Author: grabe

Various bloggers and educational writers frequently float the idea that our students regard us as out of touch because we do not take advantage of participatory web tools in our classrooms and do not use such tools ourselves. While personally quite interested in participatory web applications in education, I have expressed skepticism regarding just how involved students actually are with such tools (perhaps ignoring Facebook which may or may not meet my personal definition of “participation”). Ironically, Will Richardson seems to have come to a similar conclusion. I say ironically in that pro-blogging and personal learning network (PLN) advocate Richardson has a way of suggesting that conventional education is unacceptable. His recent post represents a more balanced perspective.

I say these things as an introduction to what was for me a very unique experience. After my educational psychology class (undergraduate) on Friday a student approached me to say that he had been reading my blog and found what I had to say quite interesting. He went on to say that I was the only faculty member he knew who used tools like blogs and wikis and he was glad to meet someone who was doing this kind of thing.

I am not certain how I react to criticism, but I know that I am even more awkward in reaction to praise. I did thank him and suggested that there were probably other faculty members who were involved in this type of thing. I suggested that I teach these tools in one of my graduate education courses and I felt it important to be a practitioner of the activities you advocate.

I thought more about this interaction afterwards. I know other faculty members involve their students in blogs and wikis. I know that other faculty members have Facebook pages. I am not certain I know other faculty members at my university who are active bloggers or who create wiki content outside of their own courses. This could mean several  things. It could mean we operate in our own little worlds and are unaware of each other. It could mean there are simply few of us who do such things.

Despite my cautious remarks regarding the level at which 12-25 year olds have embraced participation, I do think such activities should be more common among academics. Richardson is right – not everyone is a reader/writer. However, academics are. Grants and publications are expected responsibilities. We get paid for discovery AND communication. We are familiar with the proposal that it does not count until it is published – our responsibility is to communicate.

Perhaps the sad reality is that we get no credit for communication outside of the classroom that does not result in a product that ends up in some research library. I am careful to so say “some” because most libraries are unable to secure many of the journals that now exist. I support scholarly publication as a priority, but there is a point at which there is a diminishing return on this activity. Three pubs a year, 4 pubs, is there a meaningful difference. Perhaps some of the commitment here should be devoted to a public discussion of what we do. Perhaps if more “scholars” made the effort, the tax money expended on public institutions would be regarded as more acceptable by the general public. What about communication for public consumption as a responsibility of the scholar?

The student who responded to my earlier posts did get me thinking about why I do this. I originally proposed that I wrote for my own amusement and my own education (hence the title of this blog). It is more isn’t it? I do want others to understand what I do on a level that is personal and understandable. It turns out it does not take much feedback to keep me going. So, if the student I described reads this post – thanks for your comments!

I have been making decisions about the articles I require for my graduate class. I added a short Research Summary from AERA that considers the topic of Time to Learn (pdf). There are many facets to this topic. How long is the school day? How much time is spend on academic subjects and which subjects receive what proportion of the school day? How engaged are individual learners during the time allocated to a given subject?

I have long been interested in some of the theoretical issues associated with time. By long, I mean some of these topics were being raised when I was in graduate school. The notion that individual differences in time to learn may represent an alternate way to think about aptitude differences has long fascinated me. The assumed meaning of aptitude is that differences in aptitude are reflected in differences in how much is learned (given a fixed amount of time). Thinking of aptitude as differences in time to learn was originally not very practical – what is realistic about  understanding that less capable students may require 3x more time? Where would that time come from? Of course, ignoring this reality is also unrealistic. What is practical about offering many students less time than is necessary to learn what they need to learn? Such students simply fall behind, become frustrated, and give up. Mastery learning (a model of individualizing instruction I find most of my younger peers have never heard of) argued that moving ahead when understanding was present offered the most efficient approach to learning. Is differentiated instruction a new version of this claim (time and method)?

Whatever the skills to be acquired (traditional or 21st century), there are still important issues to be resolved regarding time in group settings. Perhaps it is time to expect students to acquire certain skills outside of the “school day”. I suppose this already happens for those with motivation and opportunity.