Connectivism

Through the use of social networks, my learning is not limited to one location or one group of people. Due to social networks, my circle from where my knowledge is generated has expanded. I learn not only from my close circle of co-workers or friends, but also from people I have never met, but with whom I share a common professional interest. We exchange knowledge through listserv or through other social networks such as YouTube and blogs. The exchange of innovative thinking is made easier through social networks since new ideas can be easily debated and discussed without any particular limitations or boundaries such as time and location.
Their is no one particular tool which has facilitated learning more than any other as I find the web to be is a vast resource of information. There are several options as to where to find immediate answers or to look for information as to where the best answers are. The first is to post the question on one of the social networks where there is an interest of the same topic and usually an instantaneous response will be generated. Another option is to use Open University such as http://oyc.yale.edu/; I don’t have to be enrolled in a particular class to listen to a lecture if I have a particular interest on a topic and wish to expand my knowledge.

Educause Learning Initiative Annual Meeting 2008

Collaboration

Do you believe that humans have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group,” as Rheingold proposed in his discussion of the evolution of Wikipedia as a collectively developed encyclopedia? How can technology facilitate collaboration among learners based on constructivist principles?

I believe that as humans we have a basic instinct to “interact and work as a group.” There are many examples throughout history, especially in the development of technological tools. A recent example is the development of Google's new “Wave” tool. Developed by group of people at Google, it encompasses the instantaneous of an Instant message chat and an email and can work as a motivating collaborative tool. Most computer games and softwares have all been developed by a combined effort of a group utilizing individual skills. We even create study groups in college to facilitate learning.
In his speech on collaboration, Howard Rheingold emphasizes important points, his first presumed cliché statement is that we “succeed by destroying and dominating competition.” However, he continues saying that we also succeed through collaborative effort and when we all work in concert. For example, large corporations merge for the purpose to extend and produce better products, rather than working against each other because it is in their mutual self interest. Another good example introduced by Rheingold is the Open Source products, such as Linux, Mozilla, Apache, Wikipedia, and the free Open University lectures posted by Berkley University and Yale. These free available resources are popular because they are good products in view of the fact that each programmer contributes his knowledge continuously improving these products.
Technology plays an important factor in education and Web2.0, and especially accolade constructivist principles. With Web1.0, the information was only communicated through technology to the public, with Web 2.0 it has became a discourse through the use of social networks. Web2.0 encourages dialog with teachers and with peers, asks questions and nurture a learner’s curiosity. Through the use of technology, it is important to let students analyze, create, classify and accept a learner’s independence and initiative.

Reference:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Cognitivism as a Learning Theory

Bill Kerr questions learning theories on his Blog, and especially asks how can we choose from all of the learning theories? We should cherry-pick different useful ideas out of the various theories according to what and who we are educating. Theories do evolve and interlace; the behaviorist aspects can even be observed through games associated with cognitive and constructivist theories. A game’s intent depends on understanding the motivation verses the reaction behavior of the player. An example is a player’s decisions in the game which are proportional to the rewards gained. Games teach behavior by reinforcing positive rewards. George Siemens underlines this on his website: “Constructivism suggests that learners create knowledge as they attempt to understand their experiences (Driscoll, 2000, p. 376). Behaviorism and cognitivism view knowledge as external to the learner and the learning process as the act of internalizing knowledge.”
My goal is to enhance knowledge through understanding and interest rather than pure memorization. I would like my students to be able to learn how to construct knowledge independently and be able to place it in context. To achieve this goal, I evaluate the outcomes through assessing the learning progression of the students and by evaluating the students’ interest through their engagement in the class. Some projects are done individually and some are done as part of a collaborative effort to simulate the working environment outside of the classroom. I provide the guidance on how to use and assess the needed tools and take on the role of an adviser and guide for the students to achieve the optimum results. Since each student comes to the class with a varied knowledge base, through individualized and collaborative projects, they construct and enhance individual knowledge skills.
The information technology age and especially the advancement of mobile devices have changed the working environment. Neither the employee nor the students are confined to a particular location or time to work or study. Due to the ubiquitous and mobile nature of technology, work and school have become “anytime and everywhere.” With that, the expectations of the employee have changed. The employee is required to have cognitive skills, be problem solvers and able to work in a collaborative and dynamic communication driven environment. Therefore, Karl Kapp is correct to state on his blog: “We need to take pieces from each school of thought and apply it effectively.”

Reference:
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kapp, K. (2007, January 2). Out and About: Discussion on Educational Schools of Thought. Retrieved December 23, 2009, from : http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/out-and-about-discussion-on-educational.html

Kerr, B. (2007, January 1). Retrieved December 23, 2009, from : http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/01/isms-as-filter-not-blinker.html

Siemens, G. (2004, December 12). A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved December 23, 2009, from : http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Learning Theory and Educational Technology

Critique Siemens’s “metaphors of educators.” Which of these metaphors best describes the role you believe an instructor should take in a digital classroom or workplace? Is there a better metaphor to reflect your view of the role of instructors?

As I read Siemens (2008) “metaphors of educators,” the metaphor that especially grabbed my attention was “educator as curator” and “educator concierge,” by Curtis Bong. The reason is because although the information on the web is available online, it is fragmented, unlike a textbook where the information is collected in an organized manner. In online education, an instructor can bring together resources for the student in order to have an effective learning and teaching environment. The resources can be posted in a class “library” as a suggestion. It is the instructor’s responsibility to be present as an expert or a “curator” who presents a “map” by providing clear instructions and enhancing the education of the student by navigating the student to new resources or learning devises that the student might not be aware of (p.16). In order to do so, an effective instructor has to create opportunities for the learner to express his standpoint in a more engaging form, thereby allowing him to reflect on the reading and to emphasize his point-of-view. I compare Siemens’ (2008) metaphor to my own instructions in the classroom. At the end of the eBusiness Technology class, students have to create a fictitious eBusiness. Throughout the semester, I provide them with tools in-class and online, but the students are the ones who generate new ideas and approaches and thus build upon acquired knowledge. When a student is an active participant, I believe there is also a better understanding of a subject.


References
Siemens, G. (2008, January 27). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers. Retrieved December 7, 2009, from Presented to ITFORUM for Discussion: http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper105/Siemens.pdf

Cyber-Language in Education

Final Video Project Posted on YouTube


Annotated Bibliography
Baron, N. (2005). Instant Messaging and the Future of Language. Communications of the ACM, 48(7), 29-31. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
In collaboration with her students, Baron (2005) conducted exploratory research at the American University in Washington D.C on the use of Instant Messages (IM) by students which spans over three years. The purpose of the research is to explore the question whether computer-mediated-communication (CMC) degrades the language. Baron states that viewing CMC as either good or bad is twofold. Online communication reflects on gender, age, educational level, cultural background, personality and experience with CMC platforms or the purpose of use. Furthermore, Baron writes that adolescents have long been a source of linguistic and behavioral novelty. They often use language to express group identity. However, Baron’s research concludes that the use of IMs is unlike to play a role in altering writing standards unless parents and educators allow it to happen.

Derk, D., Bos, A., & von Grumbkow, J. (2008). Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication: Social Motives and Social Context. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(1), 99-101. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9926.
The study examined the social motives for emoticon use and other aspects that might influence emoticon use in computer-mediated-communication (CMC). The participants were subscribers of Psychology Magazine Web site in the Netherlands. This group consisted of 789 women and 136 men for a total 925 participants who filled out the questions handling the background variables. The questionnaire focused on motives for emoticon use. The emoticons used were big smile, smile, sad, wink, confused, and cry. Through statistical analyses, the study demonstrates that people use more emoticons in communicating with friends than in communicating with strangers. Furthermore, more emoticons are used in positive contexts than in negative contexts. Emoticons are mostly used for the expression of emotion, for strengthening the verbal part of a message, and for expressing humor. These purposes correlate with the functions of nonverbal emotional expression in face-to-face communication. The study only concentrated on the senders’ perspective and not the receiver.

Fox, A., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, Distractions: Does Instant Messaging Affect College Students' Performance on a Concurrent Reading Comprehension Task? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(1), 51-53. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0107.
The research purpose is to investigate whether the use of Instant Messages (IM) affects cognition in student’s performances when used simultaneously while studying. The study sprouts from other qualitative studies which investigated the effects of media on cognition during study and work time. Sixty-nine undergraduate students participated for course credit in an introductory psychology course using AOL Instant Messenger (AIM). Researchers tested their reading comprehension in order to test recognition memory and a survey of computer and web use and attitudes were also evaluated. Overall, the authors concluded that their results were inconsistent with prior research indicating: “that interaction negatively affects task performance;” however IM usage did affect negatively performances on reading comprehension.

Lee, C. (2007). Affordances and Text-Making Practices in Online Instant Messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223-249. doi:10.1177/0741088307303215.
The purpose of the qualitative study conducted by Lee (2007) is to examine the factors that influence “text-making practices” in IM within a social theory of literacy. In addition, the study seeks to understand the changing nature of practices through analyzing IM texts and people’s perceptions associated with these texts. The data was collected over a 2-year period and is based on a study that examines the everyday uses of IM by conducting qualitative and semi-structured interviews, including observations, logbook keeping, face-to-face and online interviews. The sample group consisted of 19 participants, all located in Hong Kong, who shared similar linguistic backgrounds and were aged 20-28 years. Lee’s (2007) study concluded that the participants’ familiarity with their linguistic resources and typing speed justified their choice of language use in IM (English or Cantonese). Moreover, Lee (2007) states that environmental factors impact people’s decision what to do and how to act within an IM.

Lo, S. (2008). The Nonverbal Communication Functions of Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(5), 595-597. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0132.
Lo’s (2008) research examined the use of emoticons as a communication tool in computer-mediated communication (CMC) where nonverbal cues are lacking. The purpose of the study was to verify whether emoticons possess nonverbal cue functions based on the definitions of nonverbal communication (emotion, attitude, and attention). The methodology used simulated three scenarios and evaluated 137 instant message service (IMS) users who were randomly assigned into one of three scenarios. The experiment adopted a widely uses IMS software as a background. Lo’s (2008) research concludes that without emoticons, most people cannot recognize correct emotions, attitude, or intent as they are lacking the visual cues in CMC. These results prove that emoticons perform nonverbal communication functions.

Maness, J. (2008). A Linguistic Analysis of Chat Reference Conversations with 18-24 Year-Old College Students. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 31-38. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Maness’ (2008) research analyzed and compared Instant Messaging (IM) conversations held among students and among students talking to librarians using IM. The data was collected from two sources. The first source relied on the research done by Baron in 2004 that reported the findings of a study of 23 undergraduate students’ IM conversations at American University. The second source was chat reference conversations provided by AskColorado, a state-wide multi-type library collaborative service administered through the Colorado State Library using a survey and by a study. It analyzed 31 chat reference conversations by tabulating the number of words written by patron and librarians. Maness (2008) concluded that the chat reference conversation is more formal than the student-to student IM conversation. It appears that the librarians were writing, but the patrons were “speaking.” However, Maness (2008) concludes that the use of emoticons, abbreviations, acronyms, and other nonverbal compensations was infrequent when used with librarians and that student’s linguistic style changes according to the social setting.

References
Baron, N. (2005). Instant Messaging and the Future of Language. Communications of the ACM, 48(7), 29-31.

Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge U P.

Derk, D., Bos, A., & von Grumbkow, J. (2008). Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication: Social Motives and Social Context. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(1), 99-101. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9926.

Fox, A., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, Distractions: Does Instant Messaging Affect College Students' Performance on a Concurrent Reading Comprehension Task?. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(1), 51-53. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0107.

Lee, C. (2007). Affordances and Text-Making Practices in Online Instant Messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223-249. doi:10.1177/0741088307303215.

Lo, S. (2008). The Nonverbal Communication Functions of Emoticons in Computer-Mediated Communication. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(5), 595-597. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0132.

Maness, J. (2008). A Linguistic Analysis of Chat Reference Conversations with 18-24 Year-Old College Students. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 31-38. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Mind Map: Static versus Dynamic Technologies

Moving Toward Dynamic Technologies

In the article, McGreal and Elliott (2008) examine some of the latest multimedia technologies used in online classes. The article also offers suggestions for the use of the multimedia in an instructional setting. Moller (2008) states that dynamic tools: “involve learner on a much deeper level” (pp.1). Moller (2008) uses an interesting analogy when he compares the integration of technology to crafting a new recipe (pp.2). The instructor should use his experience with technology to wisely choose technology with which he is familiar and according to the skills of his students. Although, Fahy (2008) states: “technological trends tend to translate rapidly from culture to the (virtual classroom),” pedagogues have to be selective with regards to which multimedia tools they integrate into the classroom (pp.168).

Moller (2008) writes: “technology can be conceptualized along a continuum of static to dynamic” (pp.1). Furthermore, not all technologies create an active learner; web pages, podcasts, eBooks, Google scholar may contribute to learner’s knowledge, but they are static tools. Learning will be generated as expected in a traditional environment, where the learner is a passive receiver of information. Moller (2008) states that static technologies allow learner “to capture information,” and the reason they are popular is because they “mimic traditional environment” (pp.1), a zone of comfort for many educators.

As I read McGreal and Elliott’s (2008) article, I was mentally marking multimedia tools that I can use in my web design and eBusiness classes. Since I prepare my students to be integrated into the 21st century work force, there is a need for students to learn to communicate and work in concert. Dynamic tools involve learning on a “deeper cognitive level” (Moller, 2008, pp.1) by preparing students to be able to construct knowledge not provided by the instructor.

Reference:

Fahy, H. (2008). Characteristics of Interactive Online Learning Media. The theory and practice of online learning (T. Anderson, Ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

McGreal, R. & Elliott , M.,(2008). Technologies of Online Learning (E-Learning). The theory and practice of online learning (T. Anderson, Ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].