Muse #11- final post!
This marks the end of our E-Learning journey - now that the lectures and tutorials have ended, the group project is completed and the exam is looming. It is a bitter-sweet end, in my humble opinion.
I was very apprehensive when I first started doing this module because just the name sounded quite intimidating to me (what exactly IS e-learning??! Will all the classes be conducted virtually? Is the project about constructing some Java programming thing? How will exams be tested?). Throughout the whole sem, there were many moments where I enjoyed the classes and did understand some concepts. But generally (*insert sad face and disappointed sigh*), I regret to say that the content of this module is still not quite 100% clear to me as I'd ideally hope. Maybe it's just the nature of the module and my lack of know-how in this field. Hahah.
Oh wells. Let's all study hard and give our best shot in the exams! ALL THE BEST, EVERYONE!
P.S. Thanks to Mr. Alfred Low for trying your best to make our lessons more enjoyable, and to my group mates who made the group project process as fun as it could be. :) Good luck for exams, you all!
Thursday 23 April 2009
Muse #10
This week we had our WebQuest presentation! Personally, I had mixed feelings about this group project. Why? Well I certainly enjoyed myself creating a website-based learning curriculum thing, brainstorming with my lovely group mates about how to make the WebQuest more interesting/colourful/engaging since it was targetted at lower primary students. We decided to give the WebQuest a name and structure it like some sort of story to make it more exciting than a normal boring "tell them all the facts" to-the-point type. Instead, we decided to get them to solve various activities and tasks in our very own self-created JunkHouse! :D
However the actual process of creating the WebQuest was too heavy and personally I found that the 10% did not justify the amount of effort and time put into it. Especially since this was an entirely new software to all of us, it took us some time to get used to it before we actually managed to start creating the actual thing. Thereafter, minor details here and there turned out to be very troublesome and time consuming to edit, causing many late nights and great frustrations. That's not to say that the project process was entirely unenjoyable. It was definitely an eye-opening experience learning a new software. Perhaps if we had been taught it earlier and given more time to experiment with it, and of course, a higher percentage of the grade allocated to it.
This week we had our WebQuest presentation! Personally, I had mixed feelings about this group project. Why? Well I certainly enjoyed myself creating a website-based learning curriculum thing, brainstorming with my lovely group mates about how to make the WebQuest more interesting/colourful/engaging since it was targetted at lower primary students. We decided to give the WebQuest a name and structure it like some sort of story to make it more exciting than a normal boring "tell them all the facts" to-the-point type. Instead, we decided to get them to solve various activities and tasks in our very own self-created JunkHouse! :D
However the actual process of creating the WebQuest was too heavy and personally I found that the 10% did not justify the amount of effort and time put into it. Especially since this was an entirely new software to all of us, it took us some time to get used to it before we actually managed to start creating the actual thing. Thereafter, minor details here and there turned out to be very troublesome and time consuming to edit, causing many late nights and great frustrations. That's not to say that the project process was entirely unenjoyable. It was definitely an eye-opening experience learning a new software. Perhaps if we had been taught it earlier and given more time to experiment with it, and of course, a higher percentage of the grade allocated to it.
Muse #9
This lecture was dedicated to the WebQuest programme. We learnt the various components that are necessary to making a good WebQuest, namely, Introduction, Task, Process, Evaluation, Conclusion, Teacher's Page, and resources such as website links, case studies, examples, mindmaps etc.
I still remember our first introduction to the WebQuest software during tutorial where we were so amused and fascinated with how clicking on the various functions could create different ways of presenting the information such as True/False questions, Multiple-Choice, Multiple-Select, Case Study etc. (We also kept gushing about the cute pictures attached to each function such as the briefcase for Case Study. HAHAH! Guess we're not that much older than our target audience of lower primary school students. Wahahah)
The WebQuest seems like a useful authoring tool. :)
This lecture was dedicated to the WebQuest programme. We learnt the various components that are necessary to making a good WebQuest, namely, Introduction, Task, Process, Evaluation, Conclusion, Teacher's Page, and resources such as website links, case studies, examples, mindmaps etc.
I still remember our first introduction to the WebQuest software during tutorial where we were so amused and fascinated with how clicking on the various functions could create different ways of presenting the information such as True/False questions, Multiple-Choice, Multiple-Select, Case Study etc. (We also kept gushing about the cute pictures attached to each function such as the briefcase for Case Study. HAHAH! Guess we're not that much older than our target audience of lower primary school students. Wahahah)
The WebQuest seems like a useful authoring tool. :)
Muse #8
Even more types of learning and the possible associated instructional strategies were taught in this week. This time we learnt about Problem-Solving and Affective Learning. For Problem-Solving, there are basically 9 steps involved which range from puzzle problem to story problem to trouble-shooting to issue-based, with many others in between. This is known as Jonassen's Taxonomy of Problems. (Seriously, even 'problems' can be so problematic?! okay, sorry, I'm just being lame. heh)
Affective / Attitude Learning (yay! something more interesting. =p), according to Krathwohl, consists of Receiving, Responding, Valuing, Organisation and Characterisation. In my group's WebQuest project, we utilised the level of Organisation. In our WebQuest designed for lower primary school students, the basic idea was about educating them about the 3Rs - Reduce, Reuse and Recycle, and enabling them to implement it in their daily lives. Hence the level of Organisation in the Affective Outcome of Learning would be something like the students will accept, appreciate and be committed to the importance and value of environmental consciousness and actively do their part to make a difference.
Even more types of learning and the possible associated instructional strategies were taught in this week. This time we learnt about Problem-Solving and Affective Learning. For Problem-Solving, there are basically 9 steps involved which range from puzzle problem to story problem to trouble-shooting to issue-based, with many others in between. This is known as Jonassen's Taxonomy of Problems. (Seriously, even 'problems' can be so problematic?! okay, sorry, I'm just being lame. heh)
Affective / Attitude Learning (yay! something more interesting. =p), according to Krathwohl, consists of Receiving, Responding, Valuing, Organisation and Characterisation. In my group's WebQuest project, we utilised the level of Organisation. In our WebQuest designed for lower primary school students, the basic idea was about educating them about the 3Rs - Reduce, Reuse and Recycle, and enabling them to implement it in their daily lives. Hence the level of Organisation in the Affective Outcome of Learning would be something like the students will accept, appreciate and be committed to the importance and value of environmental consciousness and actively do their part to make a difference.
Muse #7
After the previous week's lecture on Fact and Concept Learning, this week we moved onto Procedures and Principles Learning. These two types are considered to be more 'advanced' than Facts and Concepts because Procedures and Principles require more in-depth knowledge and critical thinking.
The fundamental difference between Procedural Knowledge (this week) and Declarative Knowledge (last week) is that for the latter, you simply know that something is thisthisthis whereas in the former, you know exactly how to do it.
When using Photoshop to edit photos, Declarative Knowledge would involve knowing that to edit the colours, the 'adjust colour' function needs to be used, whilst in Procedural Knowledge, the learner will know exactly how to carry out the steps necessary to do the actual adjusting.
With regards to Principle Knowledge, principles are such as Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns (LDMR) in Economics, the Pythagorus Theorem in Mathematics etc.
After the previous week's lecture on Fact and Concept Learning, this week we moved onto Procedures and Principles Learning. These two types are considered to be more 'advanced' than Facts and Concepts because Procedures and Principles require more in-depth knowledge and critical thinking.
The fundamental difference between Procedural Knowledge (this week) and Declarative Knowledge (last week) is that for the latter, you simply know that something is thisthisthis whereas in the former, you know exactly how to do it.
When using Photoshop to edit photos, Declarative Knowledge would involve knowing that to edit the colours, the 'adjust colour' function needs to be used, whilst in Procedural Knowledge, the learner will know exactly how to carry out the steps necessary to do the actual adjusting.
With regards to Principle Knowledge, principles are such as Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns (LDMR) in Economics, the Pythagorus Theorem in Mathematics etc.
Muse #6
Oh no. I have been falling SO behind in my blog! Projects, midterms and more projects. But of course that is no excuse for not blogging. :( Oh well. Here goes..
Week seven's lecture covered instructional strategies for Fact and Concept Learning. Fact Learning aka Declarative Knowledge aka Verbal Information is about "Knowing that.." It is a very basic stage which involves the most fundamental issue about just simply knowing a simple fact. For example, knowing that the mixture of red and yellow paint gives orange! :) Another example is knowing that the capital of Switzerland is BERN! :)
On the other hand, Concept Learning aka Intellectual Skill is more associated with "Knowing the meaning of .." Here, an example could be knowing the meaning of the concept "even numbers".
Oh no. I have been falling SO behind in my blog! Projects, midterms and more projects. But of course that is no excuse for not blogging. :( Oh well. Here goes..
Week seven's lecture covered instructional strategies for Fact and Concept Learning. Fact Learning aka Declarative Knowledge aka Verbal Information is about "Knowing that.." It is a very basic stage which involves the most fundamental issue about just simply knowing a simple fact. For example, knowing that the mixture of red and yellow paint gives orange! :) Another example is knowing that the capital of Switzerland is BERN! :)
On the other hand, Concept Learning aka Intellectual Skill is more associated with "Knowing the meaning of .." Here, an example could be knowing the meaning of the concept "even numbers".
Wednesday 18 February 2009
Muse #5
Today we learnt that the three domains of learning are Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor, with further subdivisions within each domain.
Cognitive is about knowing/learning, Affective is about feeling and Psychomotor is about doing.
I'm wondering whether it is possible for the domains to overlap and link with one another, just like how the reading mentioned that "the divisions are not absolutes" Haven't quite figured out how to do it yet though.
Oh and we also learnt how to write Learning Objectives! I never knew that there were four distinct components to an objective - ABCD (acronym for Audience, Behaviour, Condition and Degree). The acronym certainly is useful in helping to remember the components. Hahah.
Today we learnt that the three domains of learning are Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor, with further subdivisions within each domain.
Cognitive is about knowing/learning, Affective is about feeling and Psychomotor is about doing.
I'm wondering whether it is possible for the domains to overlap and link with one another, just like how the reading mentioned that "the divisions are not absolutes" Haven't quite figured out how to do it yet though.
Oh and we also learnt how to write Learning Objectives! I never knew that there were four distinct components to an objective - ABCD (acronym for Audience, Behaviour, Condition and Degree). The acronym certainly is useful in helping to remember the components. Hahah.
Thursday 12 February 2009
Muse #4
This week's lecture was about the three faces of needs assessment , namely, the problem model, discrepany model and innovation model.
Needs assessment is necessary before diving right into the design process. I find it a great pity when organisations fall into this trap in order to avoid competitors stealing their ideas, though I can understand why they would be so impatient. Still, I feel that it is more worthwhile to risk that happening and do the crucial needs assessment than to waste precious resources and time. After all, what could be more heartwrenching than to see all your efforts and hard work come to naught because it was not even needed in the first place?
I found that the reading quite effectively explained the concepts and steps involved in each model as well as the factors to consider when decribing the learning environment. This is because the same problem may require different solutions due to varying contexts (which include the trainer's preferences, availability of hardware and software, belief systems etc).
A particular point that I found interesting was the common misconception that evaluation comes after analysis. This is where the ADDIE model rightfully illustrates how evaluation should continually be done at every stage of the process so as to ensure the design is on the right track.
I am looking forward to reading about specific examples for each model in the other fellow students' blogs. (:
This week's lecture was about the three faces of needs assessment , namely, the problem model, discrepany model and innovation model.
Needs assessment is necessary before diving right into the design process. I find it a great pity when organisations fall into this trap in order to avoid competitors stealing their ideas, though I can understand why they would be so impatient. Still, I feel that it is more worthwhile to risk that happening and do the crucial needs assessment than to waste precious resources and time. After all, what could be more heartwrenching than to see all your efforts and hard work come to naught because it was not even needed in the first place?
I found that the reading quite effectively explained the concepts and steps involved in each model as well as the factors to consider when decribing the learning environment. This is because the same problem may require different solutions due to varying contexts (which include the trainer's preferences, availability of hardware and software, belief systems etc).
A particular point that I found interesting was the common misconception that evaluation comes after analysis. This is where the ADDIE model rightfully illustrates how evaluation should continually be done at every stage of the process so as to ensure the design is on the right track.
I am looking forward to reading about specific examples for each model in the other fellow students' blogs. (:
Wednesday 11 February 2009
Muse #3
This lecture was particularly insightful to me personally and I've come to appreciate the lecture activities more. Because my friends and I had not found the time to do the required readings before lecture, we could not understand the activity and totally fumbled. Only after we went around viewing the learning designs that others came up with did we realise how badly we were on the wrong track. But I wouldn't say that it was a total disaster because if not for that activity, I probably would not have understood the concept. (Waking up at 6am for an early lecture does have its benefits after all!)
Now that we have attended the lecture and done the readings, I have a much clearer picture about what constitutes a learning design, its various components (tasks, resources and supports), and most importantly, the links between them.
It is vital to always bear in mind that every activity entails a different approach based on the objectives and contexts. This is exactly what Tegiar's reading talks about. Maximal learning results will only occur if the most suitable combination of tasks, resources and supports is employed, according to the specific learning situation. Tegiar divides these learning designs into five main techniques for assimilative information handling, adaptive, communicative, productive and experiential activities. I found the models given in this reading useful in understanding how each of the five learning designs works especially since they illustrated how tasks, resources and supports combine with one another.
Whilst Tegiar's reading divides the designs into the five abovementioned techniques, Oliver's reading does it in a different way - rule-based, incident-based, strategy-based, and role-based. I suppose these are just different ways of looking at learning designs. Again, the models in Oliver's reading helped to sum up the concepts very well for me. (Graphics certainly complement text!)
Ultimately, other than the earlier point about appreciating the relations among tasks, resources and support, the other main point that I got out of the readings is that when drawing up a learning design, the main focus should always remain on the learning process and outcome instead of the e-tool. I guess in this day and age with so much technological innnovation, it is tempting to get carried away with selecting tools and giving it too much attention. We must strike a balance with all the features and elements.
I'm finally starting to understand e-learning better. Yay! :)
This lecture was particularly insightful to me personally and I've come to appreciate the lecture activities more. Because my friends and I had not found the time to do the required readings before lecture, we could not understand the activity and totally fumbled. Only after we went around viewing the learning designs that others came up with did we realise how badly we were on the wrong track. But I wouldn't say that it was a total disaster because if not for that activity, I probably would not have understood the concept. (Waking up at 6am for an early lecture does have its benefits after all!)
Now that we have attended the lecture and done the readings, I have a much clearer picture about what constitutes a learning design, its various components (tasks, resources and supports), and most importantly, the links between them.
It is vital to always bear in mind that every activity entails a different approach based on the objectives and contexts. This is exactly what Tegiar's reading talks about. Maximal learning results will only occur if the most suitable combination of tasks, resources and supports is employed, according to the specific learning situation. Tegiar divides these learning designs into five main techniques for assimilative information handling, adaptive, communicative, productive and experiential activities. I found the models given in this reading useful in understanding how each of the five learning designs works especially since they illustrated how tasks, resources and supports combine with one another.
Whilst Tegiar's reading divides the designs into the five abovementioned techniques, Oliver's reading does it in a different way - rule-based, incident-based, strategy-based, and role-based. I suppose these are just different ways of looking at learning designs. Again, the models in Oliver's reading helped to sum up the concepts very well for me. (Graphics certainly complement text!)
Ultimately, other than the earlier point about appreciating the relations among tasks, resources and support, the other main point that I got out of the readings is that when drawing up a learning design, the main focus should always remain on the learning process and outcome instead of the e-tool. I guess in this day and age with so much technological innnovation, it is tempting to get carried away with selecting tools and giving it too much attention. We must strike a balance with all the features and elements.
I'm finally starting to understand e-learning better. Yay! :)
Tuesday 3 February 2009
Muse #2
My impression of the relative pros and cons of Behaviourism, Cognitivism and Socioculturalism based on how the three theories were presented to us is that there seems to be some sort of gradual transition. I'm not sure if this interpretation is correct but nonetheless I feel that all three theories have their fair share of educational value that they can contribute to the arena of e-learning.
Behaviourism - using reinforcements and punishments to shape one's behaviour - is too simplistic to me. It totally disregards any active thinking on the part of the learner. This implies the mindless actions carried out just so as to attain the incentives promised and/or avoid being punished. This does not really constitute real learning, does it? All the person learns is to do what the educator wants him to do and he will be rewarded otherwise he will face punishment. But he may not necessarily have understood the rationale behind.
This is where Cognitivism comes in. In contrast to Behaviourism which focuses too much on the external, Cognitivism goes one step further to include internal thoughts, assimilation and accomodation, and how these affect external behaviour. This is perhaps a better way of understanding the process of learning than Behaviourism. But for all the merits of Cognitivism, it still does not give a full picture since it is restricted to the individual. 'No man is an island'. It would be narrow minded to think that learning is a one-man show. Everything occurs in a certain sociocultural context which must be factored into the equation. That is why Socioculturalism is perhaps most reflective of the learning process.
By giving credit to the whole system, Socioculturalism acknowledges that each individual must be located in the bigger picture - the system in which he resides as well as the other individuals residing there with him. A great myriad of factors and conditions in the system would definitely have varying levels of influence on the learning process of an individual and hence these factors should not go unaccounted for.
Of course, this is not to say that Socioculturalism is always the best theory and that the other two theories are inferior. One fundamental assumption of Socioculturalism is that the various individuals in the system will interact with one another harmoniously and amicably. This could be too rosy a picture that is painted since the world is much more complicated than that. Hence it really depends whether a particular theory is more appropriate for the problem in question.
As for exactly where each theory should be applied, unfortunately, I'm still unclear about how to pinpoint precisely which type of theory suits which problem best. I suppose the general framework outlined above can serve as a rough guide whilst we continue to discover more about each theory during the course of the module.
My impression of the relative pros and cons of Behaviourism, Cognitivism and Socioculturalism based on how the three theories were presented to us is that there seems to be some sort of gradual transition. I'm not sure if this interpretation is correct but nonetheless I feel that all three theories have their fair share of educational value that they can contribute to the arena of e-learning.
Behaviourism - using reinforcements and punishments to shape one's behaviour - is too simplistic to me. It totally disregards any active thinking on the part of the learner. This implies the mindless actions carried out just so as to attain the incentives promised and/or avoid being punished. This does not really constitute real learning, does it? All the person learns is to do what the educator wants him to do and he will be rewarded otherwise he will face punishment. But he may not necessarily have understood the rationale behind.
This is where Cognitivism comes in. In contrast to Behaviourism which focuses too much on the external, Cognitivism goes one step further to include internal thoughts, assimilation and accomodation, and how these affect external behaviour. This is perhaps a better way of understanding the process of learning than Behaviourism. But for all the merits of Cognitivism, it still does not give a full picture since it is restricted to the individual. 'No man is an island'. It would be narrow minded to think that learning is a one-man show. Everything occurs in a certain sociocultural context which must be factored into the equation. That is why Socioculturalism is perhaps most reflective of the learning process.
By giving credit to the whole system, Socioculturalism acknowledges that each individual must be located in the bigger picture - the system in which he resides as well as the other individuals residing there with him. A great myriad of factors and conditions in the system would definitely have varying levels of influence on the learning process of an individual and hence these factors should not go unaccounted for.
Of course, this is not to say that Socioculturalism is always the best theory and that the other two theories are inferior. One fundamental assumption of Socioculturalism is that the various individuals in the system will interact with one another harmoniously and amicably. This could be too rosy a picture that is painted since the world is much more complicated than that. Hence it really depends whether a particular theory is more appropriate for the problem in question.
As for exactly where each theory should be applied, unfortunately, I'm still unclear about how to pinpoint precisely which type of theory suits which problem best. I suppose the general framework outlined above can serve as a rough guide whilst we continue to discover more about each theory during the course of the module.
Tuesday 20 January 2009
Muse #1
I went to the first lecture with some degree of apprehension about what exactly constituted to the word, "e-learning". As much as I would like to say that I have been enlightened after the lecture, that would be a lie. However I have certainly picked up a few pointers about the topic thanks to the readings, lecture and group activity.
E-learning is a multi faceted topic that entails many different perspectives and encompasses a range of applications and technologies. For example, some believe that because of the letter "e" representing "electronic", it should include all electronic applications but others argue that "e-learning" only refers to Web-based technologies, leaving out film, television etc. There are also those who propose alternative meanings of "e" such as "experience", "extended" and "expanded". As my group decided to pick the activity on the historical timeline, I also gained insights into the chronological lead-up to the advent of e-learning.
I hope that with future lectures and group activities, I will better understand the various aspects of e-learning, its benefits and/or possible implications, and its role in the future that lies ahead.
I went to the first lecture with some degree of apprehension about what exactly constituted to the word, "e-learning". As much as I would like to say that I have been enlightened after the lecture, that would be a lie. However I have certainly picked up a few pointers about the topic thanks to the readings, lecture and group activity.
E-learning is a multi faceted topic that entails many different perspectives and encompasses a range of applications and technologies. For example, some believe that because of the letter "e" representing "electronic", it should include all electronic applications but others argue that "e-learning" only refers to Web-based technologies, leaving out film, television etc. There are also those who propose alternative meanings of "e" such as "experience", "extended" and "expanded". As my group decided to pick the activity on the historical timeline, I also gained insights into the chronological lead-up to the advent of e-learning.
I hope that with future lectures and group activities, I will better understand the various aspects of e-learning, its benefits and/or possible implications, and its role in the future that lies ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)