Appendix 3

Group 3 Technologies

This group of technologies I have found are all interactive presentations, PowerPoint, Prezi and Glogster.  I've always found that PowerPoint is an enjoyable tool to use, as I have had to use it in many different instances.  There are so many things that you can do with PowerPoint, instead of just making slides and 'flicking' through them.

PMI on PowerPoint

Glogster is an online 'scrapbooking' style interactive website.  I had a little bit of a play around with this tool, but I think the technology has left me scratching my head!!

Prezi, on the other hand, is a totally new digital technology to me, one in which I had never heard of before the ICTs course.  I'm actually grateful for being introduced to this tool, as after exploring how to create Prezi presentations, and ones that other people have created, I can see how valuable a tool it would be to have students learn how to use.  Unlike PowerPoint, Prezi is an online tool.  I managed to create a very basic Prezi presentation, just to get a 'feel' for how it works.

eLearning on Prezi

SWOT Analysis on Prezi

I really can see myself utilising Prezi within the classroom.  Not only as a great tool for students to create visual presentations for assessment and general discussion, but as an alternative to the sometimes overused PowerPoint.  I can see great collaboration and experimentation in the classroom surrounding Prezi, and to be honest, I'd love to just get out there and 'give it a good go'!

Appendix 2

Group 2 Technologies

As our reading for week four note, multimedia is one of the most important parts/factors to online learning.  I believe that, yes this is true, but multimedia is also important to normal 'classroom' learning.

Images are a large feature of learning.  We can use images in our classroom and online.  Images can be used to engage students, force them to critically think.  Imagine students are faced with the task of analysing an image that depicts a particular event in history.  For example, look at and think about the following picture.

Image: Children in Concentration Camp

(Sourced from http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/)

** I do appologise if you find this image confronting and upsetting! **

By studying this image our feelings and emotions are tested, we begin to look for meaning in the image.  We engage in thinking, we interact with the image.  Which is exactly what we as teachers would be requiring our students to do.

Another digital technology that was introduced is Podcasts.  Podcasts are a sound file that can be accessed online.  Basically they can be a recording of students work or oral presentation.  And as our reading notes our aural literacy is as important as any other literacy in today's society.  I have made an attempt at creating a podcast, but found it quite difficult, which makes me wonder whether it would be problematic and confusing for students to use.  Although in saying that, using Podcasts in the classroom would be helpful to build students' confidence and assist them in improving their speaking skills.  For example, I remember when I was in high school one of the assignments I was required to do was to choose a song, find the lyrics, analyse the lyrics, write a speech about the song and it's 'meanings' and record myself saying the speech as though I was on the 'radio'.  I recall that to do this, I had to sit in front of an older style tape player (the one's that you could press record and tape any noises) and taped myself reading my speech.  I can only imagine how much more interesting and entertaining my assignment would have been had I been given the opportunity to use such a technology as Podcasts.

Digital video is another 'fun' digital technology useful in the classroom.  Students can create their own with digital video camera, images, audio overlay and music.  By creating video, it can push students to access 'higher order thinking' and show their critical thinking, analysis and reflection of a topic.  Below is a very simple example of a movie that I have made using images and video clips from boot camp sessions run by a friend and my partner.

(Music sourced from:

*Champion [Recorded by Grinspoon]. (1998). On Guide to better living [CD]. United States of America: Universal Music Entertainment.

*Burn it to the ground [Recorded by Nickelback]. (2008). On Dark horse [CD]. Australia: The All Black B.V: Roadrunner Records.)

This is of course a very basic example of how to use Windows Movie Maker, there are many more advanced or different options that you can choose from, such as adding photo/video transitions (eg. the next photo spins into view etc.).  I think that this is a 'great' tool for education, I certainly enjoy using it!  I can actually recall using this tool in a Year 12 assignment.  We were required to pick a news topic and make a new program aimed at both adults and youth, and record it all on video camera.  My group and I got creative and filmed our entire assignment using a digital camera and then threw it all together in Windows Movie Maker.  I'm actually glad that we did our assignment this way as it allowed for multiple 'takes' of each scene and we could edit the film the way we wanted, even including a blooper reel at the end just for fun!  I believe that by allowing students to use Windows Movie Maker, it becomes a great way for students to really get involved in their work as it allows you to manipulate the material so it is the way you want it to be seen.  I know as a teacher I will be attempting to somehow incorporate this tool into my students' learning!

Concept Map of Windows Movie Maker

This is a concept map that I created to show just what I think the capabilities and the positives are of using Windows Movie Maker within the classroom.  I personally do believe that Windows Movie Maker is a brilliant technology tool, and can really see the full potential that students will have when using it in the classroom.

Appendix 1

Group 1 Technologies

As we have already discovered in the first few weeks of ICTs, wikis are useful in the learning process and in group collaboration.  We were required to create our own wiki, the following is a link to my wiki:

http://staceydraperelearning.wikispaces.com/

As I will be teaching English and Geography, I can see a lot of potential for using wikis in the classroom.  In English I can see wikis as a great way for students to discuss their views on the various topics being addressed in the classroom.  Much like the activities we were required to do in the first couple of weeks in ICTs (learning theories and the six thinking hats), students can perform tasks like these to access their 'higher order thinking'.  Students could use a wiki when addressing an issue in Geography by setting the wiki out much like the wikis set out in the first couple of weeks in this course, for example.

The creation of a website was another of the tasks we were required to do.  I did manage to create a website, but to be honest, I did not take it much further than that.

PMI on Websites

Blogs on the other hand, I have come to find are useful and enjoyable to use.  I actually really like 'blogging'.  I have found that by 'blogging' I am able to express my views and ideas in the way that I want to.  I believe that this would make for a really useful tool in the classroom, especially for tasks (homework for example) or even assessment.

SWOT Analysis on Blogs

Personally I love blogs.  I believe that it opens up a new avenue for students to get creative in their own way.  They can express themselves in words, images, videos, even the colours and the font styles they use on their blog.  To me, I can see blogging as a virtual form of the 'journal' students are asked to keep in the hit movie 'The Freedom Writers'.  Seriously, what a great technology!

 

Sorry for the quality of the video, but I think that it really does sum up the point I'm trying to make.  I know that some students will hate the idea of picking up a pen and a writing pad and writing their thoughts and ideas down, so why not get them to create their own blogs??

Assignment Post 4: Conclusion

"The goal of blending traditional teaching and learning situations with technology are to support students' and student groups' unique interpretations of the content and use these as a source for deeper discussion" (Vesisenaho et al., 2010, p. 273).

During the first three weeks in the ICTs for Learning Design course, a wide range of information, ideas, thoughts and theories were introduced.  Learning theory is perhaps the most important of any of the topics that have been introduced.  Learning theories such as 'constructivism', 'cognitivism', 'connectivism' and 'behaviourism' were introduced into our learning.  We were also introduced to different ways in which we should approach teaching, by looking at Learning Design Frameworks, which become important in the everyday running of classrooms.  Tying all of these theories and ways of thinking together were a number of scaffolded activities based around the use of Wikis.  As many of us discovered, the material and the ideas that were introduced through learning tasks, are important to the way in which we establish learning activities in our own classrooms.

As discovered, learning theories play some form of an important role in everyday classrooms, and everyday learning situations.  Simply put constructivism is a learning theory about knowledge and the way in which we learn knowledge, with a big push towards collaboration, activity based learning and problem solving (Gupta, 2008, p. 381-382).  Connectivism encourages learners to seek out relevant information and process gained knowledge by connecting with a learning community (Kop & Hill, 2008, p. 2).  Behaviourism sees students learn as a result of experiences and from common practices, they are required to reproduce information that has been given to them (Nagowah et al., 2009, p. 280).  Cognitivism focuses on the ways in which learners process learnt information and the way in which they use information once it has been stored (Nagowah et al., 2009, p. 280).  In the activities that we were required to complete, it became evident that learning theories were being used to 'support' the activities and our overall learning.  As the students or the learners in this case, each and every one of us experienced in some form or another aspects of each from these learning theories and personally witnessed how each theory relates to the learning journey and design.  However, it became quite obvious that when participating in each of these set activities, the learning theory 'constructivism' was the most dominant and the most frequently used theory.

The majority of the activities and tasks set, provided us with an understanding of, and a scaffold for our learning journey.  The learning theories that were introduced, gave us an insight into a possible framework to work from and assisted us in gaining the knowledge and the skills that we will need in order to continue using technology aids in and outside the classroom.  de Freitas (et al., 2010) outlines a four dimensional framework that can be seen as a basic platform for supporting learners (see figure 1).

Figure 1: Four Dimensional Framework

From this framework, we can establish learning activities using technology to support our learners.  It could be argued that a framework was used to support our learning in the ICTs for Learning Design course.  As teachers we need to be aware of our own framework, because there will be a range of different students in our classrooms.  We also need to be aware that every student/learner is unique (CQU, 2011, para. 2).  "One of the key elements to designing successful learning, whether it is face to face, or mediated by ICT (Information and Communications Technology), is to know your learners and recognise their needs" (CQU, 2011, para. 1).  As effective teachers, we need to be able to plan lessons effectively and incorporate a range of scaffolded learning tasks.  The activities that we have been involved in, have allowed us to see the learning theories in action and shown us that it is possible to integrate learning theories into learning design.

Most of the course activities have been of a collaborative nature, where we have been required to share our thoughts and opinions with other students, and to work with others to complete tasks.  CQU (2011, para. 13) notes that the benefits of online scaffolded collaborative discussions give support to students in complex reasoning processes, provide support for all students and their contributions, and all 'thinking' is made visible.  It should also be noted that because learning in the 21st Century is somewhat governed by complex reasoning, constructivism becomes the learning theory that informs the majority of online learning design (CQU, 2011, para. 15).

The tasks that were created for us to complete, were based around the use of 'wikis'.  A "wiki is a shared repository of knowledge" (Siegle, 2008, p. 14).  The first task that we were set was to create a 'profile wiki' and add it to a list that contained everyone's profiles.  We were then required to work collaboratively with one another to learn about a selected learning theory and add those discoveries to a scaffolded table.  In general, this would allow every student to have access to everyone else's thoughts and findings on each learning theory, enabling us to gain further or deeper understanding of each theory.  Each learning theory played a role in the overall scheme on the wiki activity.  Cognitivism proved important as it gave a scaffold for our way of thinking, this meant we had to create a 'Plus, Minus and Interesting' (PMI) for our chosen theory.  Behaviourism showed us that by doing each part of the wiki task we were learning from our experiences.  Connectivism required us to investigate what the 'experts' had to say on our topics.  And finally, constructivism forced us to collaborate with other another.

Workman (2008) recognises that one of the main goals of using a wiki is to increase student engagement.  Wiki can also be seen as an aid to assist students improve their communication when it comes to informing and sharing their thoughts and ideas with others (Workman, 2008).  It is obvious when looking at the overall design of the ICTs course, that we have been exposed to wikis for more than just one reason.  For us to effectively learn the concepts set out in ICTs for Learning Design, we are required to engage with the wikis and collaborate our thoughts and ideas.  By doing so, we are developing a greater understanding of technology uses in education, and also gaining ideas and strategies that can be used in our own classrooms.  In relation to the topics that have been covered in these first few weeks, the wiki exercises have proved to be helpful in establishing this sense of understanding.  The wikis used in the activities have assisted student learning in a constructivist way, placing a positive mark next to future wiki usage.

References:

CQUniversity. (2011). Week 1 readings: active learning, learning diversity and the theory. Retrieved from CQUniversity e-courses, EDED20491 ICTs for Learning Design, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/course/view.php?id=17135

de Freitas, S., Rebolledo-Mendez, G., Liarokapis, F., Magoulas, G., Poulovassilis, A. (2010). Learning as immersive experiences: using the four-dimensional framework for designing and evaluating immersive learning experiences in a virtual world. British Journal of Educational Technology. 41 (1), 69-85. Retrieved from http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0007-1013&site=1

Gupta, A. (2008). Constructivism and peer collaboration in elementary mathematics education: the connection to epistemology. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education. 4 (4), 381-386. Retrieved from http://www.ejmste.com/index2.html

Kop, R., & Hill, A. (2008). Connectivism: learning theory of the future or vestige of the past?. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning. 9 (3), 1-13. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl

Nagowah, L., & Nagowah, S. (2009). A reflection on the dominant learning theories: behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism. International Journal of Learning. 16 (2), 279-285. Retrieved from http://ijl.cgpublisher.com/

Siegle, D. (2008). Working with wikis. Gifted Child Today. 31 (1), 14-17. Retrieved from http://www.node.on.ca/index.php?c=79

Vesisenaho, M., Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Havu-Nuutinen, S., Hartikainen, A., Karkkainen, S. (2010). Blended learning with everyday technologies to activate students' collaborative learning. Science Education International. 21 (4), 272-283. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ907048.pdf

Workman (Jr), J.P. (2008). Wikis in the classroom: opportunities and challenges. Marketing Education Review. 18 (1), 19-24. Retrieved from http://www.marketingeducationreview.com/

Assignment Post 3: Mobile Phones and the 6 Thinking Hats

One of the main activities for week two was to collaborate with other students on the issue of 'Mobile Phones in Education'.  To complete this collaboration we were provided with a scaffolding table that incorporated De Bono's 6 Thinking Hats.

De Bono's Thinking Hats

• What is wrong with this?
• Why will this not work?
• Is this safe?
• Can this be done?

• Where are we now?
• What is the next step?
• Where have we been?
• What sort of thinking is needed?

• What new ideas are possible with this?
• What is my suggestion for success?
• Can I create something new?

• How do I feel about this?
• What do I like about the idea?
• What don't I like about the idea?

• What are the good points?
• Why can this be successful?
• Why is this a good thing?

• What information do I have?
• What are the facts?
• What information do I need?
• What do I want to know?

(The above images and questions were sourced from CQU 2011)

Two articles were provided to give us some 'facts' and some general information on the use of mobile phones in education.  The information provided in these sites assisted me to understand the basic idea or the notion that mobile phones can be used effectively in the school classroom.
In the collaboration activity, it became evident that some students had a lot to say/offer on the subject.  And some interesting points were raised.  Admittedly, I only contributed a couple of small points to the table as many of my views/thoughts/ideas had already been raised by other students involved in the collaboration activity.  I did however, engage with what the other students had written, which is how I can to notice that most of my opinions on the subject had already been raised; hence why I barely contributed to the collaboration.

Again to me, the learning theory that this activity is based around is constructivism, as we are again collaborating our ideas and learning from what others think.  However, in saying that, this task to me shows the basic 'framework' and introduces the theory of 'cognitivism' into activities and in the classroom.

For me, there are both positives and negatives when looking at this issue.  While it is evident that the majority of students have access to a mobile phone, there can be issues surrounding how these phones are used.  There is an open invitation for example, for some students to 'bully' other students, especially if say, a classroom activity involves sending/receiving text messages.  Another issue then comes to light, the use of phones would place added pressure on the teacher to monitor the use of phones so there is none of this 'abuse' and so that all students would feel comfortable enough to get involved.  On the plus side however, there are many fun and creative ways that mobile phones could be integrated into classroom activities without students feeling victimised.  In one of the readings that we were provided with for this excersize, there is a big 'plus' focused on the use of mobile phones as now-a-days mobile phones can allow users to view PDF files, spread sheets and word processed files, mobile phones also have stopwatch and GPS capabilities, all of which would come in handy when completing some activities or tasks in or outside of the classroom (Hartnell-Young & Heym 2009).

References:
CQUniversity (CQU) e-courses EDED 20491 ICTs for Learning Design, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/course/view.php?id=17135.
Hartnell-Young, E. & Heym, N. 2009. 'Mobile phones and student learning in secondary schools'. Curriculum leadership: an electronic journal for leaders in education. vol. 7, no. 26, August. (available online), http://cmslive.curriculum.edu.au/leader/default.asp?id=28526&issueID=11897. 

Learning Design Framework

One of the activities that we were set in Week 2 was to design our very own Framework that we believe will support eLearning design.  To me, this task seemed a bit 'out there' and to be honest I was initially left with a 'what the?' attitude.

We were provided with an article on Engagement theory.  This article basically noted that Engagement theory was intended to be a framework for technology based learning and teaching (Kearsley & Shneiderman 1999).  'Blooms Taxonomy' was also provided for us.  'Blooms Taxonomy' basically tells us that there are different types of learning and the best ways in which to 'address' these learning types.  From here we were required to create our framework.

I really found that I struggled with having to create this framework.  But eventually, after struggling my way through it, and really not quite 'getting it', I eventually managed to get something down on paper, even if it is very broad and in my eyes, not very good!

My Framework

Knowledge:

• Can you/they identify the key terms?
• Can you/they describe key terms?
• Can you/they reproduce material in tasks?

Comprehension:

• Do you/they clearly distinguish between theories?
• Can you/they give an example?
• Do you/they show they can summarize large quantities of information? 

Application:

• Using ICTs knowledge gained so far, can you/they demonstrate how to do something (create a blog)?
• Can you/they produce items showing understanding? 

Analysis:

• Can you/they distinguish between different theories?
• Can you/they create diagrams showing understanding? 

Synthesis:

• Are you/they able to reconstruct clearer meanings and understanding of concepts?
• Can you/they design a template others can use?

Evaluation:

• Can you/they justify answers/responses?
• Are you/they able to evaluate ones self learning and understanding? 

References:
Kearsley, G & Shneiderman, B 1999, Engagement theory: a framework for technology-based teaching and learning, accessed 11/3/2011 (online), http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.html.

Assignment Post 2: Learning Theories Wiki

As was brought to light in the Week one readings, there are a range of different Learning Theories.  These theories can be broken down.  In this case, I will be focusing on four theories; 'Behaviourism', 'Cognitivism' 'Constructivism' and 'Connectivism'.  My understanding of these three theories after briefly looking at the given readings are:
Behaviourism: is associate with classical conditioning and opperant conditioning, implies the dominance of the teacher and is relevant to skill development and the conditions of learning (Atherton 2011).
Cognitivism: is a theory with two parts, the first is 'Ages and Stages' which predicts what children can and cannot understand at different ages, the second is a theory of development describing how children develop cognitive abilities (TRUC 2010).
Constructivism: is a theory about how people learn, understanding and knowledge of the world being created through experience and the reflection on those experiences (EBC 2004).
Connectivism: is a learning theory for the digital age, identifying the networked nature of learning with computers and the internet (CQU 2011).

The activity that we were given in relation to these Learning Theories, was to choose from a list of 'theories' (with our partner from the previous activity), a theory that we would like to explore.  We were then required to read the set reading for our chosen learning theory.  The idea of the task was to provide a 'PMI' (Plus, Minus and Interesting) on our chosen theory.  We were to then add our 'PMI' to a list so that other students could look at what our take was on the theory, and we could do the same to other students' results on other theories.  The idea was to create a feel for collaborative learning, where we learn from and with others.

From my own understanding of the learning theories that I outlined initially in this particular blog entry, this activity is informed by the learning theory constructivism, with traces of connectivism as well.  As I will show later in this blog entry, constructivism concentrates on a lot of group work and collaboration for learning, which is essentially what we are doing in the learning theories wiki task.

Initially this task proved to be very difficult for me, as I was constantly being 'removed' from the profiles wiki list, thus making choosing a partner a difficult task.  With my delay in finding a suitable partner to complete the required task, I eventually 'gave up' on the idea of having a partner and went at the task alone.  I chose to look at 'Constructivism'.  Following below is my version of the PMI that I posted to the Learning Theories wiki.

Constructivism

Plus:

• Students are involved in their own learning.
• Students learn how to learn.
• Become expert learners.
• Teachers encourage students to assess their own understanding (reflection).
• Students construct knowledge rather than 'memorise' facts.
• Triggers student curiousity.
• Become engaged by using their existing knowledge and real-world experience.
• Students questions and interests are valued.
• Interactive learning, building on what the student already knows.
• Collaboration among students - they learn from one another - pick up strategies from on another.
• Active learning, student involvement.
• Promotes social and communication skills.

Minus:

• Seems to be more active learning, students are always 'doing' activities etc.
• The teacher is no longer the 'expert'.
• The teacher becomes a facilitator, coaching, mediating, prompting and helping students to assess their own understanding and learning.
• Teachers biggest job is asking good questions (how are we to know what the 'good' ones are, aren't we meant to be doing more?).
•   Knowledge is seen as dynamic and an ever-changing view of the real world.
• Students always work in groups, no independent study.
• Students set their own means of assessment.
• Students control their own learning process.
• Main activity is problem solving.

Interesting:

• Puts a positive spin on students involving themselves in their own learning experience and with others.
• Constructivism encourages collaboration and group work.
• Uses students curiosity and real experiences to help them learn. 
• Pursuit of students questions.
• Positive - the teacher's role is 'interactive'.

 As you can see, I have looked broadly at the reading that was provided to us about 'Constructivism'.  After looking over the other student's PMI's on these learning theories, my original understanding of the theories has not changed, just perhaps enlightened!

And even though I have formed my own 'understanding' of what I believe is 'constructivism' and created a PMI on my own, I have continued to search for a partner to work alongside and to collaborate with as in the end I do believe that two heads are better than one, especially when it comes to learning about new theories and ideas that are somewhat foreign!

In general I can see myself using and incorporating 'constructivism' in the classroom.  Maybe not all of the time, but on the odd occasion I can see how this theory would fit in and work with some of the topics that I would be required to teach the students in my classes.  There is some importance therefore, that I can personally see, that these theories have in our own teaching experiences.

References:
Atherton, JS 2004, Learning and teaching: behaviourism, accessed 10/3/2011 (online), http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/behaviour.htm.


CQUniversity e-courses EDED20491 ICTs for Learning Design 2011, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/course/view.php?id=17135.

Educational Broadcasting Corporation (EBC) 2004, Constructivism as a paradigm for teaching and learning, accessed 8/3/2011 (online), http:www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism.index.html.

The Regents of the University of California (TRUC) 2010, Theories of learning: cognitive constructivism, accessed 13/3/2011 (online), http://gsi.berkeley.edu/teachingguide/theories/cognitive.html.

Assignment Post 1: Profile Wikis

During the Week 1 activities for ICTs for Learning Design, we were asked to create a personal profile wiki.  In order to do this, we were required to locate the Wiki profile page on our course Moodle site.  Within this page there was a link for a profile template.  This template looked something like this:

(This is only a small 'snap shot' of the whole profile, sourced from
CQU 2011)



The idea of this task was to give other students an idea of who we are.  My wiki profile is as follows.

Stacey Draper

          Age: 22

          Family: I live with my fiance, our son, my brother and his girlfriend.

          My involvement with ICT: I have been involved in a range of different ICTs, such as Microsoft  Office word, Powerpoint; the internet, videos, movies, music.

          Where do I live: Rockhampton.

          My hobbies: Reading, writing, watching movies, shopping.

          My degree and specialist area: I have a Bachelor of Arts, am halfway through a Master of Letters and my specialist areas are English and Geography.

          Work outside Uni: None.

          My skills: I will attempt to assist where I can!

          Am I a social or individual learner: I like to work alone most of the time, but at times I do like group work.

          My learning style: Visual-kinaesthetic learner.

          Subject matter I want to focus on in this course: More on ICTs, the DoLs, and effectively implementing ICTs in the classroom.

          My favourite ICT tools: I love computers (most of the time) and other forms of visual aids like film and video clips.

(This is just a snap shot and a condensed version of my personal wiki profile).

The next step of this profile wikis task was to then look at the other students profiles and choose someone that we would like to work with and collaborate with based on the information that they shared in their profile.  Collaboration for this course has been noted as being important as it assists us in our own learning journey, but also assists our fellow students in their own learning journey.

From my understanding of the learning theories so far, this task centers around the learning theory of 'constructivism'.  Meaning, we are looking at how others learn (in relation to ourselves) and understanding the way our own knowledge and understanding (including fellow students) through experiences and reflection (EBC 2004). But also to me, we have somewhat engaged in 'connectivism', we are learning with computers and the internet afterall (CQU 2011).

My own personal experience in performing this task was a drawn out experience that saw myself becoming agitated and somewhat loathing technology.  For me, I had a lot of difficulty initially creating my profile.  To start with I could not actually get the 'template' to copy over onto the moodle site for editing.  When I finally did get this to work, I was unable to 'save' my profile to the moodle site.  So, I stepped away from the task for a couple of days and then decided to have another go at creating my profile.  This time I copied the template directly to the moodle site and edited it from the moodle site, instead of first editing the information in the Word document as I had done previously.  This time I was successful in creating my profile.

The next issue that I faced was the 'group' that my profile had been placed into.  There were only a few names in this group list, which I found confusing as we had all been told everyone had been placed into the same group.  Again, I decided to just step away from the problem and hope that the issue cleared up before I attempted the next step of the task.  When I did go back into the moodle site to locate my profile page, I discovered that my profile had disappeared.  This meant that I had to then start the entire process again, putting me even further behind in week ones activities and collaboration tasks.  And basically meant that I was unable to choose a partner that I wished to work with based on the personal profile wikis that other students had provided.

Profile wikis could form a good grounding for peer discussion and collaboration.  Take for instance my teaching area of Geography.  I would be able to use a wiki to get students to engage with students from say different demographics or from different cultures.  The students could get an understanding of what these students are like outside the classroom, and maybe change pre-formed perspectives they may have (this is just an example of course!).  Profile wikis could form an important part of a classroom environment and dynamics, and would possibly be worth 'testing' out in the classroom.

References:
CQUniversity (CQU) e-courses EDED20491 ICTs for Learning Design, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/course/view.php?id=17135.

Educational Broadcasting Corporation (EBC) 2004, Constructivism as a paradigm for teaching and learning, accessed 8/3/2011, (online), http:www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism.index.html.

21st Century Learners

"So hi there, I'm the tuned-out kid in the back row with the headphones.  Are you going to engage me today or enrage me?  The choice is yours" (Prensky 2005, p. 64).

The arguments that Prensky presents are valid when looking at the overall picture of today's learners.  Prensky notes that learners today have changed from those of the past and unfortunately, the education systems can no longer 'teach them anything.  This is because the focus of the learner has significantly changed.  We have allowed technology to take over our lives and 'govern' the ways in which we learn.  Prensky labels todays students as 'Digital Natives' (2001, p. 1) which means that todays students have grown up surrounded by different technologies that were perhaps non-existant in the past.  Prensky also labels everyone else, or students of the past as 'Digital Immigrants' (2001, p. 2).  In other words these Digital Immigrants are those of us who find modern technologies foreign, and struggle to learn how to use them.

Prensky also mentions that the learners of today seem to rely on all kinds of technologies to learn, understand the ways in which things 'work', and in general, just to live their lives.  In many cases, as Pensky (2001) points out, the education systems that are in place, do not accommodate for the Digital Natives.  Many of todays teachers are Digital Immigrants, according to Prensky (2001) and they do not necessarily understand the natives needs nor do they appear to 'want' to.

Prensky (2005) notes that there are three types of students (or learners); "the students who are truly self-motivated ... the students who go through the motions ... the students who 'tune us out" (2005, p. 60).  It is difficult to attempt to engage each and everyone of these types of students, as many teachers are already aware of.  Prensky (2005) mentions that all students do things in their own lives that are engaging, but school unfortunately is not one of them.

In both Prensky's articles (2001 and 2005) he manages to make the same conclusion.  We need to create, invent and present the 'old' school curriculum in new, exciting and engaging ways.

I believe that Prensky's arguements are valid.  I recall going to school and being uninspired and unengaged because the content that was being taught was presented in an 'old style', 'old fashioned' way.  I also recall lessons that were the complete opposite, they were so much fun and engaging because of the way that everything was presented and the technology that was used.  And as a future teacher, I guess that one of my biggest responsibilities and tasks will be to ensure that I am successfully engaging the Digital Natives in my own classroom.

References:
Prensky, M 2001, 'Digital natives, digital immigrants', in MCB University press, vol. 9, no. 5, October, pp. 1-6.

Prensky, M 2005, 'Engage me or enrage me: what today's learners demand', in Educause review, September/October, pp. 60-64.

Multiple Intelligence

During our readings and activities in Week 1 of our course study, we were asked to take the online 'Multiple Intelligence' test.  This test was able to show us visually how best we as individuals learn and what environments we best learn in.  The areas in which this test shows us Intelligences in are as follows:

• Kinasthetic - Body Smart
• Linguistic - Word Smart
• Logical - Number Smart
• Interpersonal - People Smart
• Intrapersonal - Myself Smart
• Musical - Music Smart
• Visual/Spatial - Picture Smart
• Naturalistic - Nature Smart

Below, is a copy of my personal results from the 'Multiple Intelligence' test.

(Sourced from BGL 2011)

As you can see I am quiet stong in the 'Intrapersonal' intelligence, which means that I am aware of myself and I know alot about myself as a person, and I know my strengths and weaknesses.  I am then secondly strong in the 'Kinaesthetic', 'Linguistic' and 'Interpersonal' intelligences.  This means that I enjoy outdoor activities such exercise, I enjoy reading, writing and talking about things, and I like to mix with other people and am good at sharing things.  My results also show that I am strong in the 'Visual/Spatial' intelligence, which basically means that I may be good at art or other activities where I need to look at pictures, maps or find my way out of mazes.  According to these results I'm not very 'Naturalistic', 'Musical' or 'Logical', which means that I don't enjoy plants, animals or learning about them, I don't enjoy music or learning about it, or I don't enjoy maths, numbers or problem solving.

Personally I agree with most of these results, although personally I do disagree with the 'Interpersonal' intelligence, I don't always enjoy mixing with others, instead I prefer alot of the time to do things alone.  And I disagree somewhat with the 'Naturalistic' intelligence, I actually enjoy animals and learning about them, I love dogs - which is why as a family we own one, and I'm very passionate about horses, having grown up around them my whole life, I see them as beautiful creatures and some I see as my best friends.

So how will I use this information to inform my learning design?  Obviously the results of my Intelligence test show the best ways or the most enjoyable ways that I like to or prefer to learn.  Clearly there are 'Intelligences' that I favour more than others, which in someways will be good, and in others could affect the way in which I as a learner, learn.  These intelligences may also effect the way in which I 'teach' others.  I will have to work carefully to ensure that I incorporate all the intelligences in to my learners experiences.  To do this I myself may have to become more familiar with or involve myself more with the intelligences that I do not like or perform well in.

Reference:
Birmingham Grid for Learning (BGL) 2011. Multiple intelligences. (online). http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/custom/resources_flp/client_flp/ks1/ict/multiple_int/what.cfm.

My Learning Styles

As one of the activities from this week was to complete the 'Felder and Solomon Learning Styles Questionaire'.  Below are my results:

(Retrieved from Felder & Solomon 2011)

What is your learning style?
As you can see on my results, I am 'well balanced' in the learning areas of Reflective and Sequential styles.  I 'moderately' prefer the Visual learning style; and I very muchly prefer the Intuitive style of learning.  For me this means that I like to have pictures, diagrams, colours, lists, summaries, concept maps, logical and sequential orders of things.

What sorts of learning experiences would suit you best with your learning style?
So, as an Intuitive-Visual learner, I prefer lectures and classes that a lot of University courses provide.  Also classes that involve a number of visual aids like movies help me and engage me best.  For example, for me to better learn, I need someone teaching me, I struggle to do tasks and to learn by myself, the self-paced learning, do-it-yourself style learning that many courses offer, means that I struggle to learn and understand the concepts and subject material that I am required to know.  Though I have learnt that there are strategies that I can use when studying and learning things by myself, such as highlighting important points and information and by using concept maps, flow charts, lists and other visual aids that I can create to understand material.

In a traditional classroom of 25 students, how would you support the range of learning styles in each lesson?
Obviously I will have to get to know each student and their individual learning styles.  In order to support each students learning styles and their own learning journies, I will have to provide visual and auditory materials, such as hand outs, video clips, music, pictures, board work - done by myself and also by the students, and general discussions.  I will also have to provide students with a number of different style learning activities that are explained in a number of different ways, these activities may include individual work where the students need to find the 'answers' as such by themselves and then report back to either a partner or to the group as a whole, group work where each group may have a different task and each group will have to report back to the whole class so that everyone can get some idea of the topic at hand, whole group discussions where I may choose to ask students what they already know and what they may want to know, but by also getting students to somewhat 'run' the whole group discussions by having them ask questions or write down responses on the whiteboard for example.  There are so many different strategies that I can use as a teacher to engage each and every one of my students and to address each of the different learning styles in the classroom.

With your current knowledge of ICT, how could your design and digital pedagogy support your learners better?
I will be able to show my students how they can find and locate various information and materials that may be useful in assisting them to understand subject content and that may prove helpful when they are completing assessment items.  I will also be able to show them pictures, photos, diagrams, maps, play them music, various movies, internet clips and video clips to assist me in getting my 'point' or 'points' across to the group.  In doing this I hope to help the students better engage, understand and relate to the topics being taught, in different ways.

What sorts of profiling questions would you be asking about your learners to ensure you cater for everyone's preferences?

• Who likes looking at pictures, diagrams etc?
• Who likes to listen to me or other people talk?
• Who prefers to look at or associate information or notes with different colours to help the understand?
• Who likes to watch movies or moving clips that capture the topic and the content?
• Who likes or prefers their information and task steps set out in lists/sequential steps?
• Who likes to work in a group?
• Who prefers to work alone?
• Who likes discussions and sharing what they know with others?
• Who likes to get involved with other peoples learning journies?

How does ICT support differences in learning styles?
ICTs can provide students with different ways in which they can view, hear and take in new and even old content.  Students can self-evaluate what they have learnt and know what they are capable of.  Not only can ICTs support the individual learners, but ICTs can also support small groups and whole classes as well.

Reference:
Felder, R.M., & Solomon, B. 2011. Learning styles test. (online). http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html.