I have been thinking about a way to support learners processing of online content. I have decided to describe this as layering guidance. I like the physical imagery of adding information on top of information with the intent of guiding a learner.
I decided this concept applies to a number of services educators can utilize. in the video that follows, I attempted to use Hypothes.is and DocentEDU to demonstrate what I mean.
Some years ago we were visiting friends who live in an Atlanta suburb. They were describing the conditions in their local public school and to us they sounded horrible. I remember thinking that the strategy seemed to be to put as little into public schools as possible and allow the wealthier parents to spend money to send their kids to private schools allowing these parents to invest directly in their own kids.
My personal experience has always been with the way state-supported higher education is funded. I also think issues related to the cost and support of higher education get more attention. The results of this attention are now always positive (from my perspective), but various positions are argued in public. The funding models are also obviously different. State funds from tax revenue provide some support for institutions at both levels, but k12 support relies mostly on local property taxes and higher education on tuition and contributions for the rest.
Recovery from the economic collapse has been painful. I was less aware of how K-12 budgets have suffered. Both government and local support have been slow to respond to the needs of students. Schools have been asked to meet higher standards with fewer resources.
Both articles linked from this post focus on the politics of this lack of support. The U.S. News and World report article contains this statement highlighting the heavy burden placed on funding for education.
“When families face tough budget choices, parents’ first priority is to protect the kids,” First Focus President Bruce Lesley said in a statement. “But Congress is actually cutting funding for children more than twice as fast as spending overall.”
Explain Everything has long been a personal favorite when it comes to recommending a general-purpose authoring tool for K-12 students. I have not paid attention to more recent developments for this product line. This is my effort to catch up.
Explain Everything was originally a product specific to the iPad. There was a tool for using Macs to render projects into video, but authoring activities were unique to the iPad. The number of platforms able to author with this product has now been expanded. Users can now create using Windows, Chrome or Android.
Offerings have also been differentiated as the basic version (iOS only) that allows externalization via a video for sharing and a product with additional features including real-time collaboration (promised) and hosting (the Discover Portal).
I must try to separate my personal use of the tool from the potential for the classroom (multiple users). Here are a couple features/issues to consider. First, how do you think about purchase vs. lease of a product. If you teach with iPads, you can still own Explain Everything. A teacher with iPads could also use the leasing option ($2.67 per user per year – minimum of 5 users). The leasing option is required of Windows, Chromebook and Android users. Does this matter? I am not certain how to analyze the situation in order to respond. Try this – say you assume you would use a purchase for three years. Multiple the lease price by three and the total is very close to the cost for purchasing the more capable version of the iPad app. For those not using iPads, I would say leasing makes sense. However, these folks really have no options. The real decision must be made by educators who use the iPad. Is the difference between the classic and more featured version meaningful to these teachers and how strong is their commitment to the product? For occasional use, the classic version probably makes the most sense.
Finally, what about a functional version for Macs?
Argumentation and the value of argumentation in developing critical thinking skills has been a favorite topic. Every time I watch coverage of the present presidential race with all of the charges, counter-charges, and fact checking, I think about what it takes to digest all of this and make an informed decision. Most of my previous commentary was based on the research of Deanna Kuhn and what to me seems like debate.
iCivics takes a different approach with a focus on argumentative writing. They have developed an online tool called Drafting Board that takes scaffolds the process of developing a sound argument. A variety of possible issues and background material are also provided. iCivics is a free resource (they would appreciate contributions).
Google describes Tour Builder as a web-based storytelling service. My expanded description would be – place-identified, web-enabled storytelling service.
The service is easy to use. You enter a location and if the location is identified by Google you tag that location. If the location is not identified, you can place the tag manually. Once a location is identified, the tour builder can add a narrative and add images. The tour can be shared (our example).
Educators or their students could use this service in many ways. Yes, it is a way to show what you did last summer, but the trip complete with commenting could trace a historical route (Lewis and Clark).
Every once in a while, I come up with something I think is clever. The challenge at this point is to convince others that my insight is clever and usually to try to get them to understand my insight.
Here is my new conceptual proposal – to an effective learner all content they encounter is really experienced as a primary source. The inability to experience content in this way limits understanding and eventual application. This inability can be due to poor aptitude or poor attitude. In practice, these problems can be interrelated and mutually inflammatory. Additional learning experiences are necessary to address either problem.
The context for this observation was my thinking about an upcoming discussion of direct vs. constructivist models of instruction. I decided that making this traditional distinction is flawed and actually violates what constructivism means when constructivism is used as a description of learning. Constructivism as a description of cognitive activity implies that each learner engages in unique, knowledge building activities to make sense of experiences in the context of what a learner already knows. Simulations are experiences. Daily observations of life events are experiences. Reading a book is an experience. Listening to a presentation is an experience. Constructivism is about what the learner does with external experiences and not some classification of these external experiences.
The notion of primary source (as used say by a historian) takes a similar perspective. The inputs (data of some type) are subjected to processing in an effort to achieve meaning.The distinction between a primary and a secondary source is really most accurate for the individual who has generated the secondary source. Even a secondary source as traditionally described (say a textbook) has to be treated as a primary source by the effective learner. Processing is required for understanding.
For anyone who processes an input, flaws may arise from lack of skill or motivation. Lack of useful existing knowledge may limit integration. Lack of motivation may limit the willingness to search for relevant existing knowledge, to add new knowledge to benefit understanding, or to test alternative interpretations.
I get tired of the strange description that those of us who were educated by reading books and listening to presentations had knowledge dumped into our heads. It seems possible that we accepted this as an input (attitude) and understood our job was to think about such inputs. Additional inputs may have been necessary and helpful when personal processing was not initially sufficient, but whether learning resulted from the initial or the secondary inputs, the personal processing was what ultimately determined whether we understood or not.
Today, I signed up for an Apple Education Apple Teacher training program. I cannot really comment at this point on the content of the program because there must be some type of process to approve my application. I tend not to trust business sponsored certification or recognition programs. I will try to reserve judgment – there is a difference between pushing the brand and providing support for those who need to learn how to use specific products.
I use multiple Apple devices daily, but the only Apple software/service I use is iTunes. At this point, I do not regard the Apple software/service as competitive or as having limited value because of the proprietary nature of the product. I use their hardware because I can afford it and the hardware has always proven reliable. I use this hardware to reach the Internet where I do nearly all my work or to launch applications I prefer and could run on other devices if needed.
I make a distinction between tools and tactics in writing about classroom applications of technology. I am participating in the Apple training program because tactics are cross-platform. No matter what your area of practice there is always the opportunity to collect some new ideas. The issue for me will be the cost|benefit ratio in gleaning these nuggets.
The badges? No one cares if I earn badges. Are there settings in which the badges might indicate something of value (aside from a possible personal sense of accomplishment)? Perhaps. I can imagine a setting in which a school has made a 1:1 commitment to iPads and has limited resources to offer professional development. Administrators might appreciate proof of understanding based on meeting badge requirements. Now, if the school’s 1:1 initiative involved chromebooks, would badges indicate a competency of value? Possibly. As I suggested, tactics tend to be cross-platform. I guess my opinion on this second possibility will have to be delayed until I have had the opportunity to participate and see what I think.
You must be logged in to post a comment.