Introduction
I must say that this Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology class has gone by quickly. I began this course thinking that I already knew a great deal about the four “main” theories of learning: the behaviorist learning theory, the cognitive learning theory, the constructionist learning theory, and the social learning theory (Laureate Education, Inc, 2010a). However, what I found during this course was, while I did have a good idea as to what each theory entailed, I did not fully comprehend how each of the theories applied to strategies and technology implementation in my classroom. Also, I learned that there is a major difference between using technology as an instructional tool, and using it as a learning tool (Laureate Education, Inc, 2010b). Despite the fact that I learned a great deal during this course, it did not change my personal learning theories; in fact, it only aided in reinforcing them.
Reflection on my Personal Learning Theory
At the onset of the course I described my personal learning theory as a combination of three of the four “main” learning theories; and, that description has not been changed a great deal. Both before and now, my personal theory of learning combines parts of the cognitive theory with parts of the social theory, and even includes “a touch” of the behaviorist theory. The main modification that has been made to my personal learning theory is the realization that there is a difference in using technology as an instructional tool and using it as a learning tool. According to Dr. Orey, instructional technological tools are tools that the teacher uses to present information to the students; and, in comparison, learning technology tools are tools that students use “hands-on” to explore and learn about new concepts (Laureate Education, 2010b). In the past, I have considered using Power Point presentations when presenting materials to be a good cognitive learning tool for students, however, I now realize that the Power Point program was not being used as a learning tool, but rather a instructional tool; furthermore, I learned that this practice was not a best practice if I wanted to help my students learn and retain the information.
The other “modifications” to my personal learning theory were simple “additions” of ideas and tools that could be used in implementing my learning theories in the classroom. For instance, I now realize that there are tools like Webspiration and Voice Threads available to use when implementing activities in the classroom that are cognitive or behaviorist in nature. This course has helped to deepen my understanding of how learning theories, technologies, and teaching strategies are intertwined; and, this course has illustrated and provided multiple tools that are available in aiding the implementation of the four learning theories through the use of technology.
Adjustments to Instructional Practice
After Dr. Orey explained that simply using technology as instructional tools is not in the best benefit of the child, I realized that my use of technology to present information was not a best practice; and, realized that I should be incorporating technology in a method that uses technology as a learning tool (Laureate Education, Inc, 2010b). So, the main modification that I will be making to my instructional practice is to adjust my lessons so that they include technology in a manner that allows students to use technology “hands-on”. Instead of using Power Points to introduce concepts, I may have students view and work problems from voice threads, or I may have them research new concepts and present their findings to the class, or I may have them work on some other activity that is “hands-on” in nature.
Two technological tools that I plan to use with my students in the future are concept maps and voice threads. The use of concept maps will help support/enhance my students’ learning because concept maps allow students to tie concepts together in many different ways, which, according to cognitive learning theory, is important when it comes to adding information to the long term memory. Concept maps also tend to be very visual, tend to incorporate hands-on work, and tend to be accompanied with auditory explanations (the process of talking about the relationships within the map is auditory, and the process of actually creating the concept map is kinesthetic). And, the incorporation of all the senses when using concept maps is great, because, according to cognitive learning theory, integrating multiple senses when learning helps promote the transfer of information to long-term memory. Concept maps also support the tenets of cognitive theory by allowing students to use elaboration – multiple representations of ideas and new material-when learning; again, allowing for the transfer of information to the long term memory.
The use of voice threads will help support/enhance my student learning because it will allow students to communicate by commenting on previously made voice threads. Also, the voice threads appeal to all learning styles as well. Auditory learners benefit from listening to voice threads, listening to comments made on the voice thread, and if they are working in groups using voice threads, they benefit from the discussion among their classmates about the voice thread. Visual learners, on the other hand, benefit from actually viewing the voice thread; often, voice threads incorporate diagrams and pictures related to the topic of the voice thread, which is a great way to help students tie their previous knowledge to concepts they have to learn. Kinesthetic learners benefit from actually working the problems posed in voice threads, and from being able to stop, pause, and play the voice thread; furthermore, they benefit from being able to make comments on voice threads that have already been created. Voice threads also support and enhance learning because they can be used as social learning tools. According to the authors of the book “Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works”, technology plays “a unique and vital role in cooperative learning by facilitating group collaboration, providing structure for group tasks, and allowing members to communicate even if they are not working face to face” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, pg.140). I plan to use voice threads as a means to implement social learning theories into the classroom and support student learning.
As a result of this course, I have learned about numerous new tools that I can use to implement activities based on my personal learning theories; furthermore, these tools will help support and enhance my students’ learning. I especially like the tools that were related my the personal learning theories that I hold true. For example, in relation to the cognitive learning theory tools, I enjoyed learning about Webspiration, KWL charts, and how technology can be used to implement these tools into the classroom. In relation to my social learning theory beliefs, I enjoyed learning about social learning tools like Google Calendar, video makers, web pages, Power Points, voice threads, and Glogster. These tools can be implemented into class activities to enable students to work together, which, according to social learning theory, is a great way to help students learn and transfer information to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, Inc, 2010c).
Long-term Goals
The two strategies that I would like to become more proficient in with my classroom activities are as follows: 1) Using cues, questions and advanced organizers, and, 2) Summarizing and note taking. My long-term goal is to become proficient in implement both of the strategies above into my classroom activities. The two long-term goals that I chose to work on in my classroom both tie closely to Cognitive learning theories. Based on cognitive learning theories, we can assume that students will learn and retain information better and longer if the new information is presented in a way that allows for connections to students’ previous knowledge (Laureate Education, 2010d). There are many technological tools that support implementing cognitive learning theories in the classroom, and, my strategies for implementing these goals into my classroom involve technology. In the following paragraphs I will present my outline for implementing my two chosen strategies, and, thus, my strategy for working toward meeting my two long-term goals.
The first strategy I want to work on implementing in my classroom is the use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers. The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers ties to cognitive learning theories because it allows students to tie their previous knowledge to new knowledge. They provide a sort of scaffolding. The KWL chart is one type of advanced organizer that I would like to use. The KWL chart gets student to thinking about what they are about to learn (Cue) and questioning what they know and what they need to know (Question). When students fill out the “Know” part, of the KWL chart, they are setting the stage for tying what they know about a subject to the new knowledge about the subject. Base on Cognitive learning theories, the process of tying the “know” to the “learned” will help students building strong ties and make neuron connects which should result in the information being stored in the long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010d). According to Dr. Orey, long-term memories are stored in “networks of information”, where memories are inter-linked on different levels (Laureate Education, 2010d). Technology can be used in the implementation of KWL charts by using Microsoft Word to create the chart “skeleton”; then, the skeleton could be saved for students to modify and re-save. The “Know” and “Want” part could be filled out and saved, and the “Learned” part could be filled out at the end of each applicable lesson; thus, the students could reflect on what they knew, what they learned, and how the two are interrelated.
The second strategy that I would to incorporate into my classroom is the use of summarizing and note taking. The process of teaching students to take proper notes ties to cognitive learning theories because it help students “process” and contemplate new knowledge in efforts to summarize it and write down only the needed parts. According to chapter 6 of the textbook, one important ability for students to have is the ability to take good notes, process the notes, and “synthesize” the information (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). According to Dr. Orey, one belief of those who adhere to the cognitive learning theories, is the belief that, through synthesizing and continual processing of that information, students are more likely to add that information to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010d). Cognitive learning theory says that the more a student processes information, the more likely it is to be added to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010d). Thus, the more a student thinks about what to or how to add to his/her notes, the more they focus on needed information (not unnecessary or repeated information), and create ties between the new concepts (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). I like to think of “good” summarizing/note taking as a type of “deliberate” note taking (i.e. Not just writing down everything they see on the white board, or a PowerPoint slide, but processing what they see and taking down only the needed things). The technologies described in the next paragraph are not only cognitive learning tools, they also aid in teaching students good summarizing and note taking skills.
One technological tool that can be beneficial when teaching students to summarize and take “proper” notes is the Microsoft Word (or other word processing applications). I found the “AutoSummarize” tool available in Microsoft Word applications especially interesting (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). One objective my students need to master is related to understanding the development of Geometry. Usually, in effort to have students meet this objective, I have them each research a different mathematician and then create a project showcasing the life of the mathematician. In the past, students were given a rubric of what was required, and, then, I allowed them to create a poster, a Power Point, an essay, or a Movie based on their research. In the future, I would like to have all students write an essay (hence their “notes” on the concept), and, then use the Microsoft Word AutoSummarize tool to narrow down what should go into their presentations. I have found that some students want to put “tons” of information into their presentations; but, maybe, through using the AutoSummarize tool they will be able to see which key points to “pull-out” and include in their presentation. At some point, I would also like to introduce students to the “NoteStar” website (http://notestar.4teachers.org), where they can help students take information that they find on the internet, organize it, and correctly site it (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).
The integration of technology with the instructional strategies above will help me meet the diverse learning needs of your students because the strategy activities appeal to the different learning styles. The implementation of technologies in the two strategies listed above will not only enhance my student learning, it will also help me reach my long-term goals. To be an effective teacher, I need to be able to successfully implement my two long-term goals in my classroom.
Conclusion
I have found this Walden course to be very beneficial. Out of all of the previous courses I have taken, I believe that I have learned the most “relevant” information during this course. From this course, I learned about the “main” learning theories in great detail, I learned how those learning theories apply to education and the classroom. Furthermore, I learned about “new” technologies, and how those technologies can be used to implement effective learning/teaching strategies into the classroom.
Tonya Todd
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010a). Program: Instructional Theory vs. Learning Theory [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010b). Program: Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010c) Program: Social Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010d). Program: Cognitive Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
Hi Everyone.
If you asked any teacher whether they though cooperative learning was beneficial for students or not, most teachers would agree that cooperative learning can be very beneficial for students’ learning. This week we learned about social learning theories, which revolve around the idea that people learn through social interactions; furthermore, we learned thatteachers can implement social learning theories into their classroom by incorporating cooperative learning activities. Many of the resources described in the learning resources this week correlate with the principles of social learning. One resource discussed was the use of cooperative learning groups, both informal groups and formal groups (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). By working in groups with their peers, students can create or add to previous meanings about concepts and ideas/occurances; and, the act of creating meanings about concepts and ideas/occurances through social interactions is the premise behind social learning theories (Laureate Education, 2010a). Another cooperative learning activity that incorporate the use of group learning was the jigsaw strategy. Like with basic group work, with the jigsaw strategy, group members “went out” and learned new concepts and then came back to share their new knowledge with the group. It is easy to see that cooperative learning IS a critical part of social learning, and the two are majorly intertwined.
This week we also learned how technology has enabled teachers to implement social learning theories in the classroom. Technological software/web-based programs like Voice Threads, Webquests, and Movie Maker, allow students to work together to create artifacts/products (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007; Laureate Education, 2010b). Students can then use the same technologies to communicate with one another about their products. The authors of our textbook, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, also discussed how it is important for teachers to plan clear lessons and, how it is important for them to explain the lesson requirements to students fully and completely (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). Then, the authors go on to explain how there are technological tools available to help students (and teachers) find resources, stay on track, and know what is expected of them at all times. Tools like Microsoft Word can be used to create rubrics, shared calendar sites, like Yahoo Calendar, can be used to help students keep up with assignment dates, shared bookmarking sites, like del.icio.us, can be used to help students keep up with required website links, and communication software, like edublog.com, can be used to help students collaborate outside of the classroom (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). All of the technologies I have discussed (and many more) lend themselves to being used as collaborative tools; thus, it follows that they are also social learning tools as well. It is clear that the use of technology can be beneficial in the field of education, especially when it comes to the incorporation of social learning theories and cooperative learning activities into the classroom.
The link to my Voice Thread for this week is: http://voicethread.com/share/1881872/ It is a voice thread I would present to my students. The purpose of the voice thread is to introduce a students to a project based learning unit on calculating the area of composite shapes, as well as how to calculate/approximate quantities.
Tonya Todd
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010a) Program Number One: Social Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010b) Program Number Three: Spotlight on Technology: VoiceThread [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
If you asked any teacher whether they though cooperative learning was beneficial for students or not, most teachers would agree that cooperative learning can be very beneficial for students’ learning. This week we learned about social learning theories, which revolve around the idea that people learn through social interactions; furthermore, we learned thatteachers can implement social learning theories into their classroom by incorporating cooperative learning activities. Many of the resources described in the learning resources this week correlate with the principles of social learning. One resource discussed was the use of cooperative learning groups, both informal groups and formal groups (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). By working in groups with their peers, students can create or add to previous meanings about concepts and ideas/occurances; and, the act of creating meanings about concepts and ideas/occurances through social interactions is the premise behind social learning theories (Laureate Education, 2010a). Another cooperative learning activity that incorporate the use of group learning was the jigsaw strategy. Like with basic group work, with the jigsaw strategy, group members “went out” and learned new concepts and then came back to share their new knowledge with the group. It is easy to see that cooperative learning IS a critical part of social learning, and the two are majorly intertwined.
This week we also learned how technology has enabled teachers to implement social learning theories in the classroom. Technological software/web-based programs like Voice Threads, Webquests, and Movie Maker, allow students to work together to create artifacts/products (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007; Laureate Education, 2010b). Students can then use the same technologies to communicate with one another about their products. The authors of our textbook, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, also discussed how it is important for teachers to plan clear lessons and, how it is important for them to explain the lesson requirements to students fully and completely (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). Then, the authors go on to explain how there are technological tools available to help students (and teachers) find resources, stay on track, and know what is expected of them at all times. Tools like Microsoft Word can be used to create rubrics, shared calendar sites, like Yahoo Calendar, can be used to help students keep up with assignment dates, shared bookmarking sites, like del.icio.us, can be used to help students keep up with required website links, and communication software, like edublog.com, can be used to help students collaborate outside of the classroom (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). All of the technologies I have discussed (and many more) lend themselves to being used as collaborative tools; thus, it follows that they are also social learning tools as well. It is clear that the use of technology can be beneficial in the field of education, especially when it comes to the incorporation of social learning theories and cooperative learning activities into the classroom.
The link to my Voice Thread for this week is: http://voicethread.com/share/1881872/ It is a voice thread I would present to my students. The purpose of the voice thread is to introduce a students to a project based learning unit on calculating the area of composite shapes, as well as how to calculate/approximate quantities.
Tonya Todd
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010a) Program Number One: Social Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010b) Program Number Three: Spotlight on Technology: VoiceThread [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Constructivism in Practice
Hi everyone.
This week we learned about constructivist and constructionist learning theories. The main points of constructivist/constructionist learning theories are that people learn best when they are actively involved in creating something. Another important part of the constructionist learning theory is that people use the following four mechanisms for learning: “equilibrium”, “assimilation”, “accommodation”, and “schema” (Laureate Education, 2010). The instructional strategies described in this week’s learning resources correlate with the constructivist/constructionist learning theories because they tie to the four mechanisms for learning and involve student learning and actively creating an artifact. Below I will discuss some of the learning theories and how they tie to constructionist theories.
One learning strategy is to implement spreadsheets usage in the classroom as a means for students to compare data. The use of spreadsheets as a means for students to compare and analyze data, and then present their findings, ties to the constructionist learning theory because it allows students tie new information to previous schema, and create a product based on their findings. In our textbook we read about Mrs. Omar’s use of spreadsheets. In the case of Mrs. Omar’s use of spreadsheets, she provided for students to make a hypothesis based previous knowledge, then allowed them to test their hypothesis using the spreadsheet technology. This process of analyzing the data provides students with the chance to see the actual results; and, at that point disequilibrium may occur, forcing the students to use “accommodation” (changing/adapting the results to fit into their previous schema) or to use “assimilation” (changing their previous schema to fit the results) (Laureate Education, 2010). As assimilation deals with completely changing previous schema, it is important to note that assimilation is not likely in adults (Laureate Education, 2010). And, as stated earlier, assimilation, equilibrium, accommodation, and schema are all mechanisms for learning using of cognitive learning techniques. The use of other data collecting tools closely resembles the use of the spreadsheet for analyzing data and finding results.
Another constructivist/constructionist learning strategy discussed was having students use “web resources” like simulations and online demonstrations, and “gaming software” to learn about new topics and situations. These web resources and games can be used by students to gain a new perspective on previous knowledge, and then students can create a presentation of some sort to share their findings. According to our textbook, there are six tasks that our students engage in and that help them come up with and evaluate hypothesis. A few of the tasks that can be offered by web resources and game software are: 1) “system analysis”, 2) problem solving, 3)“historical investigation”, 4) “experimental inquiry”, and 5) “decision making” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). Through these tasks, students learn about new concepts and then accommodate their knowledge banks. The process of learning through investigation, analyzing the data, and then creating a product based on the inquiry, is what the constructivist/constructionist learning theories are all about.
There were other learning strategies mentioned in the learning resources, like having students use Power Point to create a product (Laureate Education, 2010). However, Dr. Orey summed it all up when he said, “whatever tools they use, if the student is involved in creation, then they are using constructionism” (Laureate Education, 2010). All of the learning strategies discussed this week are common in that they involve having students use tools (many of which are technological) to learn new concepts. They are also common in that, during the learning process, disequilibrium occurs in students, thus forcing students to “accommodate”; and finally, they are common in that they end with students creating products based on their new found knowledge. The principles of constructivist/constructionist learning theories are based on the same learning, accommodating, and producing of products as was described in the learning resources. I must admit that, of all the learning theories, the constructivist/constructionist theory seem like it may be the hardest to successfully implement; and, I think that is because it seems to require a great deal of forethought, preparation, and accommodation of individual student personalities, abilities, and learning styles.
Tonya Todd
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number One: Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
This week we learned about constructivist and constructionist learning theories. The main points of constructivist/constructionist learning theories are that people learn best when they are actively involved in creating something. Another important part of the constructionist learning theory is that people use the following four mechanisms for learning: “equilibrium”, “assimilation”, “accommodation”, and “schema” (Laureate Education, 2010). The instructional strategies described in this week’s learning resources correlate with the constructivist/constructionist learning theories because they tie to the four mechanisms for learning and involve student learning and actively creating an artifact. Below I will discuss some of the learning theories and how they tie to constructionist theories.
One learning strategy is to implement spreadsheets usage in the classroom as a means for students to compare data. The use of spreadsheets as a means for students to compare and analyze data, and then present their findings, ties to the constructionist learning theory because it allows students tie new information to previous schema, and create a product based on their findings. In our textbook we read about Mrs. Omar’s use of spreadsheets. In the case of Mrs. Omar’s use of spreadsheets, she provided for students to make a hypothesis based previous knowledge, then allowed them to test their hypothesis using the spreadsheet technology. This process of analyzing the data provides students with the chance to see the actual results; and, at that point disequilibrium may occur, forcing the students to use “accommodation” (changing/adapting the results to fit into their previous schema) or to use “assimilation” (changing their previous schema to fit the results) (Laureate Education, 2010). As assimilation deals with completely changing previous schema, it is important to note that assimilation is not likely in adults (Laureate Education, 2010). And, as stated earlier, assimilation, equilibrium, accommodation, and schema are all mechanisms for learning using of cognitive learning techniques. The use of other data collecting tools closely resembles the use of the spreadsheet for analyzing data and finding results.
Another constructivist/constructionist learning strategy discussed was having students use “web resources” like simulations and online demonstrations, and “gaming software” to learn about new topics and situations. These web resources and games can be used by students to gain a new perspective on previous knowledge, and then students can create a presentation of some sort to share their findings. According to our textbook, there are six tasks that our students engage in and that help them come up with and evaluate hypothesis. A few of the tasks that can be offered by web resources and game software are: 1) “system analysis”, 2) problem solving, 3)“historical investigation”, 4) “experimental inquiry”, and 5) “decision making” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007). Through these tasks, students learn about new concepts and then accommodate their knowledge banks. The process of learning through investigation, analyzing the data, and then creating a product based on the inquiry, is what the constructivist/constructionist learning theories are all about.
There were other learning strategies mentioned in the learning resources, like having students use Power Point to create a product (Laureate Education, 2010). However, Dr. Orey summed it all up when he said, “whatever tools they use, if the student is involved in creation, then they are using constructionism” (Laureate Education, 2010). All of the learning strategies discussed this week are common in that they involve having students use tools (many of which are technological) to learn new concepts. They are also common in that, during the learning process, disequilibrium occurs in students, thus forcing students to “accommodate”; and finally, they are common in that they end with students creating products based on their new found knowledge. The principles of constructivist/constructionist learning theories are based on the same learning, accommodating, and producing of products as was described in the learning resources. I must admit that, of all the learning theories, the constructivist/constructionist theory seem like it may be the hardest to successfully implement; and, I think that is because it seems to require a great deal of forethought, preparation, and accommodation of individual student personalities, abilities, and learning styles.
Tonya Todd
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number One: Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Cognitivisim in Practice
Hi everyone.
This week I learned about many instructional strategies that could be used in the classroom. The strategies I explored this week were: 1) the incorporation of cues, questions, and advanced organizers, 2) the use of summarizing and note taking, and 3) the use of concept maps and virtual field trips. After studying about these strategies and about what cognitive learning theories are, I also realized that the strategies could be used as methods for incorporating cognitive learning theories in the classroom.
In reference to the use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers, they tie to cognitive learning theories because they allow students to tie their previous knowledge to new knowledge. They provide a sort of scaffolding. The KWL chart is one type of advanced organizer that that gets student to thinking about what they are about to learn (Cue) and questioning what they know and what they need to know (Question). When students fill out the “Know” part, of the KWL chart, they are setting the stage for tying what they know about a subject to the new knowledge about the subject. Base on Cognitive learning theories, the process of tying the “know” to the “learned” will help students building strong ties and make neuron connects which should result in the information being stored in the long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010a). According to Dr. Orey, long-term memories are stored in “networks of information”, where memories are inter-linked on different levels (Laureate Education, 2010a).
In reference to the use of summarizing and note taking, the process of teaching students to take proper notes ties to cognitive learning theories because it help students “process” and contemplate new knowledge in efforts to summarize it and write down only the needed parts. According to chapter 6 of the textbook, one important ability for students to have is the ability to take good notes, process the notes, and “synthesize” the information (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). According to Dr. Orey, one belief of those who adhere to the cognitive learning theories, is the belief that, through synthesizing and continual processing of that information, students are more likely to add that information to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010a). Cognitive learning theory says that the more a student processes information, the more likely it is to be added to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010a). Thus, the more a student thinks about what to or how to add to his/her notes, the more they focus on needed information (not unnecessary or repeated information), and create ties between the new concepts (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). I like to think of “good” summarizing/note taking as a type of “deliberate” note taking (ie. Not just writing down everything they see on the white board, or a PowerPoint slide, but processing what they see and taking down only the needed things)
In reference to the use of virtual field trips, and graphic organizers, through using virtual trips, I will be helping my students tie new concepts to things that they already know. Also, I will be sparking their interest, and in most cases, helping them make connections between their real-world and the math concepts I teach. According to Dr. Orey, there are three types of memories stored in the long-term memory: 1) Declarative, 2) Procedural, and 3) Episodic (Laureate Education, 2010a). Of the three types of memories, episodic is usually the most “rich” memory; thus, it is the memory that is most relevant to students (Laureate Education, 2010b). Virtual field trips allow students to “witness” things they would not normally be able to, and through witnessing the things they are more likely to tie the lesson concepts to their long-term memory. Also, graphic organizers can be used with the virtual field trip to ensure that “focus questions” are answered and students understand exactly what they are supposed to be looking for during the virtual field trip journey (Novak & Cañas, 2008). To be able to complete the graphic organizer, students must think critically and process the information they view during the virtual field trip; and, as I mentioned earlier, that processing of the information, and the critical thinking, helps concepts be stored to the long-term memory.
By teaching our students how to take good notes through cuing them, and by providing them with graphic organizers,we can help them be successful; and, we will be applying cognitive learning theories. Virtual field trips are also great ways to help students learn about new concepts; and, because they are “episodic” in nature, they help learned information be processed to the long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010b). We should however, use graphic organizers to accompany our virtual field trips to ensure that our students stay focused on the concept we want them to learn. I hope to use the strategies learned this week in my classroom.
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number One: Cognitive Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number Two: Spotlight on Technology: Virtual Field Trips [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
This week I learned about many instructional strategies that could be used in the classroom. The strategies I explored this week were: 1) the incorporation of cues, questions, and advanced organizers, 2) the use of summarizing and note taking, and 3) the use of concept maps and virtual field trips. After studying about these strategies and about what cognitive learning theories are, I also realized that the strategies could be used as methods for incorporating cognitive learning theories in the classroom.
In reference to the use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers, they tie to cognitive learning theories because they allow students to tie their previous knowledge to new knowledge. They provide a sort of scaffolding. The KWL chart is one type of advanced organizer that that gets student to thinking about what they are about to learn (Cue) and questioning what they know and what they need to know (Question). When students fill out the “Know” part, of the KWL chart, they are setting the stage for tying what they know about a subject to the new knowledge about the subject. Base on Cognitive learning theories, the process of tying the “know” to the “learned” will help students building strong ties and make neuron connects which should result in the information being stored in the long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010a). According to Dr. Orey, long-term memories are stored in “networks of information”, where memories are inter-linked on different levels (Laureate Education, 2010a).
In reference to the use of summarizing and note taking, the process of teaching students to take proper notes ties to cognitive learning theories because it help students “process” and contemplate new knowledge in efforts to summarize it and write down only the needed parts. According to chapter 6 of the textbook, one important ability for students to have is the ability to take good notes, process the notes, and “synthesize” the information (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). According to Dr. Orey, one belief of those who adhere to the cognitive learning theories, is the belief that, through synthesizing and continual processing of that information, students are more likely to add that information to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010a). Cognitive learning theory says that the more a student processes information, the more likely it is to be added to their long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010a). Thus, the more a student thinks about what to or how to add to his/her notes, the more they focus on needed information (not unnecessary or repeated information), and create ties between the new concepts (Pitler, Hubbel, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). I like to think of “good” summarizing/note taking as a type of “deliberate” note taking (ie. Not just writing down everything they see on the white board, or a PowerPoint slide, but processing what they see and taking down only the needed things)
In reference to the use of virtual field trips, and graphic organizers, through using virtual trips, I will be helping my students tie new concepts to things that they already know. Also, I will be sparking their interest, and in most cases, helping them make connections between their real-world and the math concepts I teach. According to Dr. Orey, there are three types of memories stored in the long-term memory: 1) Declarative, 2) Procedural, and 3) Episodic (Laureate Education, 2010a). Of the three types of memories, episodic is usually the most “rich” memory; thus, it is the memory that is most relevant to students (Laureate Education, 2010b). Virtual field trips allow students to “witness” things they would not normally be able to, and through witnessing the things they are more likely to tie the lesson concepts to their long-term memory. Also, graphic organizers can be used with the virtual field trip to ensure that “focus questions” are answered and students understand exactly what they are supposed to be looking for during the virtual field trip journey (Novak & Cañas, 2008). To be able to complete the graphic organizer, students must think critically and process the information they view during the virtual field trip; and, as I mentioned earlier, that processing of the information, and the critical thinking, helps concepts be stored to the long-term memory.
By teaching our students how to take good notes through cuing them, and by providing them with graphic organizers,we can help them be successful; and, we will be applying cognitive learning theories. Virtual field trips are also great ways to help students learn about new concepts; and, because they are “episodic” in nature, they help learned information be processed to the long-term memory (Laureate Education, 2010b). We should however, use graphic organizers to accompany our virtual field trips to ensure that our students stay focused on the concept we want them to learn. I hope to use the strategies learned this week in my classroom.
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number One: Cognitive Learning Theories [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number Two: Spotlight on Technology: Virtual Field Trips [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Behaviorism in Practice
Hi everyone.
This week I learned how technology and the behaviorist learning theories can be interrelated. I also came to realize how many teachers use behaviorist learning theories everyday in the their classrooms and not realize it. Most importantly, through this week’s resources, I learned multiple ways I could use technology to, not only positively reinforce my students, but, also, to help my students practice new skills and receive immediate feedback.
The instructional strategies suggested in the “Reinforcing Effort” chapter of our textbook could be said to correlate with the principles of behaviorist learning theory. The primary correlation between the learning strategies presented, and the principles of behaviorist learning, is in that the learning strategies presented were meant to increase student performance through the use of positive reinforcements (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007). There were multiple learning strategies in the “Reinforcing Effort” chapter, however, one in particular stood out in my mind. The strategy that I really liked was the use of spreadsheets to track the correlation between student effort and achievement (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007). I liked the fact that students can input their own data, and then visually see (through the use of charts/graphs) how their effort directly correlates to the grade they receive on an assignment. If a student sees that their studying resulted in good grades (over a period of time), they will be more likely to continue to strive hard when learning new concepts. Before this week, I had never really considered using spreadsheets as a method of positive reinforcement. Incorporating positive reinforcement was not the only behaviorist strategy that technology was helpful with.
In the “Homework and Practice” chapter of the textbook, I learned that there are numerous websites and software applications that can be helpful when incorporating behaviorist theory strategies. Dr. Michael Orey explained that one big component of the behaviorist learning theory is the use of “skill and drill” type activities (Laureate Education, 2010). Behaviorists believe that it is necessary to teach a small amount of content and then test students on their understanding the material. It is only after the students prove their understanding that new material should be introduced. The “Homework and Practice” chapter mentioned using spreadsheets as well as multimedia and web sources that allow for immediate feedback (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007). I have used spreadsheets with my students in the past when teaching quadratic equations; furthermore, I have used web sources, like “Brain Pop”, to help teach and provide students (and myself) with immediate feedback. Surprisingly, I did not consider Microsoft Word as much more than a word processer until I read about its applications made for researching (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007).
While thinking about how the instructional strategies described in this week’s resources correlated with the principles of behaviorist learning theory, I also considered the operant conditioning aspect of Behaviorism. I think that allowing students to use technology during lessons is a sort of “reward” in itself. I say that because, my students have often voiced their desire to use technology when completing tasks. It is with that in mind that I note that technology can also be linked to the operant condition aspects of Behaviorism; or, more specifically, the “positive reinforcement” aspect of Behaviorist learning theory.
Before this week, I had not considered the many ways that technology ties to behaviorist theories. However, I now see that technology can benefit both teachers and students, especially in the classrooms where behaviorist theories are being implemented. As I mentioned earlier, many teachers are incorporating behaviorist theories into their classroom without even realizing it. Now, more than ever, I am aware that I have behaviorist tendencies; and, I am hoping to be able to apply many of the learning strategies I studied this week into my classroom.
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number One: Behaviorist Learning Theory [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tonya Todd
This week I learned how technology and the behaviorist learning theories can be interrelated. I also came to realize how many teachers use behaviorist learning theories everyday in the their classrooms and not realize it. Most importantly, through this week’s resources, I learned multiple ways I could use technology to, not only positively reinforce my students, but, also, to help my students practice new skills and receive immediate feedback.
The instructional strategies suggested in the “Reinforcing Effort” chapter of our textbook could be said to correlate with the principles of behaviorist learning theory. The primary correlation between the learning strategies presented, and the principles of behaviorist learning, is in that the learning strategies presented were meant to increase student performance through the use of positive reinforcements (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007). There were multiple learning strategies in the “Reinforcing Effort” chapter, however, one in particular stood out in my mind. The strategy that I really liked was the use of spreadsheets to track the correlation between student effort and achievement (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007). I liked the fact that students can input their own data, and then visually see (through the use of charts/graphs) how their effort directly correlates to the grade they receive on an assignment. If a student sees that their studying resulted in good grades (over a period of time), they will be more likely to continue to strive hard when learning new concepts. Before this week, I had never really considered using spreadsheets as a method of positive reinforcement. Incorporating positive reinforcement was not the only behaviorist strategy that technology was helpful with.
In the “Homework and Practice” chapter of the textbook, I learned that there are numerous websites and software applications that can be helpful when incorporating behaviorist theory strategies. Dr. Michael Orey explained that one big component of the behaviorist learning theory is the use of “skill and drill” type activities (Laureate Education, 2010). Behaviorists believe that it is necessary to teach a small amount of content and then test students on their understanding the material. It is only after the students prove their understanding that new material should be introduced. The “Homework and Practice” chapter mentioned using spreadsheets as well as multimedia and web sources that allow for immediate feedback (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007). I have used spreadsheets with my students in the past when teaching quadratic equations; furthermore, I have used web sources, like “Brain Pop”, to help teach and provide students (and myself) with immediate feedback. Surprisingly, I did not consider Microsoft Word as much more than a word processer until I read about its applications made for researching (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, and Malenoski, 2007).
While thinking about how the instructional strategies described in this week’s resources correlated with the principles of behaviorist learning theory, I also considered the operant conditioning aspect of Behaviorism. I think that allowing students to use technology during lessons is a sort of “reward” in itself. I say that because, my students have often voiced their desire to use technology when completing tasks. It is with that in mind that I note that technology can also be linked to the operant condition aspects of Behaviorism; or, more specifically, the “positive reinforcement” aspect of Behaviorist learning theory.
Before this week, I had not considered the many ways that technology ties to behaviorist theories. However, I now see that technology can benefit both teachers and students, especially in the classrooms where behaviorist theories are being implemented. As I mentioned earlier, many teachers are incorporating behaviorist theories into their classroom without even realizing it. Now, more than ever, I am aware that I have behaviorist tendencies; and, I am hoping to be able to apply many of the learning strategies I studied this week into my classroom.
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Program Number One: Behaviorist Learning Theory [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tonya Todd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)