Some visuals for light relief

Literacy fun sites. stbenedictscollege.co.uk
Image Retrieved from
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=707&q=literacy&oq=literacy&gs_l=img.3..0l10.2177.3290.0.4197.8.8.0.0.0.0.422.1752.2j1j3j1j1.8.0...0.0...1ac.1.12.img.1UBvFtL0P0g




 


Part 1: Literacy and the 9 Essential Skills. Image retrieved from
http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=5163855836867982725#editor/target=post;postID=3655364051292239079

Personal philosophy

  My online teaching philosophy is evolving and becoming a more refined articulation of what it means to be a literacy and numeracy teacher in the 21^st century.  I have up until now subscribed primarily to cognitive (mental processing from short to long-term memory) and behavioural (stimulus and response) theories of learning, and believe that the learner constructs his or her own learning from prior knowledge or experience and in a socio-cultural location. The emergence of techno-literacy is bringing a need for new approaches to effective online learning, and, among other theorists, Siemens (2004) proposes a connectivist theory whereby educators need combine existing learning theories with the digital age.    Key beliefs drive my teaching philosophy, online or face to face:

1. Knowing the learners’ learning needs, cultural background, and learning styles
2. Having strong subject knowledge
3. A knowledge of sound pedagogical principles
4. In my ESOL context, being able to combine pedagogical practices from students’ prior learning culture with New Zealand educational practices
5. See literacy as a primarily cognitive practice embedded in a socio-cultural milieu 
6. See education as fluid serving different purposes at different times and being both formal and informal
7. A core value of responsibility ensures I strive to ‘deliver on my promise’
8. A strong work ethic, variously commented on, is a further core value that drives my commitment to value the learners’ needs

Sound educational principles such as Chickering & Gamson (1987)  influential  Seven principles for guiding good educational practice for undergraduate students  and the familiar Bloom’s Taxonomy (Moore & Stanley, 2010) providing a paradigm of thinking levels from knowing facts to higher order abstractions I believe are essential understandings for a teacher, but that these need to be at the foundation of online teaching.  Kalat (2007; cited in Anderson, 2008, p. 22) believes that online course designers need to ensure that the appropriate cognitive framework is contained in the design. 

Much research points to the need for teachers to be aware of how to best utilize the new technologies.  Learning materials need to be designed to engage the learner and facilitate learning.  Online learning needs to have high validity, i.e. the content needs to be relevant to the learner’s purposes for it, and it needs to be interactive and collaborative (Ring and Mathieux, 2002; ibid p.16). 

Much of my educational practice is based on cognitive psychology (which is situated in a socio-cultural context) and I believe that instructors need to implement strategies that provide for learners to transfer new information to long-term storage.   In an online environment, this means attending to technical issues and ensuring that critical information is highlighted to ensure that the learners are constructing new memories to related knowledge (Stoyanova & Kommers; 2002; ibid).

For myself, I endeavour to utilize as many modes as possible to facilitate cognitive processing simply because as many pathways as possible to the brain facilitate learning (Da Sousa, 2005;  Anderson, 2005, p.28) and cognitive strategies, I personally believe, drive all other theories.  The learner processes information cognitively and this cognition is located in a social and cultural environment (Vygotsky) The learner then constructs a schema, or cognitive mental map, theorized Jean Piaget in the 1950s (Psychologists and their theories, 2005, p. 353).

The emergence of techno-literacy is bringing a need for new approaches to effective online learning, and, among other theorists, Siemens (2004) proposes a connectivist theory whereby educators need  to combine existing learning theories with the digital age.  Connectivism  (George Siemens, 2004) holds that behaviourism, cognitivism and constructivism are limiting in today’s digital age.  He believes that information flows from the individual, out to networks, to organizations and institutions and feeds back again. Critics of this theory argue that it is not a theory of learning as the networks the learner navigates may not be structured with any learning intent (Why connectivism is not a learning theory, 2011, n.a.) but that it is a theory of education.  Ally (2008; cited in Anderson, 2008, p. 37) proposes a four stage model for online education:  learner preparation, learner activities, learner interaction and learner transfer; these are all consistent with Gardener’s guiding principles.

Kanuka (2008) believes that we need to view the theories and technologies philosophically.  She notes that the pervasiveness of e-learning has brought tensions with it but that “philosophy inspires our activities and gives direction to our practices … we can articulate our own personal philosophy” (p.83).  She quotes Dahlberg (2003) who believes we have a tendency to align with one of three orientations, namely uses determinism, that sees technological artifacts for instrumental purposes;  technological determinism, which focuses on the forms and effects these artifacts have on society;  and social determinism which believes that societies and cultures influence these artifacts.  I would tend to subscribe mostly to a social determinism, because all learning is in a social practice and all cognition is social cognition and that “the brain is a social information processing organ” (Cacioppo & Berntson, editors, 2005).

The net generation concerns more with the activities, i.e. the uses, than the technology.  This view sees the technology as neutral, and a natural progression of logic is to take a retrograde view of all technology used for written symbols and see e-technology as one more evolving step (Lankshear, Snyder & Green, 2000).

Social determinism sees technology integrated into the education systems and believe that social forces shape the landscape of technological artefacts (Dahlberg, 2004; cited in Kanuka, 2008)   Connectivism is not inconsistent with this thought.

The liberal/perennial forms the basis of western education and is based in the Socratic tradition of rhetoric, question and evolving intellectual and moral value. This is woven into the fabric of our education system.

In conclusion, a personally articulated philosophy, a knowledge of sound pedagogy and androgogy, a familiarity with the tenets of behavioural, cognitive, and constructive theories in their socio-cultural practice needs to guide educators operating in a digital milieu;  the theory of connectivism appears to be one that is evolving and the effects on learners will require further observation in this rapidly evolving digital age.

References 

Ally, M. (2008) Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.) The theory and practice of online learning, 2^nd ed.           Edmonton: AU Press

Cacioppo, J.T. & Berntson, G.G. (2005) (Eds.). Social Neuroscience. New York and Hove: Psychology Press

Kanuka, H. (2008).  Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson (Ed.) The theory and practice of online learning, 2^nd ed. Edmonton: AU Press

Krapp, K. (Ed.) (2005). Psychologists and their theories for students, Vol. 2 L-Z.  MI: Thomson Gale  
                             
Lankshear, C., Snyder, I. & Green, B. (2000). Teachers and technoliteracy. Managing literacy, technology and learning in schools. NSW: Allen & Unwin

7 Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, University of South Carolina Center for Teaching Excellence. Retrieved 2013 April 28 from www.sc.edu/cte/guide/undergraduateducation/index.shtml

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, (2003). Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=26925&URL_DO=DO_TOPI...

Why connectivism is not a learning theory (n.a.). Retrieved from http://apointofcontact.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/why-connectivism-is-not-a-learning-theory/

Q: What is the most effective e-learning medium for the majority of students?

 Hutchinson, Tin & Cao (2011) point out that the net generation is not about technology, but rather about the activities the technology provides (Roberts, 2005; cited in Anderson, editor, 2011, p.203).  Technology simply supports the learning activity and can be one of the many available for a specific learning outcome, and that today’s learners have a ‘multi media literacy’ approach (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005; ibid, p.204). 

Hutchinson, Tin & Cao (2011) identify mobile learning as the emergent technology, connecting with a wide range of users with the universal ability to share and learn while breaking through barriers of age, gender, social class, locality, ability or disability (ibid, p.203).

They define mobile technologies as mobile phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), smartphones (integrated telephone, computing and communication devices) and portable media players such as MP3 players and iPods;  all of which have become interwoven into our social, work and learning environments.

They note that the net generation are technically able, like multi-tasking, and prefer autonomy of learning (Tapscott, 1998; ibid, p.203).  They are more comfortable with teamwork, in visual environments, crave interactivity and prefer activity to reflection.  The baby boomer generation, they observe, was educated in an industrial age model (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005; ibid).  Carlson (2005; ibid) observe that this demographic is impatient, creative, expect customizing and immediacy, self-focused and reliant on an array of portable of devices.

Fabio Sergio, a leader of innovative programs for international companies,notes in “10 Ways that mobile learning will revolutionize education” (n.d.) that m-learning, which he refers to as both mobile learning and me learning is the tool that is transforming education due to its ubiquitous use, weaving of informal and formal learning together and breaking down time barriers.

He sees m-learning as a means of complementing existing educational traditions and cites the model MIT and Harvard have combined to offer free online courses via edX, a non-profit organization.  He points out that m-learning can empower the young to teach both peers and adults and provide in the process a young person’s perspective. 

While researchers are citing the benefits of portability, flexibility, synchronous and asynchronous provision, others do point out certain drawbacks.  Riva & Villani, 2005: cited in Anderson, editor, 200   p.205) observe that the screen is small and therefore not suited to everyone’s eyesight, and storage capacity is low.

Clyde (2004; ibid, p.203) believes it is necessary to identify the forms of learning that m-learning is most suited for, the potential students who need it and the best strategies for delivering this mobile education.  Wagner and Wilson (2005; ibid, p.204) note that with all the benefits of its universal use, it will best advantage those who have digital communication skills.  The implication for teachers is to be aware of this when utilizing such a medium and to have an alternative mode of delivery.

The conclusions are that m-learning has the capacity to revolutionize education with its portability, affordability, near universal use, and ability to reach across boundaries of time and location, and across cultural and social classes.  It does have some physical limitations such as a small screen and small key pad.

The demographic most suited to its use may well be Generation Y, or the net generation, given their learning characteristics.  

It may be that m-learning could be the technology that will benefit a majority but this to be said with much caution, as technology is only a vehicle and is only one of many successive technologies and that “teachers need to adopt a more flexible and expansive view of literacy …” (Lankshear, et al. 2000, p. 26) and the more pertinent issues are the learner’s intent, the situated social practice, and the philosophy of the instructor.

References

Hutchison, M., Tin, T. & Cao, Y. (2008). “In-your-pocket” and “On-the-fly:” Meeting the needs of today’s new generation of online learners with mobile learning technology.  In T. Anderson, (2008).  The theory and practice of online learning, 2nd ed.  Edmonton:  AU Press

Lankshear, C., Snyder, I. & Green, B. (2000). Teachers and technoliteracy. Managing literacy, technology and learning in schools.  NSW: Allen & Unwin