learning theories - is apprenticeship still valid?

H800 week 4 activity 2 situated cognition

http://www.jstor.org.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/stable/1176008?cookieSet=1

The authors are mainly concerned with learning design in schools but I am aware that these ideas might transcend that particular situation. In particular, they are interested in how school students become enculturated into a community of practice in an authentic way. “School activity too often tends to be hybrid, implicitly framed by one culture, but explicitly attributed to another. ... What students do tends to be ersatz activity.” (page 34) “Authentic activity ... is important for learners, because it is the only way they gain access to the standpoint that enables practitioners to act meaningfully and purposefully.” (page 36) Brown et al. put forward the suggestion (page 32) that "activity and situations are integral to cognition and learning”. I like the comparison with learning language and vocabulary. They point out that vocabulary is best learned in context. Ambiguity, polysemy, nuance and metaphor, these are all words which Brown et al. use in terms of language acquisition and I rather like the sense that they can be applied to all learning (ibid: 32 -33). The authors also point out that no tool is any use unless we become accustomed to using it. Of course, as they write, many tools can be used ‘creatively’ and not necessarily in line with specified rules – or differently in different contexts. In terms of considering collaborative learning, collective problem solving and multiple roles (page 40), this article could have been written much more recently.

Is the concept of apprenticeship still valid in a modern economy? They introduce the term cognitive apprenticeship and it would seem to me that learning and education may well become the economy of the 21^st century.

I'll try to find something to back that last point up - anyone got anything?

Vicarious learning?

H800 week 3 activity 5

Havinge read the extract from Cox (2006), ‘Vicarious learning, case-based teaching and educational ICT’, the following is my response:-

AM/PM/mutable identity – vs – PATSy

The potential for this system is far beyond what is described in this article. The collaborative (PM) aspects of learning fit very well with the idea that explaining ideas to others enables us to learn more. (page 3) “Participating in a TDD[1] exercise is a useful way of learning to reflect upon and express one’s understanding of concepts in a domain, ie. a means of developing ‘epistemic fluency’ (Morrison & Collins, 1995).”

The idea that this type of learning is vicarious in nature is a interesting one: one might suppose that all social learning has a vicarious aspect and that if we believe that participative learning can be more beneficial for many learners than a ‘petrol pump attendant’ approach (sorry can’t remember where that analogy comes from – anyone help me out?) then all learning should be social. Changing the position of the subject from learner to teacher, and back again, by explaining ideas to another person might involve mutable identity.

---

[1] TDD = task directed discussion

The mutability of online persona

Sems like Sunday is becoming my study day. I've just been reading Deceit, desire and control: the identities of learners and teachers in cyberspace by Siân Bayne from her book Education in Cyberspace (Land and Bayne, 2005) for my OU course H800 (week 3 activiy 3).

We were asked to address specfic questions in response to the article and here is my output:-

Are your views similar?	I like the sort of post-modern idea (Haraway) that “ a cyborg world might be about lived social and bodily realities in which people are not afraid of their joint kinship with animals and machines, not afraid of permanently partial identities and contradictory standpoints.” (Haraway 1991: 154)
Do you feel uneasy around the uncertainties in relation to how you project your own identity online, or interpret that of others?	I only feel uneasy in that I imagine that I am actually projecting the same me as in any other environment – I would have to ask someone who knows in both contexts if that is true – this makes m slightly uneasy in that I am allowing people who I may never actually meet to ‘know’ me.
By contrast, have you found it liberating to experiment with your own identity online?	I find it’s useful to be able to reflect before writing something in a way that you cannot do when you have a face to face conversation. Elluminate, however, removes that facility to some extent. Of course you can always choose not to speak in f2f but as a tutor you might find that more difficult. *
Have your own reactions to ‘the mutable subject online’ changed with experience in using online interaction?	I like the ideas of mutability – I think that all relationships mutate don’t they?
Do you now feel differently about your own identity relationships – when participating in online forums, for example?	I suppose in fact I may have become less reticent – does this signal ‘danger’ as some of Bayne’s participants suggest?
Why do you think Bayne found differences between students and their teachers?	Power relationships! Mortals and gods ....?!
Can you draw upon the activity theory model to help interpret these differences?	It’s the rules of engagement and the way that a teacher may feel s/he must uphold these, this and the division of labour, these act upon the community which in turn affects how each of the subjects reacts to the instruments in use and produces different objects/outcomes.
Would the different subject positions of teachers in the learning activity system help to explain their reactions and feelings of control, for example?
Does a teacher’s position in authority within the community mean that they feel more confidently able to exert a particular ‘teacherly’ persona using online contributions?	See* above. Authority will always tend to enhance confidence – but personality plays a part as well – that’s a chicken and egg argument though because personality may lead (to some extent) to people becoming teachers.

on the topic of reflective practice

Developing Reflective Practice in Young Students would love some comments on this one please

by the way

relating to last two posts this video

more on technology to transform learning

Following on from yesterday's post and also related to some study for my course (OU H800, week 2 activities 3-10), I was directed by a fellow student (thanks Sian) to the one laptop per child campaign.

http://www.ted.com/talks/nicholas_negroponte_on_one_laptop_per_child.html

Nicholas Negroponte on TED Talks 2006 ( a bit less than 20 minutes)

He has spoken again on TED a few times since. In this talk he outlines the one laptop per child campaign.

What I found most interesting is the notion of learning which appears to be espoused via this campaign. Are we to assume that given the learning materials, anyone can learn? Perhaps the campaign will eventually be underpinned by a curricular framework (thinking about the audio case studies in Canada[1] and South Africa[2], this was a problem for them)?

I am left musing about a rather chicken and egg paradox. Does technology support learning as part of a well thought out curricular plan, as an add-on to that plan, or does it lead the learning?

I started to wonder about the High School in which I work. As Deputy Head, I spend a lot of time trying to help teachers develop ways of engaging students more (to lead, as Negroponte points out, to less truancy, poor behaviour etc.). I do believe that, for the moment at least, technology can engage a wide range of learners. Suppose I persuaded my Head teacher and Governing Body that we should give every student a laptop/i-phone or whatever? Many of our students already have these things at home but aren’t encouraged to bring them to school. Many cannot afford them. Would this be an egalitarian initiative? What about the potential for loss, breakage, stealing – I don’t think stealing would be an issue if everyone had them.

More importantly, would such a move open up learning in ways that I cannot yet imagine?

I discourage rhetorical questions in writing as a rule, however ...

---

[1] JOURNAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION REVUE DE L’EDUCATION A DISTANCE SPRING/PRINTEMPS 2006

VOL. 21, No 1,75-88 The First Wave: The Beginnings of Radio In Canadian Distance Education George H. Buck

[2] Distance Education Vol 27, No. 1, May 2006, pp. 63–86 Using Interactive Radio to Enhance Classroom Learning and Reach Schools, Classrooms, Teachers And Learners Charles Potter* and Gordon Naidoo University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

ed tech transforming teaching?

Just saw this on Twitter: from @endaguinan RT @gsiemens 'I've not found a SINGLE school that shows ANY evidence of using tech to transform teaching and learning' http://bit.ly/8ZkHuI

It's an interesting post - take a look

I think it depends what you call 'transformation'. Has ed tech transformed 'enjoyment' of learning? My (purely anecdotal) evidence would be that it has. Has it made it faster or easier to access information? Again, I'd suggest that it has. I started teaching High School Maths at a time when pocket calculators were not even used in class (we had slide rules and log tables). Now I am producing audio podcasts for my students to listen to and help them with their revision.

BUT has my school embraced ed tech in such a way that it has 'transformed teaching and learning'? I suppose a lot of still teach in a fairly didactic manner - with occasional attempts at discursiveness, participation and collaboration.

Where I think (hope) that ed tech will start to transform teaching and learning is through things like blogging and micro-blogging to help educators share ideas. Perhaps that is the first stage of the metamorphosis?

I'd love some feedback on this one .....

John Seely Brown 'We participate therefore we are'?

H800 Week 2 Activity 1

John Seely Brown 2007 (first eight minutes of talk)

Click here to view the webcast:

Your work so far on H800 includes some individual reading and viewing/listening. Does Brown’s argument imply that this is less valuable than your group work?

I’m not sure that Brown’s use of the phrase ‘study group’ refers only to collaborative study. I think that what he is getting at is the idea that we constantly internalise ideas/facts/skills and build them into our own ‘knowledge framework’. We do this by sharing with people who we meet socially (and this interaction could be online as well as face to face) as well as with people with whom we have a more formal learning or teaching contract. Brown is suggesting that social interaction, symbolic interaction and use of back channels are at least as valuable as reading/viewing as a solitary exercise. In my view, this is because we tend to talk about, or write about, what we have read or seen. In most areas of life this is a conversation or a report. If we are deliberately studying or teaching then it may take other forms.

What are the implications of his argument for your own use of technology – in your own learning and teaching?

I suppose I still do a fair bit of ‘stand and deliver’ style teaching in my High School and even the work that I do with MA students tends to be very ‘guided’ although relying more on discussion (online and face to face). However, I am beginning to make much more use of small group and paired work in all of these situations and trying to help students and colleagues be more reflective in their work – I see this as a way of helping them to crystallise their ideas – to build their framework, if you like – and to then share with others.

In terms of my own learning, I do find the ‘scripted’ collaborative exercises quite difficult (I’ve blogged in the past about the difficulties with asynchronous collaboration) but find that the less formal collaboration via social networking and forum exchanges very valuable.

What are your reactions to Brown’s style of presentation? What are its strengths and weaknesses...? Is it paradoxical that you are invited to listen to one person talking about, among other things, the importance of study groups?

In this first few minutes of Brown’s talk, it is very much a ‘stand and deliver’ mode but he is asking some though provoking questions within that and coming up with ideas that I would want to develop for myself (Cartesian view of knowledge transfer, socially constructed/participative view of learning, Schon – back channels). Some Open University staff development conferences that I have attended have made very good use of panels as a means of presentation of ideas. I suppose when I teach (either at High School level or post-graduate level) I expect to be ‘interrupted’ and questioned at any time. I do feel that it is a good form of discipline to be able to listen to someone all the way through a lecture or other form of presentation and to make notes which will lead to a dialogue later on – even if in the form of a short piece of reflective writing like this one – to be shared with and commented upon by others.

I'd appreciate any comments about the value of group study versus individual study. Is there really any such thing as individual learning? Are we back to Huxley's Noble Savage... ?

reflecting on my role as teacher/learner

H800 activities 8, 9 and 10

The first of the tables above is related to my first experience of formal study after leaving school. The second table relates to more recent informal study

Using the above two tables, I am reflecting on the following key questions:

1. How have your practices as a learner (and/or as a supporter of learning) changed over time, particularly in terms of your use of various digital technologies and resources?



2. What is your experience of informal learning?



3. Can you derive any useful lessons from your personal experiences about the impact of technologies upon teaching and learning practices?

The most obvious difference is the type of technology available since my first experiences were pre pocket calculators or video! On the other hand, I seem to still like portable devices (books, log tables, mobile phones) just as much as I did then and I also appear to like activities which either involve me talking or writing - oh dear, perhaps more than listening or reading? Oops

For me, informal learning is often based on something that I have heard being talked about by friends, family or colleagues or seen other people using. This seems quite interesting to me as it indicates, perhaps, that I like to know that others have a positive experience before I have a try myself?

So, as a teacher, then, I think I might assume that a lot of people prefer talking to listening? Does this mean that an opportunity to be slightly narcisstic - what we often term 'personal reflection' - is a really useful means of getting students to develop metacognitively? I also need to remember that I might not be the only person who likes a little justification in terms of hearing 'this worked for me' - and this might well impinge on work that I do for professional development with colleagues as well as the work that I do with groups of teachers with whom I work on the MA in education programme.

the net generation?

H800 activities 5 and 6 based on an interview with Gregor Kennedy and a webcast from Ian Rowlands

In his introduction, John Pettit of the Open University outlines the background to Kennedy's research. Can 'generation Y' students multitask more efficiently, generate as well as consume net content more effectively? If so, what are the implications for generation X teachers?

The pilot and full research took place in 2006. The pilot involved around 2000 questionnaires of students and the full study involved three more universities with diverse profiles, including some distance learning. The full study used questionnaires, interviews (including phone interviews) and focus groups - where the dynamic can affect results, as Kennedy points out.

The students were the youngest in the university and staff were also included in interviews. The topics covered access to, use of, skills with, preferences for eLearning technologies.

The basic outcome is that Generation Y is no more homogeneous than any other. It did appear that most students coming to university were users of the internet for information finding and messaging. Other uses were much more variable. So the implications for teachers/lecturers/learning activity design is that access and previous use cannot be assumed. Just like any other approach, it is the critical use of information that needs to be taught.

This would seem to be backed up in the webcast by Dr Ian Rowlands (2008) - the written introduction to which includes this 'summary' of the report:

"although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web"

Dr Rowlands also indicates that it is unsurprising that younger people have different brain activity when engaging in ICT activities. They would probably have different brain patterns anyway. As he points out, we could only make a truly valid generational comparison via a time machine. Perhaps a digitally naive Noble Savage might also do the trick - but that would depend on the experiences that s/he had encountered anyway.

Perhaps there are too many variables - Rowlands refers to gender, culture, and so on. He mentions professionals, recently retired professionals, academics. He also talks about perceptions and qualitative responses. When I got my Nintendo Brain Trainer Christmas 2009, my brain age was recorded as 34 (19 years less than my chronological age) and now I've got it down to 20! But the 'tests' are related to things I'm good at such as mental calculation so ...

In my view, the differences are about the development of critical thought through any kind of information gathering (including reading, watching, listening) - we are back to metacognition rather than data gathering, processing rather than data storage. These differences are not generational. They are about access to and engagement with education - a particular type of education. They may be about personality and personal/socio-cultural background.

Incidentally, I gave up watching the webcast half way through and read the transcript - it was just too tiring and too slow! Reading is my quick way of accessing information - what I've been brought up to? My impatient personality? My age? Oh dear, here we go again...

and how does it relate to Michael Wesch's video?

I'd welcome some comments on this one.

References/links
Gregor Kennedy:

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2008, 24(1), 108-122 First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Gregor E. Kennedy, Terry S. Judd, Anna Churchward, Kathleen Gray

Ian Rowlands

do we underestimate the long term effects of technology?

H800 Activity 3

“THE FIRST Law of Technology says we invariably overestimate the short-term impact of new technologies while underestimating their longer-term effects.” (Naughton, 2008[1])

Perhaps the concept of ‘overestimation’ here is more closely linked to a sort of mass hysteria which can develop about new technology – will it undermine society? Might it even destroy the world (Terminator or Artificial Intelligence style)?

When I consider how social and family units have changed over the course of my lifetime, it can be seen that technology has enabled that change, helped us to cope with possible estrangement caused by it, and even started to bring us together again.

For example, my brother emigrated to Canada from the UK in 1973. Would this have been considered a sensible option 100 years earlier? Perhaps in those days he would have been seen as an intrepid explorer (and therefore almost certainly from a well to do family) or would he have been a convict (and therefore almost certainly from a poor background)?

As it was, in those early years after he left we were lucky to get a telephone conversation that wasn’t interrupted – and it certainly cost the earth. So we relied on a different technology – the mail! Nowadays we can contact each other by skype, by e-mail, via social networking, by mobile phone as well as by old fashioned telephone.

More than that: my extended family around the world stays in touch. My professional and learning network has grown through social networking.

But, do we underestimate the longer term effects? I think this is harder to answer. Perhaps what Naughton was driving at was the notion that we simply do not always have the imagination or the courage to grab new technology with both hands and really use it to its full potential.

“Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore.”

Andre Gide

---

[1] The Observer: Business & Media: Media: THE NETWORKER: Thanks, Gutenberg - but we're too pressed for time to read

Access U.K. & Ireland Newspapers

English Español WelshThe Observer: Business & Media: Media: THE NETWORKER:

Thanks, Gutenberg - but we're too pressed for time to read

Observer, The (London, England) - Sunday, January 27, 2008

Author: JOHN NAUGHTON

starting to think about learningdesign

Activity Two – my first reactions to H800

The title of the module is: Technology-enhanced learning: practices and debates. Both practice and debate about learning are areas that interest me. The introduction to the module raised several questions which resonated with me:

1. How do people learn?

2. How does technology affect the way people learn and the outcomes they achieve?

3. What is academia for in the new technological world?

4. What is the balance between reading and writing/responding – how much of this is actual learning (building knowledge)?

5. What are the respective benefits of individual study and group interaction, and how do students feel about different methods of interaction?

6. What is a ‘successful learning experience’ – good grades, passing? acquiring knowledge, for example, or is it for you a means of interpreting ‘reality’?

7. What is learning design?

· What made the online learning material a success?

· Could you capture that and use it in another context?

· Could you tell someone else how to do it?

Here are my initial reactions to these questions – please bear in mind I’ll probably develop more ideas about these .... !

1. Of course, there are very many answers to this question. As a teacher, I believe that it is my responsibility to provide as many different approaches to learning as possible.

2. Of course that links directly to the second question. As teachers we have embraced new technology for centuries, always exploring means to enhance the learning experience. When I first started as a Maths teacher in the late 1970s, pocket calculators were not commonplace in the classroom. Since then we have seen an amazing development of computers, from the old BBC machines, to PCs to laptops to ... well I could go on. Mobile devices will probably be the next big thing.

3. Referring back to Activity One, the potential of mobile learning may well affect what schools and universities are actually for. If we move away from what has been called the ‘stand and deliver’ approach to teaching, then we may also move away from synchronous experiences. Does this mean that the days of timetabled classes are numbered? Perhaps we will be thinking more of sessions where students can tap into learning materials and resources – resources which include the teacher – with guidance rather than conventional teaching? This is all probably absolutely Utopian ....

4. So what is the balance of activities which actually leads to learning? This is what I posted on the private wiki for my Year 11 High School students (aged about 15):

Being a reflective learner means taking something that you already know really well such as how to read, or doing basic Maths, or something about how cars work, or your favourite music or artist. You then use that existing knowledge and apply it in new situations, usually to solve a problem. In so doing, you actually develop new knowledge and it is better than just being told or taught something by someone else because you will remember it so much better. Of course, at school, college or university, and even when training for a new job, you usually have to have someone to guide you. If you take the time to sit and reflect afterwards, write it down in a Learning Journal or mind map, or whatever suits you, you will find that you do something called internalising the knowledge - remember when I talked about metacognitive skills?

If you practice this now, I am absolutely certain that you will find it easier to do every time you have to learn something new. To start with you will just be being descriptive, then as you develop your skills, you will find that you are thinking about thinking (metacognition) and you have become real students.

In other words, I believe that learning, building knowledge, is more than just acquiring information; it is about reflecting on and using earlier knowledge and becoming not just real students but real learners.

5. Collaborative activities do probably lead to another weapon in the learning armoury. I am also of the opinion that responding to peers’ writing can lead to further learning. This is not always easy to do. We are busy, we do not wish to be too controversial, we lack confidence, we do not have the relevant personal experiences. This is an aspect of learning that I wuld like to explore further.

6. Successful means many things to many people of course. If we undertake a course, we probably want to achieve a ‘pass’ and maybe better than that. Surely, though, adult learners do not undertake courses unless they want to actually learn something. Perhaps this also ties in with Activity One, where I wrote about my school staff being encouraged to participate in Professional Development when they get some accreditation for it?

7. Learning design seems a fascinating area. As a mentor for other tutors on distance learning courses, this will be an area that I hope will lead me to better practice. I have already found that studying H809 and H808 has improved my practice in designing online activities, at least in terms of increased interaction amongst students.

Further reading

Tara Brabazon (2008, p.50). Her article is a critical review of Clay Shirky’s Here Comes Everybody,