I think that it is all well and good to introduce new
technology into the classroom, but if the teacher (me) has not understood the
learning theory then introducing a new type of ITC tool, then the students may
result in students playing rather than learning. Combining an understanding of
learning theory with the SAMR model (substitution, augmentation, modification,
redefinition) will hopefully mean that as I discover and introduce new digital technology
into the classroom the learning experience will be enhanced not hindered.
In the beginning I was uncomfortable about the way I was
being asked to learn about ITC this year. The materials were not presented in
the usual way, and I was being asked to explore and enhance my own learning. I
was miffed to start with, but then remembered how hard I have found traditional
learning approaches, and at the end of the first five weeks I realised that I
have actually learned an enormous amount of new skills without it being
painful. Dare I say, it has even been fun? Essentially it wasn’t about
learning how to make a blog, or a wiki site it was understanding why you would
do this. It struck me that this approach
to teaching worked because of the imbedded learning theory. I finally put the
pieces together and perceived that it would be all well and good to go out and
learn and develop lessons based on the myriad of technological resources
available but unless I understood learning theory, I might not actually achieve
a better outcome for my students.
The main tool that helped structure (perhaps even scaffold)
my learning has been thinking about the SAMR model, and how each of the
different groups of tools fits into the model.
Substitution in its simplest form is indicated by the blog:
instead of writing in a diary we write online. Similarly, if I use Japanese
POD101 to read-reread and use flash cards I am practicing and reaching a pre-defined
result at each stage, I could do a similar thing at home with flash cards and
this is how I traditionally learnt language. But it was easy to take both of
these simple technologies to a higher level when additional features allowed
the learning experience to be augmented.
It was when technology was augmented by learning that I
started to have fun. In theory with the blog
by allowing comments and giving feedback to others meant that the diary went from
a one-way learning tool, to a learning experience that invites learning from
others. It also allowed other technologies to be imbedded and I definitely found
that once I had mastered a simple form of bubbl.us I was able to reinforce my
understanding of the SAMR model every single post. Tools such as the language
learning pods become more than rote learning when quizzes are added and you can
listen to a native speaker, watch a movie, and most importantly take all of the
information with you. I practice this as I lie on the couch at night. I believe
that if I upgrade to the professional version I can interact with a real person
in real time whether this is by writing or by speaking I am not sure but this
would definitely modify the way learning a language is done outside of the
classroom.
I found it hard to distinguish modification from re-definition,
I felt that in many cases these two stages of technological uptake would merge.
What has struck me the most about these two stages is that these are
essentially group activities. There is no doubt that learning from peers, or
from an expert community outside of the classroom is the way students will gain
most of their new knowledge in the future. Essentially, this is where we started our
first activity with De Bono’s hats wiki. We read other people’s thoughts and
added our own. To scaffold this we were asked to read and comment on each
other’s blogs, web-pages, wikis. On reflection, I did gain significant
knowledge from my peers during these activities, but not through direct
interaction. I gleaned information from the moodle discussion boards, and by
browsing other people’s work. But I did not actively engage in anyone’s work.
I have been happy to participate in some processes but not all. So I can
imagine that in the classroom this will undoubtedly be an issue for some shy
learners. But mostly I think that this is a very exciting and engaging
way of learning.This also made me think about how to keep my students safe - not only in terms of their comfort with learning, but also with how to keep them safe from inappropriate use of information on web sites which have public access, and also when students are asked to completed their own online research. I think that abiding by existing guidelines and rules, applying common sense, and moderating students work, should keep them safe - from outside and inside too.
What this means for me, is that I am going to have to gain
further understanding of the theories underpinning ITC. I have a basic grasp of
the concepts of behaviourism, cognitism, social constructivism, and will surely
uncover multitude of old and new ideas of how students learn. I also have an incredible
amount of technology to learn and I am grateful for the knowledge of my
lecturer and experience classmates. I also benefit from the less experienced
peers, because I think when someone has not understood or known what to do,
that different types of answers from different types of thinkers pulls the
knowledge into place. Learning about ITC is a journey not a destination.
