Wednesday 27 July 2011

Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the 21st Century?



Learning is a complex brain function and cannot be described through the lens of one sole learning theory. Behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism tend to describe learning in ways that we can all relate to but they remain limited explanations. Connectivism acknowledges the complexity of learning and attempts to describe learning through the integration of technology, social networks and information (Siemens, 2004).

It would appear that the key to learning in today’s ever changing world is to remain open and adaptable. Change is inevitable and coming in faster than at any other time in history. No longer is it important to memorize information, everything can be accessed through the internet. However, information abundance is both a blessing and a curse. We can easily access answers to a question posed, but how do we discern between the answers we find? Collaboration and social networking is unlimited in the technological age, but how much is best to facilitate learning and result in effective outcomes? How we structure our own learning is an important factor in the learning process.


Connectivism: A Personalized Learning Structure

The web above describes some important connections I consider as I learn. A student’s disposition and desire to learn are crucial to the success of any plan of instruction. Both of these are controlled by the students, but the teacher’s actions can have an effect on them. For example, considering prior knowledge and current interests when planning instruction can have a profound effect. As a learner, once I have the interest and the desire to learn, I can begin to consider how I can best achieve my goals.

Ideas, concepts and problems can be sparked through a variety of mediums. A student’s awareness can come from a variety of sources such as news, television, readings, observations and interactions. Once I have identified an area I would like to focus on, I tend to want to learn from others. I can discuss the ideas with colleagues and friends in person, or through Skype or social networking tools such as Facebook or Twitter. I can enroll in webinars or other online training devices or search through the web, finding blogs and other sites. At this stage, I am absorbing as much information as I can find in order to fully develop the question I am trying to answer.

Then, I start to consider the resources, looking at the evidence and research. I can use books, magazines, websites through Google searches, databases such as Ebsco, JStore or Questia, listen to podcasts, etc. Through this I begin to develop a hypothesis, an ideology, an answer of sorts.

I collaborate with others to begin to refine my answer. I meet with key people, participate in focused workshops, use Google docs or wikis to facilitate communication and exchange of ideas. Learning does not end when an answer is found, as the answer can be revisited, reviewed and altered with time.

We all learn differently. Not only do our learning styles differ, but so do so many other elements crucial to learning (ie. Interests, prior knowledge, honed skills, etc.). Yet, it is precisely our differences that can be our greatest strengths. According to Feinstein and Kiner in The Brain and Strengths Based School Leadership, when we focus on our strengths, we can become great instead of “a patchwork quilt of underperforming, erratic and irregular [leaders]” (2011. P. 7). When people with different skills and talents come together, we can achieve optimum effectiveness. As a result, it is important for individuals to find their strengths, perhaps more to the point, their ‘element’ as Dr. Ken Robinson refers to ‘it’ (Robinson, 2009). The element can be described as the result of joining ones personal strengths and natural talents with what they truly love and feel passionate about. “Creativity often comes about by making unusual connections, seeing analogies, identifying relationships between ideas and processes that were previously not related” (Robinson, 2001, p. 188).

It is not enough however to discover what our passion is, or even to have someone recognize it and encourage us. We need to have the skills required to make something of this passion in the 21st Century. Although many of these skills have not yet been identified, it is clear that they will include technology and multimedia fluency (Prensky, 2010).

When we look at learning through the lens of connectivism, we realize that regardless of how we learn, technology, social networking and access to and processing of information are essential. Understanding our strengths and working with them, will enable us to be more creative and to maximize our outcomes.

Feinstein, S. G., & Kiner, R. W. (2011). The Brain and Strengths Based School Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching Digital Natives: Partnering for Real Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Robinson, K. (2009). The Element: How finding Your Passion Changes Everything. New York, NY: Penguin Group.

Robinson, K. (2001). Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. England: Capstone Publishing Limited.

Siemens, G. Connectivism (Video). Walden University: Laureate Edition.

Sunday 17 July 2011

Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity

Dr. Ken Robinson makes a compelling point about the total restructuring of our current educational system. This is one of the most thought provoking and entertaining videos I have seen on educational reform. It prompted me to buying and reading two of his books: The Element and Out of Our Minds. Both excellent resources and enlightening perspectives on teaching in the 21st century.

See Ken Robinson at TED Talks.

TED. (2006 June). Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Sunday 10 July 2011

Brain Research to Improve Learning

Declining Creativity and Our Brains

Newsweek, “The Creativity Crisis” by Bronson and Merryman
July 10, 2010
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/10/the-creativity-crisis.html


Is our focus on a standards-based education having a negative effect on our students’ ability to create and innovate?

As our school has recently gone through the process of re-accreditation, we have focused intently on ensuring that we are following our standards. We have worked diligently on creating assessments that measure progress in standards acquisition. One of the struggles we face is that there appears to be more standards than what we are capable of addressing. In a recent study by Marzano and Kendall, it was speculated that if teachers devoted 30 minutes of instructional time to teach each benchmark, they would need an additional 15,465 hours (9 years) for students to learn them all! (Wiggins & McTigue). In all of our efforts to enhance instruction, improve learning and accountability, are we overlooking and perhaps fundamentally changing one of the strengths of American education. Is American creativity declining?
The Torrance creativity test created by Professor E. Paul Torrance over fifty years ago, may not measure creativity perfectly, but has proven more effective than IQ testing in predicting lifetime creative accomplishments. Therefore, the results of a recent study by Kyung Hee Kim at the College of William & Mary is particularly alarming. After analyzing nearly 300,000 Torrance scores of children and adults, Kim found that creativity scores had been rising until 1990, but since then scores have begun to drop. The reasons for this remain unclear. But, there is some hope in developing solutions.

Many people feel that creativity is a right brain activity. As we focus on core subjects more and less on the arts, the argument is that we are favoring the left hemisphere over the right. But, this is not necessarily true. Although, I believe that the arts are essential in developing creativity, no learning occurs solely in one hemisphere. “Highly creative people are very good at marshaling their brains into bilateral mode, and the more creative they are, the more they dual-activate.”(Bronson & Merryman). And, the good news is that creativity can be taught! Using creative problem solving programs and project based learning, educators can enable their students to alternate between divergent and convergent thinking.

The Partnership for 21st Century Skills advocates for the teaching of core subjects (including arts) using learning and innovation skills. The 4Cs, as they are referred to, are critical thinking, communication, collaboration and creativity. The first three are integral to developing the fourth C, creativity. As part of restructuring our curriculum, instruction and assessments to meet the changing needs of our students in the technological age, a focus on creativity and innovation must remain at the forefront if we are to prevent a creativity crisis.

Bronson, P., & Merryman, A. (July 10, 2010). The Creativity Crisis. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/10/the-creativity-crisis.html

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2004). Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/

Wiggins, G.P. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for the Supervision and Curriculum Development.


Researched Based Instructional Strategies


Edutopia: The George Lucas Educational Foundation

This website is dedicated to innovation in education.  It challenges traditional education with the benefits of project-based learning.  Various links are dedicated specifically to brain-based research and its applications.  Although each article promotes a particular point of view, the comments are open and allow for on-going analysis and discussion. 

I have chosen two excellent articles for review.

(1) Brain-based research prompts innovative teaching techniques in the classroom
 by Diane Curtis
2/25/2003
 
The article focuses on Florida’s Key Largo School.  The school uses a variety of innovative strategies based on brain research to improve student learning. 

Teachers at the school provide a variety of ways for students to learn the subject matter.  Students can choose which way works best for them.  Some may choose to learn through the traditional textbook while others may check out a video.  Many of them seem to favor interactive websites.  One of the interactive websites featured is sponsored by the British Museum. 

Technology is a part of the students’ daily lives.  Students learn by doing and visualizing which are facilitated by technology.  The focus Is not on learning lists of dislocated facts, but rather on the acquisition of knowledge that is organized in a variety of ways. 

Instructional strategies include the use of brain “breaks” such as Brain Gym, a series 26 movements students engage in meant to improve concentration, memory and other brain skills. 

(2) Brain Research May Point to Changes in Literacy Development
 By Sara Bernard 12/3/2008

This article emphasizes student readiness for learning, with particular focus on reading/literacy.  According to the article, there are neurological reasons for the difficulty many students encounter when learning to read.  It implies that we often jump to conclusions too readily, assuming disability instead of learning difference. 

What I found most interesting here were the comments below the article.  Many comments focused on the power of the teacher and the fear that these types of findings would lead to a more inactive approach to teaching literacy.  



Also of interest:  Understanding How the Brain Thinks
ByJudy Willis MD 06/13/11
http://www.edutopia.org/blog/understanding-how-the-brain-thinks-judy-willis-md#comment-94506