Constructive Discourse and Learning Theories

Open and honest debate is essential to scholarly inquiry. Though at times I wonder how some theories have become so widespread, I realize that knowledge acquisition is viewed differently based on historical context and the value placed on the individual. While Kerr and Kapp’s views most closely match my own it does not make them any more or less correct than the views of Downes. Behaviorism is not dead; in fact many components are integrated into educational technology and serve as a valuable method of instruction for all levels of student ability. Cognitivism provides a different and divergent way of explaining how we learn, but does not completely account for more complex processes like language acquisition and biology. In isolation, theory no matter how comprehensive, only serves to exclude other empirically-based points of view and stalls open dialogue that is crucial for deepening our understanding.

Perspective is a funny thing. The value we place on the individual in a learning context influences how we view education. Behaviorism was an important first step in developing our understanding and we do not want to abandon parts of the theories, nor do we want to blindly adopt theories of cognition without the understanding that certain tasks are best accomplished through rote learning and reinforcement. As our knowledge base increases and technology improves to a degree that we can develop our understanding of the multifaceted and complex relationship of the learner to the environment, we can better explain certain aspects of learning; however, a unified theory of learning would have to be comprised of parts of all schools of thought.

Regardless of the theory each has a place in the classroom; tools in your arsenal.

What does learning look like to you?

Questions about how individuals learn best reflect the time in which they were first asked. As technology evolves into ways that more accurately reflect the complexities of the human mind, we are better able to comprehend what constitutes real "learning." Behaviorists are concerned with measurable changes consistent with reinforcement, while Cognitivists rely on structured learning environments with a strong emphasis on biological systems of memory and recall. The most accurate, at least in the current day, are the Constructivists who believe that the student is central to instruction and that learning is an active process that requires input and feedback to develop proficiency. The purpose of educational technology is to develop tools and strategies to put theory into practice in practical ways.

The best analogy that I can use for Theories of Learning is the story of the Six Blind Men and an Elephant. Depending on where each person stands in relation to the elephant is how they interpret what the animal looks like. While no one person is able to completely describe the elephant, each accurately describes what he "sees" based on his schema. Whether or not they are correct individually is moot--what matters is that together they form a more or less complete picture based on a frame of reference. In isolation learning theories do little more than attempt to explain a phenomenon; however, when used in conjunction with effective pedagogy and technology form the palette from which the teacher can create knowledge. In the future we may completely change how we view learning based on improved technology...and that is alright, because it is how we develop our understanding based on our collective accumulation of knowledge and research.

The Digital Divide

Living in a rural community provides many challenges as well as opportunities. In my county we have a high number of students with special needs (English language learners) and those who are economically disadvantaged. While there can be no strong argument against using technology, many of these students either do not have a computer at home or internet access. What use is having a vast number of resources on the internet if only half of our student population can access it from home? An informal survey of my students gave credence to the Digital Divide: out of my nearly seventy students, only about 20 had computers, while 10 had access to high speed internet. Conversely, each student in my class had either their own personal cell phone or had access to one in their home. Forget all of the high speed hardware heavy computers that are advertized, most users only need very basic devices to connect to the internet and perform every day productivity tasks. For our communities, and in a broader sense people who are disadvantaged throughout the world, our emphasis should be on providing access to mobile devices and wireless networks. I recently read about a program provided by UNESCO to bring literacy to women in Pakistan. The simplicity and low cost is what really struck me—a modest investment in a cell phone and SMS created an opportunity for a population that may not ever have the luxury of attending school.

As a current and future leader in educational technology, I can ensure equal access by making sound decisions about the types of technology we use in the classroom. Rather than purchase proprietary operating systems and expensive site licenses, we can opt for an open-source alternative. Grants may provide some resources, but must be approached cautiously as the long term cost may outweigh the short term benefits. Additionally, I can strongly advocate for the integration of mobile devices into our curriculum as both the functionality and price are ideal for students of all ages and grade levels. Part of this advocacy may include developing a curriculum for pilot program that uses mobile devices in a classroom setting.

The Digital Divide exists throughout the modern world and it is unrealistic to expect access to the internet and other resources will be equal; however, schools can make better use of their resources by developing technology plans that utilize the free open-source resources that are available and saving the bulk of their technology budgets to create programs to introduce mobile computing to students.

Red Queens?

The movie rental business is what could be referred to as a “Red Queen.” Competition to control the market share has produced myriad innovations, including: in home delivery, video on demand, streaming video, and hybrid models. For instance, I was required to view a movie for on of my courses and within one day I was able to obtain a copy, view it, and then mail it back to Netflix. The low comparative price and convenience of Netflix has made it one of the best innovations for home entertainment in the past few years. Additionally, many television shows are also available to be viewed and for a small price, less than a cable subscription, one can watch programs from HBO, Showtime, or Starz whenever they would like.

Video on demand is the next wave for the VHS, DVD, and Blu-Ray rhyme. As the popularity of mobile devices grows, so to does the need to develop the technology to make one’s media catalog portable as well. Even though free alternatives in the form of YouTube and Hulu among others are available, video on demand is of higher quality and has a larger selection of content. The vast storage capability of home computers and mobile devices makes the need to store data on a CD or DVD impractical.

I find myself watching movies that I would not otherwise go to see in the theater (or want to be seen renting at a video store), because of all the options available through Netflix and the internet. In a sense, Netflix and video on demand has rekindled my love of movies and with the ability to provide feedback, has recommended movies based on my preferences that I may not have seen otherwise. I see the next wave of technology along this vein as the competition becomes more intense as a service that allows users to watch movies the moment they are released in the theaters, effectively making movie going an experience rather than a necessity.

Disruptive Tech: SL and its Potential as a Learning Medium

How do we reinvent the landscape of education? We limit ourselves as educators by relying on textbooks and other static technologies. To fully realize the learning power of collaboration and immersive environments educators at all levels can harness the disruptive technology inherent in Second Life (SL). Not only does SL enable a student to experience learning in exotic locales, it also provides a learning medium that is perfectly suited for connectivist pedagogy (Thomas, 2010). With a small investment of resources an interested educator could create a learning space for students throughout the world, thus opening their sphere of influence and developing cross-cultural exchanges.

Though not specifically created for education, SL is a world where individuals can effectively “live” beyond their physical self. Someone who has a disability that limits his or her movement in real life (IRL) can visit places in vivid detail that may otherwise be out of reach; or enable a person with hearing impairment to communicate without the need of an interpreter or any special applications. Artists and designers can create works of art and sell their wares in SL’s virtual economy. One can even have a job in SL and transfer their earnings IRL and make a decent living doing so. In the decade or so that SL has been in existence it has established a new frontier for virtual worlds and helped to create a place for Residents to shape in whatever way they choose (Linden Research, n.d.).

Second Life is not a perfect platform for education and much of its content is tailored towards adult audiences, though a separate “grid” exists for teens. Also, the educator who chooses to use SL has to have a fair amount of technical knowledge and SL is not nearly as stable as it needs to be for daily instructional events. Despite some of the drawbacks, SL is setting the standard for the way instructional design may look in the future and altering the way we think about developing the necessary skills for students to be successful in the Digital Age. SL still has a few years before it is outmoded by a more reliable platform combined with the functionality of realistic 3D technology.


References

Linden Research, Inc. (n.d.). About Linden Lab. Retrieved April 28, 2010 from, http://lindenlab.com/about

Thomas, H. (2010). Learning spaces, learning environments and the dis‘placement’ of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 502-511. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00974.x.

Rhyming and Sharing

I think back to the wonder of kindergarten show-and-tell and how sharing a new discovery not only made me feel proud, but also helped me to understand the world a little bit more. Sharing for me was more centralized and I could only reach a few other kids within my immediate sphere. Now, I could get on the phone and call someone (if I had their number) and talk about my new discovery, but it was hard for them to visualize its appeal without seeing it firsthand. As I got older, I was able to use a Polaroid camera to capture a picture and share it with my friends and mail it to some family members, which was handy even though it took a long time to get feedback. In the mid 1990s Technology began to advance to a degree that I could now email or text someone a message and receive a response in seconds, even while I lived in Germany. Asynchronously, I could visit a discussion board to ask or answer questions and receive a response from literally anyone in the world. I could chat with someone in real time about any topic that was of particular interest to me. After awhile, I could even take a picture, scan it, and then send it to anyone in the world—this revelation was amazing and enabled me to learn and share more with others than any other time in my life.

Now technology has advanced to the degree where we can share anything, from the banal to the revolutionary in split seconds and added to the world collective memory. Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are simple tools that have provided a platform from which to connect with one another and communicate.

The recurring rhyme in technology that I connect most with is tools to share with others. From smart phones to 3-D video conferencing systems, we are constantly improving on how we share and collaborate with each other. As Kelly (2007) foresees an interconnected web that shares all information with any end user, I see a level of sharing that is unprecedented in scale. Regardless of the type of information, whether personal of commercial, the notion of separate countries will begin to dissolve and a renewed global community will emerge.

Reference
Kelly, K. (2007, December). The next 5,000 days of the Web [Speech]. Speech delivered at the EG 2007 Conference, Los Angeles. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/kevin_kelly_on_the_next_5_000_days_of_the_web.html

The Internet or An Amalgam of the Past

Long before Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET), the internet, or even the telephone a technology emerged that would revolutionize communication. The technology which clustered from the telephone and telegraph: the fax machine. A fax machine used existing telephone lines to transmit data constructed from a scanned document to a receiver which in turn created a copy or facsimile of the document. The telephone allowed people to verbally communicate over vast distances and the fax machine added the ability to share written documents or pictures. Fax machines were not without their limitations and eventually, after the advent of the computer, a method for sharing computerized documents as well as other forms of information was developed.

Fax Machine
Enhances: Communication
Obsoletes: Telegraph
Retrieves: Document sharing and collaboration
Reverses: a system that allows for sharing video

ARPANET was developed to allow multiple users to network computers and share information. What began as a military program (like many great innovations), slowly grew into a technology that revolutionized communication. ARPANET allowed for the quick access of research and data which enabled scientists to collaborate and arguably promulgated more thorough scientific inquiry. However, to be used as a tool to grow commerce and develop a global community, ARPANET needed to evolve into something that anyone could use to share and access information.

ARPANET
Enhances: Communication/collaboration
Obsoletes: University libraries
Rekindles: Collaborative inquiry, research, and experimentation
Reverses: a user-friendly, less cumbersome system for networking computers

The internet is the culmination of technologies that have been developed since the printing press. The average person through unrestricted access to the internet can obtain and share nearly any kind of information in real time. From the collected works of Aristotle to Lolcats, the internet is an emerged technology that has both promoted the sharing of knowledge and created a record for future posterity. Eventually, the internet will be replaced by a more reliable and less “cluttered” version that connects users to information without the aid of a computer.

Internet
Enhances: Communication/collaboration
Obsoletes: Telephone, television, fax machine
Rekindles: Exploration and knowledge generation
Reverses: a more reliable system that connects people without computers

After reflecting on these three tetrads, I can see that the current internet has only been possible by the development of many technologies dating back centuries. Chains and clusters can be drawn from innovations that I had not thought of before analyzing the precursors to the internet.