Multimedia oppimisprojektina kurssista

Multimedia oppimisprojektina kurssilla keväällä 2012 kävimme läpi useita freeware ohjelmia, joilla voi tuottaa kuvaa, ääntä ja videoa. Tutustuin mm. seuraaviin ohjelmiin: Audacity (äänen tallennus -ja editointiohjelma), WeVideo (videon luonti -ja editointiohjelma) ja ToonDoo (sarjakuvien luontiohjelma). Tutustuin pikaisesti myös pariin animaation luontiohjelmaan (Goanimate, Kerpoof). Ohjelmat olivat helppokäyttöisiä ja ne soveltuvat nuoremmillekin koululaisille erityisesti tottuneemman käyttäjän avustamana. Voisin hyvin kuvitella ohjaavani nuoret tekemään jotakin luovaa edellä mainitun kaltaisilla ohjelmilla!

Tehtävämme oli tuottaa kurssilla myös multimediatarina, jossa on alakouluun soveltuva pedagoginen opetus . Ohessa tarina Ufo-miehestä (Opetus: erilaisuuden hyväksyminen), jonka äänet talletin Audacity:llä, kuvat TonDoolla ja editoin ne yhteen WeVideolla. Oikea animaatio olisi tietysti ollut makeampi tuotos, mutta ajan säästämiseksi pitäydyin still kuvissa, jotka löytyivät valmiina ToonDoo kirjastosta. Videopätkän tekoon meni muutaman tunti, joten pidän hyötysuhdetta kohtuullisena 😉 Sain houkuteltua lapsenikin esittämään videolle pari repliikkiä …oli kivaa 😀

(Kuvakäsikirjoitusta ja valmista tuotosta vertailemalla näkee mm. kuinka tuotos elää valmistumiseensa saakka ja on selvästi erilainen, kuin suunnitelma.)

Ufo-mies tarinan kuvakäsikirjoitus;

Ufo-mies tarina valmiina videona:

About Self Regulated Learning Skills

There is a saying “What you measure is what you get.” I wonder if there are practical (e.g. self test kind of) ways to measure skills that reflect self regulated learning? If you know some, please let me know. Of course I can for example estimate the level of my endurance and ability to keep focus on a work that requires cognitive skills, I can compare the time I need to accomplish similar tasks on a longer time time span to observe my possible progress and I can think about my ability to get to the point when I am reading scientific texts on a foreign language… that’s part of self regulation right? However, it would be interesting to utilize some ready-made measurement, if they exist and usable. Maybe they could give information on my self regulated skills compared to average execution. That might be motivating a bit same way as other runners are in a running event (like marathon event for amateurs).

Another thing that I have been thinking about developing SRL skills is that what personal characteristics might improve or weaken them. It seems evident that good self awareness is one important factor that is linked to good SRL skills. Obviously also general intelligence plays some role. I think that temperament also is involved. It can be described as a natural tendency that tries to lead person’s behaviour. For example I think I am quite talkative. I can control my speech so that I am quiet with other people even longer time. But if I feel “normal me” and I don’t try to resist my tendency to speak I am pretty talkative… I suppose this has to do with temperament. What features of temperament support stronger SRL skills? Or is it just so that for each temperament feature there is the best strategy to learn? If that is true then it would be beneficial to know own temperament accurately and learning strategies that support personal development as well as possible. According to Liisa Keltikangas-Järvinen (Finnish psychologist and researcher) temperament consists at least from following parts (I hope I translate them right in English): sensitivity, activity, ability to tolerate interrupts, adaptability, persistence, rhythm (How accurate rhythm a person has in his/her every day life? He/she wakes up always at the same time, goes always to bed at the same time or …), approach/retreat and intensity.

Third thing I have thought is how much strong skills in SRL really can improve learning? Are there any scientific studies or enlightened guesses? It has been said that both intelligence and temperament have been at least partly inherited. I remember for example that Keltikangas-Järvinen has said that tendency to feel stress is strongly inherited feature and that it’s difficult to get rid of it if one has it. It seems obvious that ability to deal with stress sets some boundaries to develop SRL. I think that there also are other boundaries that limit the possibilities to improve personal learning. So, SRL what is your importance in the field of learning?

Finally, this picture describes persistence to me. It’s a flower that is still growing next to our house’s stone base! It’s fascinating to notice  how many living creatures can make it in an ascetic growing environment. This flower has resisted coldness, lack of water (Part of our house roof is top of it, so rain doesn’t reach it so well.) and poor nutrient (The ground underneath is sand.). “The spirit” of the flower (persistence) is one important characteristic that enhances self regulated learning. We should never give up when we have feelings of despair in our learning! There’s always a way to solve challenges in one way or another.

 

My Personal Learning Environment

What is a PLE?

The PLE is an abbreviation from “personal learning environment” that describes the tools, communities, and services that constitute the individual educational platforms that learners use to direct their own learning and pursue educational goals (Educause,2009). So, from the wide viewpoint the PLE isn’t just about emphasizing the tools that are used. Really, it can be created using any other suitable tools and services in addition to computer based tools. However, in this article I focus on PLE that is based on Web 2.0 tools.

Compared to traditional learning management systems (LMS) that for example Oulu university provides by tools like Optima PLE doesn’t control user so much. Instead it let’s the user to connect personal information with outside world and allows the user to choose tools he or she likes.

From a pedagogical viewpoint a single PLE represents learner’s cognitive space that is networked with other relevant parties and is in constant change.

Social media (or Web 2.0) defines a variety of networked tools or technologies that are used in creation of PLE. There are several tools that can be used to create student’s learning space such as blogs (e.g. WordPress) and wikis (e.g. Wikispaces). In addition to mentioned tools lot of others can be used to create and modify content on learning space. Here are few examples: YouTube (video presentations), Flickr (photo sharing), RSS-feed (connects data streams between tools), Google Hangout (video meeting), MindMeister (mind map creation tool), Facebook (social networking service) etc.

Nevertheless the number of available technologies, tools and services is huge the point in PLE isn’t on them. Rather, PLE is about an idea how individuals approach the task of learning (Educause,2009). An important aspect about PLE is that it supports learner centered learning. It’s learning task can be divided to following basic phases that student is able to repeat in a loop: 1) Student creates or modifies learning material, 2) Student shares it with others and 3) Student reflects the on comments and discussion on learning material.

Here is an picture that illustrates personal learning environment:

Learners A and B represent students that use social media to create PLE. Typically they present students that work in a group (e.g. Students that are taking the course minor studies in educational technology in Oulu university.) to achieve some learning task. Each student learns specific topics by creating content to their personal learning space and sharing it with other people. In addition to students of a group some other interested person (named guest in the picture) like their teacher can contribute to learning content creation. As the idea of PLE is to connect it openly to internet, basically anyone interested could comment on the topic. Learners create material themselves but they also utilize a lot of relevant ready-made information available in internet like pictures, written text (research results, news, Wikipedia articles etc.),videos and audio sources. Media, feeds and widgets (A reusable element of graphical user interface used in student’s learning space. E.g. avatar component that is used in WordPress.) are a way to categorize content that is shown in PLE. Database presents a physical storage for all the learner defined data in PLE. It’s usually not located in the equipment learner uses but somewhere in the internet and controlled by provider of a selected learning space (e.g. Wikispaces, WordPress, Google). All the services and data handled in PLE require a specific service provider (picture has some of them as an example).

Why would I need a PLE? … Viewpoint based on research

The key findings of modern learning sciences imply that the most effective learning environments will have following characteristics: customised learning, availability of diverse knowledge sources and collaborative learning (Sawyer, 2008). All three characteristics have been taken into account at least to some level in PLE. Customised learning experience takes into account learner’s unique learning style and development level. As the idea in PLE is student centered learning he or she can choose learning style more freely than in traditional teacher centered learning (e.g. visual, auditory or tactile way of learning). When student is let to approach study subject freely development level guides the task as student obviously deals with knowledge on a level (learning of facts, understanding, application, analysis) that he or she is capable of. Also amount of produced data, it’s level of coherence and correctness reflects student’s development level. Availability of diverse knowledge sources is evident as student is able to search for data basically from anywhere (books, web sites, colleagues, experts etc.). And since creation of PLE is based on social media tools, it’s obvious that the environment provides state-of-the-art tools to efficient collaboration.

According to Attwell informal learning through asking questions, observing co-workers, and other uncoordinated and independent learning activities accounts for 80% an individual’s knowledge about his/her job. There is growing evidence that social media that is used to build PLE is increasingly supporting informal learning (Dabbagh, Kitsantas, 2011).

Another research by Harrison’s on college students blogging helped them to direct their learning, increased engagement in course material, and promoted the development of informal learning communities (Dabbagh, Kitsantas, 2012). Blogs are commonly used in PLE and as they help students to “direct their learning” they seem to have a link to self regulated learning. This is actually what is claimed based on following reasoning:”PLEs require the development and application of self regulated learning skills because PLEs are built bottom-up starting with personal goals, information management, and individual knowledge construction, and progressing to socially meditated knowledge and networked learning.” (Dabbagh, Kitsantas, 2011, 5).

So, findings of modern learning science seem to point out that PLE enhances learning especially when it’s use is integrated with formal learning that happens in courses, classrooms and schools.

Why would I need a PLE? … My own thinking

PLE surely deserves an attention as it guides to learner centered learning and collaboration and offers a learning space where self regulated learning skills can be assessed and developed. As I have just started to use PLE (web 2.0 tools) first time in my minor studies of educational technology I don’t yet have so strong personal opinion about it. To be honest my first impression is that web 2.0 tools don’t bring anything remarkable that couldn’t be achieved with more traditional tools and methods (pencil, writing of notes manually, traditional computer functions like word processor, email and internet search, discussions with school mates and experts informally and during lecture). Even though scientific results show that PLE supports achievement of goals of modern learning science, like creation of deeper conceptual understanding and coherent knowledge, time and effort is needed to make that happen both on a level of individual student and of group of students. Time and effort have to do with individual resources (mental, values, personal circumstances, priorities etc.) that are limited and vary. Enjoying learning results of a good collaboration is even more challenging not only because it requires adequate usage of personal resources by more than one student almost at the same time. If for example students are too busy to discuss in blogs with each other I don’t see that PLEs are really used to foster collaboration. As we know what is clear in theory may not be that in practice!

It seems evident to me that to increase collaboration by means of PLEs it helpful that students know each other well enough. So, for example informal discussions within studies e.g. during coffee breaks help to take full potential of PLE in use. Neither should one underestimate the competence and guidance of a teacher as he or she can direct usage of PLE in a student group to help it achieve better learning results. At this point I really want to give thanks to our teachers as I can see are applying the latest scientific methods and good practices that improve learning!

At the moment I am more exited about self regulated learning than web 2.0 tools. I see some weaknesses in my study habits and I am interested to try to weaken them. Of course there also are other features in my learning performance like cognitive skills that I would like to improve. It would be great to grasp the main idea of each study articles faster and to improve in paying attention to bigger pictures instead of details. And as internet is full of information it’s so easy to loose time and energy on focusing some less important information. I hope I can develop my self discipline during learning. Could it even be that my first steps with PLE and theory of self regulated learning have helped me to become more aware of my current study habits and to set the target to next level? Let’s hope so!

In general I warmly accept the idea of learner centered learning. Since PLE supports it I am happy to try PLE further. I also humbly admit that I have not yet learnt to use full potential of my PLE. I am sure that I will face with more positive learning experiences as I continue practice with it!

What could my PLE be like?

At the moment I am satisfied with a learning space that is a blog and created by WordPress. As my blog’s personal data is stored somewhere in internet by service provider I am able to use blog from any device (computer, smartphone, IPad etc.) that is connected to internet which is great. I could use my blog to write about interesting subjects I want to learn about. For example it might be a realistic idea to discuss experiences, good practices and the latest research result about primary school teacher profession. I could use RSS feed to connect data streams from interesting web sites to my blog. A natural discussion group within my blog could be my student mates whose social media I could follow.

In addition to writing stories I would add pictures, videos (YouTube), and photographs to blog. I have tried Flickr kind of services that I designed to distribute photos but I would rather take my photos personally. Maybe sometimes I could try to find a suitable ready-made photo from any available source. I might need to refresh my memory about user rights to ready-made content.

If there is a need to co-operate with other people (e.g. need to write a document together) I could think about using Google+ services as they support editing of the same document with other people and some other tools that support collaboration like Google Hangouts for video meetings.

In addition to literal web 2.0 tools I would use a lots of other software applications to support my learning. Here are a few examples I am using: web dictionaries, word processors like Microsoft Word and OpenOffice, Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Power Point, screen capture software like open source Greenshot, emails, Google search engine, WinZip etc.

Summary

As a summary here is a video that tries to describe in 60 seconds what PLE is about.

Sources

Dabbagh, N. & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal Learning Environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751611000467

Educause. (2009). 7 Things You Should Know About Personal Learning Environments, http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/7-things-you-should-know-about-personal-learning-environments

Sawyer, R, K. (2008). Optimising Learning: Implications of Learning Sciences Research. http://www.oecd.org/site/educeri21st/40554221.pdf

From Science Fiction to Educational Technology And Back to Science Fiction

Do you like science fiction in books or in films? Many people do. What is it that make people like science fiction? Well, they may like it for various reasons: Maybe stories have a sharp analyse about our societies (their pros and cons), maybe they even give a probable prophecy about future happenings if we continue living to certain direction or they are just good fun. Still another reason why some people like science fiction is because of technology and it’s remarkable role in them.

What about achievements of modern (real) technology? Do they sound sometimes like science fiction? I think many of them initially might until you get to know their basic functionality and principle that’s just application of modern science. Here are a couple of examples… I read (already years) ago about a man who had been blind from his birth. With technology he could see now! Actually, his could at that moment see only rough shapes of obstacles in black and white colour. But he could see! What was the magic behind his seeing ability? His eyes couldn’t transfer beams of light to optic nerve in brain. Electronic replacement for his eyes was added to his head and it was connected to his optic nerve and he could see.

Do you believe that you could move objects with your mind? Yes you could! Magic you say? No, you could do it by means of modern technology. Check this video for more information.

So with the help of modern technology we can already now do amazing things. Surely it enhances our meta cognitive skills as well. We can for example read any foreign text moderately well by translating it with Google translate. Actually, I saw years ago a demo where spoken language was translated by computer in real time to another language: You want to book a hotel in a phone and receptionist speaks only foreign language… Think about one of the most difficult language (maybe Finnish :)) you aren’t able to speak. You reserve room in your mother language just like you would in your home country. Well, it seems that the demo isn’t yet working properly, since it’s not in wider use. But things like this seem to be quite soon our every day life.

What about educational technology then? How does it enhance deep learning? I for example use search engines heavily to search information. Finding information is fast, but it seems that many times I forget pieces of information almost as fast I have found them. More precisely what are the specific ways (not achievable by “old fashion” methods) in which only educational technology can enhance learning? Selwyn (2011) says that “’does technology improve learning?’ is not a straightforward question with a straightforward answer” (p.87). He seems to come to this conclusion partly by conflicting theories about learning and partly by learning’s complex binding to social, cultural, economic and politic “variables”.

Now back to science fiction, I guess. I have just started my first science course (quantitative research). I have understood that scientific quantitative research on educational technology would provide accurate information as the method is designed to tell the exact causal relation with too or more variables. To put it naively simple we could assume that educational technology = x and learning improvement is y and that their relation is x = n*y where n (e.g. n = 0, 1/2, 1, …) is unknown. By making a test environment with enough participants and other variables we could test our hypothesis. What’s the point in this? Our lecture said that if we would like to try to achieve something really remarkable in the field of human sciences (includes learning sciences) we should try to create a mathematical formula that represents functionality of brain/thinking. Ooh … sounds like a mission impossible? Anyway, that kind of even partial understanding about thinking and learning would result in more accurate scientific results when it comes to benefits of educational thinking.

Source

 Selwyn, N. (2011) Education and Technology, Key Issues and Debates, Continuum International Publishing Group

Some Thoughts After Country Specific Presentations

Thanks to every one for interesting presentations on educational technology usage in various countries (Brazil, Germany, Romania, Russia, Namibia, Italy, Mexico, etc.)! As circumstances in the world vary also a way in which technology should be applied in the field of education varies. However there are some key points every country has to focus on to be successful. Based on presentations and my former knowledge I have picked up following: leadership, pedagogically relevant technology and investment. Before I discuss these points a bit more, first a few words about educational technology in Ireland that was the theme of Gary’s and my presentation.

Educational Technology in Ireland

As our presentation says in 1997 Ireland (Republic of Ireland) was ranked in 23rd position with respect to country’s readiness for the Information Age. After that a steady progress has happened! Actually, I got an impression that Ireland has succeeded remarkably well in taking educational technology into use at schools when compared to other presented countries. Why? Firstly, I suppose that Irish people have understood that education of any nation is key to it’s success and that educational technology has a role in improving education. Another obvious reason is that Ireland is relatively small country with population less than 5 million and structure of it’s schooling system is simple. Surely co-operation and driving of any achievement are easier in a more homogeneous country. A couple of other reasons might have to do with the facts that economic growth in Ireland was very high from 1995 to 2007 and IT sector has been one of it’s economic cornerstones. It’s probable that strong knowledge of information technology has supported applying technology to education. And finally as can be seen from Ireland’s high living standard (a best quality of life in the world in 2005 according to study by Economist) the complex problems like poverty, corruption and crime haven’t prevented development of educational technology. Please, see attached our presentation “Educational technology in Ireland” (a big thanks to Gary Dullaghan from his contribution as a specialist on this area) 

 

What are some cornerstones successful educational technology should be built upon?

Leadership

There has to be an organisation that has authority and resources to drive ICT usage enhancements at schools. This organisation needs to create vision and strategy. Vision is like a dream. What is the educational dream of usage of ICT that inspires mind and touches heart? Is it something linked to values like equality, peace and prosperity prevailing in society? Or maybe it has to do with putting human cognitive skills to “next level”. Or perhaps it just promises to make workload lesser freeing human capacity to other activities than boring routine work? Anyway it should exist and stimulate people to achieve more realistic goals. According to Kankaanranta (2011, 81) these are the skills of the 21th century that form part of the goals that can be achieved with the help of technology: collaboration, forming of deeper knowledge, problem solving and innovation, self-regulation and skilful communication.
Strategy is a plan that describes how to achieve goal. It’s possibly a high level big picture that describes the main parts of a puzzle improving educational technology, their interaction and roles. Usually organisation has been appointed by the government like NCTE in Ireland.

It’s important that leadership doesn’t act like a dictator but co-operates with every relevant party like representatives of other countries, business and researchers of various topics (learning sciences, educational psychology, computer science, education, sociology, information sciences etc.). Of course also ordinary teachers (even pupils and their parents) have a word to say on how technology should be developed and used!

Leading and driving development of educational technology is a huge work as it is so complex project, not the least because technology evolves so fast. I was impressed when I watched NCTE web-pages. Here are a few things they provide: free training (online, face to face) for teachers to keep their ICT knowledge up to date, detailed instructions and real life use cases that so how a schools can start to utilize ICT, a lot of information on best practices on how to use technology in teaching, help to find software that is appropriate to Irish curriculum, tips on how disabled (e.g. people with hearing problem) persons can use ICT in their studies and support on internet security.

To get a more concrete understanding what it takes to lead take a look to web-pages of NCTE … Here are a couple of links that concretize how much work is needed to take technology in use in schools. The first video is a good practice that shows how videos can be used in learning a foreign language.

This links gives an idea how teachers are supported (free online courses, face to face course) to keep their ICT knowledge up to date http://www.ncte.ie/courses/

This link helps to understand what hardware is needed, how to take it into use and how to maintain it http://www.ncte.ie/Technology/

This link has a detailed step by step instructions that guide on understanding e.g. what kind of equipment, roles and processes are needed for any school to succesfully take ICT into use http://www.ncte.ie/elearningplan/handbook/

This link has several short videos showing how technology can be used in practice to support learning http://www.ncte.ie/GoodPractice/

 

Pedagogically Relevant Technology

The study of ICT usage in Irish schools says: “In recognising the failures of past initiatives future initiatives should not be presented as ICT initiatives but instead as initiatives in teaching and learning with relevance for all teachers.” (McGarr, 2008).

Quotation seems to be in line with the idea that the usage of technology at schools should be guided by research findings. What then are these findings? In general according to Selwyn (2011, p. 25) “Perhaps the most frequently discussed benefit of digital technology use is its role in supporting and enhancing learners’ cognitive processes and thinking skills.”. One concrete application of this sentence could be for example an animation that shows how nucleus of an atom is structured. These are some other learning and teaching related principles according to researcher findings: deeper conceptual understanding, building on prior knowledge, reflection, scaffolding learning, customised learning, usage of diverse knowledge sources and distributed knowledge (Sawyer, 2008). If interested see more on what they mean from the link in the end of this writing. But is it possible to make concrete and simple summaries that connect the latest research results with better learning and teaching? I mean something that can be concluded for example from the sentence:”Learning scientists have discovered that deep learning is more likely to occur in complex social and technological environments.” (Brandsford et al. 2000). Part of the point seems to be that as technology makes possible to communicate with huge amount of other people from many nations time and place independently it supports creating complex social learning environments which support deep learning. What about technology’s ability to present information in various ways (text, hypertext, audio, video, simulation etc.)? Does it also support better learning and teaching results? I would say yes. How then? Let’s leave that as a subject of some future writing 😉

On the other hand it makes sense that something that is relevant for teachers doesn’t have to be always scientifically proved, if it just seems to work according to common sense. If teacher for example has found out that he can motivate kids to concentrate better on important topics by letting them to play computer games why would he not use that method? Or think about a teacher who is close to his retirement age and has never really become familiar with technology. Does he find it relevant to learn to use web 2.0 applications in his teaching? Possibly not. Why not let him to find a way to use technology he is comfortable with or let him refrain from it totally. Surely kids would find other classes where to benefit from ICT.

I would like to link also learning principle of customised learning to relevant usage of technology. As each teacher has his or her unique circumstances, skills and taste also students have their unique learning style and development level. So, well designed technology can be used to tailor the presentation of material appropriately (Sawyer, 2008,7). Here are examples of different ways to use ICT supporting different learning styles http://www.ncte.ie/GoodPractice/

Following pictures try to summarize what educational technology is about according to my opinion. It’s not a Swizz knife that can be used efficiently in every learning situation (sometimes pencil is better). Or we could say that the same technology doesn’t apply to all persons, since their tastes and learning styles differ. On the other hand when used properly in a right situation it can boost learning and bring it to a new level in the same way as chainsaw can be used to cut more wood at the same time and with less energy as ordinary axe.

Interesting thing about technology is that many of the features of educational technology that are being used now have been discovered a long time ago! According to Selwyn already in the end of 1960s educational computing had developed into a number of forms, such as: 1) Computer presents material to the learner and asks questions about it. Based on learner’s responds computer decides how to continue to achieve specified goal. 2) The computer helps the learner to acquire skills by repetitive practice (e.g. Training of multiplication table). 3) The computer gives learner a problem to solve and discusses the result. 4) The computer simulates elaborate dialogue with learner. 5) The computer provides simulated versions of experiments with learner observing result of his actions on a screen. 6) The computer provides large files of information on database that the learner can browse selectively.

So the question arises: You researchers and inventors in your dusty chambers what amazing things are you hiding from us?

 

Investment

It’s all about money and not a single nation has too much of it! What is the priority of educational technology in each country? If schools don’t for example have a proper heating, it’s understandable that money shall be put to something else than in technology. There has to be balance. Putting money to things that improve basic human rights (e.g. equality, health care and reducing famine) is of course more important than educational technology even though our subject has a link to them. I think that education (with or without technology) is a key thing that helps any nation to fight against problems.

Maybe one way to enhance usage of ICT in less developed countries is to think how available technology can be used. The newest technology is not necessarily needed. Just only think what broadcasting well prepared and locally relevant lectures by radio to distant areas in a poor country can do! Of course the richest nations and international companies have an important role to play here as well. Nokia for example has had a strategy already years ago to connect one billion people to internet with mobile phones. Even though companies have selfish interests these kind of aims support enhancing educational technology in certain areas. How? As mobile phones are much cheaper than computers developing countries have better possibilities to utilize internet in education. This became evident in the presentation of Namibia.

It’s natural that each country will think investments to technology from their perspective. The fact that western countries are leading on this front doesn’t automatically mean that other countries should follow them blindly by trying to reach same level of usage. One relevant question on this connection is what brings happiness? Sometimes and for some people it might be e.g. simple life close to nature with reading and writing skills without the latest technology!

As the lack of money influences also well developed countries schooling systems in all the countries need to prioritize their needs. They might need to ask which is more important: To share modest educational technology all around a country or to concentrate to build some technologically world class schools. As technology develops fast it’s really important to evaluate what is mandatory (pedagogically relevant) technology? There is no need to update hardware and software at the pace of new releases as part of the game is that the business is trying to create new needs to us. For example some time ago there wasn’t a product like Apple’s IPad. Now it’s widespread and popular but is it essential tool needed in educational technology? Definitely not!

This is quite nice real life example from Irish primary school showing that taking ICT into use can start from by small steps that doesn’t require that much money (First part of the video deals with general benefits that result of ICT usage, story about acquiring equipment starts in 1:33).

 

Finally

Like learning development of educational technology is a process. How does our understanding about educational technology change on a shorter period of time during these minor studies? What kind of technology is used in education in coming years? Let’s find out!

 

Sources:

Education and Technology Key Issues and Debates, Selwyn, Oliver (2011)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland
Opetusteknologia koulun arjessa, Kankaanranta (edit.), Marja (2011) http://ktl.jyu.fi/ktl/julkaisut/luettelo/2011/d094

Optimising Learning: Implications of Learning Sciences Research, Sawyer, R, K. (2008).

The development of ICT across the curriculum in Irish schools: a historical perspective, McGarr, Oliver (2008)
2012-09-14 Lecture: Introduction to Technology-Enhanced Learning by Prof. Sanna Järvelä

Mindmap

 

 

 

 

 

This is my Mindmeister link

Tiivistelmä “Scamo” tutkimushankkeesta

Valitsin tiivistelmän aiheeksi “ScaMo – Motivaatio ja itsesäätöinen oppiminen: analyysi ja interventio oppimisen taitojen kehittämisestä peruskoulussa” tutkimushankkeen.

Didaktiikan perusteet luennolla Sanna Järvelän luentomateriaalissa oppimisen itsesäätely määriteltiin näin: “Itsesäätely on läpi oppimistilanteen käynnissä oleva prosessi, joka koostuu erilaisista oman tavoitteellisen toiminnan tarkkailuun liittyvistä vaiheista. Sisältää kognitiivisia, motivationaalisia ja emotionaalisia prosesseja, jotka ovat monimutkaisessa yhteydessä toisiinsa.”

Scamo tutkimushankeen tiivistelmässä todetaan, että vaikka oppimisen itsesäätelystä on paljon tutkimustuloksia, erityisesti motivaation rooli osana itsesäätelyä oli tuntemattomapi, kun tutkimus aloitettiin 2007.

Tieto -ja viestintätekniikan rooli tutkimuksessa tullee esille siinä, että tutkimuksessa pohdittiin miten tietokoneavusteinen sovellus voi tukea riittävää motivaatiota oppimisessa.

Tutkimuskohde: Motivaation rooli ja ilmenemismuodot itsesäätöisessä oppimisessa todellisissa koulun oppimistilanteissa? Miten motivaation säätelyä voidaan tukea tietokoneavusteisen sovelluksen ja opettajan tarjoaman tuen avulla?

Päätulokset: Näytti siltä, että sivu kertoi minkä suuntaisia tuloksia odotetaan hankkeen alussa: 1) Motivaation ja itsesäätelyn teoreettisen ymmärryksen kasvattaminen, 2) Kehitetään metodi, joka toimii työkaluna todellisten oppimistilanteiden itsesäätelyn jatkotutkimuksessa, 3) Käytännön keinoja, joilla peruskoulun oppilaiden oppimisen itsesäätelyä voidaan tukea. Epäselväksi jäi miten tavoitteet toteutuivat käytännössä ( missä kerrottu? ).

Esimerkkejä mahdollisesti samankaltaisista hankkeista:

http://www.mendeley.com/research/a-computerbased-approach-to-fostering-motivation-and-selfregulated-learning/http://lecotec.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/self-regulation-and-motivation-in-computer-supported1.pdfhttp://www.tojet.net/articles/10332.pdf

Lähteet:

Sanna Järvelän Didaktiikan perusteet luento 4 “Oppimisprosessi monitasoisena systeemisenä kokonaisuutena”, sivu 9.

http://let.oulu.fi/fi/tutkimus/projektit/scamo-motivaatio-ja-itses%C3%A4%C3%A4t%C3%B6inen-oppiminen-analyysi-ja-interventio-oppimisen-tai

Hyvä, paha netti? Miten suojella lapsia vaaroilta?

Internet-tietoverkkoa voisi verrata puukkoon. Puukko on hyvä työkalu monissa askareissa, kuten kalan perkaamisessa tai kiehisten vuolemisessa nuotiota varten. Sillä voidaan kuitenkin myös tappaa ihminen. Onko puukko siis paha? Ei, mutta sitä käyttävillä ihmisillä voi olla pahoja tarkoitusperiä. Sama pätee internetiin. Se on hieno keksintö! Joidenkin ihmisten kierouden vuoksi, se sisältää kuitenkin vahingollista materiaalia. Esimerkiksi eräässä tutkimuksessa Yhdysvalloissa 90 prosenttia 8–16-vuotiaista kertoi törmänneensä vahingossa pornografiaan verkossa – yleensä tehdessään läksyjä.

Lapsia on suojeltava sen vaaroilta.

Miten? Alla on lueteltu joitakin keinoja, joita lasta kasvattava aikuinen (esim. opettaja) voi käyttää:

1. Aikuisella (esim. opettaja) on oltava perustiedot siitä, kuinka internet toimii ja millä eri tavoilla sitä voi käyttä.

Tämä vaatii sitä, että aikuinen pysyy tekniikan kehityksen tasalla, mikä jo itsessään on haaste nopean kehityksen vuoksi. Perinteisten verkkosivustojen ja sähköpostin lisäksi internet tarjoaa useita erilaisia tapoja kommunikoida, kuten keskustelukanavat, pikaviestintä ja verkkopäiväkirjat. Internetin yleisyys useimmissa kodeissa ja julkissa tiloissa ja sen käyttömahdollisuus matkapuhelimissa tarkoittaa sitä, että aikuinen ei voi kontrolloida lapsen kaikkea internetin käyttöä.

On hyvä aika ajoin esimerkiksi lukea tutkimustuloksia, joissa arvoidaan kuinka paljon internet sisältää vahingollista aineistoa, jotta motiivi suojella lapsia osaltaan pysyisi yllä.

2. Sovi lasten kanssa käytön suuntaviivat ja valista lapsia

Päätä kuinka paljon lapset saavat käyttää internetiä päivittäin ja mihin tarkoitukseen. Keskustele suuntaviivoista lasten kanssa (esim. vieraiden ihmisten kanssa ei keskustella) ja kerro selvästi mitä seuraa, jos käyttöä koskevia rajoja rikotaan. Pidä kiinni säännöistä!

Ainakin nuorempien ja kokemattomampien lasten tapauksessa on järkevää aika ajoin silmäillä sähköposteja ja internetsivuja, joilla he ovat vierailleet. Opasta lapsia tarvittaessa näkemäsi perusteella. Luonnollisesti lapsille kannattaa kertoa etukäteen, että heidän internetin käyttöään valvotaan.

Valista lapsia internetin vaaroista ja yleisyydestä realistisesti. Auta heitä ymmärtämään, että rajoitusten ja seurannan tarkoitus on suojella heitä. Kyse ei ole luottamuksen puutteesta, vaan rakkaudesta.

3. Arvot ja oma esimerkki

Juurruta lapsiin oikeita arvoja, jotta he tekisivät viisaita valintoja internetiä käyttäessään silloin, kun et ole paikalla. Käytä itse internetiä opettamiesi arvojen mukaisesti. Ole hyvä esimerkki.

4. Tutustu sisällönsuodattimiin

Palveluntarjoajat ja ohjelmat tarjoavat sisällönsuodattimia, joilla voidaan estää sopimattoman sisällön näyttäminen lapselle. Joillakin ohjelmilla voidaan lasta estää jopa paljastamatta henkilökohtaisia tietoja, kuten nimeä ja osoitetta. Vaikka suodatinohjelmat eivät ole täysin varmoja, niistä voi olla apua.

5. Sijoita internetyhteys keskeiselle paikalle, kun se on mahdollista

Kun yhteys on tilassa, jossa on myös aikuinen on epätodennäköisempää, että lapset tietoisesti muodostavat vahingollisia yhteyksiä. Näin aikuisen on helpompi valvoa, että lapset eivät joudu vaaraan.

Tiivistelmä: Mitä tietokoneavusteinen yhteisöllinen (CSCL) oppiminen on?

Yhteisöllisestä oppimisesta

Yhteisöllistä oppimista voitaisiin kuvata tilanteeksi, jossa useampi kuin yksi ihminen ratkaisee systemaattisesti jotakin ongelmaa ( oppimistilanne ). Oppijoiden välinen vuorovaikutus vaikuttaa olennaisesti oppimistilanteeseen. Yhteisöllisen oppimisen mahdollisia etuja yksin tapahtuvaan opiskeluun ovat esimerkiksi yhteisön etujen parempi huomioon ottaminen ja ongelman laadukkaampi ratkaisu.

Tietokoneavusteinen yhteisöllinen oppiminen?

Tietotekniikan käyttö yhteisöllisessä oppimisessa on työkalu, jonka avulla eri paikoissa olevat ihmiset voivat voivat osallistua oppimistilanteeseen eri aikoina ( esim. internetin käyttö ). Tietotekniikkaa voi käyttää oppimiseen myös samassa paikassa opiskeleva ryhmä. Tietotekniikan avulla voidaan pyrkiä ohjaamaan oppijoiden välistä vuorovaikutusta tuottavampaan suuntaan oppimistilanteen aikana tai sen jälkeen ohjeiden annon muodossa.

Tietotekniikan avulla ylitetään ihmisaivojen ajatteluun, ongelmanratkaisuun ja oppimiseen liittyviä rajoituksia, jolloin oppiminen tehostuu.

CSCL ei kuitenkaan ole ns. “silver bullet”, jonka avulla ratkaistaan kaikki yhteisölliseen oppimiseen liittyvät ongelmat. Edelleen yhteisöllisen oppimisen avaimia ovat selittäminen, perustelu ja yhdessä sovittu opiskelukäytäntö. Eräs haaste tietotekniikka käytettäessäkin on: Miten varmistetaan, että kaikilla oppijoilla on sama riittävän samankaltainen ymmärrys ratkaistavana olevasta ongelmasta? Tietotekniikka ei poista ihmisten väliseen viestintään liittyvää haastetta, joka on osuvasti tiivistetty näin: “Viestintä poikkeuksetta epäonnistuu, jos se ei sattumalta onnistu.”

Esimerkkejä CSCL oppimisympäristöistä

Tietotekniikan monipuolistumisen myötä sitä voidaan käyttää oppimisessa hyvin monin tavoin. Perinteinen tapa voisi olla se, että oppilasryhmä käyttää internettiin kytkettyä tietokonetta koululuokassa. Nykyään teknologiaa voidaan käyttää yhä useamissa tilanteissa yhä uusilla tavoilla. Esimerkkinä voisi mainita Nokian “Point and Find” ratkaisun, jonka perusajatus on seuraava: Ottamalla kuva matkapuhelimen kameralla kohteesta, siitä saadaan lisätietoja. Teoriassa esimerkiksi kuvan ottaminen keksinnöstä teidekeskuksessa tuottaisi matkapuhelimen näytöllä siitä lisätietoja ja oppimista stimuloivia kysymyksiä, videoita tms. Teknologian ja tutkimuksen edistyessä löydettäneen uusia tapoja, joilla CSCL tukee oppimista.

Alla joitakin konkreettisia esimerkkejä CSCL ympäristöistä ja niiden joitakin hyötyjä:

– Internet blogit: Mahdollistavat mm. tiedon jaon ja muokkaamisen yhteisössä kätevästi.

– Älytaulut: Koulun oppikirja voidaan näyttää taululla, koko luokan edessä. Opettaja säästää aikaa, kun hänen ei tarvitse kopioida kirjan tietoja perinteiselle taululle. Älytaulun tuottamaa kirjaa voidaa täyttää yhä uudelleen.

– E-kirjat & verkkopohjaiset oppimisympäristöt: Opettaja näkee tiivistetyn raportin kautta miten oppilaat etenevät tehtävien teossa, kenellä on ongelmia ja missä? Näiden tietojen avulla hän voi perinteisiä tapoja tehokkaammin onnistua ohjaamaan oppilaita. Sähköisesti tuotettujen kokeiden korjaaminen voidaan ainakin osittain ( esim. kertotaulu ) automatisoida.

– CSCL scriptit: Ilmeisesti esim. Arguegrap ja Jigsaw sovellukset käyttävät skriptejä. Skriptien tavoite on parantaa erityisesti oppijoiden välistä vuorovaikutusta. Eräs skriptisovellutus Wiki oppimisympäristössä lienee se, että jonkun oppijan kirjottaessa kommentin, sen linkki voidaan lähettää heti sähköpostissa toisille oppijoille, jolloin toteutuu tehokkasti ajasta ja paikasta riippumaton kommunikointi.

– Reflect-pöytä: Pöytä näyttää oppilaiden kommenttien määrän tavoitteena tukea, että kaikki saavat tilaisuuden osallistua tasapuolisesti keskusteluun ( peilaaminen ).

– Tekoäly: Tekoälyn avulla voidaan analysoida syvällisemmin oppijoiden vuorovaikutuksessa synnyttämää sähköistä tietoa ( logit, tekstit, kuvat, videot, jne. ) ja antaa konkreettista palautetta ryhmätyöskentelystä, jopa ehdotuksia sen tehostamiseksi.

Kehitysmaat jaloilleen tieto -ja viestintäteknologian avulla? Onnistuuko?

Tulkitsen tässä kirjoituksessa, että kehitysmaiden ongelmilla tarkoitetaan ihmisen perustarpeiden täyttämistä rajoittavia ongelmia, kuten nälänhätä, suuri lapsikuolleisuus, alhainen elinikä, vedenpuute, köyhyys, sairaudet, sodat, tasa-arvon puute, koulutuksen puute, korruptio jne.

Kokonaan toinen kysymys on haluavatko tai pitäisikö kaikkien kansojen kehittyä samaan suuntaan kuin Suomen kaltaisten länsimaiden? Siispä, onko tieto -ja viestintäteknologia avain kehitysmaiden ihmisten perustarpeiden täyttämiseen tasolla, johon länsimaat kykenevät tällä hetkellä?

Tieto -ja viestintäteknologiaa (TVT) voinee verrata mihin tahansa työkaluun, esimerkiksi lapioon. Jos tavoitteena olisi vaikkapa ojankaivaminen, lapio olisi sopiva työkalu, mutta pelkkä lapio ei ojaa kaiva. Tarvitaan ihmisiä, jotka käyttävät lapiota ojankaivamiseen!

Samalla tavalla tieto -ja viestintäteknologia on hyvä työkalu, joka tukee kehitysmaiden olosuhteiden kehittämisessä, mutta mielestäni ongelman ydin on enemmänkin yleisesti ihmistä koskevissa rajoituksissa, kuten itsekkyydessä. Kuinka paljon hyvää saataisiin aikaan, jos esimerkiksi asevarusteluun käytetty valtava raha -ja työmäärä käytettäisiin kehitysmaiden hyväksi? Jos kehittyneillä mailla ja meillä niissä asuvilla ihmisillä olisi todellista tahtoa, voisimme tukea kehitysmaita hyvin merkittävällä tavalla jo nyt ilman TVT :n käyttöä!

Toisaalta on todettava, että TVT:n käyttö tarjoaa monia mahdollisuuksia ja sen kekseliäs käyttö tukee kehitysmaiden kehittymistä merkittävällä tavalla.

Esimerkkinä voidaan mainita “Nokia Money”, jonka perusajatus näyttää olevan tuoda halpoihin matkapuhelimiin pankkitoiminnan kaltaisia palveluja: laskujen maksaminen, rahan siirto, talouden kirjanpito jne. “Nokia Money” hankkeen yksi etu on se, että mahdollisimman pienillä kustannuksilla ( Matkapuhelin on halvempi hankinta kuin tietokone ja se on jo useammilla kehitysmaiden ihmisillä kuin tietokone. ) voidaan tarjota palveluja, jotka parantavat elämänlaatua. Hankkeen avulla käyttäjät ovat saaneet esimerkiksi tietää reaaliajassa mikä on päivän hinta heidän kauppamillaan tuotteilla, jolloin he osaavat hinnoitella ne oikein ja välttyvät myymästä alihintaa. Nokia Money hankkeen käytännön kokemukset valottavat mm. sitä, että teknologia voi tarjota apua pieniltäkin näyttävissä arkipäivän askareissa, jotka kuitenkin nostavat ihmisten elintasoa.

Luonnollisesti esimerkiksi pelkästään internetin tarjoaminen mahdollisimman pian laajasti kehitysmaiden ihmisille tukee heitä monilla tavoilla ja osaltaan vauhdittaa heidän kykyään auttaa itse itseään.

On jännittävää miettiä millaisia mahdollisuuksia teknologian kehittyminen tarjoaa vielä meidän omana elinaikanamme kehitysmaidenkin tukemiseen. Tämän päivän kalliit huippulaboratioroiden tekniset laitteet ovat lähitulevaisuudessa halpoja ihmisten jokapäiväisessä käytössä olevia hyödykkeitä. Entä miten esimerkiksi tietokoneiden yhä kehittyvä tiedonkäsittelykapasiteetti tukee tutkijoita merkittävien sairauksia vähentävien keksintöjen tekemisessä? Lisäksi internet on mahdollistanut jo kauan aikaa laajojen massojen yhteistyön. Tästä hyvänä esimerkkinä voi mainita “Human Genome Project -hankkeen, jossa odotettua nopeammin saatiin selvitettyä ihmisen geeniperimää juuri siksi, että internet mahdollisti saman alan asiantuntijoiden laajan yhteistyön.

Miten merkittävä on tieto -ja viestintäteknologian osa kehitysmaiden auttamisessa? Tulevaisuus kertoo sen meille.