Through this week’s videos and readings, I
was most fascinated and puzzled with the Cyborg Learning Theory. In the article, Social Networking
Technologies in Education, it mentions that learning how to learn will become
the new curriculum because what we know will become decreasingly useful as obsolescence
becomes as familiar as exhaling (McPheeters, 2009). It
also states that adopting the new Cyborg learning paradigm will allow education
to focus on preparing a generation to adapt to the unavoidable rapidity of
changes they will face (McPheeters, 2009).
Essentially, education will exist for learning to learn. In the video, Cyborg Life, Kevin Warwick stated,
“It may be dangerous, but it is exciting and opens up new opportunities” (Warwick,
2008). He also spoke to how this theory
changes the education system and universities because a Cyborg could simply
download information. The theory puts an
interesting spin on our educational systems as they exist.
Utilizing technology with instruction
offers an array of benefits for students and teachers. Bringing technology into the classroom
provides opportunities for differential instruction, increases student
learning, understanding, and achievement while motivating students to learn, collaborate,
and supports critical thinking and problem solving skills (Pitler, 2009, p
3). Technology allows teachers to individualize
instruction to meet student needs and has proven to be highly effective with at-risk
and special needs students. Certain
technologies support instructional strategies, so it is essential to implement
technologies and resources that best support instruction. Several
theories support technology integration within the classroom such as the
Constructivist Learning Theory and Theory of Connectivism. Constructivist Learning Theory explains that
we learn in a variety of ways and the more opportunities we have and more
engaged we are, the better the understanding (Bransford, 2000, p. 194). Experience is a valuable instructional tool,
which is why hands-on activities and field trips are so important (Bransford,
2000, p. 194). Technology is used as a
tool to help students solve problems and explore new ideas and concepts. A learner-centered classroom best supports
constructivism by allowing students to actively engage in discussion and
actively pursue information. I found several interesting points in the
article “If I Teach This Way Am I Doing My Job?” regarding constructivism. The article provides an excellent definition
of the Constructivism Theory which states that students learn by taking in information from the world and
constructing their own meaning from the experience as opposed to someone telling
those bits and of information (Sprague, 2009, p.7). In a classroom that is utilizing technology
and engaging learning experiences based on the Constructivism Theory, the
teacher becomes a facilitator by asking questions to encourage students to find
the answers. Constructivist teachers
organize information around conceptual clusters of problems and questions as
opposed to facts in isolation (Sprague, 2009, p. 7). The Theory of Connectivism is an approach to
learning that also considers technology as a key factor (Soloman, 2007,
p.40). Technology and making connections
are linked and by combining connectivism with constructivist methods offers
students an opportunity to gain 21st century skills (Soloman, 2007,
p. 40). Soloman offers several valid
points regarding trends. Informal
learning is a significant part of our learning experience and occurs in a
variety of ways including communities of practice, personal networks, and
through completion of work-related tasks (Soloman, 2007, p.40). Technology alters our brains and the tools we
use define and shape our thinking (Soloman, 2007, p.40). It is also worthy to note, technologies are
constantly changing and therefore affecting the way we learn and think. As teachers we face the challenge to keep up with 21st century trends while transposing the traditional classroom into a learner-centered environment that utilizes project-based learning.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., &
Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and
school (Expanded
edition). Ch. 9, pp. 194-218. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9853&page=206
McPheeters (2009, March) suggests real
change or shifts in usage do not occur with the introduction of new
technologies, but with their large-scale adoption. Based upon what you have
read and investigated, what technology do you think will be the impetus for the
next generation shift in education?
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., &
Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development,
Introduction, 1 – 14.
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web
2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in
Education, 7-44.
Sprague, D. & Dede, C. (1999). If I
teach this way, Am I doing my job: Constructivism in the classroom. Leading
and Learning, 27(1). Retrieved
from the International Society for Technology in Education at http://imet.csus.edu/imet9/280/docs/dede_constructivisim.pdf
Southwest Educational Development
Laboratory, (1999). Learning as a personal event: A brief introduction to
constructivism. Retrieved from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/tec26/intro2c.html
No comments:
Post a Comment