Other web 2.0 musings...

at...

http://kindalearning.blogspot.com/2008/02/web-20-much-when.html

But I'm too lazy to retype for here, so this is the link to my other blog's entry on the whole web 2.0 deal.

Web 2.0 Much?

My boring old computer
Could type up my reports
Could send out my dull letters
And business-like retorts.

But web 2.0 came and changed things,
Now all is quite bizarre
Linked-in, betwittered, "Friended";
Connections from afar.

The data stream is endless
I’m never ever friendless.
Micro-blogging here we go...
My life’s minutiae, blow by blow.

I know when you're out jogging
I know when you've been blogging…
Superficial? Artificial?
Anything real to read?

Drip, drip, drip, drip
Voices all around;
Can anyone truly hear these days,
Drowned out by walls of sound?

Presidential candidates
Themselves are all a-twitter
Chirp loudest and be heard by all...
Political big hitter??

Online living...
Offline losing?
Web 2.0 democracy?
What are we really choosing?

MySpace is now your space.
'I' transformed to 'we'.
Somewhere, somehow
I lost a part of me?

There is good reason to be worried about declining rates of reading | Comment is free | The Guardian

Response, Sunil Iyengar and Mark Bauerlein: There is good reason to be worried about declining rates of reading | Comment is free | The Guardian: "Johnson denies there is any evidence of damage linked with excessive viewing and surfing. Yet sufficient data has led the American Academy of Pediatrics to advise parents to keep children's rooms free of electronic media. Reading is at risk, but so are the minds of the young; we need a more critical view of their digital environment and its omnipresent allure. Now is the time for educators and intellectuals to produce sound empirical studies of the risks and benefits of electronic media."

Interesting response to last week's Guardian article on The Dawn of the Digital Natives. I wonder why the claim for 'Now is the time...' though? Why now? Why empirical studies? What would the real impact be of finding out these results since one common cry is that parents can't and don't control their children's exposure to media anyway? Do we accept that the world has changed and that we live in a state of connectedness, whatever that may bring? Do we resist and step back while the world carries on changing anyway?

Yes, it's good to understand the impact of the changes around us... but panic at the developments the digital age holds? No. There's good and bad in everything, isn't there? TV is said to have seen off books... but people still read, Amazon thrives and libraries do business. The publishing of the written word was said to have changed the nature of childhood (Postman, 1995) ... but we still remember our 'idyllic' childhoods despite the fact that they were permeated with literature of one form or another. We use the internet, are connected via mobile phones, social networks, online, offline, face-to-face, alone, together... but it's only the 'minds of the young' who are at risk?? Pespective people. Put it in perspective before you wind yourselves up into a frenzy and risk waking up from the panic to find the world has changed and the point at which you could have affected that change has gone... :o)

Felder Silverman Learning Model test

Your Score

You received a score of 4/7 for your ACT/REF.

You received a score of 1/10 for your SEN/INT.

You received a score of 8/3 for your VIS/VRB.

You received a score of 3/8 for your SEQ/GLO.

LEARNING STYLE SCALES

How to interpret your score ...

Let us say, for instance, that you received a score of 5/1 for your ACT/REF. This would mean that you are leaning more toward being an active learner than a reflective learner ...

Keep these general guidelines in mind when interpreting your score ...

• If your score on a scale is 1-3, you are fairly well balanced on the two dimensions of that scale. For instance, a score of 2/1 for your SEN/INT would indicate that although you lean a little more towards being a sensing learner than an intuitive learner, you are balanced between the two.


• If your score on a scale is 5 or 7, you have a moderate preference for one dimension of the scale and will learn more easily in a teaching environment which favors that dimension. For instance, a score of 1/6 for your VIS/VRB indicates that you are a verbal learner and much less a visual learner.
  
  
• If your score on a scale is 9 or 11, you have a very strong preference for one dimension of the scale. You may have real difficulty learning in an environment which does not support that preference. For instance, a score of 11/0 for your SEQ/GLO would indicate that you prefer to learn sequentially over globally.

Comment:

The above says I have a moderate preference for being a reflective learner. A strong preference for being an intuitive learner. A moderately strong preference for being a visual and global learner. I guess I'd agree with that in general. I certainly like to reflect on things and like to think about the 'big picture' and need that to make sense to have lightbulb moments. I flit from place to place mentally until I 'get' the details of what it is I'm trying to understand. I hate trying to learn umpteen facts by rote and need to be able to relate what I'm learning to me and my life to help make sense of it. But... I do also like to diagram my ideas and adore things like maps etc for making sense of things so I'm not totally a verbal learner either.

I found the test answers somewhat restrictive and leading in parts. They didn't quite 'fit' me and the nearest answer wasn't even a 'best fit' either. There was no 'both' option for the points at which I genuinely couldn't differentiate and ended up having to plump for answer because the test wouldn't let me progress without doing so. For example, the question asking whether I prefer to study in a study group or alone - I just couldn't make up my mind. I study alone when I need or have the opportunity to study alone. If I have the opportunity to study in a group or need to... then I do.

Just shows. These tests give a flavour of you, but they don't give the whole picture. Even years of psychoanalysis and parting with hefty wads of cash wouldn't truly do that... would it?!

Further links:
http://www.crc4mse.org/ILS/self_test.html - the test itself
http://www.crc4mse.org/ILS/ILS_explained.html - for explanation of the results

What John said...

The lovely John Millner asked a really interesting question in our H806 tutor group about whether or not instruction was akin to behaviourism. I’ve had a mull and the following was my resulting ponderings on his question…

John Millner writes:
“Im doing the reading on behaviourism, and am having difficulty understanding why instruction per se is regarded as a stimulus/reward process. Up to now I would have thought that attending a traditional lecture was an example of learning as understanding (ie, in the cognitive camp) but apparently it is more about behaviour modification thru instruction, and therefore in the behaviourist camp.
can anyone help me out here?”

Me in response:
“The CiPD report “How do People Learn”, p.17, says that:

"Practice takes the form of question (stimulus)-answer (response) frames that expose the learner to the topic in gradual steps. The learner is conditioned to make a response each time and receives immediate feedback. Learning is ordered in stages of difficulty so that the response to each step is likely to be correct; thus offering opportunities from positive reinforcement. Progress is achieved in small incremental steps and is 'shaped' towards a positive outcome".

If you think about a typical 'stand at the front and spout' lecture, the lecturer is drip, drip, dripping information at the students. They might ask a question which they expect a particular response to in order to continue the lecture. This is positive reinforcement. The students are being conditioned to respond in a particular way which is deemed behaviourally appropriate by the incremental accummulation of knowledge and the questions which are set to test that knowledge. The response consequence is the 'correct' answer achieved. There is a power relationship there as well. The lecturer lectures the students. It isn't the students lecturing, is it? Someone has the knowledge. Someone else doesn't. The book describes the behaviourist approach as having the focus on the expert - the lecturer is the 'expert' in this context. However, other types of learning such as social learning can happen outside the lecture theatre context, for example, chatting things over with others in the Student Union etc - so although there may be behaviourist aspects to the traditional lecture, the university environment affords the application of several different types of learning.

I get the impression that all of these types of learning are not distinct learning events but can flow into and out of one another. If you view a lecture as not belonging in the behaviourist camp, it's probably because its effectiveness was heightened by mixing it with other contexts and muddying the waters of why a particular learning theory was in place at any point. But that's probably just my blurry ideas on what it's all about... or something!”

Anyway, my feeling is that this sort of reflection on what I’ve read may be useful. Not least because I’m prone to hefty shifts in thinking having had a think about someone else’s perspective on a topic! Will keep on chewing it over. :o)

Memorable learning experiences...

I’ve struggled to find a memorable learning experience for the activity in the "Learning Theories" section of Module 1… and I’m not sure why because if one thing’s for sure, I’ve certainly had enough of them. It was much easier to come up with one which was memorable because it was negative than the many, many experiences that were positive. In lots of ways this is quite sobering. Do your job as you’re meant to – and unless it’s absolutely exceptional, people forget. Have an off day – and it’s remembered, and remembered and remembered! However, your off day can be a powerful tool if it's reflected on and used in a positive way by those affected. Hmmmm...