As I read through the texts and watched the videos, there were several things that I would deem as significant. First, the P21 Framework gives new light to using technology to learn. Then, the videos really gave some insight into the learning theories that are prevalent in today’s educational world. Lastly, the reading from the HRECT really gave a good historical background and introduction to many learning theories.
Many complaints that I hear from educators about technology is that students are not really developing the problem solving, communication, and critical thinking skills at the level that students in the past had. According to the Partnership for 21st Century Skills Framework (2009), “Within the context of core knowledge instruction, students must also learn the essential skills for success in today’s world, such as critical thinking, problem solving, communication and collaboration.” (p.1). The implications of this statement are that students need both core knowledge and essential skills to be successful. The framework goes on to discuss how students need a blend of core subjects and 21st century themes. I really appreciate that this framework pulls in creativity and innovation. It is so easy in today’s schools to get bogged down by what students have to be able to do that is the same as everyone else (think standardized tests). It is a welcomed change to see something like this discuss the importance of being creative and unique. I also like that the framework addresses life and career skills. P21 (2009) notes that, “Today’s life and work environments require far more than thinking skills and content knowledge. The ability to navigate the complex life and work environments in the globally competitive information age requires students to pay rigorous attention to developing adequate life and career skills.” (p.6). The last section gives implementation information and indicators of progress. The ISTE Standards for Students go hand in hand with the P21 Framework. The student standards lay out expectations for students to interact with technology.
As I watched the videos and took notes about them, much of the information was a review for me. I learned about many of the learning theories during my undergraduate program and during my master’s program. It never hurts to refresh on things like that though. Honestly, I can see different situations that using different theories would be appropriate. I do not feel like I fit into one particular theory. I feel like I am a hybrid of several of them depending on what I am teaching or asking my students to do. I am an inclusion teacher, so repetition is a huge part of helping the students I teach remember the content, in that regard I fall into the behaviorism theory. Along the same lines, I try to give my students information that will help them “hook” the information to something they already know. This falls into the constructionism theory. Of course, I love to help students learn things in the real world, and helping them see where it will be applicable to them in life. This falls into situated learning. The videos lead me to my first question, do other people feel like they fall into more than one category when it comes to learning theories?
Spector (2014) stated that that, “The question, however, is not if tools can contribute to learning but how instructional materials in various forms can enhance learning and allow the manipulation of the properties of instruction that impact learning.” (as cited in Loomsdaine, 1963, p. 6). This statement has a profound meaning in my opinion. The question is not IF tools can contribute to learning, but HOW. Considering that the original text this was quoted from was written in 1963 really is an indication of how long instructional technology has been around. It has been in the forefront for the last decade or two, but people have been talking and writing about it for much longer than that. The quote goes on to say ‘but how instructional materials in various forms can enhance learning.’ That is the whole purpose of technology in the classroom is to enhance learning. The next chapter of the book discusses different paradigms and perspectives on learning. In the discussion and conclusions section at the end of chapter two, the authors basically say that it is almost impossible to compare the paradigms and theories, then they go on to say that forward motion in any of them is made from ideas from another. It is like the ideas are completely different, and completely the same at the same time. According to Spector (2014), “although different ways of looking at reality may produce different results, they do not exclude the identification of basic principles in learning” (p. 28). After reading these chapters, I am not sure if I have questions or answers. I hope to discover that as I continue the book later.
My vision for teaching and learning with technology is there is no one right way or one wrong way to do it. What one theory says works, another theory may contradict. While I do believe these theories are important, at the end of the day for me what truly matters is if I am reaching the students that I teach in the most effective way possible. The P21 framework lays out some really interesting ideas about using technology and ensuring students are not only learning the core academic facts, but also learning life and career skills, technology skills, critical thinking and problem solving skills, and learning and innovation skills. Each category of skills is vital to a students success. I look forward to learning more and developing my vision.
References:
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2007). ISTE Standards for Students [PDF].
Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2009). P21 Framework Definitions [PDF].
Spector, J. M. (2014). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Springer.
Many complaints that I hear from educators about technology is that students are not really developing the problem solving, communication, and critical thinking skills at the level that students in the past had. According to the Partnership for 21st Century Skills Framework (2009), “Within the context of core knowledge instruction, students must also learn the essential skills for success in today’s world, such as critical thinking, problem solving, communication and collaboration.” (p.1). The implications of this statement are that students need both core knowledge and essential skills to be successful. The framework goes on to discuss how students need a blend of core subjects and 21st century themes. I really appreciate that this framework pulls in creativity and innovation. It is so easy in today’s schools to get bogged down by what students have to be able to do that is the same as everyone else (think standardized tests). It is a welcomed change to see something like this discuss the importance of being creative and unique. I also like that the framework addresses life and career skills. P21 (2009) notes that, “Today’s life and work environments require far more than thinking skills and content knowledge. The ability to navigate the complex life and work environments in the globally competitive information age requires students to pay rigorous attention to developing adequate life and career skills.” (p.6). The last section gives implementation information and indicators of progress. The ISTE Standards for Students go hand in hand with the P21 Framework. The student standards lay out expectations for students to interact with technology.
As I watched the videos and took notes about them, much of the information was a review for me. I learned about many of the learning theories during my undergraduate program and during my master’s program. It never hurts to refresh on things like that though. Honestly, I can see different situations that using different theories would be appropriate. I do not feel like I fit into one particular theory. I feel like I am a hybrid of several of them depending on what I am teaching or asking my students to do. I am an inclusion teacher, so repetition is a huge part of helping the students I teach remember the content, in that regard I fall into the behaviorism theory. Along the same lines, I try to give my students information that will help them “hook” the information to something they already know. This falls into the constructionism theory. Of course, I love to help students learn things in the real world, and helping them see where it will be applicable to them in life. This falls into situated learning. The videos lead me to my first question, do other people feel like they fall into more than one category when it comes to learning theories?
Spector (2014) stated that that, “The question, however, is not if tools can contribute to learning but how instructional materials in various forms can enhance learning and allow the manipulation of the properties of instruction that impact learning.” (as cited in Loomsdaine, 1963, p. 6). This statement has a profound meaning in my opinion. The question is not IF tools can contribute to learning, but HOW. Considering that the original text this was quoted from was written in 1963 really is an indication of how long instructional technology has been around. It has been in the forefront for the last decade or two, but people have been talking and writing about it for much longer than that. The quote goes on to say ‘but how instructional materials in various forms can enhance learning.’ That is the whole purpose of technology in the classroom is to enhance learning. The next chapter of the book discusses different paradigms and perspectives on learning. In the discussion and conclusions section at the end of chapter two, the authors basically say that it is almost impossible to compare the paradigms and theories, then they go on to say that forward motion in any of them is made from ideas from another. It is like the ideas are completely different, and completely the same at the same time. According to Spector (2014), “although different ways of looking at reality may produce different results, they do not exclude the identification of basic principles in learning” (p. 28). After reading these chapters, I am not sure if I have questions or answers. I hope to discover that as I continue the book later.
My vision for teaching and learning with technology is there is no one right way or one wrong way to do it. What one theory says works, another theory may contradict. While I do believe these theories are important, at the end of the day for me what truly matters is if I am reaching the students that I teach in the most effective way possible. The P21 framework lays out some really interesting ideas about using technology and ensuring students are not only learning the core academic facts, but also learning life and career skills, technology skills, critical thinking and problem solving skills, and learning and innovation skills. Each category of skills is vital to a students success. I look forward to learning more and developing my vision.
References:
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2007). ISTE Standards for Students [PDF].
Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2009). P21 Framework Definitions [PDF].
Spector, J. M. (2014). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. New York: Springer.