I'm a little frustrated, right now.
My wife forwarded me an announcement for a web presentation through ASTD, titled, "Using gamification and serious games in learning," and I was hoping to watch it. I don't have time to watch it at the moment but I thought that, if I archived it or better yet, embedded the video here, I could watch it at my convenience, when I finally found the time. The added benefit? All of you would get to watch it as well.
Bupkis. No repost on YouTube or anywhere else (if I couldn't embed it, I'd at least link it), no, I have to register at the ASTD site, jump through hoops, agree to allow my spam folder get heavier due to the ASTD "sponsor" getting my email address and then sending me loads of crap, advertisements for doo-dads and programs I have no money for.
Holding information proprietary is decidedly not a 21st-century or Web 2.0 approach (I'm not talking about widget designs, OK?) and the best way to move us forward is to disseminate information in the most efficient, expedient way possible.
Share it!
Showing posts with label PBL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PBL. Show all posts
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Monday, May 26, 2014
Collaborative learning, critical questioning and decompression
I have finally finished this week's individual assignment (you can view my work here as well as the lesson plan that accompanied it) and am ready to enjoy the rest of the day with some beer, baseball, and barbecue -- so nothing special about the last part, donchaknow?
Before calling it a day (and an end to Week 3), it occurs to me that I worked to include a collaborative learning element into my individual project and, in meta-fashion, asking my students to include a collaborative element into the PBL I designed for them. Additionally, I included two critical questions (one, the aforementioned collaborative element) for them to answer in response to the assignment.
Trying to walk the talk, here, it occurs to me that I need to ask a critical question for myself: Do I embrace opportunities for collaborative learning when they are assigned?
I have to say that I am enjoying this PLN immensely and, it just so happens, the current members are also on my Learning Team for school. I was fortunate that the instructor for this class accommodated us in honoring our requests for team membership. having said that, I have not always had the best experience with learning teams; indeed, I have griped in the past about being forced to work with people who seemed to have no motivation to learn or produce the best product possible but were only participating because they believed they would eventually acquire a credential but were seemingly uninterested in acquiring knowledge or skills.
Many assumptions are made about the benefits of collaborative learning and, I confess that I am largely a fan of the method. However, my critical question for today is: Is collaborative learning only effective when members are equally motivated to learn or is the potential for disparity inherent in the method, where the more motivated members actually become instructors (to a degree) when compensating for less-motivated group members?
OK, enjoy your Memorial Day Holiday and think about your answer when we're back on task. Have a beer and enjoy the barbecue!
Before calling it a day (and an end to Week 3), it occurs to me that I worked to include a collaborative learning element into my individual project and, in meta-fashion, asking my students to include a collaborative element into the PBL I designed for them. Additionally, I included two critical questions (one, the aforementioned collaborative element) for them to answer in response to the assignment.
Trying to walk the talk, here, it occurs to me that I need to ask a critical question for myself: Do I embrace opportunities for collaborative learning when they are assigned?
I have to say that I am enjoying this PLN immensely and, it just so happens, the current members are also on my Learning Team for school. I was fortunate that the instructor for this class accommodated us in honoring our requests for team membership. having said that, I have not always had the best experience with learning teams; indeed, I have griped in the past about being forced to work with people who seemed to have no motivation to learn or produce the best product possible but were only participating because they believed they would eventually acquire a credential but were seemingly uninterested in acquiring knowledge or skills.
Many assumptions are made about the benefits of collaborative learning and, I confess that I am largely a fan of the method. However, my critical question for today is: Is collaborative learning only effective when members are equally motivated to learn or is the potential for disparity inherent in the method, where the more motivated members actually become instructors (to a degree) when compensating for less-motivated group members?
OK, enjoy your Memorial Day Holiday and think about your answer when we're back on task. Have a beer and enjoy the barbecue!
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
My PBL rant for this week
I'll admit that I was immediately intrigued by the potential for encouraging problem-solving strategies in learners when I approached my first instructional design project, intuitively thinking that the approach led to more depth and breadth in learners. After all, in my own experience with problem solving, learning was deeper when I was required to identify the problem, think of a solution, test my solution (and then make revisions when my idea was less than satisfactory) and then present my results. It just made sense to me that, when challenged with having to look closely at a problem and then creatively and deductively develop a solution.
Indeed, in enumerating the ten key elements of PBL, John Barell provides a succinct rationale for why problem-solving strategies create more depth and breadth in learning objectives. Barell said those elements are real-world problems, choices about content, objectives reflecting the highest of intellectual challenges, experiences in small-group collaborations, feedback (from cohorts and instructors), revisions, modifications and elaboration on findings, engagement in planning, obtaining pre-, formative and summative assessment information, "clear and easy-to-follow curricular structure centered on authentic problems and inquiry," and shared control of decision making as well as instruction and learning. With those elements, it's evident how problem solving goes well beyond a teacher merely lecturing and explaining.
PBL is not without its critics, however, and Colliver (2000), in a review of research conducted between 1992 and 1998 on the effectiveness of PBL on outcomes, concluded that the evidence did not support the idea that PBL methods were more advantageous than traditional teaching methods. However, in a later review of the literature, Hmelo-silver (2004) reached a different conclusion regarding the research but cautioned, "[M]uch of the research has been restricted to higher education, predominantly in medical schools."
Although PBL may be a "flavor of the month" (which is all too common in education), it is apparent to me that it will continue to find support from both educators and students. In fact, the idea of the effectiveness of PBL has been around since at least Dewey who, by his own admission, recognized its effectiveness in the tradition of apprenticeship.
As far as my own prejudice regarding the effectiveness of problem-solving strategies, I believe it not just demands critical thinking skills but is complex (RE Barells elements) in a way that standard, flat pedagogy is not.
Indeed, in enumerating the ten key elements of PBL, John Barell provides a succinct rationale for why problem-solving strategies create more depth and breadth in learning objectives. Barell said those elements are real-world problems, choices about content, objectives reflecting the highest of intellectual challenges, experiences in small-group collaborations, feedback (from cohorts and instructors), revisions, modifications and elaboration on findings, engagement in planning, obtaining pre-, formative and summative assessment information, "clear and easy-to-follow curricular structure centered on authentic problems and inquiry," and shared control of decision making as well as instruction and learning. With those elements, it's evident how problem solving goes well beyond a teacher merely lecturing and explaining.
PBL is not without its critics, however, and Colliver (2000), in a review of research conducted between 1992 and 1998 on the effectiveness of PBL on outcomes, concluded that the evidence did not support the idea that PBL methods were more advantageous than traditional teaching methods. However, in a later review of the literature, Hmelo-silver (2004) reached a different conclusion regarding the research but cautioned, "[M]uch of the research has been restricted to higher education, predominantly in medical schools."
Although PBL may be a "flavor of the month" (which is all too common in education), it is apparent to me that it will continue to find support from both educators and students. In fact, the idea of the effectiveness of PBL has been around since at least Dewey who, by his own admission, recognized its effectiveness in the tradition of apprenticeship.
As far as my own prejudice regarding the effectiveness of problem-solving strategies, I believe it not just demands critical thinking skills but is complex (RE Barells elements) in a way that standard, flat pedagogy is not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)