Learning in an Online Environment

Learning in an online environment

There are some obvious that are differences between in an online class and a face-to-face class. The learner is now responsible for constructing his or her own learning and the teacher becomes more of a facilitator. In this situation, the teacher provides guidance to students completing assignments, but the student must take responsibility for learning the material. Another, factor is communication between the instructor and students is just as crucial in an online class as it is in a face-to-face class. In one class, one of my students expressed surprise that I participated in discussions.

Dewey’s (1938) theory of experience describes a classroom where the children construct their own learning from their experiences and the teacher is a member of the group. The student constructs knowledge from experience while the teacher provides realistic learning opportunities for the student (Driscoll, 2005). These roles work well in an online class. Communication shortens the transactional distance; that is the communication and psychological distance between teachers and students who are physically separated (Kang & Gyorke, 2008). Lack of communication has the opposite effect.

References

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & Education. New York: Macillan Publishing Company.

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kang, H., & Gyorke, A. (2008). Rethinking distance learning activities: a comparison of transactional distance theory and activity theory. Open Learning, 203-214.

Motivating students in a Beginning Computer Class

Teaching a beginning computer class provides for a wide range of attitudes. On one hand there are young students, just out of high school, most of who have grown up on the computer. Older students, on the other hand, often come to class with little or no experience with a computer. Being a required course sometimes affects attitudes also. To some students course is an unwelcome stress factor, while other students see it as a waste of time because they feel that they know all of the information already. This variety of attitudes can be a challenge to an instructor who is faced with progressing at a pace that is appropriate for all students.

Keller’s model of motivation is useful for assessing and improving the motivation of students. A motivated learner will meet the four conditions for motivation out lined by this theory: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction, ARCS (Driscoll, 2005, p. 333). The first day of class provides opportunity for the instructor to motivate students to succeed in the class. The instructor might gain students’ attention, for example, by showing a video depicting new advance in technology. In online classes, students might use discussion boards to discuss the relevance of computers in the work place. Instilling confidence can be difficult, but I have found that spending time individually to tutor and encourage students experiencing difficulty pays large dividends in this area. Providing students with opportunities for success usually helps in the satisfaction category. This can be accomplished by providing learning activities with goals that are understandable, fair, and achievable.

Reference

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Learning has become a “chaotic, complex, but holistic” (Siemens, 2006, p. vii) activity in the digital world. For centuries learning has preceded in much the same fashion as it always had. Learning involved receiving instruction from the teacher, completing a couple of worksheets, and perhaps joining a couple of other students in some sort of group learning project. After this the teacher might assign a student to write a report on Pennsylvania, for example. The student would then request a pass to the library where he or she would pour through encyclopedias, atlases, and other printed materials until he or she had enough information to write the report.

Today the scenario is a little different. Ask a student to write a report on Pennsylvania, and the student will probably go straight to Google. In fact, students are just as likely to surf the web on their smartphones as they are on computers. Instead of reading a book, he or she might converse with Pennsylvanian students live through various social media. The Internet and technology in general, have changed the way that we learn. This type of learning is essential in a world where knowledge is decentralized (Siemens, 2006, p. 92).

Connectivism contends that knowledge is composed of connections and networks (Siemens, 2008, p. 10). I didn’t realize how much I learn from those around me until I began sketching my own learning network that I’ve developed through the years. Because knowledge is decentralized, accessing that knowledge requires a vast network of nodes. Developing these nodes is a key component of learning.

References

Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. Creative Commons. Retrieved July 16, 2012, from https://class.waldenu.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/USW1/201270_01/PH_EDUC/NCATE_EDUC_8845_EDUC_7105/Module%204/Resources/Resources/embedded/siemensknowingknowledge.pdf

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers. Presented to the IT Forum. Retrieved March 5, 2012, from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Learning Network Developed July 20, 2012

Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge. Creative Commons. Retrieved July 16, 2012, from https://class.waldenu.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/USW1/201270_01/PH_EDUC/NCATE_EDUC_8845_EDUC_7105/Module%204/Resources/Resources/embedded/siemensknowingknowledge.pdf

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers. Presented to the IT Forum. Retrieved March 5, 2012, from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

I responded to Julie Kaplan at http://juliekaplan.wordpress.com/

and Laura Wojciechowicz at http://wojoedtech.blogspot.com



Learning Theories

            In their respective blogs, Stephens and Kerr discuss whether the traditional learning theories are still relevant in education. The consensus is that the “’isms,” as Kerr (2007) refers to them work best when they are used together.  Many individuals claim this is because different people have different learning styles, but I believe that there is more to it than that. It’s true that there are individuals are different, the “’isms” apply to each of us at different times. I agree with Kapp (2007) when he explains that different theories are applicable at different levels of learning.  Behaviorism might best explain lower level tasks, cognitivism is used to teach procedural and rules based tasks, and constructivism might be used in problem solving.

An example of this might be driving. Cruising on Interstate 10 between Odessa, Texas and El Paso, Texas requires little thought. Behaviorism rules the day until the driver comes upon the ever prevalent construction sign. Suddenly, cognitivism takes over as the driver is forced to analyze the traffic, warning signs and other factors that require careful adherence to the rules. Later, after deciding that a short cut is in order, the driver finds himself or herself in the middle of the desert, running out of gas, with no idea of their location. Constructivism takes over as the driver attempts to work out a solution to a major problem.

The learning style of the driver in this case is of little relevance. One person might read a map while another listens to an eBook on survival in the desert, but both of them will work their way through the “’isms” whether they realize it or not. If fortunate enough to be in cell phone range, connectivism might even take over as they driver connects to others using GPS, the World Wide Web, or any other technology available.

References

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and About: Discussion on Educational Schools of Thought. Retrieved July 5, 2012, from Kapp Notes: http://www.uleduneering.com/kappnotes/index.php/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational/

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). _isms as filter, not blinker. Retrieved July 5, 2012, from Bill Kerr: http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Module One Posts

I responded to

http://learningtheoryeducationaltechnology05.blogspot.com/ (Schquetta Hawkins)

http://wojoedtech.blogspot.com/2012/06/module-1-role-of-teachers.html?showComment=1339982823680#c7036110778907353888 (Laura Wojciechowicz)

Learning Theories

Driscoll (2005, p. 9) defines a learning theory as a set of constructs that links changes of performance with what causes the change in performance. She lists three components that must be present in a learning theory. First, the theory must identify the results that the theory is meant to elicit. Second, the theory requires identification of the means or the process by which results will occur. Finally, it must identify the inputs or the triggers that cause the changes in performance. If it is to be considered valid, a theory must answer the questions posed by these three factors. (Driscoll, 2005).

Driscoll (2005) and Siemens (2008) both summarize the three traditional learning theories, behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism, and Siemens (2008) explains a fourth theory, connectivism. Each learning theory considers the components in the first paragraph in a different manner. The behaviorist focuses on the external behaviors because the inner activities of the learner are unobservable. This theorist expects observable, identifiable results  (Driscoll, 2005, p. 68), plans for task-based activities, and provides stimuli such as reward and punishment as input (Siemens, 2008, p. 11).The cognitivist, who recognizes that children learn differently at various stages of life (Driscoll, 2005, p. 189) focuses on providing lessons with clear objectives that utilize reasoning and logic, inputs from previous experience (Siemens, 2008, p. 11), and results in physical, logical, and social knowledge (Driscoll, 2005, p. 221). The constructivist assumes that learners construct their knowledge as they attempt to make sense of their world (Driscoll, 2005, p. 387). He or she will provide lessons that rely on social interaction. The inputs are minimally structured problems with results that support reasoning, critical thinking and mindful reflection (Driscoll, 2005, p. 409). The connectivist views learning as occurring as result of networks and connections; learning is distributed among nodes on a network. Lessons provide opportunity for students to connect to a network and receive input from other nodes on the network, whether local classmates or stimuli from across the globe. The results are fuller than what they can obtain by themselves (Siemens, 2008, pp. 10,11).

References

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers. Presented to the IT Forum. Retrieved March 5, 2012, from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf