Saturday, July 10, 2010
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Review
My final blog entry....I have to admit that I thought I would enjoy writing this blog more than I have done. I love writing, and was looking forward to reflecting, in my blog, on all that I had learnt throughout this unit. But I found the 'clicky' nature of the blog website a little irritating - going backwards and forwards between my blog homepage, the comments, my postings, other people's blogs, etc.etc. I also was a little disgruntled at having to write to a prescribed theme; I would rather have reflected on my own personal themes- after all, that is what a blog is mostly used for. However, this disgruntled attitude has made me re-think the use of a blog as an e-learning tool for my students. It may be too much of a personal tool for sharing with others, especially with regard to reflecting on aspects of learning. Those students who do not speak up in class, for fear of sounding 'stupid', may also fear writing about their learning experiences on public blogs. Something to consider...
I contributed comments to the blogs of the following fellow students:
Lea: Year 2000, July 4
Lea: ICT current trends, July 9
Cam: Digital Natives Debate, July 9
Rebekah: VARK learning styles, July 9
Charlene: Web 2.0, July 9
I did enjoy reading what everybody else was thinking; that IS an advantage of a 'communal' blog! Thanks for allowing me to share with you all. Good luck with the rest of your e-learning, and with all your e-teaching tools.
I contributed comments to the blogs of the following fellow students:
Lea: Year 2000, July 4
Lea: ICT current trends, July 9
Cam: Digital Natives Debate, July 9
Rebekah: VARK learning styles, July 9
Charlene: Web 2.0, July 9
I did enjoy reading what everybody else was thinking; that IS an advantage of a 'communal' blog! Thanks for allowing me to share with you all. Good luck with the rest of your e-learning, and with all your e-teaching tools.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Current trends in ICT
The article that I found on current trends in ICT is found at the following website: http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSEReviewMagazineVolume41/ManagingCoursesDefiningLearnin/158070.
It is entitled "Managing courses, defining learning: what faculty, students, and administrators want". It is written by 3 academics in the USA, who undertook a study to find out what faculty members, students and administrators liked and disliked about the technology they were currently using, and what they felt was needed in future technology.
Overall, a deep reliance on technology was identified, but many users were unhappy with various components of that usage, such as speed, efficiency and "intuitiveness" of the e-systems. It was also felt that many aspects of technology could be improved so as to make course management, such as reviewing assignments, entering grades, etc. much easier. Students identified the following needs: "interactivity, mobility, synchronous communications, and a faster, friendlier, and more locally controlled interface".
One point that resonated sharply with me as that students are looking for collaborative tools to use at university. Flickr, Facebook, MySpace, de.lic.ious, and wikis were a few such examples that were given. Synchronous communication tools (whiteboard, chat, group surfing) were not seen as efficient and useful communication tools, and were, on the whole, shunned by the students. The reason why this was the case was not well explained, other than to comment that these tools were "poorly implemented". I wondered whether that implementation was on the part of the lecturer, or on the part of the IT personnel. My attempt to get groups of students to discuss a particular issue online failed miserably. The students 'chatted' about where and when they were going to meet up, rather than discussing the topic in detail. Perhaps they found the experience of chatting in academic format too foreign. Would the use of MySpace format be more acceptable to them?
The use of ICT in future tertiary environments is going to increase exponentially, according to the authors. ICT will have to have all the "social tools, intuitive tools, smart agents, and interactive environments of Web 2.0", in order to be considered for use by academics and students alike. Besides being multi-modal, the ICT of the future will have to be mobile as well. Accessibility from PDAs and mobile phones will be the norm, and smart systems will be able to communicate directly with the student.
Technology is advancing at such an incredible rate, that I was overwhelmed reading this article. I could only identify some of the 'apps' that the article discussed. It made me consider what I would want from an ICT-rich university system. Some of my answers are the same as those in the article: efficiency (hold the clicks!), speed, and the ability to have improved collaboration and communication. I also liked the suggestion of archiving of courses/units, so that they are always available for students to refer to throughout their academic life.
ICT needs to become 'smarter' so that lifelong learning trends are encouraged in our students.
It is entitled "Managing courses, defining learning: what faculty, students, and administrators want". It is written by 3 academics in the USA, who undertook a study to find out what faculty members, students and administrators liked and disliked about the technology they were currently using, and what they felt was needed in future technology.
Overall, a deep reliance on technology was identified, but many users were unhappy with various components of that usage, such as speed, efficiency and "intuitiveness" of the e-systems. It was also felt that many aspects of technology could be improved so as to make course management, such as reviewing assignments, entering grades, etc. much easier. Students identified the following needs: "interactivity, mobility, synchronous communications, and a faster, friendlier, and more locally controlled interface".
One point that resonated sharply with me as that students are looking for collaborative tools to use at university. Flickr, Facebook, MySpace, de.lic.ious, and wikis were a few such examples that were given. Synchronous communication tools (whiteboard, chat, group surfing) were not seen as efficient and useful communication tools, and were, on the whole, shunned by the students. The reason why this was the case was not well explained, other than to comment that these tools were "poorly implemented". I wondered whether that implementation was on the part of the lecturer, or on the part of the IT personnel. My attempt to get groups of students to discuss a particular issue online failed miserably. The students 'chatted' about where and when they were going to meet up, rather than discussing the topic in detail. Perhaps they found the experience of chatting in academic format too foreign. Would the use of MySpace format be more acceptable to them?
The use of ICT in future tertiary environments is going to increase exponentially, according to the authors. ICT will have to have all the "social tools, intuitive tools, smart agents, and interactive environments of Web 2.0", in order to be considered for use by academics and students alike. Besides being multi-modal, the ICT of the future will have to be mobile as well. Accessibility from PDAs and mobile phones will be the norm, and smart systems will be able to communicate directly with the student.
Technology is advancing at such an incredible rate, that I was overwhelmed reading this article. I could only identify some of the 'apps' that the article discussed. It made me consider what I would want from an ICT-rich university system. Some of my answers are the same as those in the article: efficiency (hold the clicks!), speed, and the ability to have improved collaboration and communication. I also liked the suggestion of archiving of courses/units, so that they are always available for students to refer to throughout their academic life.
ICT needs to become 'smarter' so that lifelong learning trends are encouraged in our students.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Learning and teaching styles
The VARK questionnaire analyses learning styles and indicates preferences for learning. After doing the questionnaire, I was not at all surprise to find that I scored strongly for reading/writing (16) and visual (10), but weakly for kinestheic (3), and very weakly for aural (1). Reading and writing are my strong points, and the description that was given for this preference could have been written about me! I make lists all the time, I diarise everything (and rely heavily on that real -not virtual - diary, I'm always reading one or two books, and I love looking up words that I don't know in the dictionary. Dale Spender is my guru. As far as learning is concerned, I do read material that I have to learn over and over again, in order to memorise it, but I don't reorganise it much. I do like flow-charts, so I am happy to plan my learning into some kind of diagrammatic chart, but I don't rely on them totally.
As far as output is concerned, I LOVE dot points, bullet points, lists, etc. That is how I think and visualise my material! I also used to write out the answers to exam questions in full at uni, and learn those in preparation for exams.
I encourage my students to use these strategies too. I especially encourage them to use flowcharts, to plan what they have to learn, and how to learn it. I also encourage them to write a lot, and they always have at least one academic essay in my units. Last semester, in which I taught many (and in my opinion - unnecessary) definitions of new concepts, I encouraged the students to make their own glossary, so that they could better understand the words. I provided them with an online template, which they could download and fill in.
One message that I get from doing this exercise is that I need to rethink the exercises that I give to my students. Many of them may be more kinesthetc than read/write, or more aural than visual. I have to have activities that encompass all of these learning styles (not necessarily all at once, but throughout the semester), so that the differences between the students are acknowledged and used.
As far as output is concerned, I LOVE dot points, bullet points, lists, etc. That is how I think and visualise my material! I also used to write out the answers to exam questions in full at uni, and learn those in preparation for exams.
I encourage my students to use these strategies too. I especially encourage them to use flowcharts, to plan what they have to learn, and how to learn it. I also encourage them to write a lot, and they always have at least one academic essay in my units. Last semester, in which I taught many (and in my opinion - unnecessary) definitions of new concepts, I encouraged the students to make their own glossary, so that they could better understand the words. I provided them with an online template, which they could download and fill in.
One message that I get from doing this exercise is that I need to rethink the exercises that I give to my students. Many of them may be more kinesthetc than read/write, or more aural than visual. I have to have activities that encompass all of these learning styles (not necessarily all at once, but throughout the semester), so that the differences between the students are acknowledged and used.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Digital natives debate
How do the characteristics of your students affect how they might learn, and what might an ideal environment look like for them?
Prensky (2001) asserts that today's students (the "Digital Natives") can multi-task and parallel process. they need immediacy, with instant gratification and frequent rewards. I feel that whilst many students do have the characteristic of immediacy, they also often require very clear instructions on the set tasks. I wonder whether this is because they do not have the relevant reading skills ("less than 5000 hours of reading in their lives"!! - Prensky, 2001), so as to be able to assimilate information.
Taking these characteristics into consideration, I wonder whether the ideal environment for these students might include short questionnaires, with immediate results, but no long-winded, involved, convoluted tasks.
Prensky (2001) asserts that today's students (the "Digital Natives") can multi-task and parallel process. they need immediacy, with instant gratification and frequent rewards. I feel that whilst many students do have the characteristic of immediacy, they also often require very clear instructions on the set tasks. I wonder whether this is because they do not have the relevant reading skills ("less than 5000 hours of reading in their lives"!! - Prensky, 2001), so as to be able to assimilate information.
Taking these characteristics into consideration, I wonder whether the ideal environment for these students might include short questionnaires, with immediate results, but no long-winded, involved, convoluted tasks.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Higher education in a Web 2.0 world
The Web 2.0 world is incredible. The amazing array of resources for social communication is mind-boggling. But is it relevant to education in a tertiary setting? I think that wikis, blogs, etc. can be used as educational tools. They allow for dissemination of education in an easier and quicker manner (eg. use of global text messaging for large classes, in place of individual emails). Lecturers can include internet material in lectures/tutorials/online discussions. Podcasts can be used to disseminate important points, or whole lectures. Engaging in different technologies can maintain the interest of the students.
For me, the challenge of Web 2.0 technologies is great. I have a huge amount of learning to do if I want to make use of these technologies. I can see that some students will need similar instruction, prior to using the technologies,and so I will have to know how to teach this technology as well. The most important point, however, is that the students will need to be sure that the technology is being used for a purpose, and not just because it's there. They will need to see that the technology can promote collaboration, writing skills, reflective thinking, etc. Without knowing this, the students may just view the technology as yet another assessment to get through, and deep learning will not be encouraged.
For me, the challenge of Web 2.0 technologies is great. I have a huge amount of learning to do if I want to make use of these technologies. I can see that some students will need similar instruction, prior to using the technologies,and so I will have to know how to teach this technology as well. The most important point, however, is that the students will need to be sure that the technology is being used for a purpose, and not just because it's there. They will need to see that the technology can promote collaboration, writing skills, reflective thinking, etc. Without knowing this, the students may just view the technology as yet another assessment to get through, and deep learning will not be encouraged.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)