Group items tagged

Investing heavily in school computers and classroom technology does not improve pupils' performance, says a global study from the OECD. The think tank says frequent use of computers in schools is more likely to be associated with lower results. The OECD's education director Andreas Schleicher says school technology had raised "too many false hopes". These results worth to be disscussed. Shall we go back to traditional classrooms or continue with technology? If so, how should we use it in the classroom?

It is an important an overwhelming issue about how we integrate technology into education. A well-balanced implementation is required for successful instruction between the use of technology and traditional methods like paper-pencil activities (Hitt, 2011). We should not force technology and traditional instruments like paper-pencil and blackboards fight against themselves. We may play the role of negotiator between the technology and traditional methods.

Perhaps, we need to focus more on the pedagogy rather than the technology.

Research finding on Flipped Classrooms. Connected to some of the reading reflections this week on technology.

This classes can have no effect on students learning, in a short term. For me, a study should measure the long term effect of the flipped classroom. This point can be missed. there is need for not only summative but also confirmative evaluation.

As a language teacher, I've felt really interested in such a change in the instructional process. I always need more time for activities and hands-on experiences; however, I fail to have. I think if the initial preparations are well-organized and students are provided with effective support, flipped classrooms idea may work better than the traditional classes. Therefore, I disagree with the researchers who have found no significant difference in learning. One research may not set a good example for a generalization.

The video explains the necessity of transition of traditional learning classroom into 21st century learning space and clarifies the concepts of flipped classroom and blended classroom. And the importance of application of design-based research on the creation of blended learning classroom is underlined as well.

TeachLive of the University of Central Florida is a virtual platform that the teachers can test out their classroom management skills before going up on the "big stage". What it basically does is to place a teacher-in-training in a virtual classroom populated by computer-generated students. A Skype conference call and a Microsoft Kinect motion sensor power the high-tech pantomiming behind the platform. It's currently being used at more than 80 campuses across the U.S. to train some of the next generation of educators, and it appears to be working.

Very interesting. I was thinking for a similar program for training clinical psychologists. Looks like it'll be a thing in the coming years.

This is a very useful platform, I think. Pre-service teachers are facing some problems at classroom management. I always think it is absurd to give classroom management lesson at theoretical and that is the best way to teach teacher candidated.

By this classroom, students work and learn naturally by communicating with each other and with the teacher actively in real time. Interactive tablets, computers and the board provide students work with groups using technology, while natural learning happens.

summerize where the technology will be in 10 years in schools. But what can we say about our schools? Even people are paying big amount of money for private schools, they still not have such a technology in their class. Technology getting cheaper and cheaper everyday but still I wonder how many years we need to wait to see these kind of technlogies in our school?

This is great example to CSCL but when I thought about Kutay's question according to our country; my answer get upset me :/ Because while we cannot use the smartboards at our clasroom, that kind of usage is just a dream :/

They say "No one else does what we do" while mentioning their interdisciplinary approach. They say that "The learning sciences field emerged more than two decades ago after researchers found that what worked in a laboratory simply did not hold up with real children, teachers, classrooms and workplaces. They saw that learning technologies, which held great promise for solving education's problems, were not being transferred to classrooms and schools. Cognitive scientists, educational and instructional psychologists, and computer scientists worked together to put their ideas and knowledge to use to improve the learning outcomes for a diverse group." The institute basically do two things: 1 - They identify the critical challenges in education, literacy, mathematics, science and the social sciences. 2- They work to find solutions. Their main aim is to create learning systems for 21st century classrooms thanks to interdisciplinary research in teaching and learning. They believe that learning is a complex process and so they get benefit from different disciplines (e.g. anthropology, computer science, education, linguistics, psychology and sociology) to share knowledge and best practices on education. At their another webpage, they define learning science as a science which "focuses on how to create new, improved and equitable learning environments for 21st century learners.". In order accomplish this, they focus on four questions: 1- How do people learn? 2- What do we want them to know and be able to do? 3- How can we design learning environments that help them learn? 4- How can we monitor what they are learning? They offer a Ph.D. program to raise future learning scientists.

This could be addition to Elanur's "All in the mind?" post. There is often a big divide between what happens in the laboratory and the way laboratory findings are practically applied. The relationship between neuroscience research and education is no exception. While there are numerous educational products that claim to be based on neuroscience research (often quite dubiously so), the real impact of brain-based research on education has been much more subtle.

Although it is a kind of advertisement, I like this smart technology products and the idea of smart classroom. Small groups can be engaged very easily for collaborative activities and they can touch the multi touch screen at the same time. Also, teacher can connect it to smart table with a software.

I think it is basic but very effective application. Especially it is fun and when thinking the usage of it is for children, it is a great advantage.

I've watched the video twice and in the end I've felt some concerns about the results of the studies. In the "how people learn" part, researchers were testing the storage and connection system of the brain through some high-tech tools. However, does neuropsychology provide enough evidence on the functioning of the brains? Can we generalize the results to all people from all cultures? I am not the one who is against neuropsychology, but for me one discipline may not give an appropriate answer to such a deep question. My second concern is about the integration of computer programs into the curriculum as a major learning tool. We see a program where "Betty" is speaking and giving feedback on the video. The program seems user friendly, but what about the negative aspects and limitations of the integration of technology into learning? Ok, I agree that we have to adapt to the rapid technological changes in the society. However, is technology the key to all learning processes? Plus, the program is designed on the mapping of the concepts. Does concept mapping make a curriculum compelling all the time? I am not sure about all characteristics of the program, but if it hasn't been designed in a challenging style and if all students come up with the same products, then how will they develop their knowledge and reasoning abilities? I couldn't find an answer to that. As for the part "effective teaching", I am in the same opinion with the researchers that there should be a connection between the real world and the subject taught. Moreover, I think the integration of the disciplines is difficult but a very good way of giving meaning to life. Besides, in the video we see teachers as a guide, as a facilitator and there is no doubt that providing individual support to the students helps students feel more involved.

Firstly, even if it is designed by utilizing modern technology and different understanding, which makes it a more developed and complicated one, the program used in the video reminded me the teaching machines of old times. It gives the priority to the cognitive aspect of learning. This seems to be a one-dimensional approach which underestimates the social aspect of learning. I think the value of classroom interaction for effective learning cannot be replaced by any kind of computer programs. Research on brain is really important and it provides very useful insights for learning and instructional activities. However, it should be supported by the findings of research by social psychologists as well. The very same individual may perform at varying levels when he is taught with the same methods in different environments. I personally experienced many times that even the absence of one individual in my classes affected the teaching an learning processes in a negative or positive way depending upon the classroom dinamics.

I am interested in social learning theory and this famous experiment can let us discuss this alternate view on learning in the classroom. Is it influential after 50 years?

Yes actually following this experiment, we know that it has been influential in education. But still today, it provides us with alternate views for our classrooms.

Canan, I think social learning theory will be alive until societies will die..:) Main concern of the theory is related to people who is living in the society. However we could not mention the social learning in online learning or distance education settings which is without interaction between learns and instruction. Interaction at least observation of someone leads revealing social learning in every settings.

Here is an interesting example how learning is practiced in social media. If you want to find out more about the theoretical background, google "Professor Sreenivasan".

Some of social media samples can be used during some spesific classes such as History, English, Biology and likewise. But as a Maths teacher, I do not believe that I can use it as a tool to teach a subject. However, I definately aggree that it is obviously a great thing to exchange new ideas, to make brain storms, to create a discussion platform and broaden ideas according to several perspectives.

I liked the idea of integrating social media into instruction. But the teacher or instructor should be extra careful and strategic as it may be risky. Such devices or technology are mostly to capture the attention of the students or to keep students engaged in the lesson. I still think that the magic is in the hands of the teacher to keep the students attention and ensure effective learning. It may be too much technological to use facebook or tweeter in each lesson, which constitutes a balance issue. The students need to be close to the books, pencils and notebooks, papers etc. The dose of social media should be arranged carefully and strategically.

this includes both infographic and definitions for each ways how high schools changed by neurescience. I think it is very clear to understand the effect of neurescience.

Neuroscience integrated learning is certainly a way for staying off memorization based learning.

An online platform that can be used for collaborative learning.

That may be a drawback for the teachers teaching different courses but time allocated for lessons are not enough to engage students in discussions and have every student voice their ideas. This is just an example. Teachers can use any other online platform to do this.

This can be used in the online classes. I taught several online and blended courses before. One missing element was the audio-visual cues in online discussions. I would be more inclined to use the tools that allow muli-modal interaction in an online platform.

The website describes how Professor Paul Harris advises the interactive learning company Mindshapes on incorporating educational principles into the development of websites and apps for young children.

I think games always work and the company seems really successful at locating the points children may find interesting and enjoyable. After reading your post, I watched a video at youtube, Hickory-Dickory Dock and it was very enjoyable. It teaches not only vocabulary but also how to tell time. It seems a really effective tool. Like the company, I also think that students should be exposed to the changes in the technology. There is always a world outside the classroom and they should keep themselves up-to-date. And our job is to provide them with such opportunities.

Actually your point is really important, changes in the technology should be followed and used as a tool in the classroom, the tools that are significant in terms educational value for sure. Or the other end would include only games on stealing or killing as mentioned. I have checked out Hickory-Dickory Dock now and it seems effective to me as well. The website "mindshapes.com", provides us with detailed information on the games.

the page briefly and clearly defines what situated learning is, and shows how to create authentic learning contexts by using digital media. There are very short videos showing situated learning genres and some handouts which can be helpful in the class.

While I was reading about interactive case scenarios, I remembered some of my friends playing a game on the Internet called "fantasy role play". I am sure most of us have already heard about it because it is very popular among METU students. Actually the major aim of the game is to have some fun, but it can also be organized as a learning tool.

Thanks for sharing the examples. I already started thinking about how to integrate these into teacher training programs.

For our motivation discussion next week. 

Hi Evrim Hocam; Thanks for sharing this video. I lwatched and istened to it with great curiosity :) Hi Selçuk; I agree with you to some extent. If the point is having students memorize something, it is useful. Yet, if the point is related to deep understanding, it is not very beneficial.

Yes, I agree repetition and passive demonstration may not have as much impact as active exploration. I recommend using these approaches for factual learning or things that require recall. But, for deep learning, other approaches such as problem based learning offer much better results.

This is an online course for educators who want to understand how their students learn by helping them connect brain research into classroom practice. This course sheds light on some current issues related to neuroscience. I recommend you have a look at it :)

Dear Seda, I like this website too much, thank you :)

Its a whole course. Valuable resource for teachers. Similar examples, particularly in Turkey, can bridge the gap between neuroscience findings with the teaching practice.