Learning

I'm really excited about this blog! It's kind of fun to have a place to reflect on what is discussed in class, and add my own thoughts.

We talked on Tuesday about the nature of education. What is it? Dr. Monson listed several metaphors that could be used to describe the process of education/learning. The comparison was between a mind and:

1) A muscle that needs to be exercised
2) A garden that can be cultivated
3) A dark cave in need of illumination
4) An empty vessel to be filled to overflowing

I said that I liked the first metaphor, but I guess in reality, my definition is somewhere between the first and the second. I like the muscle idea because I think that learning is individual, and unless the student is engaged, they won't accomplish anything. Knowledge is built by the learner stretching their mind, making connections, and putting information into place along with the information and experiences they already have. A person can increase (or decrease!) their own ability to learn and retain information as they exercise (or don't!) their own mind.

The second metaphor, a garden, is also appealing to me. I think that students have potential, just like fertile ground. We as teachers can plant seeds and nurture them, and depending on what is planted in each person's mind, they will each develop into a unique and prolific garden.

I guess my difficulty with the garden metaphor (and actually, with the cave and vessel as well) is that most of the work is being done to the learner, instead of the other way around. Having worked with many students over the years, as well as my own children, I know that learning cannot occur without effort on the part of the student. A teacher can present information (metaphor #4) but unless the student is truly interested and/or motivated, they may only "learn" in that they memorize enough to satisfy minimum expectations from the parents or teacher. Similarly, an instructor may try to illuminate the dark crevices of the student's mind (metaphor #3), but unless the student also finds those corners dark and in need of a little bit of light, the change will be only momentary.

This brings up the question of what exactly learning is, and how it occurs. I guess I'd say that learning can be as simple as the acquisition of information. However, I think I would add that this information has to influence the learner in some way. Some part of their behavior or cognition has to change, as a result of the new information.

As for how this occurs, as I mentioned before, I believe that the student has to play an integral part in the learning process. I don't know much about educational theory, but from my understanding, I would say I'm a bit of a constructivist. I think that students learn best when they have to build some part of the knowledge themselves, and then find a way to fit it within their existing thoughts and ideas.

My personal example of this (within my own discipline, naturally!) is learning math equations. I have taught or tutored math for 17 years, so I have worked with a lot of students on this topic. Frequently they come to me with a list of equations, not really sure how each one works or what they are even supposed to do. In some cases, sadly, there is nothing to do but tell them to memorize the list, but most of the time, I try another approach. I spend a minute explaining to the students where the equation comes from and what it is used for. If it is possible, I give the student a problem that will naturally lead to the equation, and then ask them how to solve it. As we work through the process together, the student finds a meaningful place in their psyche for the particular equation, and then often finds that they've arrived at the answer themselves. In this manner, rather than telling them how to do the problem, I try to help them do it themselves. The students then leave with the self-esteem of knowing they can do the work, and the knowledge that if they get "stuck," there is a way to think the problem through. Furthermore, the student now has a scema to put this new information into; it is not just a random bunch of letters and numbers rattling around in their head. It has become meaningful and they have found a way to "attach" this information to other things they know and understand.

Now that I think about it, this brings up a question. Do I believe that learning occurs this way because that is the way I learn? Do different people learn in different ways? Would I be a poor teacher, then, for someone who was looking for illumination in their dark corners? Hmmm. I am interested to see if we can answer this (and many more!) question(s) this semester.

IDET -- what is that?

Last week was the first week of fall semester, and the first week of my new IDET program!! What is IDET, you ask? It's Instructional Design and Educational Technology. Wow! That's a mouthful!! What does it mean?

Well, I actually spent the summer working on classes in the IDET program, so maybe I have a different perspective on what exactly Instructional Design is (than I otherwise might). I don't know much about educational theories and principles yet - that's my Thursday class - and although I have spent time in a classroom as a teacher, I am not a trained educator. To me, IDET is made up of two things: Infomation Design is the first; Educational Technology is the second.

"Information Design": The word "design" makes me think of art -- designing something, like a beautiful lanscape, or a scrapbook page (yes, I am a "scrapper"). Design is something that generally alludes me, as in my previous life (at the U anyway!) I was a mathematician. I proudly tell people that I am a math person, and not in any way an artist. And although I love to scrapbook, I sometimes feel woefully inadequate as I watch my sister-in-law, who was an art major, and who can somehow sense what elements of design fit best on her pages.

"Information Design", however, I think, has a broader scope. We are now talking about designing the presentation of information in a way that is appealing, engaging, and understandable to the user. I don't know if this field is generally used by other disciplines, or if it is usually oriented towards education. For my own purposes, however, I intend to study with the ultimate goal of improving my ability to teach and present information.

"Educational Technology", then, must be the study of the technologies that are available, appropriate, and useful in an educational setting. I spent the summer working with technology as I learned how to design and program web pages, make photoshop and fireworks images, animate things with flash, and put it all together into a useful product. I have to admit, I really love technology! It was great to learn how to use the adobe suite. But as we discussed in class last Tuesday, the word "technology" has a much broader definition as well.

We usually think of "technology" as an electronic or computer-oriented product that we can use to get something done. But what about all of the other disciplines out there? Artists might talk about using the newest "technology" much the same way they might teach a new "technique". Are the two words related? (I don't know. . .) What about other areas, like gardening, construction, or decorating? I'll bet they use the word technology too, and not always (in fact, I'll bet usually not) in the sense of a computer program. (I wish I had some specific examples, but in my own field -- mathmatics -- the technology is generally computer-dependent!) Dictionary.com lists technology mainly as a word dealing with "technical" implementation, but it's last definition is interesting:

3. Anthropology The body of knowledge available to a society that is of use in fashioning implements, practicing manual arts and skills, and extracting or collecting materials.

Hmmm. . . I look forward to more discussion in class about what exactly technology is.