למידה, אינטרנט ... ומה שביניהם

תוויות: הרהורים

אם אתה מורה בתיכון ואתה נותן מטלת כתיבה, תלך הביתה עם 150 מאמרים ותצטרך עזרה.

הוא יכול לנתח מאמר בתוך שניות ולזהות שגיאות איות, דקדוק, ארגון ותכונות אחרות כמו גם לעודד את התלמידים לבצע תיקונים. התוכנה סורקת מילות מפתח ומנתחת דוגמאות סמנטיות, ופירסון מתפארים בכך שהיא "יכולה 'להבין' את המשמעות של טקסט בדיוק כמו קורא אנושי".

ג'ן אמר שהוא חושש שתלמידים יוותרו על הניסיון ליצור מטאפורה יפיפיה או אנלוגיה מלאת מחשבה עליה לא חשבו מעולם אם הם ידעו שהמאמרים שלהם לא נקראים, אלא נסרקים במשך שניה על ידי תוכנת מחשב. "אני רוצה לדעת שאני כותב לקורא אמיתי, בשר ודם, שמתרגש לשמוע את המילים שעל הדף", אמר ג'ן, "ואני בטוח שכך מרגישים גם ילדים".

And oh, the labor. Grading essays – whether in comp or in other writing-heavy classes – is incredibly time-consuming. That makes the move to robot graders one of efficiency, time- and cost-savings. Grading essays is also incredibly grueling intellectually, I’d argue, as giving meaningful feedback on student writing (and by extension on student thinking) is hard work.

College-level writing requires critical reading. It requires critical thinking. It requires tackling a “question at issue” for the community you’re a part of – whether that’s the class or the university at large. It requires thinking about assumptions – of the writer and the reader. It requires taking the reader carefully through the logic of the argument, building connections throughout the essay so that a writer’s claims are supported by reasoning throughout. It means revising. It means rethinking. It means rewriting. It is a process, not a product.

We were tired of getting these e-mails from these conference people, so we thought it would be fun to write software that generates meaningless research papers and submit them.

תוויות: כתיבה, סתם מעניין

Learning involved every subject and students were more self motivated to do quality work because the work was more creative and was usually published online for all to see ... so it better be good. (And note that direct instruction was not and never will be abandoned, just more opportunities for students to build knowledge, use and share what they know and learn in creative ways).

Their excitement, focus and requests to work extra outside of school on their research reminded me what we had been onto previously. We didn’t have this new pedagogy down to perfection, but we were well on our way, and with some support we would be even closer to being there now (not that you would ever get to perfection mind you).

The almost total lack of autonomy because of a daily schedule designed by my administration that only includes reading, writing and math ... and most taught with prescribed programs or specific direct instruction pieces that MUST be included literally leave no time.

So together, that's three and a half hours. Add in one hour for lunch, and forty minutes for art, music, or physical education, and I am left with one hour a day for all the fun stuff. It used to be the whole day was fun. Now it's not.

And I am determined not to let the government, administrative initiatives, and test scores to let me veer from that goal.

תוויות: הוראה, למידה, מורים

The world has changed; the expectations in the workforce have changed.

In the six months since its technology infusion, EKA has become a model of what the classrooms of the 21st century might look like.

It’s like second nature for the students,” she said. “They’re open to trying this and they’re used to this multimedia access."

Technology is used to enhance the learning. … A (printed) textbook gives one person’s view (of a subject). When students use multiple sources, they get a global view.

With iPads, they’re engaged and using them in a learning capacity. Students aren’t confined to doing a report or making a poster; they can create movies, songs and presentations.

The world has changed; the expectations in the workforce have changed.... You can’t even work at a McDonald's without using a touch screen.... If we don’t change how we teach, it’s a disservice to our kids.

"It’s like second nature for the students," she said. "They’re open to trying this and they’re used to this multimedia access."

Students use the iPads to access educational websites and applications as well as electronic textbooks. They use the iPad to take notes and the tablet’s camera to photograph whiteboards filled with teacher’s lessons and chemistry formulas. Some even record lectures using the iPad’s digital voice recorder or video camera, referring to them when they review for tests.

Learning = better test scores. And so it goes...

has used its academic flexibility to institute a project-based learning method, where students create projects — presentations, plays, dances and dioramas — to demonstrate their knowledge.

But I also know that if we keep allowing stories like these to set the bar for change, we’re shortchanging our kids. It’s yet another example of conflating teaching and learning, of not fully understanding the shift to self-directed, personal learning that technology and the Web support. Transformation in this sense means shifting the balance of power to the learner. And I know that starts way before we put a piece of technology in a kid’s hands.

תוויות: שימוש בבתי ספר

So while the OLPC project might have been a good idea, so the story goes, it is not a good investment.

We aim to provide each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop. To this end, we have designed hardware, content and software for collaborative, joyful, and self-empowered learning. With access to this type of tool, children are engaged in their own education, and learn, share, and create together. They become connected to each other, to the world and to a brighter future.

No mention of improving standardized test scores in there, you'll notice. No talk of "student achievement." "The best preparation for children," according to the OLPC website isn't test prep. It is "to develop the passion for learning and the ability to learn how to learn."

In an effort to be "non-invasive" then, OLPC ends up often being unsupportive -- unsupportive of the tech, the teachers and the learners.

But is that failure? It doesn't feel like pointing to standardized test scores in math and language is the right measure at all to gauge this. It goes against the core of the OLPC mission.

תוויות: ניידים, OLPC

לפטופ לכל ילד? לא בטוח שזה עוזר

על טענות אלו משיב ניקולס נגרופונטה, הוגה המיזם, שהוא ממליץ להחליף את המילה מחשב נייד במילה חינוך ולזכור שהמיזם שינה את הדרך שבה אנשים מבינים ילדים ותופסים למידה. במקומות מסוימים ילדים מלמדים את הוריהם כיצד לעבוד עם המחשבים.

Almost 1 million laptops later, the program is now the largest XO deployment in the world and one of the most faithful to OLPC's technology-centric Constructionist principals.

Teacher training was downplayed, with the belief that exposure to XO laptops alone would create a learning environment where children were excited and inspired to learn learning. Rather than developing relevant digital content, the focus was on how to use existing "Activities" (software applications) on the XO laptop to teach different subjects.

This was a radical change from existing ICT4E best practices, which tend to focus on teacher professional development and locally relevant content as equal or greater in importance than hardware, and invited close evaluation.

However, to improve learning in Math and Language, there is a need for high-quality instruction. From previous studies, this does not seem the norm in public schools in Peru, where much rote learning takes place.

More generally (and interestingly), however, I hear two common responses to the findings detailed in the IDB report about the lack of compelling impact evidence directed at the authors: What are you testing for -- is it really what's important? And: Are you testing for this in the right way?

עד מתי ימשיכו מובילים והוגי דיעות לצפות מהטכנולוגיה שתפתור את כל בעיות בית הספר? האם לא התבגרנו ולא למדנו מאום מהעבר?

if you are already going down the wrong road, technology will only help get you there faster

To benchmark the magnitude of the impact uncovered, we construct an estimate of the expected monthly gains in each cognitive test. We generate this estimate by computing the mean difference in the raw score between students in the sixth and second grades of the control group and dividing it by 48 months. We then express the impacts in terms of expected monthly gains by dividing the estimated effect by the estimated monthly gain.

תוויות: ניידים, OLPC