Module 6 Final Blog

My Philosophy of learning

Education has evolved through centuries of change socially, economically and politically. Now it faces a new challenge – technology – that will either thrust education into the future or hold it back in time. The later would impede on social and economical growth, as the world needs productive members of society to sustain human life and community development. The future of education relies on the willingness to take risk and immerse ourselves into technology so we can have a better understanding of how technology can help us. Saettler (2004) contends that educational technology is not all about the technical devices but also about the technological process.  

If we hold true to the idea that educational technology is both device and process, we should recognize educational theories in Constructivism (Vygotsky, XXXX and Connectivism (Siemens, 2004) in our educational curriculum.  Education should be enticing, invigorating, stimulating, and inspiring. Students should be asking “How”, “When”, “What”, Why” and “Where” and at the same time, explore those questions readily through technology. Teachers should connect with other professionals, teachers, experts, and others beyond their geographical area to grasp a broader view and thought process so that they i.e. teachers are able to better explain and demonstrate to their students the concept, methodology, and logical reasoning to an idea. Equally important, students should be able to connect with other students, experts and professionals who can enlighten them on subjects of interest and boost their learning drive. Education should be free flowing, fluid and attainable to all.

In my own words,

Lynda Marshall

Saettler, P. (2004). The Evolution of American Educational Technology. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publication Inc.

Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from http://elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.). [Adobe PDF]. pp. 1-91. Retrieved from http://generative.edb.utexas.edu/classes/knl2008sum2/eweekly/vygotsky1978.pd

F

Blog Module 5

Briefly describe a situation in which you have encouraged people to use a new technology and have been met with resistance or disappointing results.

Interestingly, I am in a middle of a situation where faculties have to incorporate online classes to their curriculum this upcoming fall term. The two faculty involved in this pilot phase initially dug their heels and approached the project with negative attitudes. At every corner, the two faculty would always ask the “how” and “why” questions.

What attitudes did these people exhibit?

They did not hesitate to show their disagreement with the project. They continuously proclaimed that their courses are hands-on and project-based learning. For every possibility, the two faculty would match with “how” question.

What behaviors did they demonstrate?

The two faculties appeared to lack confidence in them and in their ability to teach online. More so, they did not seem satisfied with the idea that online classes equally challenging and beneficial to students.

Using Keller’s ARCS model, describe how you could change the motivation of these people, or learners, to encourage success?

Given Keller’s ARCS model i.e. Attention, Relevance, Confidence and Satisfaction (Learning-Theories.com, 2013), experience is still the best teacher. The two faculties will experience growing pains during the online course development process before appreciating the benefits of an online course. The cliché “the proof is in the pudding” implies that the two faculties will have to see for themselves how students can benefit from activities and assignment, what a great motivator the discussion forums can be for both parties (students and instructor), and the amount of attention students seek from their instructor – equating to Keller’s (Learning-Theories.com) relevance model. All in all, the best approach that proved to be effective for the two faculties was Keller’s (Learning-Theories.com, 2013) confidence model. The two faculties had to gain self-confidence in their abilities to create an equally relevant online course as their traditional face-to-face class. The confidence came in the form of praise, demonstration, and most importantly, support from their Industrial and Engineering Dean.

Lynda Marshall

Reference

Learning-Theories.com (2013). ARCS Model of Motivational Design (Keller). [web article]. Retrieved from http://www.learning-theories.com/kellers-arcs-model-of-motivational-design.html