Readings Reflection:
I have always been a constructivist teacher. When I first started out I was a one without even knowing what constructivist theory curtailed. I always had students working in different center/station arrangements working through their own topics to increase their knowledge and keep them involved in the decisions of the classroom. I tried to make each section of the curriculum there idea by molding my questioning to drive them to the next topic to be learned. The readings of Sprague and SEDL supported my educational theories.
While in the area of professional development and technology integration, I would often come across teachers who thought technology should be a class and not “another thing” teachers should have to teach. I appreciated the article from Sprague and Dede that stated, “Technical literacy should not be taught as an isolated subject, nor should activities with technology be isolated from other activities in the classroom.” We need to integrate the technology into what the students are doing in their classrooms with their curriculum. Otherwise, the knowledge will not transfer. To me, having technology as a separate course is like having a spelling test once a week. They may know the information for the test, but a week later they will have forgotten most of what they learned.
As Solomon and Schrum remarked, Web 2.0 is allowing collaboration to be a fundamental tool for our 21st century students. Teachers can now use a more flexible model for our students to represent their learning. We do not need our students to stand and deliver a report where only one classroom can hear the information. Now with Web 2.0, our students have a global audience.
Bradford, Brown, and Cocking researched how the brain allows us to learn. I appreciated this piece since it went into detail about specifics that some teachers take for granted. We often wonder why some students spend days on a project and never finish. We must facilitate their learning with technology. They many be “Digital Natives” but they are still children and need to be given the tools to manage their time and to utilize the technology in an appropriate manner.
As McPheeters reminds us in the article Social Networking Technologies in Education, social networks have been rife with controversy especially in the field of education. We need to embrace this form of technology since our children are of a social nature. We can communicate with parents in a manner that most are already engaged.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Video Reflection
With Constructivist theory you never lean anything from scratch as stated by Abbot. You construct bigger framework from previous knowledge and you embed new ideas with old ideas. The constructivist theorists believe everything is subjective. A good teacher takes kids where they are now and expands upon that knowledge. For me this theory is the most relative and adaptable to the 21st century classroom. I find that as an educator I utilize the constructivist theories.
The Connectivism theory as stated by Siemens centers around a network model of learning where connections people make with are with databases and other forms of knowledge are through the network of learners that a learner creates. Today due to complex environment, connectivism does not occur completely within the mind. This theory of knowledge is about distribution that happens across a network. Two types of networks are the internal neural and the external. The internal neural network is how our mind creates leaning itself in a network matter; neural networks. We can't control our neural. The external network of learning we do when we form connections with other individual learner control. There is a strong emphasis on the manner in which knowledge is evolving. We must stay current. What I learn today that knowledge may be obsolete. Connectivism is reflective. In other words, we must stay current as knowledge changes through lifetime. The social element is prominent connections with individual is what helps us to stay current.
The third theory we learned about is the cyborg learning theory. Kevin Warwick discussed how people will go from humans to cyborg: part human part electronic/robotic. This theory dedicates that within decade people will implant chips to help improve communication. When Warwick had his first implant, they place it in arm with radio frequency to identify him to his computers. He had main part in nervous system (wrist) which filed into nervous system. Electrodes he could plug into computer, in other words: plug nervous system to computer. He moved hand through nervous system to control computer. He stated we supposedly only notice 5% of stimuli. He believes we could have implants that took ultrasonic signals to stimulate which could give us an extra sense similar to the sonar in bats. Kevin Warwick connected his nervous system to his wife's nervous system. They were electrically linked through the nervous system; when his wife moved her hand, his brain got the pulses.
Cyborg theory believes in linking the human brain with technology in order to upgrade the human species. Simplistically stated, computers will do good where humans do poorly. Kevin Warwick discussed that if technology needs more memory we just go out and get more memory. He wondered why people can just go out and get extra memory when needed. This theory involves how we will evolve with education. If we can just upload knowledge, then we won't need universities and schools. We would never need to physically go on vacation. He discussed how this will have a matrix style of download/uploading knowledge and vacations. He also discussed how medical would change. We would go from chemical to electronic stimulation.
Finally discussed were the thoughts of the destiny of humans without chips. He knows there are critics since cyborg theory will change life as we know it. He sees the cyborg to be intellectually superior and able to think in more dimensions.
