Praxis Makes Perfect

I came across iCue from NBC which bills itself as an interactive learning environment built around video from the NBC archives, games, and discussion for people to learn about politics and the coming election. What a great idea, and I wonder if this kind of format would lend itself to “fun” learning opportunities in other subjects… then again, the cost and expertise needed to develop high quality educational video might hinder widespread development of these kinds of sites… on the other hand, maybe people can leverage web 2.0 tools like youtube to invite students who know a subject to develop their own videos and then organize them into a learning site…. is it possible? http://www.icue.com/

I am intrigued by the thought of participating in the K12 online conference and submitting a proposal. As an education researcher interested in ed-tech, I think I’d have the most to contribute to Week 2 (”Prove It”). But, as I think about what I could propose as a presentation, I realize that (1) there is very little to no research done particularly on the the learning effects of Web 2.0 tools in particular, most of the research has been on multimedia or direct instructional tools, then (2) the questions posed in the Call for Proposals are all very traditionally psychology focused questions. There are plenty of debates currently about the correct instructional strategies for the classroom… would it be helpful to the ed-tech community for a PhD grad student to present the findings that he has learned through his classes, even though he hasn’t done the research himself? Or would additional questions about broader issues related to Web 2.0 also be relevant?

For example, I am particularly interested in studying students’ social networks and social capital and its effects on student success… My hunch is that social tools may influence and change students’ networks, but we still need to understand how that might influence learning in the classroom using Web 2.0 tools. Again, the research hasn’t been done yet! But how helpful would it be if I did a presentation framing how we could think about student social networks from a dual research and practice perspective?

If anyone reads this that is also interested in the K12 online conference, maybe you can help me with these thoughts.

I’ve been playing with a rather simple, but interesting idea in my head, when it comes to online schools in K-12 public education. Many of the controversies in states implementing online charter schools are due to a fundamental misalignment between the policies and organizations of the established school system, with the new possibilities of online schools. I think the key for anyone interested in seeing online options for schooling, or even using the Web for “outside the box” schooling models (e.g. here), is understanding how this can and cannot happen within the current edu policy framework can be helpful. More after the jump.

Keep reading →

I stumbled across this site (via my Firefox StumbleUpon extension). It’s an interesting graphic simulation of carbon emissions by country, across the world.

http://www.breathingearth.net/

So I am currently working on a study doing some comparative case studies of cyber charter schools. Why cyber charters? Well they are interesting cases to me for several reasons. (1) They are online schools that serve K-12 students, when most of our distance learning discussions center on higher education. (2) They are charter schools, so they have their own history of policy and controversy. (3) The existence or extinction of cyber charters have important implications for issues of school choice, home-schooling, the limitations of how our public education system is currently set up, and media-based schooling. (4) They are relatively new and haven’t been studied much (which is good for a budding academic like myself).

I’ll look forward to sharing my findings and thoughts as the project progresses. But for now I want to point out that virtual, online, or cyber schools (whatever you want to call them) are concrete examples of a disruptive technology. The mere fact that using the Internet to deliver public schooling is an option now, throws many of our assumptions about education into flux as well as the policies, regulations, and funding mechanisms that are designed for brick-and-mortar schools.

The fight is happening as we speak… Check out the recent ruling in Wisconsin. Links here and here.

The teachers union sued to close down Wisconsin’s virtual academies. And for now, they have won as the courts ruled to stop sending funds to those schools. What is the issue here? Well online schools pose several problems that come into play:

• Who is responsible for paying for the education? An online school can hypothetically enroll students from anywhere. But how do those public funds (which normally get sent to a student’s resident school district) get transferred to the cyber school? Many districts get angry when they lose student funds for their kids who enroll in an online school.
• What about the quality of education? Most of the popular arguments that come from opponents center around quality of education. Certified teachers? The cyber charters I’ve spoken to hire certified teachers. Do children get the same quality schooling online versus a physically live teacher? Why wouldn’t they? The modalities of learning may be different (more text, more multimedia, more self directed) but who says physically sitting in a classroom is somehow a better experience? The cyber schools I’ve looked at so far have been able to provide a more intimate educational experience for their students, with highly independent attention… all because the use of technology.
• A thorny issue for teachers unions is the possibility that cyber schools can be more efficient with their money. Cyber charters can use curriculum and Internet based multimedia to handle basic instruction and assessments. Teachers can then play a more advisor, guidance, and coaching role. They can provide individual plans for each student, check in on each of their students efficiently via email, telephone, or other means, and make sure each student is progressing. On top of that, we might blow up the entire idea of “class size”. A teacher in a physical classroom might be overwhelmed with 30 students in a class. But the new job description of a cyber school teacher might enable them to easily handle a case-load of 30 students who they mentor, or even more! The implications are that cyber charters may spend their money in other areas, other than teachers… and I bet that is at the core of the teachers union in Wisconsin trying to kill cyber schools in their state.

I read a great little post by David Buckingham (click here) today about the role of digital media in schools. The post brings to bear many of the popular arguments made in the media and learning debate. I thought I’d share some of my thoughts:

1. What we know: Digital media does not improve (or negatively impact) students’ learning. In fact most good studies show no significant differences in student learning from using media or traditional classrooms. Mr. Buckingham writes about those who champion the use of media in learning that, “They see the more playful, democratic forms of learning offered by games or online communities as infinitely preferable to the traditional, authoritarian approach of schools.” If we’re concerned about how well students learn, then this is a weak argument. (EDIT: see some good articles about media and learning, and pedagogy below)
2. What I think: I think the above quote sheds light on how digital media can enhance our qualitative EXPERIENCE of learning. Maybe using media may be more engaging, fun, and enjoyable. These are important aspects of learning, but if using digital media is separated from solid pedagogy (what many pundits often call boring, traditional teaching practices) it becomes meaningless.
3. Mr. Buckingham makes a great point that schools are not “out”. In fact school is deeply ingrained into the social, cultural, and economic flows of our society. It will take a full on revolution and upheaval of many of our (humankind) cultural norms to replace school with playing games on the Internet.

In all, the time is ripe right now for new thinkers to clearly define the role of digital media in schools. Throw away the weak arguments. Media does not improve learning. Games are not superior ways to learn than some traditional pedagogies like role modeling or plain showing someone how to do something. Media is not inherently more “democratic” (what does that term mean anyway), but particular uses of it may open up opportunities for students to interact with other people. Economic arguments about having “digital skills” are also weak. The kindergarten students of today will need far different digital skills when they graduate from college than we do now… so why do we need to TEACH them how to use the Internet or blog? Many will likely learn and adapt on their own.

Digital media is clearly an innovative and engaging tool. However, justifying its use in schools will require far more clear and coherent arguments than are currently discussed. Does anyone have any ideas?

EDIT: Some articles to read.

Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P. A., Fiset, M., & Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439.

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

Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 42(2), 7-19.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J, & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.

Using the Nintendo Wiimote to create your own interactive whiteboards.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/clips/use-a-wiimote-to-make-whiteboards-out-of-anything-332039.php

Ok, so in the previous post I critiqued the problem of thinking about networks and technology in general terms. Here is an example of thinking about networks in a more focused, and I think more helpful way. Check out this link:

Keep reading →

I came across this post from Weblogg-ed today, and spurred some thinking I’ve been doing about “networks”. There has been a lot of punditry these days where various folks tout the rise of networks and the power of technologies which connect people. The intuitive thought is that the Internet, mobile communications, and applications like Facebook etc etc etc create networks of people in ways that we’ve never seen before. I think this point is true, but not as provocative as some would make it seem. Here are some of my quick thoughts on social networks:

Keep reading →

HippCampus: http://hippocampus.org/?loc=interstitialskip

This one is not really an open source project, but a free resource for curricular materals. They invite academic institutions and publishers to contribute.

A friend pointed me to this link the other day and it got me very excited. It is an open-source hub for early literacy curriculum. We definitely need more of this kind of open curriculum, sharing, and dissemination that is built by the collective wisdom of teachers everywhere. IMO, one enhancement of any open-source project would be to explicitly show how various curricular activities help to address particular state standards.

Are there other good examples in other subject areas? Please send them my way, I’d love to build a directory to point others to.

Here’s the link: http://free-reading.net/index.php?title=Main_Page

Here’s a post from Ray Schroeder’s Educational Technology blog: http://people.uis.edu/rschr1/et/2007/11/free-online-materials-could-save.html

And another story done by USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2007-11-06-freereading_N.htm