Skip to main content

Home/ Networked and Global Learning/ Group items tagged practice

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
thaleia66

Learning by Design: TPACK in Action - EdITLib Digital Library - 0 views

www.editlib.org/37022

shared by thaleia66 on 03 Nov 15 - No Cached
  • To help teachers develop TPACK, Learning by Design (LBD) is one promising instructional model for creating such a learning environment, addressing the situated nature and complex interplay of technology, pedagogy and content.
  • thaleia66 on 03 Nov 15
     
    "One criticism of skill-focused technology training, a common practice in teacher preparation, is that these experiences develop teachers' technological knowledge and skills, but fail to challenge their underlying beliefs about teaching and learning, which are more fundamental barriers to technology integration (Ertmer 1999). This criticism stems from the argument that technology knowledge and skills alone are insufficient for teachers to utilize technology and initiate educational change."
djplaner

The reusability paradox - WTF? | Damo's World - 4 views

damos.world/...the-reusability-paradox-wtf

example

shared by djplaner on 17 Aug 16 - No Cached
ollie1 liked it
  • Learners construct new knowledge, upon their own existing knowledge.  This is very individualised, and based on each learner’s past experiences, and ways of thinking.
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      From a NGL perspective, I'd say that what people know is a network of connections - both internally in their brain and with the tools and artifacts they use. To learn is to make a new connection with that existing network. It's easier to make that connection when what you are learning is closer to where you are. The more it has in common with you.
  • Learning designers have some tricks to help deal with such diversity, such as researching your cohort, conducting a needs analysis, and ultimately categorising learners and focusing on the majority.
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      A major flaw in this approach is that it assumes that people fall into these categories. You are this type of person, you have this learning style which ignores the true variety of people. By spending a lot of time categorising you feel like you're trying to understand complexity, but never do. The book "The End of Average" touches on some of the problems with this. This type of approach doesn't work if you see the world as "complex, dynamic, and consists of interdependent assemblages of diverse actors (human and not) connected via complex networks"
  • three approaches
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      Damien misses two additional possibilities here - Personalised learning - the use of Artifical Intelligence so that the unit of study is smart enough to respond to the individual student. But the problem with this approach is that it can generally only do this within a pre-defined body of knowledge. It doesn't work well with motivation and other forms of context - Personal learning - you put the agency back into the learner and allow them to be in charge of their progress through. The issue with this is that it assumes that the learner has the skill, knowlege and motivation to do this. It is also not a model that fits well with standard educational institutions. This links to the dual-layer pathways design aproach - http://www.edugeekjournal.com/2016/06/14/evolution-of-the-dual-layercustomizable-pathways-design/ And perhaps choral explanations and federation.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • meaningful for everyone
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      Or another option, help each learner make it individual to them.
  • These technologies become so complicated to use, that people simply don’t use them.
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      While I agree with this trend, I wonder whether there is anything that can be done about it. e.g. I think part of the problem here is the opaque nature of digital technology - https://davidtjones.wordpress.com/2016/06/28/the-nature-of-digital-technology-part-2/ Perhaps the problem with the workshop activity is that it's model is not readily apparent to the people who use it. The abstraction that has been made isn't communicated to the people using it, so they have to go through trial and error and generally fail. -- The Ben-Ari and Yeshno (2006) quote on the above link is good for this.
  • “the system does this, but I want to do that.”
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      I really like Kay & Goldberg's (1977) - that's right 1977 - 40 years - quote any attempt to specifically anticipate their needs in the design of the Dynabook would end in a disastrous feature-laden hodgepodge which would not be really suitable for anyone Reference on this page https://davidtjones.wordpress.com/2016/02/02/what-if-our-digital-technologies-were-protean-implications-for-computational-thinking-learning-and-teaching/
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      Perhaps that quote explains what students see when they see a course that relies on material that's been shared amongst various different STEM contexts When you can't connect something directly into your understanding and context, it becomes a feature-laden hodge podge that you just can't figure out how to connect to your practice and understanding.
  • What if a technology is so specific, it’s designed for just one person – yourself?
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 17 Aug 16
       
      Which comes back to the option of providing the individual with the agency to make the learning personal to them. Giving them the agency to make connections into their networks. Of course, this approach isn't just some pancea. It has it's own challenges (especially when trying to concieve of it within existing mindsets/institutions) and also it's own weaknesses. The question is how to overcome those weaknesses and challenges in meaningful ways that addresses the resuability paradox.
  • djplaner on 17 Aug 16
     
    Damien is a ed developer at CQU. In this post he struggles with some of the common problems faced by that type of position and tries to understand them in the context of the reusability paradox. Some of this is inspired by my own thinking, hence it resonates with me. It also resonates with me because I see the possibility of a network perspective offering a useful way to look at these problems. I'm hoping to illustrate some of this via annotations. Whether this will be useful to you is another matter entirely. A lot of this is thinking out loud by both Damien and myself.
ollie1

Chapter 3. A Typology of Social Forms for Learning - 5 views

teachingcrowds.ca/...y-of-social-forms-for-learning

shared by ollie1 on 07 Aug 15 - No Cached
  • In brief, the evolved form illustrates three kinds of aggregation of learners in either formal or informal learning: groups, networks, and sets. We originally conflated sets with a further emergent entity that is not a social form as such, which we have referred to as the collective
  • the tutor can respond directly to questions, adapt teaching to the learner’s stated or implied reactions, and the learner can choose whether to intervene in the course of his or her own tuition without contest with others (Dron, 2007
  • one-to-one dialogue represents an “ideal” form of guided learning, at least where there is a teacher who knows more than the learner and is able to apply methods and techniques to help that learner to learn
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • t continues to play an important role in network forms of sociality because of the essentially one-to-one edges between nodes that lead to what Rainie and Wellman (2012) refer to as “networked individualism”—
  • However, one of their defining characteristics is that their members are, in principle and often in practice, listable.
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 07 Aug 15
       
      For me, this category is where all of Riel and Polin's (2004) types of community fit. The notion of community (as per Riel and Polin) doesn't capture the full set of possibilities that are observable on in netgl
  • People may be unaware that they are part of a set (e.g., people with a particular genetic marker), or they may identify with it (e.g., people who are fans of football or constructivist teaching methods).
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 07 Aug 15
       
      In my context "as teacher" - helping other academics learn how to learn online - the Set may be one of the missing considerations in staff development. i.e. all of those people teaching huge first year university courses could be said to belong to a set. Yet there is - at least at my institution - very little sharing/engagement/learning within this set. Most of it occurs within their group (e.g. the school of education) even though chances are that someone teaching a large first year education course has more to learn from someone teaching a large first year accounting course than from someone teaching a Master of Education course with 12 people in it.
  • Group-oriented systems tend to provide features like variable roles, restricted membership, and role-based permissions. Network-oriented systems tend to provide features like friending, linking, and commenting. Set-oriented systems tend to provide tools like topic- or location-based selections, tags, and categories.
    • djplaner
      djplaner on 07 Aug 15
       
      The design of the technology you use can be very important. Trying to create network learning with a group learning tool (e.g. Moodle) can be difficult. One of the reasons why this course has moved to using an open blog, rather than Moodle.
  • djplaner on 07 Aug 15
     
    Chapter from the Dron and Anderson book that expands upon the "group, networks and collectives" paper (by Dron and Anderson) from week 3
« First ‹ Previous 41 - 43 of 43
Showing 20▼ items per page