Catch up Education!

In the last few weeks of class, one thing has been clear: Education is extremely far behind when it comes to instructional design. The military and the medical industry are changing and adapting at a far faster rate than we are. Why? My classmates brought up a very good point that they have a lot more to loose and much to gain with their instruction. Ok, so we may not see the danger in not having the most effective instruction and certainly there is no risk of causing the death of another human being, but I would argue that effective or ineffective institutions have the ability to shape human beings and in doing so, also change our society. Thus, there is danger in not looking at what the outcomes may be. And, unfortunately, for some kids, not getting the tools they need in school will leave them with no other option but to pursue avenues that may result in death. Are we looking at education the wrong way? Are we really thinking about what happens to our kids once they are out of the system? What can we do to show that we need to push education forward?

Military vs. K-20

Although there are many differences between instruction in the military and instruction in K-20 education, I think there is much to be learned from the unified nature of the military. The military's success in training is a direct result of the values that are instilled in its members. Thus, when they are instructed and they train, they are constantly thinking about how this instruction will benefit their team and lead to the success of their group. One of the reasons why instruction is often difficult, especially in K-12, is because we have failed to instill the values of education in our society. So many students struggle to make sense of why the are learning what they are learning and teachers often struggle to provide answers that make sense. Are we material because the district put it in the curriculum? Are we learning this content because it is going to appear on a standardized test? What kind of values should we be instilling in our youth? Why is education REALLY important? If students could see that through education they can improve themselves, their community, and their country they may be more motivated to learn content and seek new learning endeavors beyond the classroom.

Goodbye Desks

Last night, I started to thinking about one of the suggestions I had for improving the classroom with technology in response to the question posed to us at the end of last week's class. I came across a couple of interesting articles about classroom design. The first article, "Open-Ended Learning," takes a look at new school construction. Beyond the photos of the new designs, I found the theory behind them most interesting. In many cases, the buildings were designed to "become part of the learning." And spaces were designed specifically for flexibility. The article also quoted a 1999 study of more than 21,000 students that found a correlation between daylit schools and student performance. I chuckled when I heard this and memories of my teaching experience in a school district in Texas flooded my mind. When I originally applied to Lakeview High School, I imagined myself bringing students outside to read by the beautiful lake or at moments of stress being able to relax by looking out the windows at the sunlight glistening over the calm water. It wasn't until my first tour of the building that I realized that Lakeview not only had no lake, but it had no view...of anything! There were NO windows in ANY classroom. I wonder how this affected students and teachers. I mean, even prisoners get some light, right?

But, daylight or not, most classrooms look the way they did 150 years ago. In my opinion, this is a factor that is preventing us from teaching 21st century skills. Check out IDEO's Ten Tips for Creating a 21st Century Classroom. These are things you could implement in your classroom whether they are supported by technology or not.

In the future, however, we may just need to throw out all the desks! Of course this seems rather extreme, but new technologies like the iPad enable mobility. With this kind of mobility, classrooms no longer have to be confined to a traditional structure, learning environments, don't need to be defined to four walls, and students are free to learn beyond the school building.

Coercing Change

As we decide how we are going to affect change in education with respect to technology, we must recognize the challenges that exist with stakeholders, teachers, administrators, and government. Many districts buy technology and expect that the piecemeal change will eventually lead to a systematic change. However, we cannot expect that technology can just be implemented and that the system will change simply because of its presence.

I would posit that the reason why so many technology programs fail is because they are centered around the tool instead of the process and the environment. The change that is really needed is larger than just putting technology in schools and training teachers how to use it to enhance lessons. The change needs to be much broader. We need to focus on a new model of learning that uses technology to transform education, embraces 21st century skills, and prepare students for the future.

The draft of the 2010 National Technology Plan is on the right path, but it seems to be lacking a section on the funding that the government will be providing in order to achieve these goals. Indeed, they put forth some lofty goals, but I don't think they are impossible. No matter what challenges we face with implementing this broad change (financial, resistance of educators, unwillingness of administrators, etc.), we must recognize that it would be detrimental to wait any longer. As nations around the world continue to surpass the United States in education, we need to realize that not doing anything ensures our decline. Let us not forget that today we educate the leaders of tomorrow. We must make education a priority in order to secure our hegemonic role, remain competitive in world markets, and ultimately protect national security.

It is our civic responsibility to be well educated.

Thomas led a very informative and interesting discussion on Thursday night that left me thinking about some challenges of education that I hadn't thought about in a while. As a high school teacher I was often faced with the challenge of making students want to learn and as I got more experienced I was adept at responding creatively to the question, "Why do I need to know this?" My answers were often witty, some that directly related to the student, while others were matter of fact. Most, however, dealt with the present and immediate gratification that students craved in order to motivate them to want to learn something. If I think about Keller's ARCS model, I was motivating them by providing them with immediate relevancy. I guess I chose this because most teens have difficulty thinking about their lives past this week, unless of course they are thinking about the prom or summer break. But, how should I have responded? Could I have made them understand in a broader sense that it is their civic responsibility to be educated.

You don't have to look far to notice the stereotype that is developing among other countries about the citizens of the United States. Recently, friends in another country shared a YouTube video with me that included a combination of video interviews that asked Americans simple questions about the world in which we live. They laughed hysterically as average citizens didn't know the answers to questions like, "Who is the Vice President of the United States" and "Can you name a country that starts with 'U'" We are even making fun of ourselves. Jay Leno has dedicated a segment in his late night show to exposing Americans who cannot answer common sense questions and know who Paris Hilton is, but have no idea that Paris is in France. And beyond just common sense, we are plagued with information telling us that the US is rapidly falling behind in education compared with other industrialized nations.

So, what can we do? Why is this gap widening? I would argue that in many places around the country, the culture that has developed has a lot to do with this. For some reason we are teaching students the importance of state standardized tests, but we are not teaching students the value and importance of education and the impact that it has on the success of our country. And, If we are not doing this as individuals, we cannot expect a cultural shift. This has to be a united effort between the community, parents, teachers, and students. Students must know that it is within their power to keep their country strong or let it fail. Sure, this isn't going to happen overnight, but by instilling this notion in the youth of today, we can ensure their support as the parents of tomorrow.

I am sure another entry could be devoted to the reasons of this current culture, the challenges with initiating a shift, and the potential outcomes. I would welcome any comments and I think we would benefit from a dialogue on this topic. I have also always been extremely interested in comparative education, so please feel free to share any current articles.

Seriously?

OK, since this is my blog...it seems only appropriate that I use it for the purpose for which it was intended...to RANT! Today, I read a very disturbing article that was printed in the Washington Post. The article, "Wide Web of Diversions gets Laptop Evicted from Lecture Halls," discusses Georgetown Law Professor David Cole's crusade against technology.
Here is my favorite quote from the article: "This is like putting on every student's desk, when you walk into class, five different magazines, several television shows, some shopping opportunities and a phone, and saying, 'Look, if your mind wanders, feel free to pick any of these up and go with it."
1. Mr. Cole, you are ridiculous!
2. Mr. Cole, if your class was interesting enough, maybe their minds wouldn't wander!
3. These are adult learners we are talking about here, I'm pretty sure they are responsible enough to learn the material that they need to...and if they don't they probably shouldn't be at Georgetown Law. Yes, I do understand that there are some issues with younger learners with respect to being responsible digital citizens in the classroom, but these are adults! Stop treating them like children!
4. Wake up and get with the 21st century! Your students are more comfortable using laptops to take notes, looking up information they don't understand, seeking supplemental materials during your lecture. THIS IS THE WAY THEY LEARN AND COMMUNICATE! If you force them to learn the way you prefer to learn you are doing them a huge injustice, not to mention making the material more difficult for them to learn. Why don't you take some time and read some learning theory--don't worry you can find this information in books!
5. Understand that your class is NOT about you, it is about your students. Yes, I am sure you worked hard to get to where you are, but at the end of the day, you are an EDUCATOR...so start doing your job! If your students aren't paying attention, get their attention! Don't just expect them to ride on your every word and drool while staring at your pretty face for 3 hours. If they aren't learning...TEACH THEM!!!
6. As for your love of pens and paper, I am sure you can find another use for them :)

Kirkpatrick in the Context of E-Learning...and other problems

As I read Chapter 10, I kept trying to understand how his Four-Level Model would translate into the world of E-Learning. What would have to be changed in order to evaluate those specific programs and E-Learning environments?

I found this article that may offer some insight, Evaluating E-Learning Programs, An Adaptation of Kirkpatrick's Model to Accommodate E-Learning Environments (Hamtini, 2008).

Check it Out!

Even without considering the changes in environment, I struggled to understand the effectiveness of the different evaluation levels. I thought back to the many surveys I have completed in my life and have watched other professionals complete after a training session. There are many factors that can affect responses. So, what are the challenges associated with gaining true and meaningful responses from participants? What are the biases associated with the evaluator and the supervisor? How do these things play a role in the evaluation process?

I know it seems as if this week's blog is filled with a lot of questions, but please respond and I will follow up with my own opinions as I seek out additional articles that deal with these problems.

Presentation Day!

As soon as I saw the list of topics for the presentation, my eyes were drawn to Motivation. I have always been interested in the motivation of students and specifically how technology can play a role in motivating students. Notice that I tried to be careful with the way that I worded that. Technology, of course, can not be the motivator alone. We cannot expect to design a lesson that uses some kind of technology and expect that alone to make students have the desire to learn. Keller points out that we need to be focused on creating instruction that engages students rather than just entertains. I do, however, think that motivation is a very tricky thing as classes and groups of students are extremely dynamic. Keller's ARCS model provides a great foundation and provides guidance for both instructional designers and teachers to properly create and assess the motivational aspects associated with a lesson. One thing that is not specifically mentioned, but may be assumed if task analysis is performed, is that the designer or teacher must be aware of the specific needs of his or her audience. As a teacher, I know that sometimes what is motivating to one group of students is not motivating to the other group. I have often come up with strategies that completely engage one class, but fails miserably with the next. I am looking forward to the presentation tonight and I hope that we can all engage in a discourse that will be mutually beneficial.

Misinterpreting Marzano

We have often discussed the "trends" in the field and the implications of those "trends" in higher education and research study. But, how does new research affect our K-12 schools? Marzano has been a buzz word in the K12 world for a few years now. And, as research-based instruction has become increasingly important as it is now mandated and thus, has been tied to the budget, state and district officials have called for research-based instruction to be implemented in their schools. As an educator, I see how research-based instruction has the ability to positively affect our students if implemented correctly. In case you missed it, the operative words there were "implemented correctly." If not implemented correctly, the research-based instruction has the ability not only have a negative affect on student learning, but could adversely affect teachers and the way that they teach. For example, the district that I was working for last year mandated that teachers use Marzano's strategies. It wasn't that they wanted us to used research-based instruction, it was that they really didn't show us how. They constantly threw buzz words at us like "instructional goals," "cues," "advance organizers," and "non-linguistic representation" in faculty meetings and development workshops. They told us what these things were, but they gave no indication of how they should be implemented in our classrooms. And, on top of that they gave us ultimatums for not implementing the strategies in our classrooms such as, "Teachers may receive letters in their files if objectives are not visible when administrators enter the classroom." Though this is only one example, the ultimatums put pressure on teachers to use strategies they were not comfortable with and did not fully understand. Therefore, many teachers used the strategies, but in inappropriate and ineffective ways.
Merrill does a good job in chapter 7 of breaking down his principles of instruction, but as I was reading through the chapter, I kept coming back to the problems that the teachers faced last year. We would constantly say, "How can we use this in our own classrooms?" I think that implementing this type of instruction is feasible, but also extremely problematic for subject matter teachers because some subjects lend themselves better to implementing these strategies. I know we are not expected to use every strategy in every lesson, but I think more work needs to be done so that teachers can use these strategies in specific contexts. Moreover, failure to implement theses strategies is directly related to higher-ups who are not well-read in the research. It should be the responsibility of those mandating the use of these strategies to not only fully understand them, but to aid in the transition and implementation process.
I do agree with Merrill, however, the field seems both limiting and extensive. There are many theories and strategies, but a lack of foundation. I, too, hope with the maturation of the instructional design, that the principles can give us the foundation we need for models and prescriptions to come.

Where are OUR theories?

The Theory Development article seemed to jump around from perspective to theory and back again without any solid conclusions. The authors presented a plethora of ideas, but made no distinction of which theory or perspective is best. Though I was frustrated that with this process, I realized that this in itself should be the conclusion that I draw from the article.
The authors state that "it can also be observed that every time new media or technologies are introduced the field is tempted to reinvent the
wheel. This suggests a need for (1) a consolidation of the theoretical approaches, and (2) a kind of classification of the various models so their relationships can be more clearly exemplified and more robust theories elaborated."
Since technology is developing at such a high rate, we are constantly seeking new theories that include these new technologies. What we need to do is formulate basic theories about learning with technology that can be adapted to any new product. What would this mean? We would probably need to look at the core learning theories first. For example, what if we look at Gardner's Multiple Intelligences. Within his seven different types of learning, he predicts that learners have the ability to learn through all modes, but have strengths in certain areas. What if the addition of technology into our daily lives has allowed learners to adapt to a new kind of learning style...a sort of combination of all of Gardner's ideas...where the strengths lie in a particular combination rather than one type of learning? What if being exposed to technology and learning through it at a young age changes the way that we learn?
I think there is a lot of work to be done here, especially because of the rapid development and expansion of technology that has occurred over the last decade. Thus, we are just beginning to see learners who have been exposed to these new technologies their whole lives. What kind of research can be done now that could not have been done in the last ten years? What kind of core learning theories can be developed with respect to those who learn through these media? So much to do...so little time...

Social Networking and Constructivism- Comments Please!

As I explored the tenets of constructivism, I couldn't help but think how constructivist practices are developed and used in social networking sites. I started becoming interested in social networking sites and their potential in education while writing a paper last semester titled, "Social Networking Sites Enable New Literacy Practices." I will be happy to share it with anyone who is interested.
I guess what I'd like to know is, what do you think about constructivism, social networking, or both? Pros and cons of using it the classroom?

PS. If you respond you are engaging in constructivist practices! :)

If I could do all over again...

The environment was ripe for learning as I began to read the next assignment: Reiser and Dempsey, Chapters 4-6. My eyes were focused, my highlighter was working, I was actually comprehending the concepts until I got to Chapter 5. That is when I began to think about the project that gave me so many nightmares last semester in Instructional Design. My group's goal: 12th grade students will be able to construct a college application essay. Unbeknownst to us, we were designing instruction from an objectivist perspective...which I have to say was probably better for our first project. As I read about Design Research, however, I tried to imagine what would have changed about our process, our design, and our result if we had used the design research method instead. Instead of using formative assessments to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction, "design researchers use formative experiments (pg. 48)" Although we thought that our process was quite iterative, I wonder what would have been different if we would have been able to make adjustments during the design process. One of the advantages might have been that we would have been able to make changes based on learner feedback, adjusting the design appropriately and therefore increasing its effectiveness. Of course a drawback would have been the time commitment to this type of design strategy. Whereas we were able to perform task analysis quite quickly, planning stages of design research and process between each macrocycle would have prevented us from actually completing the assignment.
So, which design practice would have worked best for learners? In Chapter 6, I tried to envision the changes to the product. What would our website have looked like if it was more constructivist? We probably would have focused on creating an environment of discovery rather than an environment of instruction. We would have had to construct an environment that was more process based rather than end-product based. For example, we could have posed the question, "How do admissions counselors determine which essays qualify for admission into a university?" Picture this: the home page is set up like an office. A counselor sits at her desk with a stack of applications. On the bookshelf behind her are her resources, similar to the ones we provided (dictionary, thesaurus, etc.) Students could explore the environment rather than being forced to create the essay step by step. Of course, the construction and explanation could have its own blog...so I will stop here for now.
Although it seems like the authors go back and forth between which approach (constructivist or objectivist) is best, I believe that both of these perspectives have the potential to effect education in a positive way.

History Rant

The authors give us a lovely history lesson about instructional media in Chapter 3. After taking us through the advancements over the last century, they confess that the advancements have had a minimal effect on instructional practices, but they offer no reason why this may be the case. They then pose the question, "Will the impact of media on instruction be greater in the future than it has been in the past?" I am going to have to go with YES. First, we have to take into consideration the training of teachers and preservice teachers. How do we learn how to teach? Sure, we take all of these classes where we learn about learning theory, recite Bloom's taxonomy, practice writing lesson plans, etc., but we learn how to teach like we learn how to do many other things. We watch, we imitate, we adapt. And, for the most part, teachers are still teaching like they did a hundred years ago! In my opinion this is one of the reasons why media has had such a minimal impact in the last century. Being a teacher is hard work, keeping the attention of your students is even harder, and coming up with creative ways to teach is the hardest. When we get stuck, we revert to what we know...the basics of reading, regurgitating, lecturing, and testing. But, we can't do that anymore. Technology is developing at such a high rate that we are preparing students for jobs that don't even exist yet. We are faced with a very real problem. One that cannot afford to dismiss technology. We must focus on giving preservice teachers a foundation in instructional design and technology...one that can guide them as they enter the classroom. I think we have to show them new and improved ways to teach so that perhaps technology does not just become a tool to show powerpoint presentations, but it forces students to develop a foundation for learning this way and ultimately prepares them for the work they will do in the future...

So, what do you do? Wait, what is that?

So, what do you do?
This used to be so easy to answer. For the last few years my answer was simple, "I am a teacher." Of course that prompted the standard follow-up question, "Oh, what grade do you teach?" And then my favorite part...the shocked look on the person's face when I said that I taught high school English and that yes, I loved it. I have to admit, it was pretty easy to keep the conversation going for a while with the interesting stories of my kids and the trials and tribulations of teenage life: the laughs, the tears, and the enormous amount of fights (many which I have personally broken up). Now, it has become increasingly more difficult to answer that question.
Last weekend, my friend and I went to a local bar. As it is customary for men trying to start a conversation with a woman, the two that eased their way into sitting at our table asked, "So, what do you do?" Nervously I answered, "I am PhD student at LSU." Follow up: "What are you studying?" I took a deep breath and loudly declared, "Educational Technology." And then, as if I was in some Bill Murray film reliving the same thing over and over again, I heard the all too familiar words being muttered from the guy's mouth as if he was genuinely interested, "Wait, what is that?" I took a deep breath and for the next ten to fifteen minutes I tried to explain the many facets of the field. When I saw the guy's eyes wandering around trying to find his next prey, I ended the torture and decided that I wasn't really too sure about anything I was saying.
Chapter 1 of Reiser and Dempsey attempts to define and name the field, describing the various definitions and changes that have occured through the years. Although, their personal definition of Instructional design and technology is lengthy one, they do a good job of trying to incorporate all of the elements...even though it seems like one big run-on sentence! The chapter did help me to focus on the most important aspects: analysis, design, development, implementation, and management. One key part of the definition was that they mentioned that through the field professionals intend to improve learning. It reveals the ultimate goal and of course that is one of the major reasons that I am so passionate about the field. I believe in its ability to improve learning and facilitate learning in a better way.
There is no doubt in my mind that this definition will continue to change as advancements continue to be made. However, reciting Reiser and Depsey's definition or even the AECT definition is not going to help me get a date anytime soon. I think I will have to come up with my own definition...not one that I expect to be published, but one in layman's terms that includes the major elements, but also focusses on my specific interests within the field. I'll save the history lesson for date five and learning theory for date nine.

My Very Own Blog!

Welcome everyone...or should I say classmates. I'm not sure if anyone else will be reading this blog except those who are forced to...but I hope to offer my thoughts and ideas about Educational Technology...a field I am extremely passionate about. Feel free to comment or contact me with any questions or ideas you may have. I wish you all a successful semester...