AT, ET, DNS, and ARCS

I once had this amazing student.  He was bright, funny, highly intelligent, and musically gifted.  I swear he was smarter than me and had a larger vocabulary than me.  If I’m wrong about those observations, I can say with no uncertainty, he was funnier than me!

This student, who I’ll call John, was a tenth grader that read at a post-secondary grade level.  He would read anything you put in front of him, any genre, any format.  John particularly enjoyed novels from the Harlem Renaissance even though he had little to no understanding of the culture or the times.  But John couldn’t write.  He had a writing disability that translated into some fine motor issues, difficulty with transcribing his thoughts, and even problems with constructing paragraphs.  You could watch time pass as he attempted to respond to writing prompts and essay questions.  Ten minutes would go by and he had written his name, illegibly. 

John was highly verbal and very articulate so I figured a transcription software program [an assistive technology (AT) device when used by someone with a disability] would be just the thing to get him again interested in school and maybe move on to college after graduation.  He was initially excited by the prospect, he enjoyed training the program, and, as most teens do, he enjoyed stringing together cuss words and other profanities to watch Dragon (Dragon Naturally Speaking or DNS) record them effortlessly. 

He used the program for an assignment.  One assignment.  Only one assignment.  An assignment he never even turned in!  I was crushed.  I kept asking him to use it.  I kept calling him out of his advisory classes to come and use Dragon for his work but he didn’t.  So I got John a laptop with the program and talked with his mom.  He still didn’t use it.  I asked him why he wouldn’t use it, why he wouldn’t do his work.  John never did answer me.  It just seemed as if he’d lost all interest, in much the same way that he had with his written work.  Now, reflecting on it all, maybe it was an overriding fear of failure.  After all, you can’t fail if you don’t try.

If I had to do it all again, I would implement Keller’s ARCS model to motivate John to use Dragon and find the academic success he was worthy of.

A- Attention

I did have John’s attention.  His curiosity was instantly peaked and I didn’t quell it by disallowing him to explore the program using academically inappropriate language. 

I could have upped the ante and sustained his attention by showing him how the program could do more than just transcribe his speech into a word processing program.  He may have been more motivated to know he could write emails using Dragon.

R- Relevance

John saw the relevance of the program.  He did use it to complete a writing assignment.  If John had turned the assignment into his teacher, he may have considered the program to be more relevant.

If given a chance for a do over, I would (as previously stated) show him the other capabilities of the program.  I would also have John call over to the local colleges’ disability centers and have him inquire into which translation programs they used.  Or better yet, have him send emails to them using Dragon.

C- Confidence

I want to blame this on John…had he turned in his assignment then he would have gained some confidence… 

But I’m a teacher so I have to take some responsibility for this.  His first written assignment crafted using Dragon should have been for me.  I should have given John his first assignment, sat there with him as he completed it, and been there as he emailed it to me.  Then I could have been the one to assign him his first grade on a written assignment.  I could have then graded him on a rubric and provided him with a copy of previous work so he could see the difference.  I’m certain the comparison alone would have given John enough confidence to continue using the program.

S- Satisfaction

As a teacher, I want to think that John being able to see what he is truly capable of would provide him the satisfaction necessary to continue using the program.  If that weren’t enough for him, I would hope that his academic progress would provide the satisfaction.  Other than that, I’m not really sure what it is I could do.  I open this up to you for commentary.

Network Connections

My Network Connections

I have had or been part of networks for as long back as I can remember.  These networks help me to navigate new environments; assist me in attaining my academic and professional goals; serve as a source of encouragement and support; and keep me connected to the goings-on in the world.  So, I can’t say how my networks have changed the way I learn but I can tell you how they have been part of my learning.

I am a learner that needs to interact with my learning material.  When I am not given the opportunity to talk to a video or to argue with a podcast, I reach out to my network to find people that will talk through concepts, events, formulas, and the like, with me.  That usually starts with some kind of random question that I post to my Facebook status and typically results in comments and lists of resources from various friends.  When I don’t have time to wait, I will reach out to classmates via text message or Skype.  Oh, and for those times when I am so far from understanding something that I don’t know how to even ask the question, Wikipedia and You Tube have been there for me every time!

You can’t hunt mastodons while your fighting with other groups

You can’t hunt mastodons while your fighting with other groups and you probably can’t catch one by yourself either. Collaboration is the key to finding food, health, wealth, and your way in society. Collaboration, also referred to as collectivism, isn’t a new concept; it’s something we humans have been doing throughout all our years. Is it innate as Rheingold suggests? Well, I can’t answer that. It seems that many in the world get by with little to no human interaction but maybe I’m wrong. And I don’t know if they are happy or not, so please don’t ask me. The only thing I do know is that they would have more if they were willing to collaborate.

That “more” can be defined as pretty much anything you want. More information. More money. More education. More travel. More food. More friends. More technology. More freedom. More A’s in your Quantitative Reasoning course (shout out to my Cohort Crew!)…OK, maybe that last one is just about me but I think you get the point.

Technology makes getting groups together, to work toward common goals, easier than it has ever been.

I’m not exactly reaching out to the masses with this blog but it does allow me to communicate ideas and even ask for input from my peers. Wikipedia is another example of the power behind collective action… an online encyclopedia with a level of accuracy that is comparable to the print versions we always thought to be The Truth but with entries and revisions that are real-time (there’s even a wiki page for that!).

How do constructivist principles come into play? That’s easy. Technology allows people to develop their own background knowledge and to create their own experience. Collaboration tools allow learners to reach out to one another, to share and gather more information through a variety of dialogue styles, and also provide a platform for self-reflection.

Want a tangible example? Chile mine rescue spurred unprecedented global coordination

Becognorism

The acquisition of knowledge is the result of exposure, reinforcement, application, interpretation, recollection, etc, etc, etc. With so many components and so many variables like cognition, development, motivation and so on, it is inappropriate to select a theory such as behaviorism or cognitivism as the be all end all.

Behaviorist approaches may work best with spelling and multiplication tables and cognitivist approaches may work best with comprehension and health but what if rote memorization isn’t the way that Johnny will learn to spell and what if Ana, who can explain the correlation between dental hygiene and heart disease, forgets to take a shower? Instead of taking a one theory fits all approach to instructions, we must look at which theory best suits the learning objective, the learner, and the immediacy of application. We may then find that a marriage of learning theories is far more appropriate than an all for one, one for all approach to classroom instruction.

I believe that this is especially important when considering the impact of technology of on teaching, learning, knowledge, and communications. But that is a discussion better had after introductions to constructionism and connectivism.


http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html

Online educators as...

Online educators as master artists, network administrators, concierges, and curators are accurate metaphors for educators in online environments (Siemens, 2008). These various metaphors address educators’ roles in guiding, facilitating, directing, and connecting learners toward the learning objectives and resources even when the resources are the educators themselves. Siemens’ (2008) educator as curator goes so far as to describe the role of educator in creating a space “in which knowledge can be created, explored, and connected” (p. 17) but doesn’t address a need especially relevant to the K12 online classroom, safety.

Void from these metaphors, these descriptions, is a mention of the responsibility of online educators to provide a safe space for learning and a sense of security amongst learners. That is a primary need of learners of all ages. Learners must feel safe to express themselves, to push themselves beyond their current level of understanding, and feel secure enough to admit they just don’t know. Failure to do so generates learners who have sought only to solidify their own understanding of academic concepts and the world as opposed to learners who are free to explore and generate completely new knowledge. Therefore I propose the metaphor of custodian for educators in online environments.

Educators as custodians may or may not be a new concept but I propose that in the online environment, these educators are keepers and stewards of information and artifacts and protectors of learners and the learning experience.

Resources

Five lessons from the nation’s best online teacher: Nonprofits create first-ever awared to recognize excellence in online teaching. (2010, September 13). eSchool News: Technology News for Today’s K-20 Educator. Retrieved from: http://www.eschoolnews.com/2010/09/13/five-lessons-from-the-nations-best-online-teache/?

Pierce, D. These Traits make online teachers successful: Clarity, creativity, and compassion are key characteristics for online instructors, says UCF researcher. (2008. November 7). ). eSchool News: Technology News for Today’s K-20 Educator. Retrieved from: http://www.eschoolnews.com/2008/11/07/these-traits-make-online-teachers-successful/?

Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for educators and designers. Paper presented to ITFORUM. Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Motivating Secondary Students in an Online Learning Environment

The irony of my video presentation is that in it I mention how students lose motivation when they find the task to be too difficult. That was me up until about an hour ago, ready to call it all quits and just walk away from it, when I was finally able to pull the audio and slides together. That was after pairing down my original plans to something simple just to get it done. Regardless, I really enjoyed this project. It forced me find meaning from materials I had difficulty comprehending and provided me with the chance to synthesize prior knowledge of classroom instruction, skill instruction, and intervention strategies for the traditional high school with newly acquired knowledge of effective online instruction, environment, motivational strategies, and teaching in order to create a foundation for academic intervention for online high schools.

Here is what I have put together Motivating Secondary Students in an Online Learning Environment

Technology and Media for Distance Education

The classification of static and dynamic technologies with the inclusion of those considered "middle of the road" (Moller, 2008) proved to be more difficult than I had anticipated. I had to keep asking myself whether the technologies, when used in educational settings, would be considered teacher driven, student driven, or teacher facilitated. In doing so, it became evident that existing educational technologies can be modified to meet the growing needs of learners and educators since some tools reside within more than one classification.

While technologies evolve to meet varying needs, I find myself stuck in the middle of the road. I want to be able to implement dynamic technologies in instruction but find myself in a place where it is that I am having difficulties navigating such technologies myself. Web 3.0 or semantic web, I get the premise yet I don't understand it. I do understand that it is all semantics (couldn't resist) but I'm not certain what that means as far as how I interact with the Web let alone the implications for my students. With that, I now understand why teachers sometimes refuse to embrace new instructional methods. I love my Web 2.0 world, it's safe there because I know how to navigate it, however, I do not want to go by way of the dinosaur so I must continue to interact with these new technologies.

Moving Toward Dynamic Technologies - Concept Map

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AXeZgatDfDm4ZGZiM3dtZjZfMWM0NWhjdmM2&hl=en