As for my own learning process, there were characteristics that I had observed but had never articulated. A good example is elaboration, which Dr. Ormrod discussed during Week 6 (Laureate Education, 2009, Learning Styles and Strategies). I have recognized that doing something with a fact, rather than merely attempting to fix it in my memory, helps me a great deal in assimilating it. I also learned the terms “metacognition” (Laureate Education, 2009, Information Processing and the Brain) and “comprehension monitoring,” which appeared to me a subset of metacognition. I have long done these things (and often chided myself for wasting time by allowing my attention to wander while reading), though it never occurred to me that there were terms for them.

Regarding learning theories and styles, educational technology, and motivation, how does one summarize in a few sentences? One of our early articles discussed behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism; and one of the particular points I recall was that there is no “best” learning theory: which one, or ones, to use in designing learning materials will depend on one’s objectives and the level of the learner (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). I certainly did not agree with the validity of all aspects of the various perspectives; however, at least I became aware that there are theorists who do hold them and perhaps gained some insight into what they do and do not believe. (Radical social constructivist: “Yes, yes, the earth and the stars and planets exist; but their existence has no intrinsic meaning… apart from the meaning people impose on them. Therefore, true knowledge of them … does not exist.”) (Kim, 2001).

In our final week, we learned about motivational design and, specifically, the ARCS model of addressing the challenge of maintaining learner motivation in self-directed environments, and we considered some practical ways of revitalizing interest in an online class, in which participant enthusiasm showed signs of wilting.

Given my fascination with the uses of the Internet in learning, I particularly enjoyed The Horizon Report (2009), from Week 7 and the discussion of technologies projected to gain popularity over the next few years. I have actually noticed that I tend to be more excited about a new process by which information can be gathered and connected than about the information itself.

How will what I have learned help me as I explore a career in instructional design? For one thing, I believe I have learned that there is no one “right” approach. The latest technology may be cool, but it is never an end in itself. The latest learning theory may be interesting, but it may not be appropriate for the current situation. The objective is to design instructional material that will engage and challenge the learner, so that, as far as possible, the mind will embrace the process of absorbing new knowledge, so that learning will be not a burden but a delight.

Reference list

Ertmer, P. A. & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-71.

Gilbert, J. & Swanier, C. (2008). Learning styles: How do they fluctuate? Institute for Learning Styles Journal [Vol I]. Retrieved from http://www.auburn.edu/~witteje/ilsrj/Journal%20Volumes/Fall%202008%20Volume%201%20PDFs/Learning%20Styles%20How%20do%20They%20Fluctuate.pdf

Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Social_Constructivism

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Information Processing and the Brain [Motion Picture]. Dr. Jeanne Ormrod.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Learning Styles and Strategies [Motion Picture]. Dr. Jeanne Ormrod.

Dr. Ormrod also noted that verbatim memorization is among the least effective ways to learn. I agree, yet I have invested a lot of time in personal memorization projects involving pages of text. Much of this is, unfortunately but necessarily, rote memorization; however, I also employ certain techniques to allow me to associate content in a way that happens to mean something to me. These are generally highly subjective and can be entirely fortuitous as well.

I also have long been aware that I learn better by example than by mere explanation. However, whereas I have tended to regard this as something of a handicap or limitation, I was pleased to read of a case study (Gilbert & Swanier, 2008, 34-36) in which it was found that, in a particular technical subject, most students did learn more effectively if an example of what they were being taught preceded an explanation of it.

As valuable as an example is, I need a hands-on connection: I need to be able to experiment with what the thing to be learned–to see for myself that, for instance, some programming technique will work if done in this way but not in that way. This seems suggestive of “Experiential Learning,” as described in the resources in Week 5 (Conlan, Grabowski, & Smith, 2003)

As for the role of technology, the question makes me smile, given my high dependence on the Internet as an information resource–to say nothing of my graduate studies. I use Google routinely, of course; however, there are many specific sources to which I go to learn about particular subjects. Through the Walden University library, I have access to a subset of the O’Reilly technical books; and I have used these to gather information on various programming technologies (e.g., Ruby on Rails, ASP.NET, C#).

If I decide to take an interest in a certain topic, I will search for what appear to me reliable sources of information and bookmark the links. I have been using delicious.com; however, I recently discovered that Google Reader provides the ability to note certain particular portions of text. Even more recently, I read about diigo.com, which allows the user to actually highlight content on the page itself and even add sticky notes.

Of course, many topics are discussed in blogs or other types of pages that provide RSS feeds; and I have taken to using Google Reader to organize these and give me a quick overview of new discussions. I can then read or ignore, as I choose and entertain some idea that I am keeping up with matters that interest me.

Unsurprisingly, the one learning theory that resonated best with me was probably connectivism–even though its status as an actual theory has been questioned (Davis, Edmunds, Kelly-Bateman). This is natural for one who enjoys technology and is fascinated by means of gathering content together and being able to quickly hone in on what seems relevant. Moreover, as an adult learner, I value self-directedness and the ability to skip over content with which I am already familiar–or to follow up on anything that might have incidental interest for me: in other words, to not be fenced in by a one-size-fits-all, linear approach.

Reference list

Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., & Smith, K. (2003). Adult learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning

Gilbert, J., & Swanier, C. (2008). Learning styles: How do they fluctuate? Institute for Learning Styles Journal [Vol. l]. Retrieved from http://www.auburn.edu/~witteje/ilsrj/Journal%20Volumes/Fall%202008%20Volume%201%20PDFs/Learning%20Styles%20How%20do%20They%20Fluctuate.pdf

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Learning Styles and Strategies [Motion picture]. Dr. Jeanne Ormrod.

When I was a child, I would learn through books corresponding to my personal interests–whether dictionaries or books available at home or from a library. Later, I would purchase books that had content I thought I might be interested in learning.

Some years ago, the Internet became available to me, opening up its dazzling array of resources. As a result, the conventional, brick-and-mortar library long ago became obsolete for my purposes: there really is not any information I would typically have been interested in that I cannot find online.

Which digital tools best facilitate learning for you?

This is difficult to say; however, I would probably identify the online O’Reilly books I can access through Walden University library system. These have been indispensable to me in learning ASP.NET and C#. I also find forums helpful, as I can pose questions and usually get answers. I have used forums for advice on automobile purchase and care, nutrition and fitness, and Latin and French.

For certain subjects, I use a search engine to look for articles and compare the information I find. The social bookmarking site delicious.com is helpful here, as it allows me to keep track of sites I’ve found and categorize them. Google Reader is also helpful, as it allows me to highlight salient portions of text and add my own notes, as well as simply store a reference to the page.

How do you gain new knowledge when you have questions?

This depends on the nature of the question. If I want to know how to say something in another language, I consider forums trustworthy: with multiple participants, it is unlikely that incorrect information will go unchallenged. In some cases, I will even consider a translation algorithm (such as those available through google.com) reasonable.

If I want to know something about math, I can simply do a search and trust that any of the results is likely to be reliable. At the same time, there is one particular site I favor, due to its breadth of content and its clean, professional look and feel. (This is mathworld.wolfram.com.)

Some subjects that interest me require a little more research. Recently, I thought it would be worthwhile to inform myself about the basics of Big Bang theory, so I started reading books, collecting Web pages, and making notes. On such a subject, there are differing perspectives, as well as strong disagreements; so part of the challenge is sorting what information belongs with what point of view.

Other subjects are difficult because of the highly tendentious nature of much of the available content. One’s options seem to be to become an independent expert or to choose sources one will regard as trustworthy; and I have typically opted for the latter. It’s natural, after all, to gravitate toward authorities that one finds congenial to one’s worldview.

In what ways does your personal learning network support or refute the central tenets of connectivism?

Although I’d actually like to be able to use my experience to challenge connectivism, it appears to me that it does tend more to support it.

Based on the Davis, Edmunds, & Kelly-Bateman article, I find most of the “Principles of Connectivism” lining up with my approach to learning. For example:

Learning and knowledge rest in diversity of opinions: I would actually prefer the word “perspectives”; and yes: I do like to compare perspectives–and not necessarily to see if two sources disagree but even just to see how they will complement one another.

Capacity to know is more critical than what is currently known. Yes: having a fishing rod and a place to use it is more important than having a bucket with fish in it.

Nurturing and maintaining connections: Of course–and especially in a rapidly evolving field such as online technology.

Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts: Yes. This is what allows one to recognize a single mountain, as viewed from several different angles, rather than thinking one has seen several different and unrelated mountains.

Accurate, up-to-date knowledge. Again, of course: on many subjects, article dates are important, because if information is a few years old, it could easily be obsolete.

Enlarged view

In case it isn’t obvious, this week’s assignment represents my first foray into the world of mind mapping.  In fact, I do not recall having so much as heard of the concept previously.

One thing that’s immediately obvious is the huge preponderance of technology and the printed word vs. live human interaction.  Of course, I do hang out with people from time to time; however, generally the purpose is more recreational than instructive.

It appears to me that I didn’t represent my network as efficiently as I might have:  there are similar elements within both books and Internet that surely could have been combined in some way.

What is the acquisition of “internal mental structures”?  Is that simply learning how to think in a certain way?  Is it talking about metacognition–learning to be aware of one’s thought processes?  This would make sense, as these things were discussed in the course text chapter on Cognitivism.  However, it’s also possible that I’ve misunderstood.

And then, what about “discrete changes in states of knowledge”?  What, exactly, is a “state of knowledge,” anyway?  Is it indicated by whether one knows a thing thoroughly, hazily, or not at all?  Does it suggest one’s level of certainty about a particular fact?  This is another of those phrases one feels as though one ought to understand but nevertheless couldn’t rephrase with confidence.

Anyone who can enlighten me is encouraged to comment on this.

I have previously taken some issue with what the course text refers to as Radical Social Constructivism, according to which “objects in the natural world are not part of an external preexisting reality…  Therefore, atoms, molecules, and quarks are entirely human constructions.  They are social artifacts that are products of social forces, interests, and historical characteristics of the local context (Bloor, 1976; Woolgar, 1988)” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009).  I think most people would agree to the absurdity of imagining that physical phenomena are merely human constructions.  Moreover, science is not about deciding how the world shall work but discovering the natural laws by which it does, in fact, operate.  If concerted efforts were made to inculcate the belief that the sun revolved around the earth, and everyone came to accept this as fact, the solar system would not then change to reflect this belief.

More recently, I have begun to read about Connectivism, which seems to have to do with making connections between perhaps seemingly unrelated events and using these as a basis for gathering knowledge.

According to one article, “one of connectivism’s defining principles states that what we consider to be right today may tomorrow be considered wrong (Siemens, 2005)” (David, Edmunds, & Kelly-Bateman, 2008).  In some areas, this is certainly true:  it used to be the case that, in Web development, one used HTML tables to position elements on a Web page; this approach, however, has been obsolete for some time.  In another area, the recent “Climategate” revelations have called into question the validity of the evidence of anthropogenic global warming.

At the same time, surely there are fundamental areas of knowledge that may be considered quite solid:  for instance, people who regularly travel long distances take it for granted that the laws of aerodynamics are not going to be proven wrong tomorrow, with the result that airplanes will start dropping out of the sky.  Likewise, we do not entertain the apprehension that the basic foods we routinely consume will tomorrow turn out to be rapidly and deadly poison.

Still learning, evaluating, questioning as I go.

As the program I’m pursuing specializes in online learning, the title of this online journal naturally captured my attention.

One of the articles I thought looked interesting was titled “Two Approaches to Podcasting Use in the Classroom.” In one case, the teacher used podcasts to supplement her teaching materials—evidently much in the same way as the Walden University courses use video presentations. In the other case, podcasting was part of student assignments: they were to conduct interviews as part of their research and present their results on the Web.

Both teachers considered the use of podcasting to be beneficial, even though, for the teacher in the second case there were logistical complications (e.g., the need to train students before they could effectively use the technology, and the delay in the availability of equipment).

Resource: Thinking & Reasoning (through Academic Search Premier – Publications)

ISSN: 1354-6783
Publisher: Psychology Press (UK)

The publication is described as “an international journal dedicated to the understanding of human thought processes, with particular emphasis on studies on reasoning… Topics published in the journal include studies of deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, problem solving, decision making, probability judgment, conceptual thinking and the influence of language and culture on thought.”

One article that caught my eye was “The Psychological Puzzle of Sudoku” (Nov 2008). Though not yet available online, the abstract indicates that the article presents a theory of how people solve sudoku puzzles, including an examination of tactics and deductive strategies. It notes that “a major strategic shift is necessary to acquire tactics for more difficult puzzles,” suggesting that the puzzle solver will have to examine his or her approach and consider how to modify it in order to tackle puzzles at an advanced level.

I did initially take some issue with the constructivist approach and its apparent de-emphasis of the external world. While one would agree that everything we know about the world has come to us through the filter of our minds, I suppose I was somewhat put off by the suggestions of subjectivity and imprecision. According to the article, cognitivists “contend that what we know of the world stems from our own interpretations of our experiences” and believe that “since there are many possible meanings to glean from any experience, we cannot achieve a predetermined ‘correct’ meaning” (Ertmer & Newby, 1993, p. 62-63).

This is true; however, the world is not therefore entirely subjective: if several people witness an automobile accident, no one questions that there are certain steps that need to be taken, that there may be injuries, etc.

The article also noted that, from a constructivist perspective, just as a person’s current understanding of a word continually evolves, likewise concepts “continually evolve with each new use” (Ertmer & Newby, 1993, p. 63).

I agree with this, and I would think of it as a refining process. One’s understanding of a word, once the standard meaning has been learned, is not likely to undergo radical change. In the same way, a concept may be honed but will likely retain the basic principles. As an analogy, one can approximate the value of phi by taking the ratio of an element in the Fibonacci series to the previous element. So 5/3 is 1.67, 8/5 is 1.6, 13/8 is 1.625, etc. The standard approximation is 1.618, and this is reached at about the 13th element of the Fibonacci series. Progressing further through the series does indeed produce closer approximations of phi; however, these never alter the basic approximation of 1.618.

I read with a modicum of incredulity the perspective of Radical Social Constructivism: in particular, “objects in the natural world are not part of an external preexisting reality… Therefore, atoms, molecules, and quarks are entirely human constructions.” (Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M., 2009, p. 16). I was gratified to find in the Criticisms section that scholars have noted various problems with this, including that basic scientific principles may have been radically altered in a different society.

Reference list

Ertmer, P. A. & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4).

1. The Rapid E-Learning Blog

This site is hosted by a blogger who identifies himself as Tom.  On the About page, he indicates that he has a Master’s degree from Pepperdine in Education Technology and over 15 years in the training industry, and he expresses a passion for learning and technology.

The blog archives include articles on such subjects as the creation of screencasts, practical ideas for using Twitter in e-learning, tips for recording high-quality audio, and many others.

The blog offers a free 46-page ebook titled The Insider’s Guide To Becoming a Rapid E-Learning Pro.

This blog promises to be a good resource:  the writing appears generally free of compositional errors; the posts are recent; the subject matter is timely; and the blog is visually attractive, making abundant use of high quality illustrations and clip art.

2. the eLearning coach – Tips, ideas, and reviews for online learning.

The “coach” here is Connie Malamed, who has a graduate degree in Instructional Design and Technology.  Connie has been developing training products for 20 years and has a consulting business that produces online courses, Web sites, and graphic designs.

The site content is divided into categories for design, the use of Web 2.0 technology in eLearning, cognition concepts, preparation and presentation of visual and audial media, applying eLearning to business, and product reviews.

In clicking through the various categories, I see a number of articles that interest me, including such titles as “Are Your Online Tests Valid?”, “Podcasts for Learning”, “Audio Recording: Preparing Your Script”, etc.  The articles appear rather short (less than 600 words) but may provide enough information to prompt further study.

3. electronic papyrus – OSU EESC Faculty Blogging about Instructional Communications

This blog evidently has a few authors, though my impression is that one Chris Labelle is the primary.  The stated purpose is to present examples of the use of technology—especially new media—for instructional purposes, with recent focus on Web-based eLearning and multimedia.

I found this blog through a search on instructional design and the iPhone, and I was immediately attracted to the vibrant graphics and the prospect of being exposed to new (for me) and cool applications for these compact devices.  (I tend to think of mine as an electronic Swiss Army Knife.)

One feature that stands out for me on this site is the incorporation of the author’s delicious.com bookmarks.  I have no doubt this is easily done by means of existing plugins, and it’s simply another way to share interesting information.

There is a common theme in these three sites, as well as in others to which I have gravitated; and that is the concept of eLearning.  I appear to be as fascinated by Internet-related technology now as I was perhaps 15 years ago, when a friend introduced me to the novel concept of email.  With regard to instructional design, the draw for me was the idea of using the Internet to present educational materials.  This appears to be a burgeoning field, with an increasing richness of multimedia experience and numerous channels through which the desired information can be gathered and filtered.  My excitement is only growing.