Learning Theories

 Below are just a few keywords on the main learning theories as a reminder prompt for myself.

BEHAVIOURISM

• Learning is a perminant change in behaviour
•  Conditioning
• Operant conditioning - participant - follows through with an action i.e. pulls a lever - behavioural chaining - learnt steps to reach desired behaviour
• Classic conditioning - introduced stimulant - something happens to the participant
• Observable & measurable
• Change in behaviour
• Black box
• Lower level thinking
• Behavioural psychology
• Objectivism ( claimed at least)
• Programmed
• Automatic
• Conditioning
• Routing skill development
• Teacher centred 
• Outside source of knowledge
• Reinforced
• Practised
• Repetitive
• Processes - steps -stages
• Programmed instruction

http://www.flickr.com/photos/psychpics/4542749171/ 

           COGNITIVISM

• Learning is a change in understanding or reorganisation of cognitive structures
• Knowledge is abstract and symbolic
• Focus on how the brain works - improving memory and increasing meaning
• 3 stage information processing model, sensory memory, short term memory, long term memory

1. Sensory memory:

• information absorb from the environment through the senses.
• Filtered
• Forgotten after a few seconds unless it triggers interest or relevance

 2.   Short term memory:

•  Retained for up to 20 seconds
• Rehearsing can increase retention
• Can retain up to 7 items
• The 7 items can be clusters of information.n

3.    Long term memory: 

• Unlimited capacity 
• Rote memorisation can help information reach this level but it is easier if the information is interesting.  

• Shema = pre-existing knowledge - internal knowledge structures - base knowledge that allows new knowledge to be absorbed. 
• Meaningful information is easier to absorb
• Retention works better when - new knowledge is linked to prior knowledge - information is grouped in 'chuncks'
• Combining new with old information leads to deeper levels of processing. 
• Learner centred. 

           CONSTRUCTIVISM

• Learning process:

1.  share a common understanding of content
2. Use a suitable cultural, physical or virtual tool
3. Exchange ideas
4. Internalise the new information

• Very student centred
• Teachers role is to model and scaffold
• Learning to occur in realistic settings
• Prior experiences are used to construct new meaning
• Knowledge is gained from internal sources.
• Emphasis on problem solving
• Intrinsic motivation
• Observational learning
• Encourages social interactions with experts. 

• 3 levels of proximal development:

1. Current ability
2. Possible with support
3. Unachievably even with outside help

These dot points have been sourced from the Pedagogical Content Knowledge week 2 readings  and 

Merger, B., (1998). Instructional Design & Learning Theory. 

Digital Native of Digital Immigrant?

The following ideas come from a commentator on technology in education called Marc Prensky who created a games based learning company called Games2train and was formally a teacher himself.

A few of Prensky's articles are part of our readings for week 1 including the article in which the below concept emerged (Prensky 2001a), and another where Prensky claims that if we don't engage children, we will enrage them Prensky 2005.

 Prensky 2001b expands on the ideas from Prensky 2001a by discussing why he believes digital natives thinking processes have developed slightly differently to digital immigrants due to the increased digital contact experienced by digital natives.

Digital Natives are;

Born into a world where the use of technology is normal and expected and are very good at adapting to new technologies. They find it very difficult to 'slow down' for traditional forms of learning and even think differently to older generations. Linear thinking is found to be boring and often results in students 'tuning out'. These same students, if engaged, excel at multitasking, representational comprehension, mind mapping, inductive reasoning and other skills in which modern digital medias  regularly utilise (Prensky 2001b). 

Digital Immigrants;      

Started life before the technological boom and have had to adapt and relearn behaviours to fit into a technological world. Understanding new technologies does not come naturally. They where taught to think linearly by cause and effect

Closing Comments:

I personally agree with this theory to some existent but mostly from the middle to upper classes of society. There are still young people growing up today that have a basic understanding and use of ICT but have a narrower use or ability to develop ICT adaptability skills due to economic reasons or lack of parent involvement reducing home exposure and the older equipment or lack of program's available in some schools. This divide has reduced and is still reducing due to lower prices but it has not vanished completely.  

References

Prensky, M (2005). Engage us or Enrage us. EDUCATE Review September /October 2005. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0553.pdf 

Prensky, M (2001a). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. From On the Horizons MCB University Press Vol. 9, No. 5, October 200. Retrieved http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf

Prensky, M (2001b). Digital Natives, Digital Iimigrants, Part II: Do they Really Think Differently? From On the Horizons MCB University Press Vol. 9, No. 6, October 200. Retrieved http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part2.pdf

Interesting links

This section is for interesting links I come across  during GDLT 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/ks2/    

This site provides some teaching adds and simple explanations for English and math subjects. 

It can be used by teachers and students

  I came across this website in the week 3 readings for EDED20490 Literature. 

Here are two useful sites that can be used by teachers to source mental maths question or by students to practice their mental maths skills. 

http://au.ixl.com/math/year-6
http://www.teachingtreasures.com.au/teaching-tools/mental-mathematics/Main-Mental-Math.htm

Intro to this Blog

                                                  

Sourced from Flickr, CubaGallery, colour in the hand. 2012. Retrieved 29/3/13

This blog was created to show weekly reflections experienced during the EDED 20491: ICTs for Learning Design subject within the Graduate Diploma of Learning and Teaching (GDLT)  and compulsory assignments.

As the sentence above indicates I am a student in this course.

Although I have had computers around me the majority of my life, I have resisted technology trends to the extent that I have never bought my own phone (all hand me downs), I still don't have a smart phone and have only recently started using an iPad ( it still surprises me that spell check acknowledges the word iPad without complaining to much). Note: spell check is actually still a little out of date in that it wants to change it to iPod. I completely missed the iPod phase.

So in summary if you read between the lines ( as I have politely left it out),  you will probably hear the swearing, at least for the first few weeks ( I hope only for the first few weeks).

Regards

Your friendly blog host

Faye Prideaux

Wiki Phone Exercise

This exercise is from Week 2 and what you are seeing is only the reflection section of the assignment. Prior to writing this blog I participated in a Wiki debate using Bono's six thinking hats. As I am still in the 'I hate you technology' phase of learning about ICT ( remember the days when it use to just be IT), I chose the black hats side of the argument.  This half of the assignment has two components. The first is the reflection of this exercise as a learning tool, and the second is how does this exercise relate to the main learning theories, behaviourism, constructivism, cognivism and connectivisim. 

Section One

 The reoccurring themes within the black hats section of the Wiki 'phone use in classrooms' debate included viewing inappropriate material during class time, potential for bullying, cheating, and possible discrimination against students without personal mobile phones. Something else to think about is the risk that mobile phone use in classrooms will reflect a reoccurring trend found outside of the classroom where phones interference and sometimes remove normal face to face verbal interaction. 

One issue I hadn't though about before it was brought up was the issue of privacy when personal phones are used as a teaching tool within classrooms. Does a teacher have the 'right' to review a students personal phone? So how about if the phones are school property instead of personal? My take on this is that there is already better technological options available that school could purchase for classroom use that would work better, likely be cheaper in the long run and are much more controllable.

In summary the black hat side of the debate is concerned with the limit means of control inherent with the use of personal mobile phones within classrooms.

In regards to the use of the Wiki forum as a teaching exercise, my personal experiences was not positive. This was the first time I have tried to use Wiki and it keep freezing before I could finish writing. I also discovered when I returned to the forum that my comments had not actually saved.

 I have done a similar exercise in a classroom which was effective in presenting the different perspectives in a fun and informative way. It worked best with only a few participants in each group as this allowed everyone time to present their ideas  within the group and them compare the group ideas with the other groups within the allocated time. With larger groups the internal group discussions often went overtime. This time issue is something that the use of Wiki reduces as the activity can go other a longer period and to be fare, it does allow the use of group activities for distant students.

For me personally, Wiki is still in my personal 'I hate you category' reserved solely for technological gadgets and tools that annoy me.

Section Two

I believe this activity is more cognitive and constructive more than behaviourists as it is more learner based than teacher based and focuses on first presenting internal thoughts, comparing these thoughts against other people's thoughts and then evolving into a joint consensus but still acknowledging other view points.