1^st Blog – week commencing 25^th February 2012

I bet if a group of primary school students were asked to set up a blog they would be able to do it within a blink of the eye...get this  30 year old, computer illiterate, ‘immigrant’ to do it and its like learning a foreign language (without Google or some other ‘easy to learn’ or ‘step by step’ app).

Nonetheless, I have embraced the challenge, and in typical kinaesthetic/tactile manner, I decided to jump right into it and figure it out as I went. I did glance at the ‘set up’ demonstrations - manly the diagrams and pictures (the visual learner in me) and eventually managed to, albeit simplistically, set up my very first blog! I have never kept a journal/diary before so I just hope I’m not too much of a bore.

Week 1 of ICTs for Learning Design focused on two topics – ‘Knowing your Learning’ and ‘Learning Theories.’

Thoughts on ‘knowing your learning’ – It is clear that we are all different in many ways – we all have different needs, likes, wants, cultures, expectations etc. Similarly we all learn differently. Understanding the preferred learning styles of our students means we are able to work to each student’s strengths to better enable them to achieve their full capabilities. There are a number of ‘tests/questions’ that can be used in determining which style of learning suits a student best.

As suggested in this week’s module I undertook the NC State University learning style test. My results from that test are as follows:

NC STATE UNIVERSITY

Learning Styles Results

Results for: Grace Gannon           ACT                          X                        REF            11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11                               <-- -->         SEN                          X                        INT            11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11                               <-- -->         VIS                          X                        VRB            11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11                               <-- -->         SEQ                                              X    GLO            11  9   7   5   3   1   1   3   5   7   9   11                               <-- -->

·         If your score on a scale is 1-3, you are fairly well balanced on the two dimensions of that scale. ·         If your score on a scale is 5-7, you have a moderate preference for one dimension of the scale and will learn more easily in a teaching environment which favors that dimension. ·         If your score on a scale is 9-11, you have a very strong preference for one dimension of the scale. You may have real difficulty learning in an environment which does not support that preference.

The findings suggested that I am ‘fairly well balanced’ with regard to my learning style under the headings: active and reflective; sensing and intuition; visual and verbal. This concurs with the notion that to some degree we are all ‘multiple learners,’ with preferences to certain learning styles. I note that I scored a very high 11 in favour of the global style of learning. Apparently I have ‘real difficultly learning in an environment’ of sequential learning – yeap agree, but don’t most of us!

I also looked at a ‘SMARTS’ multiple Intelligence checklist and the a ‘Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic and Tactile’ learning style test. Both tests resulted in ‘multiple’ learning style preferences. I was interested to note the consistent perception that I’m not a learner that enjoys sequence and logical order, having scored the lowest under the ‘Math/Logic Smart’ heading. Coming from a Town Planning background, and working heavily with strategic planning, it was often the case that I could see the bigger picture or end result before I could digest the bureaucratic steps and processes to get there.

I do raise some questions about the effectiveness of the types of questions posed in the many of learning style tests. Some questions could easily be responded to ‘either way’ or are a bit confusing in the way they are worded. The questions require some degree of knowledge, understanding, and experience in your own learning preferences. In that regard I’m not sure how a primary school student would be able to answer the questions – which therefore rely on teacher observation and research into the learners (see reassurance that ICTs do not mean that the teaching profession is dispensable).

The point is that every learner is different and learns differently. Knowing these differences promotes the teachers ability to prepare pedagogies that are diverse and ‘student centred.’ However to think that a teacher will be able to effectively create 25-30 separate unit plans for each unit for each student is a very daunting, if not impossible, task. I believe that the use of ICTs will be a very useful tool to teachers in creating learning environments that are more individualised, without compromising collaboration and communication between the teacher and students, and between students themselves.

It may be that some students rely heavily on such devices for all aspects of learning – such as a child with autism. Whereas others by not be depended on ICTs yet will gain vital knowledge in being able to effectively utilise the devices for future careers; or to communicate globally; to see and hear things as opposed to simply reading from a text; to learn music; to improve their own sporting techniques etc. In any case, the learning style will be suited to that child preferences and strengths and learning capabilities.

Thoughts on ‘learning theory’ –  ‘Learning theories’ relate to the learning process as opposed to what is being learnt. This week’s module discussed the core theories  - behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism.  All learning theories have their place and there are often times when the use of many theories is often employed.

The readings suggest that in the case of utilising ICTs within the classroom environment the constructivism learning theory is often key.  Indeed the social constructivism learning approach being used in this ICT for Learning Design class, by way of blogging, is an example of scaffolding using ICT. However to be effective constructivism I believe that this approach relies on the learners to comment/discuss others blogs as well as teacher feedback to ensure communication and collaboration is not lost.  

GG