Group items tagged

Hi Elanur Hoca, thank you for sharing this news with us. I agree to many things written in this news. 1. I agree that students are unhappy in school. Anybody who have teaching experience must have seen that when the last bell rings and the classes end, the students begin running to escape from school. The body never lies. 2. I agree that "non-academic factors" such as resilience, grit and empathy can have a profound impact on young people" and their ability to succeed. 3. I also agree that person's wellbeing, and overall life outcomes and success in life is affected by much more than academic grades. They are affected by their character attributes, and their social and emotional skills.

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."

This change in the system is very major, I agree with you. Once again we as educators are facing implementations without needing any pilot testing or making use of any kind of sound research. I also read that there will be open-ended questions but I am not sure. But if this is the case, we have one other reason to worry about maybe; the quality of these new questions.

I am afraid that there is no other country in which incessant testing is applied more Turkey. Every year, something is changed by the Ministry of Education, no need to mention about the examination system. They change the system without even measuring or analyzing the results or outcomes. Deep modifications need to be implemented to improve the infrastructure of the education system. However, in our "unique" political environment How???

I am afraid I have already become a 'pancake person' :) because, I can access whatever I want with just a search button. I also feel like the author that something is changing in my brain in a negative way, becuase I do not have to force my brain anymore. Sometimes I realize that I have searched the same phone number over and over again then I really get mad at myself why I cannot just keep it in my mind, then again I realize that I do not have to as I have google with me everywhere I go:) And I think that is why computers seem smarter than us. Also, it is stated in the article that if we had all the world's information directly attached to our brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you'd be better off! I have lots of doubts about it. How something built by a human being can be smarter than a human being?

Hocam, I think this guy has an introvert personality. If he doesn't, perhaps he took a course from a teacher who made him feel fed up with pair and group work activities :-)) I have read the comments of other people under the article and I liked the one made by Doug. As Doug stated, Donald Clark compares different perspectives in a linear manner, but these thinkers represent different developmental periods of the theory. So he should have made comparisons considering the development of the theory to be more plausible. For his overall comments at the end of his article, I can say that what he mentions ("Those with good digital literacy, literacy, numeracy and other skills will have the social support, especially at home") is not something peculiar to the results of this theory. We used to have more segragations in the societies when former theories were dominant. So his comment doesn't seem logical to me. He also mentions that some learners like studying alone, which is not supported by this theory. Of course sometimes we need some isolation to think, analyze and synthesize, but this doesn't make us forget about the advantages of peer learning. There is a saying, "two heads are better than one". As we discussed in the classroom, we learn better when we are cognitively engaged and in my opinion, "engagement" requires contradictory or contributory comments made by other members of the society. It doesn't take place without interactions. To sum up, the theory may have some limitations, but I prefer it to the older ones :-)

I like the idea of including different stakeholders in the DBR process. Learning is a complex phenomenon. Context plays a critical role in the DBR on learning. Perhaps, we need to think about ways to build a DBR team.