The Future of the Science of Learning: Learning as an Active Process

If we look back at how far we've come in the last 25 years or so, one can see tremendous leaps forward in terms of both understanding how mind and brain function works and deeper understanding of teaching and learning techniques to improve the educational experience.  The authors of How People Learn cited role of prior knowledge, brain development, early experiences, technology and many others as having a significant impact on the learner's ability to gain and apply knowledge.  Two of these factors - learning as an active process and learning for understanding - caught my attention as being particularly meaningful.  I believe that  the future of learning lies in the ability to fuse the concrete with the abstract.  For this blog post, I will be looking at two examples of that fusion in action:  problem-based learning and service learning.

As a part of my graduate assistantship, I am doing a benchmarking exercise looking at graduate research at other institutions.  One standout theme to me has been the focus on both problem-based and service learning.  Problem-based education, as we have learned, is an instructional approach that promotes the student as problem solver, using real life scenarios in order to take the lessons in the classroom and apply them outside of that realm.  Service Learning, on the other hand, is similar in the real-life problem solving aspect, but it has another component that stresses service and community.  While we have discussed much about K-12 education, I was intrigued to see how many higher education and, more specifically, graduate education programs that are using this approach for a wide variety of purposes.  For instance, two programs at Emory University stood out for their usage of these approaches.  PRISM, for example, is a National Science Foundation funded endeavor that pairs graduate student researchers with middle and high school teachers to help develop lessons utilizing problem-based learning (PBL) and investigative case-based learning (ICBL) for the math and science classroom.  A second community fellows program (akin to Lehigh's Community Fellows Program), partners students with non-profit, service organizations to tackle issues in the community-at-large using lessons learned in the classroom.  In all of these scenarios, students are given the opportunity to see first hand the applicability of their skills, and also to gain a sense of pride and accomplishment in using those skills for the betterment of the society around them.

Furthermore, problem-based and service learning approaches allow for creative ways to reach non-traditional learners and learners with special needs.  Whereas rote memorization and testing can leave out a portion of the population that may experience dyslexia and a variety of other conditions that affect the processing of written information, lessons that have an active component can help reach students beyond the textbook.  Even for students who do not have the challenge of a learning disability, active lessons are more interesting, capture the imagination of students, and engender a sense of teamwork and pride that helps solidify the lesson in a student's mind.  Students who have projects such as these can also find their individual approach to problem solving and lending their specific talents to an organization, thereby individualizing and playing to the strengths of a wide variety of learner types.

More and more, teachers must begin to understand what they are teaching their students in terms of usefulness, understanding, and applicability.  In a society driven by standardized tests and subsidies for success, it seems a tall task to ask teachers to refocus their efforts not on the facts and figures that dominate such tests to the information's practical application and usefulness in their lives.  However, I see this as the challenge of future learning.  If we find ways in which we can engage students in these ways - through active, hands-on, translatable skills - we will be able to reach more students and create more engaged members of society.  What better role of education than to prepare the thinkers, dreamers, and leaders?  If we are not doing that, then we must move from this standardized test culture to one that promotes students ability to think, dream, and lead.

Technology to Support Learning: 11.12.09

While many think of technology as a recent development - a post-1950s creation that is heavily computer-oriented - the reality is that technology and the human history of technology usage is much longer and more complex.  Technology, as defined by Merriam Webster, is "a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical processes, methods, or knowledge".  For the purpose of education, educational technology is the way in which we accomplish the task of teaching and learning using those technical processes, methods, or knowledge.  According to the presentation, Educational technology is "the entirety of ideas, methods, and devices used in the process of human learning."  From slide shows to SMART boards, each methodology involving an innovation, tools, and/or a craft counts as educational technology.  While there exists a plethora of these innovations and mechanisms to promote technology in education, there are three main characteristics that must run through any decision and implementation of technology in the classroom.  Our technologies must be mindful, accessible, and most of all, they must enhance the learning process beyond the scope of traditional teaching methods.

The mindful implementation of technology is also key to the usefulness of that technology in the classroom.  The presentation materials pointed out that Reigeluth (1983) argued that good design is a plan for the most effective way to realize some desired outcome.  When planning to use technology in the classroom, teachers must ask "What am I trying to achieve here?"  They must use technology just for the sake of its use, but for the ability to bring something to the table that traditional methods cannot.  Technologies must engage students and give them the ability not only to absorb the lesson, but to create or participate in a way that helps to solidify the lesson at hand in their own heads.  Technology can also have the ability to bridge the learning experiences between learners of different levels, and the avenues for special education and enhanced gifted education are also available using technology.  For students who need extra stimulation or extra help, technology can bet the medium through which they get what they need through a variety of visual, audio, and textual methods.

In the realm of accessibility, when looking at technology, educators must ensure that technology is accessible to all of their students both conceptually and logistically. When going through the design phase of a curriculum, implementing teachers must give thought to the appropriateness or learning curve for the technology.  For a non-art class, Photoshop might be too technically advanced a program for students to turn over a project in a week.  Educators must be aware of the ability for students of different levels of technological savvy to use the software or hardware at hand.  Another issue of accessibility is cost.  Educators must take into account that not all students have computers at home, despite the seeming proliferation of computers and mobile devices.  There is still disparity in socioeconomically underserved areas, and an assumption that students can easily get to a computer or the internet could be false.

Finally, the technology should enhance, rather than replace, the lessons in the classroom as well as give students the ability to actively participate in learning.  Technology can allow students access to experiences that they might not normally be able to have in the classroom or even in life.  For example, my focus and interest lies in international affairs/social studies.  To give students a real world view of the topic, there needs to be more than the by-the-book, traditional education to bring home the weight of the lessons.  History, in particular, is a difficult subject to get students engaged if using only book and memorization methods.  However, if one can find a way to use visual, engaging, and participatory lessons, students can really find the spark and excitement of history education.  Award-winning teacher and podcaster Eric Langhorst gives us a perfect example of an innovative technological approach to history.  Through his blog and podcasts, Langhorst has found ways to bring the lessons of history alive to his students.  Take for example the Battle of Gettysburg.  Most of those students would not have the ability to travel from Missouri to Pennsylvania in order to walk the battlefield.  But Langhorst podcasted and photojournaled his own trip for his students to experience vicariously.  He has done these sorts of podcasts for all of his family trips and conferences, giving students experiences they might not otherwise have and bringing history a little bit more to life for them.

Technology has many applications in the classroom, and by following these three guiding principles, one can ensure its proper and effective use.  Technology is also a contentious topic, as some kick against the seeming progress of technology and its implementation in the classroom.  For these people, do not cry "Luddite!" and judge.  Technology has its place in the classroom, but it must have a purpose in order to enhance the learning experience for students.  Through careful planning and thoughtful implementation, educators can curb the fears of those less willing to embrace technology and help better the learning experience for all students.

The Daily Me and the Individualization of Information

After our class discussion, I wanted to find the reference for the "Daily Me" and the idea of what the web becomes when you customize to an extent that you never see alternative viewpoints.  The originators of these ideas - Nicholas Negroponte of MIT and Cass Sunstein of Harvard - discuss the dangers of living in an echo chamber where information merely confirms your prejudices and biases rather than opens your mind to new ideas.  They argue that when you do not have the ability to run across information you would not have sought out otherwise (e.g. reading an article in a newspaper, catching a documentary on public television), people become more polarized and unchanging on the views they already held.  Technology, as Professor Sunstein argues, gives us an abundance of information and an abundance of ways to close your ears to information you do not like.

A terrific op-ed by Nick Kristof of the New York Times outlines these views.  There is also an interesting article by Samantha Power that shows a fantastic personal story of what happens when you do not have a filter delivering all of your news.  (Full disclosure: In my previous life, my job was as the author's Research Associate.  I factchecked this article.  This could be why it left a mark on my brain.)