Conclusion of the Wiki

A Thought to the Previous Weeks…..

Within the last few weeks of ICT’s for Learning Design we were asked to participate in three Wiki activities. After completing these activities we were asked to reflect on the effectiveness of these learning experiences by trying to pin point how theories of learning aided the structure of the information and tasks given. It is probably best now to show my view that when asked to reflect people take different routes of investigation as we all learn differently and are at "different stages of maturation" (Smith, 2002). Also because I am what's defined by Prensky's article as a "Digital Native" (Prensky, 2001) I have grown up with technology and a lot of the findings within the first few weeks aren't so mind-boggling to me, therefore, it would be expected my reflection and views to differ to other generations.

The four learning theories which we explored included, Behaviourism, Constructivism, Cognitivism and Connectivism. All of the Wiki activities had elements of these learning theories imbedded within their structures which enabled the learner to process and develop new found knowledge.

Behaviourism was apparent in all activities as it involves using basic low level brain function to complete activities. Cognitivism was found in the majority of the activities as it was needed to process the information received as well as the information asked to be recalled in the proceeding activities i.e. after learning about Wiki’s we were asked to implement the knowledge in further activities.  Constructivism involves the learner constructing their own views of a subject based on previous experiences or beliefs etc. This was touched on in the activities however mostly when asked to form groups and provide information on a topic whereby we had perceived ideas of the tasks at hand from previous experiences. Connectivism gives the idea that not all information is known and that it is more important we can find the information when needed and where to find it especially when dispersed within the internet. Connectivism was highly explored through the majority of the activities as we began building our own links to others information once the Wiki’s and Blogs were introduced.

Wikis are a great technological tool teachers can use to guide students through the learning process and can be seen as more "engaging and interactive" (Gonzalez, 2004). This is clearly evident through my reflections where I deconstruct the learning experiences and reflect on the scaffolded framework given. The use of the P.M.I tool promotes students to deconstruct a topic finding, ideas presented through research. When couple within the tool of a Wiki, students are able to view, decipher and object to information given however the information found may not be completely explored. That’s were De Bono’s Six Hats tool comes in. The six hats strategy promotes the student to find parallels in information and work at a higher level of thinking then a P.M.I. Thus when coupled with a Wiki, information becomes better triangulated for others to view and use.

A Wiki is an online tool for which any person can read or edit information in a basic style. Because of its simplicity numerous people can use, review, change and learn from the information given on the Wiki at a rapid rate. In turn giving the most up-to-date informed information possible, which is great in a context like this degree where the students are scattered around the country.

In conclusion the previous week’s activities have aided my knowledge of eLearning via analysis and implementation of Wiki’s, Learning Theories and Scaffolding.

SOURCES:

Gonzalez, C. (2004). The Role of Blended Learning in the World of Technology. Retrieved March 17,  2011 from http://www.unt.edu/benchmarks/archives/2004/september04/eis.htm.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the horizon. 9-5. University Press.

Smith, M.K. (2002). Howard gardner and multiple intelligences. The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved March 17, 2011. from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/gardner.htm.

Mobile Phone Wiki Reflection

I always find that to attain new information old information must be used in the process…. Once again using a Wiki to group our whole courses finding, we work autonomously in reading the information given about the topic however were asked to then culminate/process our information differently to the Learning Theories Wiki… This will be done via using the De Bono hat system.

The Six Thinking Hats

De Bono’s Thinking Hats are another method teacher can implement for students to deconstruct information found on a topic by arranging it into six different section (dependant on whose organizing it) The six hats usually are: Negative (Black), Process (Blue), Creative (Green), Intuitive (Red), Positive (Yellow) and Objective (White). The Hats method aims to provide a parallel way of thinking about a topic in deconstruction of its worth, as usually in analysing a topic narrow-mindedness sets in. De Bono’s hat method seeks to triangular a thought process, for instance although something might be classified a negative, in doing so you seek to rectify an answer by offering an intuitive response to the problem and in turn could be done creatively.

All Alone…

Being asked to work by yourself on a topic at first and then combining your information is always a good tactic to use, it requires yourself to cognitivistic way to decipher if the information is worthwhile adding to your findings or remembering.

Using De Bono’s Thinking Hat method coupled with the use of the Wiki provided us with a more indepth analysis into the topic. In retrospect, this method combined with the Wiki is a more high order thinking process than using a P.M.I method as it promotes you to break down the information into its component elements as well as evaluate and critique the topics validity.

I found the activities core strength was within the previous material learnt, whereby the students had already been taught what to do, but new information was also introduce (such as using the De Bono method instead of the P.M.I method). If the topic allowed, I would aim to have students use the De Bono method as it gives a more thorough investigation into the topic at hand. Asking students to work by themselves is always a good way for them to be able to form their own opinion on something before others influence it (cogntivism/constructivism). It was also good however that once you had done some individual work it was added to the Wiki where others could view what you had to say, thus providing everyone with a network of synthesized information on a topic (Connectivism).

Learning Theories Wiki Reflection

Well then, it wasn’t too long before the information we created and gained from the “Profile Wiki” was implemented.

When asked to work in groups usually I cringe with hatred as you normally aren’t too sure of your partner’s capabilities especially in only week 2 of the first term. However, when given the option to choose a partner with the aid of the profile wiki, group work seemed a tad bit more interesting as I could almost stalk their profile finding good traits I want in a partner. I guess this part of the activity was structured so we could become connectivist thinkers for the future, whereby we now know where to find information on our cohort.

Okay, so…. Once finding a group, being asked to read and source information on a subject usually requires a brainstorm between the group members, to produce an overall summation of what we found about the topic. This of course is learnt in a contructivitic way, whereby our previous experiences and perceptions of group work come into play…. We all know how it goes, normally done in one lesson, sprawled out in a classroom this experience has been well worn by many a teacher and has become somewhat monotonous. However, when the classroom is virtual and the students don’t live in the same town, group work gets interesting....

Going with what I know best, I emailed my two group members, proposing we all source and read information on the topic and culminate our information together by a virtual- online meeting at the end of the week using Skype. One would now assume that the lecturer had almost scaffolded part of the activity on a behaviourism-based factor, whereby our learning was a response to conditioning i.e. were led to explore other means of electronic communication to effectively work together (even if the task didn’t clearly stipulate us to do so).

P.M.I FTW?!

Well now… Of course in brainstorming in a groups setting, there are many ways to pinpoint the main information on a topic. Plus – Minus – Interesting…. the use of the P.M.I template quickly using a lower-order thinking action of understanding by classifying and comparing gives the group grounds to base an opinion on a topic.

So where now?

Okay our group has had our meeting on Skype where we assimilated, compromised and compiled our thoughts on the topic and now have been instructed to add the findings to a….. WIKI! Yes indeed, our lecturer has asked we delve back into our knowledge bank on how to use/edit/save Wiki’s online to provide the rest of the students with our findings on a topic. A very cognitivistic way to draw back to information learnt previously and stored in the memory but recalled and reiterated in this activity, which we all know as KNOWLEDGE!

Now, given the fact we all know what the benefits of Wiki’s are, when coupled with our information provided in a P.M.I format, the entire cohort are able to gain a broader range of ideas which would hopefully cover a large majority of the pluses, minuses and interesting facts about the topic. In this forum now information has been provided in a connectivistic manner whereby the students are able to identify where to find knowledge that is known (although also created by themselves) about a topic.

The Learning Theories Wiki acitivty (that’s a mouthful!) was well designed in a way which incorporated more than just an outcome of finding out information on a topic. The activity taught new skills (such as eMeeting), revised and implemented fairly new information (such as the Wiki tool) and also revised old information and skills needed and acquired from previous group work.

Now….. considering the information we have learnt in the previous week on Wiki’s as well as the connectivist thought process of knowing where to find information, the lecturer was able to create a learning experience for us whereby less scaffolding was needed for the activities i.e.

In choosing our group - we had created our own information from the activities in the previous week (Connectivism).

In knowing how to go about group work – we all had previous experiences/perceptions of group work and used that knowledge to help structure how we were going to work together to produce the results of the activity (Constructivism).

Having to work together over the internet to produce work – we explored other methods to get together over the internet to work as a group (Skype), by using previous knowledge (constructivism) as well as identifying how and where we could find the knowledge (connectivism) to be able to get our group work discussions going.

Adding the information to the Wiki – we once again used previous knowledge acquired through mental processes such as thinking which was needed to be recalled using the memory (cognitivism) to add our groups thought to the online Wiki.

Accessing the information on the Wiki - In turn adding the information to the Wiki created a connectivist forum whereby others could know how to find/access the information we had gained and produced in our group activities.

Profile Wiki Reflection

I guess the first week for most universities is much like a “getting to know you” kind of experience, where you would chat amongst one another and talk about what you expect the course to be etc. Then progressively through the weeks you would learn more about one another as your contact stays consistent through the semester. However, what if like in the case of the GDLT Flex student degree your face-to-face communication ended at week 1? How would that crucial information you need to deceiver if the persons argument is valid or frivolous be found? Then again what medium could you use to effectively distribute the information for others to view and make the decision if you’re a loony or not?

Wiki’s to the rescue?

A Wiki is a simplified online website which allows you and other to work collaboratively to edit and save information on numerous pages. Of course, the most well known Wiki is Wikipedia, an online encyclopaedia where any user from around the world can input information into their website. Wiki’s are a great way to exchange and update information efficiently between groups of people. It could be seen as the “new black” of the technology world, taking over the use of e-mail to correspond between groups of people.

In our first activity we were asked to become acquainted with Wiki, by setting up our own page linked from a homepage where we could input information about ourselves for other to view. For GDLT students a Wiki is a great tool to use to aid learning and in completing this activity we were able to learn the basics of how a Wiki works by adding information about ourselves to a profile where others can view it. However, in this basic giving of information one would wonder if a simple webpage would suffice? I guess the lecturer has set-up the activity in a connectivist way, where once the activity is completed others can find the knowledge that is known/provided about others. This in turn could scaffold our learning in a constructivistic way, where our prior experience/knowledge of Wiki’s could enable us to use the Wiki in other ways for future activities.

I found the activity to be a great introduction into the basics of how a Wiki works, in turn also gaining a database of knowledge about our cohort. Of course, at this early stage with our minimal insight into Wiki’s the activity could not be fulfilled if it wasn’t for the scaffolded material given by the lecturer for us to fill out. This included the homepage with links to pages we could claim as our own, as well as a template for how the information could be presented on our own pages. Hopefully in future weeks we are shown further into the creating of Wiki’s and how to design them and use them in other ways.

Week 1 - Activity 3 - Learning Styles

21st Century Learners

1.       What is your belief and understanding of the nature of today's learners? Is there substance to the "engage or enrage" argument?

Prensky’s research could be seen to be quite narrow-minded in assuming all “digital natives” to be able to use and find the use of ICT’s helpful in education. Thrupp (2010), however starts to delve into Prensky’s defined “digital natives” ICT-based and online behaviours to find that not all ICT’s are as useful to the dig-gen as first thought. Therefore, one should not assume that all “digital natives” find ICT’s useful in learning.

Thrupp’s findings on the matter as most of today’s learners are very diverse in background and behaviour. ICT’s to most of society today are seen as a device that’s just there, and therefore, do not realize that some student’s do not have the same access or exposure to the technology as others.

For instance one student may have their own laptop with Wifi and unlimited internet in their room and therefore can access the net and socialize with friends online all the time as opposed to a person having a family computer in the living room with capped internet and might not be allowed to use social networking sites. Therefore, it could be assumed that these two students have different exposure, abilities and mind-sets about computing and its use for socializing.

This of course is only a small example of two “digital natives” exposure to computing and the internet but one cold see how in a class of 25 net-gen students may have different abilities and beliefs about the use of ICT’s in an educational setting.

In Prensky’s “Engage or Enrage Me” article it could be seen how one would assume some student’s to be able to multi-task and succumb to boredom if used to working and processing information at quite a rapid rate without constant stimulus, new information and activities to work on. However, once again this seems to be a narrow-minded concept as some students can’t multi-task and can feel overwhelmed when asked to complete more than a few things at once, especially if they are having trouble completing or understanding a single task at hand.

There is substance to Prensky’s argument, which is to understand your student learning abilities and needs. Realizing that there are some students who will get bored if things get slow and monotonous where as there are others that will freak out if you over burden them with too much information and activities at once.

The moral to this story people is, do not assume, as it makes an ASS out of U and ME!

Week 1 - Activity 2 - Learning Styles

My Multiple Intelligence Test Results:

1.       Review your results:

Well then, it appears Musical Intelligence dominates my abilities. Perhaps this is why I want to become a music teacher? I also find it interesting that my intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences are quite high, perhaps there could be a link between Music using both of these intelligence whilst performing and studying music?

2.       How would you use this information to inform your learning design?

It is always said to go with your strengths, and I guess in doing so I would try to design activities which provide students the ability to think and respond creatively to information given using kinaesthetically based activities.