Group items tagged

Years ago a seminar that I attended called "brain-based learning" discussed about similar topic. It was the first time that I had learned about "when learning starts". And this video reminds me of the seminar and it is like adventures of a fetus very open to learning. It is really interesting that a fetus can understand each and every language besides its native one. And as you mentioned this video shows how much we learn in womb, which means learning starts with a fetus in womb and goes till the end of life.

Yes, it really is interesting and hard to understand for me as well. There are various factors involved in our learning process for sure, but frankly I did not imagine the time before birth. "brain-based learning" sounds like an efficient keyword to achieve new knowledge on this topic.

It is really interesting to see that fetuses behave like the photocopies of their mothers. They can nearly comrehend everthing during their life in their mothers' belly. I think this video implies many ideas for the improvement of future generations and of course warnings and precautions for the pregnant women.

This is an absolutely amazing and inspiring video. After watching video, I strongly believed that barriers we have to overcome have emotional bases instead intellectual ones. Maybe if I follow 4 steps properly and focus on ı can even play guitar. In fact, it seems to me devotion and removing practise barriers are the keys to success and manageable, then why not give a try.

I liked the song in the video very much and the graphics showing the relationship between the time and skill or how we are good and the practice. However, I am not sure that 20 hour is applicable to everything to be learned. In the four steps, we can relate self-correction part to self-coaching as mentioned in the readings.

The four steps mentioned in the video have really good implications for the learners. Self correction and removing the barriers are especially important to learn anything new. However,I agree with Burcu, 20 hours of practice is not enough to acquire some kind of skills. Can anybody learn a foreign language in 20 hours? Kaufman reminded the fact that early stage of skill improvement is very fast but being an expert takes long time and effort. It is a very common phenomenon we come across in language classes. After students become intermediate or upper intermediate, they have difficulties to improve in English to be advanced learners. Expertise requires patience, motivation and continuous hard work. Students need to be patient and practice more but under the stress of proficiency exam they feel hopeless. Maybe, teachers should inform them about the stages of skill acquisition so that learners will know that what they experience is just a part of the skill acquisition process.

I deeply believe the power of motivation to learn and classroom technology can be used to enhance students' motivation in learning of the specific content. Still, it is open to debate effective use of technology in classrooms, especially in our country. To deal with this inefficiency of classroom technology, we need to focus on teachers' technology literacy and try to develop this literacy.

Hi Özlem Hoca, BBC news you shared with us is very advisable to our friends. (1) I agree that computers may have the possibility to be distractors for learning and they may be abused by some students. Students may prefer to use computers for activities other than for school activities. When I was an intern teacher, I wanted to show how a literature search is performed to my 20, 9th grade "Project" (noncredit course) students in 2006, I ended up running from one student to another because as I leave him/her with his/her search, s/he began to sign in facebook and their emails. (2) I also agree that plagiarism may occur in homeworks due to internet resources. (3) Another interesting opinion in this news is that "We're training the students to use technology which hasn't yet been invented." We are training the students to the future that is not defined, not yet clear.

I think integrating technology in classrooms is inevitable as computers have been being used in lots of areas in the world and it is a little bit optimistic to assume that education will escape from this "invasion". Today's students live with technology and indeed, technology can enhance the representation of a topic, communication among learners, eliminate time and space limitations in reaching information, etc. The article says that "frequent" use of computers in schools is more likely to be associated with lower results. Instead of frequent use, one should know how one can healthily get benefit from computers, when to use it, how to use it, when not to use it, etc. Those questions are still major questions in modern educational science research. Findings from such research can enhance the positive impact of technology in classrooms.

Having read this week's reading assignment, a part of which focuses on this particular result, I felt the need to comment on your share Özlem hocam. It is mentioned in Chapter 1: Introduction that "in the 1980s, cognitive scientists like Roger Schank and Seymour Papert made claims that computers would transform the schools and learning. This was a rather radical claim and it helped form a strong consensus among parents, bussiness community, politicians that getting computers into schools was a must. During 1990s, installing computers and the Internet in schools was a major trend. By 2003, 95% of all the schools in the US had their computers and were connected to the Internet. However, the impact of this huge investment was highly disappointing. Studies had shown computer use was not correlated with improved student performance. When the reserachers began to study to find the reason, they found out that the computer use in schools was not based on learning sciences; instead, they were being used as an extension of instructional classroom. By this I mean, bringing technology to the classrooms was not enough without changing the structure of instruction. Educational software has been based on instructionist theories, with the computer performing roles that are traditionally performed by the teacher. Teachers and students were not aware of how to use those computers efficiently. Students read the texts on the computers instead of reading them on books.Learning scientists continue to emphasize the powerful role that computers can play in transforming all learning. But they reject instructionalism and behaviorism. Instead, they present a new vision of computers in schools. They suggest that computer should take on a more facilitating role, helping learners have the kind of experiences that lead to deep learning."

I liked this source too much. As the role of the teacher: "The instructor's role moves from providing and structuring the information and knowledge through lectures and presentations to modeling, coaching, and scaffolding learners as they use information and create knowledge to solve contextual real-life problems". I ask myself: To what extent, I create such authentic environments in my classes.

That is such an inevitable and reasonable concern; the extent we imply authentic environments in our classrooms. Sometimes it is for the sake of applying without including the essential elements of authentic learning. Time concerns or motivation and knowledge levels of teachers might be some issues related.

Male and female brains are radically different? Though there may be subtle differences between male and female brains, there is absolutely no significant evidence to suggest that the genders learn or should be taught differently. This myth might stem from a misinterpretation of books such as The Essential Difference: Men, Women, and the Extreme Male Brain, which focused largely on patients with autism.

Here is a new reserach about differences of male and female brains. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25198063#FBM315349 But I think we need more of them to generalize and decide,since the brain is the most complex organ.

Excellent!!! There are so many myths about education and learning teachers, parents, and children just believe without further inquiry. Take mathfobia for instance. Many girls at very early ages are trained to believe that that cannot do math. Their whole education and career are shaped accordingly. These beliefs and misconceptions are really dangerous, and I have to admit that teachers and professors held many of these myths and educate accordingly.

I am really disappointed now :( I have been deceived by those myths :( I was very sure about some people are left-brained and some are right-brained or the ages 0-3 are more important than any other age for learning. It is quite interesting that I still do not want to believe that they are wrong :)

Thank you for this source, there are some like Afranur that disappointed me:) I believe that people taking these myths and carrying them all along can be related with a crucial element of our education system: not emphasizing making critiques and reflections. Fortunately critical literacy is gaining importance, I hope its effects will be seen in our education system as well.

Now I understand why I felt so incomplete while learning those MYTHS in training sessions :-) As a listener, I always questioned my brain's capacity and thought that only the genius can use their brain's full potential...:-((