During the second part of the course, there are certain objectives that all students are expected to meet. These objectives measure our progression throughout the course. How have I met these objectives? Well that is a question that takes examining the objectives on a weekly basis then explaining how I’ve met the objectives per their respective weeks:
Week 7
1. Discuss the potential uses of digital portfolios.
2. Evaluate digital portfolio products.
3. Select a personal portfolio product.
4. Create a work plan that reflects the activities needed to learn to use the selected portfolio program and meet course requirements for initial portfolio elements.
This was our first look at e-Portfolios. At first, the cost associated with it almost made me drop the course. But, with working with it and posting my work, I have become very attached to it. There are a variety of uses for online portfolios. Mainly, it is a conduit in to our professional and academic careers. I believe that this will soon replace paper resumes and professionals will count on them to get a more detailed look at a prospective employees. I have met the objectives by completing most of my e-portfolio during this week.
Week 8-9
1. Discuss learning theories and the impact that the selection of theory has on the design of online courses.
2. Evaluate models of instruction in terms of their potential effectiveness in the online environment.
3. Discuss the factors involved in achieving the Seven Principles of Effective [Undergraduate] education in the online environment.
During these weeks, we were to look at our teaching styles again. I found that as a result of taking this course, my style of teaching changed. I learned that I am still a ‘hands off’ type instructor, however I am more of a delegator and expert and less of a personal model. I expressed less of a formal authority as well. This made me feel comfortable with designing a student-centered course. We were also introduced to the 7 Principles of a good undergraduate classroom. This revolutionized the way we learned to design a course. These principles address seven key areas that make a difference in the success of learning of a student.
Week 10
1. Identify strategies for addressing the 7 Principles in the online environment.
2. Select technology-based strategies for implementing the seven principles in an online course.
3. Discuss instructional strategies that are effective for distance education.
We got more into the design of our discipline based on the 7 principles. We were assigned to make a suggestion on how we would implement each principle in our chosen discipline. The assignment was rather lengthy. But it was worth it. I found that some principles were not easy to implement and often thought they were unnecessary. With careful thought, I found a way to include that respective principle. During the second part of week 10’s assignment, we learned about different modules we could use in our instruction. I chose to use a combination of group project and case study. This hybrid will not only give a collaborative effort for different students, but it also will give those students real world application of the course lessons. This week was landmark in transitioning to the next course.
Week 11-Week 12
1. Identify the major technologies used in web-based instruction today.
2. Locate information sources on the Internet
3. Select technology strategies for design of instructional modules.
I had fun with this week. I consider myself technologically inclined, therefore I had alot to say about what technologies would work online and what wasn’t feasible to implement. I am a PowerPoint advocate. I believe it is much user friendly on the composition side to use PowerPoint as opposed to Flash. Flash can be easier for the user but is much hard to construct for the instructor. The facilitator of the course and I were back and forth about using Flash as opposed to PowerPoint. She argues that Flash’s functionality is much more superior to PowerPoint. I agreed but the build of a Flash presentation can take hours in comparison to PowerPoint. Since PowerPoint has increased its compatibility with the Internet, I think PowerPoint is the perfect medium between the student and the instructor.
Week 13
1. Identify a variety of resources on the Internet for locating existing content to incorporate into online courses.
2. Locate content that is provided by publishers to supplement text books.
3. Find useful content related to your teaching discipline.
This is the easiest week of the course. It opened my eyes to new websites that I couldn’t have found on my own. The MERLOT website was phenomenal. In the group project, we were asked to find some resources in our discipline and give an annotated bibliography about them in the previous week. I looked at these websites and was floored because they were exactly what we were looking for in the group project. I also completed my e-Portfolio. Use this Visitor’s Pass to view it: 2354FF66.
Part 2 of this course was not as tough as part 1 but the work load was still heavy. This part was truly the downhill portion of the course. I had fun doing the coursework in this part and I am glad I stayed. The tipping point was the unanticipated $89 purchase of an e-portfolio. Living a life on a fixed income made this an inconvenience. I’m still glad that I remained in the course. Part 2 made me realize that the more engaging a course is a student won’t mind doing extra coursework. The learning experience was great for me this time around. Although I am glad that this course has come to an end, I will take this course with me as I progress further into my education. Part 2 of the course was well organized. As a result of a rough Part 1, I was able to adjust to the facilitator’s grading style. The comments she left were very helpful. Part 2 made the course exciting.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Going Deeper into The Three Common Schools of Thought
Ok…Now I was really confused. From what I gathered from reading 1 and 2 from the last blog in combination with reading 3, it seems that I still have a distorted view on the learning theories. So here it is. I re-reread the readings thoroughly in order that I might formulate a better way of understating the concepts. This is what I’ve learned from the readings as I’ve interpreted them:
Behaviorism
This school of learning is based on our natural response to stimuli at its most basic form. Negative and positive reinforcement has a big impact on the effectiveness of this type of learning. This is known as classical or operant conditioning. This is rather outdated with the different learning styles today. It is tough for an instructor to constantly reward or punish a student because they have or haven’t effectively grasped a concept due to a particular teaching approach. Behaviorism is therefore a result of a change in behavior based on a negative or positive experience when in implementation of that respective behavior.
Cognitive
As a result of the outdating of behaviorism, cognitive learning was born. Cognitive learning is the use of internal mental processes to guide natural behavior. As opposed to passive learning in behaviorism, cognitive learning encourages more activity on the part of the learner. Learners who use cognitive processes take newer information that is taught and applies them to previous learned processes. This association recreates a link to complex storage of learned information and thereby suggests that knowledge will be better organized in the learner’s mind. Cognitivism is most effective when a student can commit ideal concepts to memory and effective recall/retrieve them at a future point in time.
Constructivism
We looked at this school of learning earlier in the course (Week 2) by reading:
Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching andLearning
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html
Constructivism is an avenue of independent learning. In my post for that week, I explained:
“Constructivism is a theory that encourages semi-guided, independent learning through self-encouragement and self-exploration. Constructivism compared to the other schools of learning seems to be somewhat new. Traditional lectures are a conglomerate of facts that are taught based on the same past principles and never evolving into new practices and ways of thinking or improvement on previous theories. Constructivism breaks all the traditional rules and allows students to explore alternative interpretations of those conglomerates of fact. Behaviorism places limits on exploration into a particular subject where constructivism allows for insight and deeper understanding to basic facts.”
This theory allows the learning to explore new meaning of concepts through experience and construction of real-world situation. The teacher encourages students to create their own ‘constructs’ of the subject at hand, addresses their new conceptions, and then helps guide them to effectively understanding the subject through the student’s own interpretations.
I don’t think that these articles do justice for students understanding the theories as they apply to approaches for teaching. The articles are a wealth of information that doesn’t provide enough clear examples on when and where to apply those approaches. Initially, I took the principles of a given school of thought and directly applied them to a given situation. That was incorrect on my part. Applications of respective approaches take more than just read and apply. It takes one to be well-versed and mastered at the intricacies of these schools of learning in order that one might apply those principles effectively and correctly. It takes further examination into the schools of learning in order to grasp this subject matter completely.
Behaviorism
This school of learning is based on our natural response to stimuli at its most basic form. Negative and positive reinforcement has a big impact on the effectiveness of this type of learning. This is known as classical or operant conditioning. This is rather outdated with the different learning styles today. It is tough for an instructor to constantly reward or punish a student because they have or haven’t effectively grasped a concept due to a particular teaching approach. Behaviorism is therefore a result of a change in behavior based on a negative or positive experience when in implementation of that respective behavior.
Cognitive
As a result of the outdating of behaviorism, cognitive learning was born. Cognitive learning is the use of internal mental processes to guide natural behavior. As opposed to passive learning in behaviorism, cognitive learning encourages more activity on the part of the learner. Learners who use cognitive processes take newer information that is taught and applies them to previous learned processes. This association recreates a link to complex storage of learned information and thereby suggests that knowledge will be better organized in the learner’s mind. Cognitivism is most effective when a student can commit ideal concepts to memory and effective recall/retrieve them at a future point in time.
Constructivism
We looked at this school of learning earlier in the course (Week 2) by reading:
Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching andLearning
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html
Constructivism is an avenue of independent learning. In my post for that week, I explained:
“Constructivism is a theory that encourages semi-guided, independent learning through self-encouragement and self-exploration. Constructivism compared to the other schools of learning seems to be somewhat new. Traditional lectures are a conglomerate of facts that are taught based on the same past principles and never evolving into new practices and ways of thinking or improvement on previous theories. Constructivism breaks all the traditional rules and allows students to explore alternative interpretations of those conglomerates of fact. Behaviorism places limits on exploration into a particular subject where constructivism allows for insight and deeper understanding to basic facts.”
This theory allows the learning to explore new meaning of concepts through experience and construction of real-world situation. The teacher encourages students to create their own ‘constructs’ of the subject at hand, addresses their new conceptions, and then helps guide them to effectively understanding the subject through the student’s own interpretations.
I don’t think that these articles do justice for students understanding the theories as they apply to approaches for teaching. The articles are a wealth of information that doesn’t provide enough clear examples on when and where to apply those approaches. Initially, I took the principles of a given school of thought and directly applied them to a given situation. That was incorrect on my part. Applications of respective approaches take more than just read and apply. It takes one to be well-versed and mastered at the intricacies of these schools of learning in order that one might apply those principles effectively and correctly. It takes further examination into the schools of learning in order to grasp this subject matter completely.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Grasping the Schools of Learning
I got started early on this blog because we are learning about a concept that I thought I had a handle on. We were asked to read the following articles:
Foundations of Educational Theory for Online Learning
http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch1.html
Toward a Theory of Online Learning
http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch2.html
Learning Theories and Instructional Strategies Matrix
http://www.elizabethstps.vic.edu.au/learningtheoriesmatrix.htm
These are explaining three common schools of learning: behaviorism, cognitive, and constructivism. We were asked to look at three mini-cases.
Mini-Case 1: You have be assigned the task of developing an online training for "How to Change a Flat Tire". Which learning theory would you use to guide your training design? Why would you select that particular theory?
Mini-Case 2: You are developing an online Business Ethics course for a University. Which learning theory would you use to guide your training design? Why would you select that particular theory?
Mini-case 3: You are developing an introductory Chemistry course for high school students. Which learning theory would you use to guide your training design
I thought I was rather versed on the subject until the professor pointed out flaws in my way of thinking.
My post:
I would have to go with behaviorism on this one simply because there are certain concrete and definite rules to business ethics. I don’t think this course is intended to change to rule of business ethics. But rather, it is to observe and apply the parameters of business ethics. Constructivism can be used to go deeper into the course. However, primarily behaviorism should be used to deliver and teach specific objectives.
The instructor’s response:
Rarely in academic settings would you see 'behaviorism' as the primary learning theory employed, although there are elements of behaviorism in most courses. Taking a behaviorist approach, approach for something like ethics, which involves discerning relative 'rights' and 'wrongs' and coming to a decision certainly would not be appropriate for an approach that was predominantly behaviorist. If any of the mini-cases would support a behaviorist approach, it might arguably be changing a tire.
This response prompted me that I really didn’t have a grasp on the three theories. So I reread the articles and the third one happens to give me insight on how I should go about understating these ideals. I paid close attention to mini-case 2 because I still believe that my answer is on point. Let’s look at the rubric from the third reading.
If you can click on the above link and reference the behaviorism module, there are some key tenets that match how a Business ethics course should be taught. I will name only the ones that serve as a base for my answer:
· Stimulus-Response
· Programmed Instruction (logical presentation of content, overt responses, immediate knowledge of correctness)
· Learner must know how to execute the proper response as well as the conditions under which the response is made
· Communicate or transfer behaviors representing knowledge and skills to the learner (does not consider mental processing)
· Instruction is to elicit the desired response from the learner who is presented with a target stimulus
· Practice paired with target stimuli
These alone can be fitted to business ethics because this course is behavior-based. Ethics is an abstract course that is not necessarily based on fact, but is based on a set of rules that should be followed. Of course, those rules are constantly updated but still there are a set of parameters that govern business ethics as a whole. The mere idea that behaviorism is hardly used anymore doesn’t rule it out as a good fit. Constructivism is a more lengthy, independent, and innovative approach to behaviorism in my opinion.
Look at the chart and compare behaviorism and constructivism. The common thread that binds the two schools of learning is stimuli and situation-based learning. Learning can come through experience and living a lesson. These approaches adopt both. Behaviorism is a more basic approach to teaching a set of guidelines that govern a whole subject matter. Constructivism addresses those guidelines but gives the learner the ability to interpret and mold those respective rules. Where behaviorism would be a high school diploma of the subject, constructivism would be the doctorate.
Now, that I’ve read and review those articles and looked deeper into the subject, I believe that I have a greater understanding of the schools of learning. I think I had a good base to begin with. These readings helped spawn new insight into different learning styles and how they apply to the success of online learning.
Foundations of Educational Theory for Online Learning
http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch1.html
Toward a Theory of Online Learning
http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/ch2.html
Learning Theories and Instructional Strategies Matrix
http://www.elizabethstps.vic.edu.au/learningtheoriesmatrix.htm
These are explaining three common schools of learning: behaviorism, cognitive, and constructivism. We were asked to look at three mini-cases.
Mini-Case 1: You have be assigned the task of developing an online training for "How to Change a Flat Tire". Which learning theory would you use to guide your training design? Why would you select that particular theory?
Mini-Case 2: You are developing an online Business Ethics course for a University. Which learning theory would you use to guide your training design? Why would you select that particular theory?
Mini-case 3: You are developing an introductory Chemistry course for high school students. Which learning theory would you use to guide your training design
I thought I was rather versed on the subject until the professor pointed out flaws in my way of thinking.
My post:
I would have to go with behaviorism on this one simply because there are certain concrete and definite rules to business ethics. I don’t think this course is intended to change to rule of business ethics. But rather, it is to observe and apply the parameters of business ethics. Constructivism can be used to go deeper into the course. However, primarily behaviorism should be used to deliver and teach specific objectives.
The instructor’s response:
Rarely in academic settings would you see 'behaviorism' as the primary learning theory employed, although there are elements of behaviorism in most courses. Taking a behaviorist approach, approach for something like ethics, which involves discerning relative 'rights' and 'wrongs' and coming to a decision certainly would not be appropriate for an approach that was predominantly behaviorist. If any of the mini-cases would support a behaviorist approach, it might arguably be changing a tire.
This response prompted me that I really didn’t have a grasp on the three theories. So I reread the articles and the third one happens to give me insight on how I should go about understating these ideals. I paid close attention to mini-case 2 because I still believe that my answer is on point. Let’s look at the rubric from the third reading.
If you can click on the above link and reference the behaviorism module, there are some key tenets that match how a Business ethics course should be taught. I will name only the ones that serve as a base for my answer:
· Stimulus-Response
· Programmed Instruction (logical presentation of content, overt responses, immediate knowledge of correctness)
· Learner must know how to execute the proper response as well as the conditions under which the response is made
· Communicate or transfer behaviors representing knowledge and skills to the learner (does not consider mental processing)
· Instruction is to elicit the desired response from the learner who is presented with a target stimulus
· Practice paired with target stimuli
These alone can be fitted to business ethics because this course is behavior-based. Ethics is an abstract course that is not necessarily based on fact, but is based on a set of rules that should be followed. Of course, those rules are constantly updated but still there are a set of parameters that govern business ethics as a whole. The mere idea that behaviorism is hardly used anymore doesn’t rule it out as a good fit. Constructivism is a more lengthy, independent, and innovative approach to behaviorism in my opinion.
Look at the chart and compare behaviorism and constructivism. The common thread that binds the two schools of learning is stimuli and situation-based learning. Learning can come through experience and living a lesson. These approaches adopt both. Behaviorism is a more basic approach to teaching a set of guidelines that govern a whole subject matter. Constructivism addresses those guidelines but gives the learner the ability to interpret and mold those respective rules. Where behaviorism would be a high school diploma of the subject, constructivism would be the doctorate.
Now, that I’ve read and review those articles and looked deeper into the subject, I believe that I have a greater understanding of the schools of learning. I think I had a good base to begin with. These readings helped spawn new insight into different learning styles and how they apply to the success of online learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)