Reflective Post #4: Collective Intelligence and Personal Learning Environments

Collective Intelligence: What it could mean for education

Bullock, Shaun Michael 2011

Bullock’s main emphasis is on the need for education reform and using technology to truly create this reform. He states that it’s difficult for teachers to change education because many of us teach as we were taught because it is where we feel most comfortable. The new technology available to us is what should and will drive educational reform. He completely disagreed with Prensky’s “natives vs. immigrants” debate and believes we all have something to contribute, regardless of our age.

Bullock discussed four different types of true collective intelligence: sharing, cooperation, collective production and collective action (46). These four methods are difficult for teachers to integrate because our focus on individual learning as a goal remains strong. He raises the important question of how we can genuinely and authentically co-construct knowledge and how can we transfer this type of pedagogy to the classroom? He advises that we must take advantage of our “natural human impulse to create and share” (47).

How collective intelligence redefines education

Ilon, Lynn 2011

Ilon’s main emphasis is that education is not changing the way the world is changing. “The logic behind Google, Lines, Wikipedia, etc. is not used as a learning tool,” states Ilon (1). Even though educators may utilize and value these sites, education is not embracing this collective intelligence as a much needed style of learning. Ilon discusses the current style of education: education as managed intelligence, system controlled, expert driven, outcome defined and efficiency constrained.

Ilon sees education as controlled from the top and believes it is rooted in the need for more expertise in math and reading due to the industrial revolution. Education must be controlled in order to maximize societal benefits. Teachers are seen as having a mastery of knowledge and learning grows upon this expertise. The knowledge we convey is fixed. Education’s main concern is lower costs and higher test scores, along with measurable outcomes.

Our current system is inefficient where collective intelligence is more dynamic and more applicable to today’s world. Collective intelligence can handle the rapid change of knowledge. If used properly in schools, Ilon states that the primary goal of education will be learning rather than test scores. She concludes that our new economic system supports the collective intelligence method.

7 things you should know about Personal Learning Environments

Educause, 2009

Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) are different from the Learning Management Systems (LMS) that some may view as similar. Where LMS platforms are course centric, PLE platforms are focused on the learner. It is a completely new approach to the idea of how students approach learning. Many universities are incorporating PLEs by having groups of students create a blog, use YouTube or Flickr. Instructors provide the framework for the PLE but try to stay hands-off as much as possible so as not to intrude on the whole point and value to the PLE. Students’ learning possibilities grow immensely when the boundaries of the classroom are removed; they are in charge of their own learning.

A few issues arise when using PLEs, especially in the beginning stages. The lack of continuity for students, along with the vague definition, may prove unsettling to those students who desire more structure. Students will also need self-awareness and time to get used to this new method. It is also difficult for students as most of them are unaware of how they learn best. This is quite a bit of responsibility, especially in the beginning, for a student. This, however, appears to be the future of education and, as the use of PLEs increase, students will become more skilled in it. Educause states that teaching will become “less of a matter of data transmission and more of a collaborative exercise in collection, orchestration, remixing and organization of data” (2).

7^th grade PLE video

Wendy Drexler

The student begins by showing us how she has all of her information organized. She doesn’t exclude the “fun stuff” but has all of her school-specific sites together at the bottom of her screen. She has her own schedule of when she checks her sites each day; she decides when and what she will work on.

Google docs, a blog, websites in social bookmarking, online note-taking and Glogster are some of the online tools she regularly uses. She uses Google docs to share her final presentations and products. Her blog is also used to share but is mostly used for reflections on her work. She uses the online note-taking tool to help her keep track of her research.

She was watching a show on box jellyfish and decided it looked interesting so she researched it. Using Glogster, she created an online poster of her findings. She then emailed a scientist in Australia and the U.S. for peer review of her facts. Skype is also used for peer review and discussion.

The student stated that she really enjoyed learning this way. She enjoyed the freedom that comes with this type of learning. The topic itself is not to be avoided but she can choose how and when she researches. This does provide more responsibility for the student and she stated it’s difficult at times to avoid the social media distractions. She stated that it’s much “cooler” than bookwork and she can do her entire science class without a pencil.

Reflection

While reading through these articles, my emotions ran the gamut from frustration (education is so hard to change) to excitement (that 7^th grader’s PLE blew my mind!) to anger (I taught at an online school and we didn’t even hear of these things) to anticipation (how can I use this in my classroom?). I agreed with Ilon that education hasn’t really changed all that much. Yes, we have new tools and new methods but the underlying method of pedagogy hasn’t changed that much: teachers are the experts, knowledge is static and students are there to learn from us. We have all of this technology at our disposal, and all of the students’ knowledge of the technology, and we are, frankly, wasting it.

The new Common Core standards kept coming into my head, the focus on nonfiction texts and lack of creativity, in particular. If we are not instilling creativity and imagination and collaboration in our students, where will the next generation’s brilliant and innovative ideas come from? By not allowing our students to participate in PLEs and collective intelligence methods, are we stunting their future growth and ability to perform in today’s society? Ilon stated that our economic structure has completely changed; yet our education system has not. Isn’t that worrisome? I feel as though we should be focused on these ideas and constraints instead of worrying so much about test scores.

I found myself thinking of ways I can incorporate these ideas into my 8^th grade math classroom. I think it will be tough because, in mathematics especially, we are definitely expert driven and outcome defined. How can I use PLEs or collective intelligence to study the Pythagorean theorem or area of a triangle? I think it will be tough but definitely worthwhile to explore these new methods of learning.

Two items resonated with me. One, from the Educause article, statement that discussed students’ metacognition skills: students don’t know how they learn best. I have said it a million times if I’ve said it once: students don’t know what they do or don’t know. This self-awareness, of how they learn and what they know, is a skill that many just don’t have. I’m constantly trying to think of ways to help increase this knowledge. I also was struck by how excited Ms. Drexler was in her video when talking about science. She even did a research project just for fun because she thought it was interesting. I can see using PLEs and collective intelligence as a way to inspire this type of interest in learning just for learning’s sake and that will be amazing!

Activity #3: Exemplary, Equitable, Constructivist Lesson

Here is the lesson I chose: http://www.nsa.gov/academia/_files/collected_learning/high_school/statistics/typical_american_student.pdf

In this lesson, students will use graphing calculators to interpret data collected in class. With this data and the calculators, students will find the mean, median, mode, summary statistics, bar graphs, box and whiskers plot and scatterplots. Students will then report their findings in a summary letter.

Common Core standards addressed: 

• CCSS.Math.Content.8.SP.A.1
 Construct and interpret scatter plots for bivariate measurement data to investigate patterns of association between two quantities. Describe patterns such as clustering, outliers, positive or negative association, linear association, and nonlinear association.

• CCSS.Math.Content.8.SP.A.2
 Know that straight lines are widely used to model relationships between two quantitative variables. For scatter plots that suggest a linear association, informally fit a straight line, and informally assess the model fit by judging the closeness of the data points to the line.

By the end of the lesson, students will be able to: 
collect datafind the mean, median, mode and summary statistics for their datacreate a bar graph, box and whiskers plot and scatterplotinterpret the datasummarize the data
Materials needs: 
activity sheetsmeasuring tapeTI-83 graphing calculators

This lesson is exemplary, constructivist and equitable for the following reasons:

• students work collaboratively to collect and interpret data (Jonassen, 35)

• even though the goal is to learn these methods for interpreting statistics, this lesson allows them to  branch out into whatever connections they relate to according to the data collected (Jonassen, 35)

• it allows time to reflect while collecting, processing and summarizing the data (Jonassen, 35)

• the teacher is more of a mentor/coach throughout the lesson while the students are learning together and teaching each other; teacher's role is to monitor, answer and ask probing questions and facilitate the use of technology(Jonassen, 37)

• all students will be provided with a graphing calculator to make it equitable and also the tasks are meaningful and difficult to do without the graphing capability (Chapman, 1)

• students are each given a role which will help with equity as well and, hopefully, escape the gender stereotypes that may occur (Chapman, 3)

• the use of technology allows students to dive deeper into the data and their reflections on interpreting the data whereas, without the technology, most of the time would be spent on the simple graphing and calculations (Jonassen, 35) (Kozma, 181-182)
• data collected relates to the students' lives and the students themselves (Jonassen, 35) 

Reflective Post #3: Technology Best Practices

•   Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.

Clark’s basic argument throughout his article is that learning, and therefore achievement, are not increased because of media. His basic theory is that the data referenced by various researchers is ambiguous and can be attributed to other factors such as teaching, enjoyment of the novel media and interest rather than to the media itself. He states that no benefits are to be gained from one specific media to deliver instruction. The media changes the delivery of the information, not the achievement of the learner.

If, as Clark asserts, you get ambiguous results when researching different methods of delivery through different forms of media, does that mean they are all equally effective, or does it mean that the media doesn’t matter at all? He states that just because the students find certain methods involving media more enjoyable, doesn’t mean they increase their achievement.

He insists that researchers must separate the method from the medium. Is the new medium more effective or are students increasing their attention because it’s new and entertaining? Clark asserts this doesn’t imply greater achievement. He also states that comparing different methods of media is like comparing a teacher versus teaching. When looking at the effectiveness of a teacher, we are studying their teaching behaviors not the type of teacher.

Clark states that the media attributes can aide in the cultivation of cognitive skills but doesn’t necessarily imply that the media increases achievement. If it is useful, Clark states, it is valuable but not necessarily irreplaceable. One of his main arguments is the failure to replicate results. While one lesson delivered via lecture may produce great results, another lesson on a different topic may get poor results via lecture. This same idea applies to different forms of media and, therefore, because of this failure to replicate, can’t be determined as more or less successful.

Lastly, Clark discussed students’ ability level and how it pertained to their choice of media delivery. For example, he found that students’ perceptions of the difficulty of the media influenced their choice. Text was perceived as more serious whereas delivery via T.V. was considered shallow and easy. Students with high ability also tended to choose the method they felt would allow them to put forth less effort and still achieve success. Lower ability students tended to choose those methods that were less structured and allowed for more discovery-based learning.

Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with Media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179–211.

Kozma’s main assertion is that media can influence learning and achievement. He states that more learning can occur as well as different types of learning by using media. Media aids in building relationships for students between internal and external cognitive environments; it can complement learning. By using media, students can make connections between concrete and abstract concepts.

By using media, Kozma states, students can use different symbol systems and processes in their learning. When students use T.V., they are learning through visual and auditory processes. When using radio, they are only using auditory. He states that different symbol systems work better for different tasks. Just as Clark stated that different approaches to pedagogy depend on the topic, Kozma asserts that the same approach should be used when using technology. He also asserts that learning with media allows for continuous, give-and-take interaction between the students.

Kozma then discusses the various types of media studied and their relevance to learning. Books provide text and pictures. Students must use context clues, the table of context and bold or highlighted words to decipher information. It is even more beneficial when the books include pictures and diagrams. Students who are very knowledgeable in the topic presented process the text faster where novices will process at a slower pace. T.V. as a form of educational media provides a low level of engagement, but does provide simple representations of the information that is beneficial for many students. According to Kozma, it is most beneficial when viewed with a purpose. The combination of visual and auditory processes is beneficial. Students are able to make connections to mental models. He does worn, however, that when faced with an unfamiliar topic through T.V. media it rarely stays in long-term memory. It is best used with familiar topics. Lastly, computers help take an abstract concept and make it more concrete; it provides the tool to make more connections to real-life situations. Students can manipulate the representations on the computer to cement their understanding of connections of these topics.

Multimedia provides a powerful tool for social situation simulations and learning and to make real-life connections for students. For example, students are able to simulate the Vietnam veteran’s decision to live life disabled or die based on the multimedia simulation. It allows the students to be put in real-life situations and problem solve. Through multimedia, students can explore topics in multiple ways. Kozma does caution that it might be difficult for students to decide what to read when as they use multimedia and hypertexts; it may be more beneficial to some students to be told what to read and when instead of searching for what they think they need to learn. Kozma asserts that the best approach is when the medium and method of delivery are integrated.

•   Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking Technology: Toward a Constructivist Design Model. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34–37.

Jonassen’s article explained the constructivist model and how it pertains to learning. The basic tenets of constructivism are to have students “construct their own reality based on their perceptions of experiences, mental structures and beliefs”. Each learner bases his or her knowledge on prior frameworks.

A constructivist model includes multiple realities, avoids oversimplifying the topic, construction of knowledge, authentic tasks, connection to a real-world environment, time for reflection, context and content knowledge and collaboration. With this model, the learning outcomes are unpredictable; the focus is on the design of the environment rather than the pre-conceived learning outcomes.

This type of learning allows for the “three C’s”: context, collaboration and construction. It is process oriented for students. The teacher ‘s role is more of a coach or mentor instead of the guru with all of the answers. Jonassen does state that different situations require different models of instruction.

Redefining Equity: Meaningful Uses of Technology in Learning Environments

Chapman, Robbin

Chapman discusses the meaningful uses of technology in the learning process with focus on constructionist models. This model of learning provides for an active student who uses the technology tool to help them reach their learning goal. This type of learning will produce meaningful content, activities that motivate the student to explore and incorporate the students’ support systems to enhance their learning.

According to the constructionist model, students connect better to activities and learning that are meaningful to them and connected to their life. Technology is viewed as an expressive tool that helps them make these connections. The design of these lessons provides an opportunity for reflection.

Also discussed were the various inequities as they pertain to technology. Not only do lower-income school districts struggle to provide opportunities for their students, but there are many stereotypes that interfere as well. For example, girls and minorities may be perceived as not “tech-savvy” and only interested in technology for entertainment or consumer purposes. One way to combat these inequities is through the Community Technology Centers and the Computer Clubhouse. These are opportunities for public access to technology. The Computer Clubhouse even provides girls only days to provide these opportunities for girls to use the technology without the influence of the boys. The article’s main focus was to open a discussion on how to make technology more equitable for all learners.

Reflection

I sensed the common theme through all of these articles was that, whether you use technology or not, different learning outcomes require different methods of instruction. I also felt a connection to the idea that technology offers a way to connect students to their learning and their real-life.

I found myself agreeing with Kozma in the debate. I agree that technology can not only provide lessons that are engaging and provide real-life connections, they can also get students excited about what they’re learning in a way that textbooks or lecture can’t. I liked Kozma’s idea that students have more success when their learning is evaluated in the same way it was presented. I had never made that connection before. It made me stop and think about the way my lessons are delivered and assessed.

Clark’s main focus was on levels of achievement but I believe learning is so much more than that. If, by using technology, I can get students excited about math that is just as valuable as their score on a test. Just because their level of achievement doesn’t increase through the use of technology that doesn’t necessarily indicate that their learning or knowledge didn’t increase. Maybe, through using technology, a teacher can ignite a spark that wasn’t there before, regardless of how they score on a test.

Constructivism focuses on the individual learner and allowing them explore and make connections to their life; they are also the driving force in the instruction rather than the teacher. By using technology, teachers can have greater success in providing these constructionist approaches to learning. I found myself thinking that it would be difficult to construct these lessons. Typically, when I design a lesson, I have a specific math goal in mind that I want the students to accomplish. In this constructivist design, I would need to provide the opportunity for students to create their own learning; I would focus on the exploration rather than the goal. I think that design will be a challenge for me, especially in math. I often use exploration in my lessons, rather than just telling them the process or formula, but I still have a specific goal in mind. However, I do agree that by providing these opportunities in the classroom, we can help students construct their learning and make connections to their life. 

As for the first question asked by Dr. Angelone, does technology make a difference in the learning process or could you teach just as well without it? I have been teaching for 16 years and, in the beginning, had very little access to technology. So, yes, I can teach without it but I believe that, with the use of technology, my lessons are more engaging, my students can easily dive deeper into content and topics that would have been difficult without it, and I enjoy teaching with it much more than without it. 

edX Demo reflection

After logging in and using my edX demo account,  I can say it was very easy and user-friendly. I had no trouble signing up for the account, verifying my account, or working through the course. Everything is very step-by-step and easy to use. By clicking through the top dashboard, I was able to get a feel for what would be in each course. By clicking through the lessons on the left, I was able to get a realistic feel for what taking the class would be like.

I found it a bit frustrating because certain videos and interactive websites wouldn't load for me. I'm sure that would be frustrating as a student, especially if your homework depended on those videos or activities. I think the use of "interactive" was a bit overused as you are just interacting with the computer, not a person. I did like the way the course provided videos, readings and interactive sites.

It seemed as though taking quizzes and submitting work would be very easy to understand and use as a student. Halfway through the second lesson, I was wondering how you ask a question. This was answered in the third lesson. I enjoyed the ability to find a study buddy near me also.

I'm not sure if MOOCs are the future of learning. I can see there being a balance of MOOCs and traditional methods for students. I think there would have to be some standardization of the courses if they were going to be used for a diploma or a degree. They would benefit those who are unable to afford education or are unable to attend class in person. I had quite a few students at my former online school who were teenage mothers; online school was a great option for them as they took care of their infants and toddlers. It was also beneficial for those students who were gifted athletes and musicians. They were able to train for their sport or instrument while still attending school, just not during traditional hours. I also believe it was beneficial for those who have medical or mental issues.

I think the major harm is in the interaction between people. This human interaction is vital to our society; the thought of most of us at home and not interacting face-to-face is scary to me. I can see how our society has already changed for the worse with the overuse of technology. If we also take away that interaction with education, I'm afraid for what may happen. Will we forget how to interact with each other? I think a balance between the two would be the best approach.

Reflective Post #2: MOOCs and BYOD

In Framework for 21st Century Learning, new types of focus on learning were described. Instead of the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic, educators should now be focused on 21st century learning which includes global awareness, business, civic, health and environmental literacy. Focus should be not only on learning the basics, but also include enhancement of creativity and innovation, flexibility and the ability to take initiative and self-direct. 

With access to technology 24 hours a day, seven days a week, our world is changing. The work force will now not only require content knowledge but the ability to create new ideas at a rapid pace, the flexibility to work with the constant changes and think about the big picture. 

The "MOOCs and Beyond" video and the Will the Future of Education be Online, Open and Massive article described a possible 21st century classroom where most students attend online and for a greatly reduced cost. Lifelong learning at your own pace is a possibility, according to these experts. Learning will be customized instead of standardized. All of these changes are taking place due to dissatisfaction with instructor's methods of teaching, the rising cost of education, change in quality of the education and a rising dropout rate. This new type of learning, through MOOCs, will provide more choice for students, be more learner centric instead of teacher centric and provide a better blended form of learning between traditional and modern methods. 

I think MOOCs can be a wonderful addition to education when taken for the right reasons and when used by the right type of student. I think the access it provides to a wider demographic of people is very beneficial. However, I had issues with some of the points discussed in the article. When Basdevant states that education will become less standardized and more customized, I disagree. Students can choose which MOOCs to participate in and choose what interests them, but I still believe that there has to be a level of standardization in order to earn a diploma or a degree. I highly doubt that will change. 

Basdevant also states that cheating and grading will become a huge issue in education with the use of MOOCs. I taught online for seven years and I know this is already a major issue. There are very few ways to ensure that students won't cheat when they are not right in front of you. With the pressure students face to get an outstanding G.P.A. in order to get into the college of their choice, I can see how cheating could become a real problem. With the access to technology, there are many ways to share answers and papers and whatever else they might need. In our online high school, this was a very big problem. Students would use Yahoo! answers and other forums to ask questions and get answers. I teach math, which is not subjective, and it was simple for students to copy and paste answers. Cheating online is also very hard to prove, especially in math. I had no way of knowing if a student's work was their own or if they had copied someone else's work when everything is done online and turned in online. 

I thought it was interesting to see that students were deciding not to buy textbooks. Basdevant stated that less than 60 percent of students are buying their assigned textbooks. They are outrageously priced and, in this technological age, there's no reason why at least some of the cost can be reduced by providing them online.

At the end of the article, when interaction between students was discussed, I found myself agreeing more and more. After my online teaching experience, I can tell you that this is one key element that is sorely missed when getting your education online. Even though students do interact online, and sometimes even in person, it is not the same as daily face-to-face interaction. As a teacher, I was unable to see that face that tells me they don't really understand even though they're telling me they do. It was more difficult for me to make connections with students. John C. Maxwell stated "People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care." I believe a huge part of my success as a teacher is the interaction between myself and my students. They see my smile when they walk in the room, they see my eyes light up when they participate in class, they see and know that I care. I can tell you from experience this relationship is much more difficult to cultivate in an online environment. I was successful, but made fewer connections than I do in person. 

It scares me a little bit to think of everyone at home learning online. Not just from a teacher's perspective, but from a human perspective. I can see changes in how people interact already due to the changes in technology. I think if we take away education in the classroom, it will be detrimental to our society as a whole. I think MOOCs and online learning can be beneficial when blended with traditional in-person methods. 

In Technology in Education: BYOD and Equitable Access, McCallum raises many accurate points. She states that there can be many benefits with successful integration and with the right pedagogy attached to these devices. It can encourage creativity and collaboration, makes learning more student-centered, allows for ease of sharing information and provides many opportunities to practice those 21st century skills. 

McCallum also address the major issue that comes with BYOD and integrating its use in the classroom: inequity. She states that BYOD can increase the vast digital divide between the "haves" and the "have nots".  McCallum addresses the issue of lower-income students by stating "often an ‘invisible’ problem wrought with stereotypes of what poverty looks like. Run the risk of not realising that many middle class families are also at risk of economic insecurity. This certainly translates into the classrooms and learning environments." 

I think BYOD can be a "game changer" as McCallum states. I think the opportunities it provides for collaboration and sharing of ideas is unsurpassed. The junior high where I currently teach provided Google Chromebooks for every 8th grader this year. Having them in the classroom has been an asset. Sharing projects, sharing documents, sharing ideas suddenly became very easy. However, I can see how many issues would arise if the technology was not provided for the students and, instead, they had to bring their own. The inequities would be obvious and, sometimes, hurtful to the students in the "have not" category. I agreed with McCallum when she stated that many middle class families are not technically in poverty, but would struggle to provide devices for all of their children. Every student would not have a device and that would be a great challenge for teachers. 

I think these changes are coming whether we agree with them or not. It is our job as educators to adapt and discover how to best apply these changes to our teaching.

 Technology in Education: BYOD and Equitable Access. McCallum, Deborah Oct. 2013. http://bigideasineducation.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/byod-the-politics-of-equity-and-access/

Will the Future of Education be Online, Open and Massive? Basdevant, Adrian June 2013. http://ouishare.net/2013/06/will-the-future-of-education-be-online-open-and-massive/

********************************************************************************

After logging in and using my edX demo account,  I can say it was very easy and user-friendly. I had no trouble signing up for the account, verifying my account, or working through the course. Everything is very step-by-step and easy to use. By clicking through the top dashboard, I was able to get a feel for what would be in each course. By clicking through the lessons on the left, I was able to get a realistic feel for what taking the class would be like.

I found it a bit frustrating because certain videos and interactive websites wouldn't load for me. I'm sure that would be frustrating as a student, especially if your homework depended on those videos or activities. I think the use of "interactive" was a bit overused as you are just interacting with the computer, not a person. I did like the way the course provided videos, readings and interactive sites.

It seemed as though taking quizzes and submitting work would be very easy to understand and use as a student. Halfway through the second lesson, I was wondering how you ask a question. This was answered in the third lesson. I enjoyed the ability to find a study buddy near me also.

I'm not sure if MOOCs are the future of learning. I can see there being a balance of MOOCs and traditional methods for students. I think there would have to be some standardization of the courses if they were going to be used for a diploma or a degree. They would benefit those who are unable to afford education or are unable to attend class in person. I had quite a few students at my former online school who were teenage mothers; online school was a great option for them as they took care of their infants and toddlers. It was also beneficial for those students who were gifted athletes and musicians. They were able to train for their sport or instrument while still attending school, just not during traditional hours. I also believe it was beneficial for those who have medical or mental issues. Students who are visual and auditory learners would enjoy these videos and interactive activities. I think it would be much more difficult for students who are hands-on learners. 

I think the major harm in online learning is in the interaction between people. This human interaction is vital to our society; the thought of most of us at home and not interacting face-to-face is scary to me. I can see how our society has already changed for the worse with the overuse of technology. If we also take away that interaction with education, I'm afraid for what may happen. Will we forget how to interact with each other? I think a balance between the two would be the best approach. There are definite benefits to online learning, but I think the interaction from face-to-face learning is vital, especially in K-12 education.