assignments per the schedule. Two students fell behind and expressed frustration at the amount of work required to catch up. Teacher intervention was required to facilitate their successful completion of the course. They were given a daily list of tasks designed to scaffold the time management aspects of the project. Time management issues were less associated with construction of the personal learning environment and more concerned with the blended format of the delivery. It was an adjustment for students to manage work outside of class even though they enjoyed the freedom of attending a formal class meeting only 3 out of 5 days a week.

Achieving the delicate balance between teacher control and student autonomy is an ongoing challenge when facilitating student use of new technologies for self-regulated learning (McLoughlin & Lee, 2010). Motivation, self direction, and technical aptitude are key considerations for implementing a networked student design. The students constructing personal learning environments in this test case were successful in the contemporary issues course.

spite of the challenges highlighted above, the Networked Student Model offers a design and framework through which teachers can explore a student-centered, 21st century approach to learning. It further provides a foundation for constructing a personal learning environment with potential to expand as new learning avenues emerge. The student is challenged to synthesise diverse and extensive digital materials, connect to others interacting in respectful and meaningful ways, self-regulate an active approach to learning, and develop an option for life long learning that applies to virtually any curricular area. Once a student has learned how to construct a personal learning environment, he or she is left with a model of learning that extends beyond the classroom walls, one in which the learner assumes full control. Regardless of teacher control, the students' success will depend on how well they have been prepared in the processes that support learning in an ever changing, increasingly networked world.

So what I am trying to say is that using technology would be my way as an instructor to take risk