Explore
Teaching and Learning in an online environment in Junior Primary Schooling.
Explore ways to lead students and teachers to the use of higher order thinking
skills, through innovative learning management (teaching) and quality
questioning research models. Discuss constructivism and differences in teaching
and learning styles and preferences, and how these can be supported through
technology.
The students in our care, no matter how young, are
going to encounter information and communication technologies (ICT), and the
influence of the Internet, daily. It is therefore our responsibility to
maintain our understanding and research about their learning needs in this new
online world. As teachers who are encouraging students and staff to use
technology effectively in their school programs, we have a responsibility to
support all members of the school community in their acquisition of
technoliteracy and critical literacy. With explicit teaching in ICT, including
online experiences, our students and staff will be better able to make informed
judgments about the information overload they are bound to encounter online.
The term ‘learning manager’ was suggested instead of
‘teacher’ by Lindy McKeown in her keynote speech at the CEGSA conference, 2000. It recognizes
that the role of the teacher has become broader than facilitator and the
required skills may well reflect those of managers in charge of the learning
environment.
From our search for suitable and relevant materials
for teaching in an online environment with Junior Primary (Elementary)
students, we have found that there is very little constructive online material
available for these students. Internet designers in this area are creating
websites that are too complex, busy or devalue our JP students with the belief
that young children only need to play. Although we accept and support the
ideals of play in all areas of the learning environment, teachers can guide
even very young students towards enhanced questioning and higher order
thinking, through effective learning management with embedded technology. This
learning management can only be effective if teachers are provided with ongoing
opportunities and support for their own learning.
The Junior Primary Environment
A Junior Primary learning environment distinguishes
itself from other levels of schooling by providing for a diversity of active
and passive learning experiences. Hands-on experiences are more vital for
learning and thinking at this level. JP students enter school with a broad
range of previous experiences in learning and with technology. As teachers we
have as one goal, a desire to develop technoliteracy in our students, which
encourages a love of learning with and through technology. In a review of Managing
literacy, technology and learning in schools authored by Lankshear et al,
Glen Seidel writes
“Technoliteracy education at it’s simplest level
involves students using new communication and information technologies to
develop the same old skills of researching, analyzing, decoding, and encoding
information effectively.”
Development of such literacy should, like other
literacies, be embedded into programs that already exist and are currently
successful. The core content of curriculum does not need to change as much as
the delivery of curriculum material and the management of the learning
environment.
Although a great deal of political emphasis has been
placed on the improvement of student to computer ratio numbers, how the current
resources are being utilized for JP students is of far greater significance.
Each school or learning environment has differing facilities but this should
not affect the processes or beliefs that underpin learning in information and
communication technology.
Unless teachers are encouraged to develop their own
technoliteracy the use of online computers in every classroom may not be
effective. One online computer for a whole school where this computer only is
used to enhance the learning of a whole school community may be more effective.
“Just as students need to learn by building their
operational skills onto a cultural and critical base, so too must teachers be
able to commandeer their learning for their own purposes. This is not as simple
as paying for some PD days. If staff are to become believable exponents of
technoliteracy they must meaningfully incorporate it into their own lives
first.” (Seidel, G 2000)
This includes the creation of useful research models
or Webquests by teachers for teachers, in a shared online community. Following
on from this research paper our next goal will be the creation of a Webquest
which will not only be of significant use to teachers and students, but will
also model best practice in online publication and the use of questioning
skills which may inspire teachers to feel more confident about creating their
own such units.
Educational Theories
Our thinking about this area of research has been
influenced by the theories of Gardner, De Bono, Bloom, Langrehr, March, Dodge
and McKenzie. These theories include arguments about Higher Order Thinking,
Questioning, Research Modules, Multiple Intelligences, Resource Based Learning,
Thinkers Keys and Webquests.
We will be directing much of our discussion towards
the thinking that supports the creation and use of Webquests through Higher
Order Thinking. Teacher created Webquests may well provide support for the
needs of our JP learners, by incorporating what we consider to be the best and
most effective practices suggested by a range of theorists.
Gardner proposes that there are eight intelligences,
with a possible ninth still in discussion.
These are
- Verbal /
Linguistic
- Logical
/ Mathematical
- Intra-personal
- Visual /
Spatial
- Musical
- Bodily-Kinesthetic
- Inter-personal
- Naturalist/Environmental
Poole,
D. (1999) accessed Dec 17, 2000,
Many
educators construct learning activities around these eight areas of
intelligence suggested by Gardner with the aim of catering for differing
learning styles and meeting the needs of all of their students.
Allowing for all of these intelligences in the JP classroom
requires teachers to be aware of the differing approaches their students may
choose to take. Although we may try to teach across, and inclusive of the
multiple intelligences, we also need to make decisions about whether we
encourage the preferred modes of learning, or introduce and encourage the
students into new ways of learning outside their preferred modes. As educators
we must take responsibility for managing the learning of our students, and in
particular we are responsible for guiding students and other teachers towards
new ways of teaching and learning.
Edward De Bono’s thinking theory, with its designation of
roles in a collaborative work, is well supported in the JP classroom. The roles
each member plays when sharing research in an online environment, and their
ability to argue their position supported by their collected information,
naturally supports De Bono’s theory. His theory had a significant impact on
schools in the 80’s and asked teachers to reassess how they were teaching.
Teachers needed to relinquish some level of control and revise their thinking
to allow students to take a more active part in the decision-making role.
Questions with and without answers are expected. Students are also encouraged
to see different perspectives around the same problem or question.
Current theorists such as Jamie McKenzie suggest that “questions
and questioning may be the most powerful technologies of all ” and that “the
question is the answer.” (McKenzie, J. 2000)
His writings deal extensively with the creation of Research Models based on
effective questioning, in learning with technology. His questioning tool-kit is
useful for teachers during the planning stage of an online unit of work.
|
Questioning
Toolkit |
||||
|
Essential
Questions |
Subsidiary
Questions |
Hypothetical
Questions |
Telling
Questions |
Planning
Questions |
|
Organizing
Questions |
Probing Questions |
Sorting &
Sifting Questions |
Clarification
Questions |
Strategic
Questions |
|
Elaborating
Questions |
Unanswerable
Questions |
Inventive
Questions |
Provocative
Questions |
Irrelevant
Questions |
|
Divergent
Questions |
Irreverent
Questions |
As well as
other types you find useful in the search for meaning |
||
From McKenzie, J. (2000) Beyond Technology, Questioning,
Research and the Information Literate School
Langrehr, Dr. John. S. (1994) suggests that
”Thinking involves us mentally processing information in
our brains. Learning sometimes follows. Learning strategies are based on
improved concentration, regular practice, feedback, rewards and repetition.
Thinking strategies are based more on giving people a better range of questions
to ask themselves when they mentally process information in particular ways.”
(pg12)
Langrehr includes the following question matrix in his 1994
text.
|
|
Event |
Situation |
Choice |
Person |
Reason |
Means |
|
Present |
What is? |
Where/When is? |
Which is? |
Who is? |
Why is? |
How is? |
|
Past |
What did? |
Where/When did? |
Which did? |
Who did? |
Why did? |
How did? |
|
Possibility |
What can? |
Where/When can? |
Which can? |
Who can? |
Why can? |
How can? |
|
Probability |
What would? |
Where/When would? |
Which would? |
Who would? |
Why would? |
How would? |
|
Prediction |
What will? |
Where/When will? |
Which will? |
Who will? |
Why will? |
How will? |
|
Imagination |
What might? |
Where/When might? |
Which might? |
Who might? |
Why might? |
How might? |
He suggests that this matrix is “A good thing to have
alongside you if you want to ask yourself some probing and different types of
questions about any kind of topic. The more questions you ask the greater your
understanding. “ Langrehr,J. (1994)
These probing questions can form the basis of all other
questions and help the learner to construct his or her own ideas about the
topic. This should lead students to improvements in the types of questions they
are exploring and once the have formulated an argument or stand point they are
beginning to use higher order thinking to justify their position and their learning.
“Bernie Dodge and Tom March have been working since early
1995 to develop the Webquest as one strategy for effectively integrating the
web into classroom instruction.” “Education has changed a bit since the three
R’s…The webquest strategy provides a scaffold for classroom activities that
integrate the power of the web with sound learning theory and instructional
design methods.” (ozline.com)
From our online search for suitable webquests for JP
students, we discovered a significant need for teachers, and students to
evaluate critically all information and online material, and in particular,
Webquests. The content, format and suitability of Dodge’s work is exemplary for
older students but is not structured to meet the needs of younger students.
Many of the Webquests we have found in other locations on
line, have not met this sound learning theory and thinking theory criteria, for
a number of reasons. These criticisms may be content based, credibility based
or involve questions of relevance. We would like to see greater applicability
to our Australian students and an emphasis on a diversity of cultural inclusion
in a Webquest for JP students. As
teachers in an Australian setting we are making a conscious choice about the
inclusion of Australian content in our work.
Constructivism
The theory of constructivism is described as..
"..one of
several theories of learning, building upon what cognitive theorists discovered
about how mental structures are formed. John Dewey was one of the founders of
this theory. He believed that in order for learning to occur, education needed
to move away from behavioural methods and create models of teaching and
learning where students were actively involved in the learning process."
This theory involves relating learning to the
student's experience. How we learn is very much influenced by our personality,
our family and social expectations. The teacher has a vital role in a
constructivist model in developing a range of differing and motivating
activities that are both meaningful and relate directly to a child's interest.
Children have the opportunity through this learning to explore and develop
their own areas of interest and take responsibility for their own learning.
The "Learning to Learn Project",
which is currently being trialed in many South Australian Junior Primary
schools, embraces the theory of constructivism. This approach is based upon
John Joseph's work on brain theory:
"Learning is the
process of making sense from experience".
Learning therefore involves:
·
Languaging
·
Remembering
·
Retrieving
·
Modifying understanding in the light of new
experiences
·
Using information"
(Taken from Minutes of Education Committee meeting
Magill Primary and Junior Primary Schools 18 October 2000)
The SACSA
Framework being implemented in all South Australian schools in 2001 is
based on the theory of constructivism.
In a constructivist environment, collaborative
learning allows for students to share their knowledge, questions and answers
with each other to further enhance the learning taking place. Responses from
students are able to guide the content and path that individual students are
following. Teachers act as facilitators and through careful open-ended
questioning are able to help each student to come to an understanding of what
they are learning. As stated in Bellingham
schools research model-
"As
teachers, our goal is to provide our students with varied learning experiences
that will improve their current areas of strengths while challenging them to
improve their abilities in weaker areas. Through a working knowledge of our
students' learning styles and "intelligences," we are better able to
tailor our lessons and activities to expand our students' strengths."
The use of computer technology in the learning
environment for both teachers and students is a perfect example of
constructivism being implemented with little difficulty. While working on the
web users generally follow their own links and interests when exploring new sites.
With many other computer applications we tend to learn as we progress through a
task, as it is not so important to learn each and every application.
Teachers and Technoliteracy
“Educators
must prepare for a technology permeated future by keeping up with change. They
must learn to adopt effective strategies, such as reading technical and
educational publications, attending training sessions, and perusing internet
websites, for keeping as current as possible on new and anticipated
technologies as well as methods of using them. … If technology is to make a
real difference in their work, teachers must have a vision of what they are
working toward, recognize the kind of infrastructure necessary to bring about
their vision, and be active in building what is needed for change and growth.
Teachers must adopt an outlook that their pre-service preparation is only a first step in what must be a life-long exploration of ways to use technology and other resources to improve education. Technology is coming to represent both a constant resource and a continual reminder that educators never can become satisfied with their methods, skill levels, or results.” (Roblyer,MD 2000 – page235)
Just as with any student research on a topic, where
students need guidance and scaffolding, teachers also need the same levels of
support. This support can include learning about the research process and
guiding pathways through the maze of information that is the World Wide Web,
We can make some presumptions about teachers
understanding about learning and thinking, but no such assumption should be
made about their confidence or experience with technology or with online
learning. Teachers with a keen interest in embedding technology effectively
have a responsibility to support, through collegiality, those who are joining
the technoliteracy pathway at different points. The ride is often problematic
or confusing for teachers who lack confidence, skills or experiences with
technology and the inclusion of the World Wide Web as an information source.
Until recently, many JP teachers may have presumed
that they did not need to include online learning or web based research into
their programs, when traditional text and picture book research was
enough. With the permeation of
technology into all areas of daily experience, where else will the children
learn to be critically literate and technologically literate, if not at school?
Although home Internet access for many young students is a reality, their
ability to make informed judgments needs to be taught explicitly in a
supportive environment. Teachers’ acceptance of change needs to include online
realities, such as the example of the student in a JP classroom, who due to
illness, could not attend a class excursion. The ‘technoliterate’ parent guided
the student through a virtual tour of the same location on line. In fact, the
young Year one boy returned to school two days later, having visited similar
venues in Victoria, the USA and Germany. He provided some very interesting
information for the class about his virtual excursions.
In the document “Learning in an online world” one of
the goals set is that
“All students will have access to educational programs that
provide a technology-rich experience and environment for developing required
skills and attitudes for lifelong learning.” Edna(2000)
In order to reach this goal we need to accept that our role
as learning managers, which is greater than that of just teachers, has shifted.
“Young people take readily to new technologies and to rapid technological change. The role of schools is to ensure that young people use technologies purposefully and critically and that they are able to continue to adapt and learn throughout their lives.” Edna(2000)
Those who are guiding and managing the learning
environment for students, the teachers, also need to be able to adapt and learn
throughout their lives in order to provide such a technology rich experience.
The initiatives established in South Australia
through the discovery school programs and
the discovery network teachers program, supports the belief that not all
teachers have time to commit to exemplary work, but those who are given the
time needed, should be sharing their work extensively with others. It also
recognizes the fact that traditionally as teachers we often worked in
isolation, developing and exploring with our students wonderful units of work.
The Internet provides an opportunity for teachers to share and communicate with
one another about their own learning, ideas and information no longer on a
school or district level but globally.
Education is a constantly changing and shifting
environment currently moving from left to right on the following diagram.
|
|
|
|
|
teacher
centered |
à |
student
centered |
|
individual |
à |
collaborative |
|
structured |
à |
exploratory |
|
competitive |
à |
cooperative |
|
classroom |
à |
whole
world |
Extrapolated
from class lecture, White, B. (2000)
Which theory and where to now?
As education makes significant shifts for students
and teachers, we need to take a positive stand for the inclusion of technology
literacy and how embedded technology might support a wide range of thinking,
learning and information theories. This needs to include a range of theories
rather than one trendy theory or currently in vogue educationalist. Teachers
are very good at drawing parallels between theorists while creating, with their
students, meaningful programs of learning.
They may select processes or ideas from resource
based learning (RBL), Thinkers Keys or Anderson’s revised Blooms taxonomy or
any of the theories included in this paper.
|
RBL |
Thinkers
Keys |
Revised
Blooms Cognitive Processes |
||
|
Defining
and Mapping |
Changes |
Characteristics |
Cognitive Processes |
Types of Knowledge |
|
Finding |
Types/Kinds |
Cause |
Remember |
Factual |
|
Collecting
Information |
Roles/Jobs |
Effect/Result |
Understand |
Conceptual |
|
Processing
Information |
Purpose/Value |
Structure |
Apply |
Procedural |
|
Presenting
Information |
Past,
Present or Future |
Style
/ Lifestyle |
Analyse |
Metacognitive |
|
Evaluation |
Adaptations |
Conditions |
Evaluate |
|
|
|
Influence |
Functions |
Create |
|
|
In notes from
a CEGSA 2000 session, Hollands, S |
Survival
/ Defence |
Consequences |
Lorin
W Anderson, University of South Carolina, Feb 1999 In notes from
a CEGSA 2000 session, Hollands, S. |
|
|
Relationships |
Communication |
|||
|
|
Significance
/ Importance |
In notes from
a CEGSA 2000 session, Hollands, S. |
||
“A key to the effectiveness of educational technology
lies in the recognition by the teacher and the student that all people have
learning strengths and weaknesses.” (Edwards – online)
An acceptance by teachers of the fact that students
in their care learn ‘best’ in a variety of ways and that teaching with and
through technology needs to reflect such differences, is as vital as in any
other area of the curriculum. Allowing students and teachers to play a more
active role in determining their learning should be possible with the inclusion
of embedded technology and online learning environments at all levels of school
structures and with the active involvement of all stakeholders in school
communities.
ãJudy Beal and Kathryn Beilby – December,
2000
Text references
Anderson,
Lorin, W. (in Hollands,.S.) University of South Carolina, Feb 1999
Education Committee meeting Magill Primary and Junior Primary Schools
Minutes (18 October 2000)
Hollands,
S. Notes from a CEGSA conference 2000 session.
Langrehr, Dr. John. S. (1994) Become a Better
Thinker, Wrightbooks Pty Ltd, Victoria
McKenzie, J. (2000) Beyond Technology,
Questioning, Research and the Information Literate School, FNO Press, Bellingham,
Washington
Roblyer, M.D. (2000) Integrating Educational
Technology into Teaching, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey
Seidel, Glen. (Dec 2000) Research Review –
Teachers and Technoliteracy. ANGEE Independent Teacher Vol 16 Issue 5
Online references
Bellingham Schools Project http://www.bham.wednet.edu
Department of Education Training and Employment
(99-2000) The South Australian Curriculum Standards and Accountability
Frameworks accessed Dec 2000 www.sacsa.nexus.edu.au/
DETE discovery schools www.tsof.edu.au
accessed Dec 2000
Education Network Australia (2000) Learning in an
online world, School education action plan for the information economy. Produced
by Curriculum Resources Unit, Seacombe Gardens, SA. Available online at www.edna.edu.au/onlineworld.pdf Sept
2000
Edwards http://www.firn.edu/~face/about/dec95/mult_int.html
accessed Dec 2000
Learning to learn project http://www.learningtolearn.nexus.edu.au accessed Dec 2000
McKenzie, J. (2000) www.fno.org
accessed Dec 2000
McKeown, L. (2000) - keynote speech CEGSA
conference accessed at www.cegsa.sa.edu.au Accessed Sept 2000
Ozline http://www.ozline.com/learning/index.htm
accessed Dec 2000
Poole, D – accessed Dec 2000 http://lead.csustan.edu/advstd/dawn/4730class/learningtheory.html
White, B. (2000) Lecture on Assessment and
Evaluation www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/11572 accessed 26
Oct, 2000
Other Useful Related Sites
http://www.firn.edu/~face/about/dec95/mult_int.html
http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/k12/livetext/docs/graze.html
http://ei.cs.vt.edu/book/chap6/foundations.html
http://www.metronet.com/~bhorizon/teach.htm