Do you believe that humans have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group” as Rheingold proposed in his discussion?
The idea that humans have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group” as discussed by Howard Rheingold in his video “Howard Rheingold: Way-New Collaboration” is an interesting perspective for discussion. There are many situations that can be discussed that support this notion. One situation, which is currently occurring, is how people group together to help during a disaster. For example, the efforts of many individuals to come together to help those affected by the disaster in Haiti. People are working together to collect and transport supplies to the affected area while others are traveling to the area to work in groups that will assist in search and rescue efforts. There is a basic need to reach out and be part of a collaborating group to bring about relief during this type of times. Another situation is during the act of celebration such as Independence Day or New Year’s Day. Individuals tend toward a natural grouping behavior to celebrate shared experiences or histories. For example, millions of people group together around the globe on New Year’s Eve to bring in the New Year together. It is an interesting concept considering it is just another day in the time span. What really makes January 1st any different from December 30th or January 2nd other than at some point in time it became the starting point of the year and a chance to be better. There are other situations where the basic instinct to group can be observed such as the tendencies to group by similarity, group for conquering, group for looting and rioting, and group for punishment. The last three examples are not representative of the best part of the human nature; however, they are very powerful aspects that occur. There are many examples throughout history where people grouped together to conquer other people or lands. A more recent example for looting and rioting would be the LA riots that took place in the early nineties. As for an example of grouping for punishment, a prime example would be covered in the mob mentality dealing with lynch mobs.
How can technology facilitate collaboration among learners based on constructivist principles?
The ability of technology to facilitate a collaborative process is shown in distant learning environments where technology is utilized in collaborative efforts of learners as they work on projects with group members that are located across vast distances. These learners work towards problem solving on issues as they communicate to enrich their experiences through a discussion and reflection process. Without the technology to allow this effective and timely interaction, the ability to collaborate on projects and issues would be limited to the physical arena of proximity.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Module 2- Cognitivism
At http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html, Bill Kerr wrote, “I've also noticed that learning theorists, who have a different favourite _ism to mine, might still come up with significant findings in their empirical studies that I find hard to reject or ignore”
I agree with Bill Kerr’s comment regarding relevant aspects in the different theorists’ _isms that are difficult to dismiss even though the theory is not all encompassing on its own. As I go through and consider the components of several of the _isms, I find descriptions about learning I have observed in classrooms as well as in other social settings where learning takes place. When considering how learning occurs, it makes sense to see a variety of methods or processes that are productive. Learning takes place in a plethora of settings involving a diverse group of individuals, which would suggest a variety of learning processes. For example, individuals tend to like praise or recognition and will acquire learned behavior in response to receiving positive feedback. Children will learn behaviors in response to being given praise for a job well done. Teenagers will improve homework skills in response to positive reinforcement from parents and teachers. Adults will learn and follow procedures at work in response to positive recognition from a boss. It is easy to observe behaviorism in action; however, it is not proof behaviorism will absolutely be true for all situations. Other _isms such as cognitivism and constructivism, which have premises of learners like computers where information is input, processed, and output in some form and learners must construct meaning to learn. Yes, there is a great benefit in the learning process for students who are actively engaged; however, not all learning experiences are necessarily active processes. I have observed learning in a foreign language class that occurred in what would be considered an immersed environment where some learning was the result of unconscious modeling. Some of the students had not even realized they had incorporated some of the vocabulary at first.
As Bill Kerr discussed, it is definitely possible to acknowledge findings throughout the different _isms that have merit when considering the process of learning. Since learning occurs in many different areas, with many different people at many different stages it is logical to consider a variety of paths to understand how it occurs.
At http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html, Karl Kapp wrote, “The issue many forget is that “learning” is not one thing…it is a multi-layered word that tends to get treated as if it were just one thing…and it’s not. It is multi-facetted and that is why developing new models for “learning” is so difficult…there are too many levels for one school of thought or one model to do it all”
Karl Kapp’s statement seems to center in on a crucial aspect of understanding how learning occurs, and that is to understand that the process of learning is a diverse and complicated issue. When you consider how different individuals are from one another and how diverse their environments can be from day to day as well as from one another, it would be difficult to automatically accept that their learning experiences and processes would be the same. If this premise is accepted, then it would have to assume that both genetics and environment have no bearing on the functioning process or path in which an individual learns. This is to say that all humans would be exactly the same in how their body functions in the overall learning process for every situation. We know not all individuals will have the same perceptions of a situation or gain the same meaning from the occurrences that happen, so why would we decide that all individuals would be exactly the same in how they learn? Why would we decide that all situations are the same for how the learning would need to take place? It would seem more logical that the learning method or mode would be a combination of the requirements for the intended learning and the predisposition of the learner. For example, does the intended learning involve an active process or a passive process?
We know that the physical natures of individuals are remarkably different to the extent that medicine and treatment will have varied effects on the individuals. Basically body chemistry varies, which means the responses to outside forces and influences can vary. This is the same body chemistry that affects how the brain perceives, stores, and access information in the brain. This would imply that the how and why of processes dealing with the brain would vary as well. This does not mean there will not be similarities; however, probability would also tell us there would definitely be differences as well.
I agree with Bill Kerr’s comment regarding relevant aspects in the different theorists’ _isms that are difficult to dismiss even though the theory is not all encompassing on its own. As I go through and consider the components of several of the _isms, I find descriptions about learning I have observed in classrooms as well as in other social settings where learning takes place. When considering how learning occurs, it makes sense to see a variety of methods or processes that are productive. Learning takes place in a plethora of settings involving a diverse group of individuals, which would suggest a variety of learning processes. For example, individuals tend to like praise or recognition and will acquire learned behavior in response to receiving positive feedback. Children will learn behaviors in response to being given praise for a job well done. Teenagers will improve homework skills in response to positive reinforcement from parents and teachers. Adults will learn and follow procedures at work in response to positive recognition from a boss. It is easy to observe behaviorism in action; however, it is not proof behaviorism will absolutely be true for all situations. Other _isms such as cognitivism and constructivism, which have premises of learners like computers where information is input, processed, and output in some form and learners must construct meaning to learn. Yes, there is a great benefit in the learning process for students who are actively engaged; however, not all learning experiences are necessarily active processes. I have observed learning in a foreign language class that occurred in what would be considered an immersed environment where some learning was the result of unconscious modeling. Some of the students had not even realized they had incorporated some of the vocabulary at first.
As Bill Kerr discussed, it is definitely possible to acknowledge findings throughout the different _isms that have merit when considering the process of learning. Since learning occurs in many different areas, with many different people at many different stages it is logical to consider a variety of paths to understand how it occurs.
At http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html, Karl Kapp wrote, “The issue many forget is that “learning” is not one thing…it is a multi-layered word that tends to get treated as if it were just one thing…and it’s not. It is multi-facetted and that is why developing new models for “learning” is so difficult…there are too many levels for one school of thought or one model to do it all”
Karl Kapp’s statement seems to center in on a crucial aspect of understanding how learning occurs, and that is to understand that the process of learning is a diverse and complicated issue. When you consider how different individuals are from one another and how diverse their environments can be from day to day as well as from one another, it would be difficult to automatically accept that their learning experiences and processes would be the same. If this premise is accepted, then it would have to assume that both genetics and environment have no bearing on the functioning process or path in which an individual learns. This is to say that all humans would be exactly the same in how their body functions in the overall learning process for every situation. We know not all individuals will have the same perceptions of a situation or gain the same meaning from the occurrences that happen, so why would we decide that all individuals would be exactly the same in how they learn? Why would we decide that all situations are the same for how the learning would need to take place? It would seem more logical that the learning method or mode would be a combination of the requirements for the intended learning and the predisposition of the learner. For example, does the intended learning involve an active process or a passive process?
We know that the physical natures of individuals are remarkably different to the extent that medicine and treatment will have varied effects on the individuals. Basically body chemistry varies, which means the responses to outside forces and influences can vary. This is the same body chemistry that affects how the brain perceives, stores, and access information in the brain. This would imply that the how and why of processes dealing with the brain would vary as well. This does not mean there will not be similarities; however, probability would also tell us there would definitely be differences as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)