I want to clarify a bit as I have thought more on the problem. The fact that we have this particular blog set up is evidence in itself that 3PP principles can exist online. I think it depends on the format or layout of the class. What I mean by that is the way that the class is facilitated. Is the class conducted asychronously or synchronously? How are captures submitted and validated? One of the great dilemma's of the online environment is the ability to validate the authenticity of someone's work, whether it is original or plagiarized. While this problem exists in physical classroom courses, it becomes increasingly easy for individuals to use the online environment as a pseudo-reality. This principle harmonizes with what you mentioned, Susan, regarding the reality and unreality of game dynamics. When we are face to face with people, it is easier for us to read body language and facial expressions. These physical communications, while they may be transmitted over the internet through Web 2.0 tools, is still a representation of physical proximity as opposed to 'the real deal'. There is a need in the 3PP model for 'total' communication, by which I mean the physical, emotional, social, intellectual, and environmental communicaitons occurring. As I see it, all of these communicative elements form the structure of the 'role' of L/T and are essential to building the relationship that enables knowledge transfer. So if there is a way to transcend the communication issues of online environments and build trust through student relationships, then yes, I believe that the 3PP model can be replicated via Web 2.0 interactions.
I would just add this: a well-written textbook ought to be able to communicate as clearly and powerfully as a well prepared teacher. As this is the case, I don't see how the web--which has significantly more resources than a mere textbook--should be considered anything less than a wonderful tool in assisting students to learn.
There is a sentimental reluctance to let a teacher go--something to do with presence in the classroom, love, and other warm fuzzies--but there is also a more sinister one: teachers don't want to be replaced by websites. If a textbook is written to communicate well, or if a website is designed to enlighten students understanding, isn't this just one more medium to be used? Would students really be at a disadvantage due learning something from a textbook instead of from a teacher, or, from a website instead of a textbook?
Given what I have learned in the class, (and while I still feel that a teacher's presence is important) I wonder if having someone for the students to teach would be more helpful than to have someone from whom the students could learn.
Here you have for examples the great texts of literature and scripture which do communicate on many levels and change lives. Do you think the scriptures can do their job if they are not mediated by the spirit? A lot of people have gotten a lot of rotten relgion from the Bible. This is something we still have to bat around.
I think the spiritual dynamic is really critical to learning. Like Benjamin, I have felt in many classes I have taken that I could have learned and taught the material more effectively without the teacher I had. Perhaps the online experience could have replaced the physical teacher scenario for me. But the other dynamic is the simple interaction between students in the classroom. I feel that the difference between good instruction and poor instruction is the instructor's ability to to enable students to discuss and learn from one another. My paradigm of others has totally changed in this class. I now see others as infinite repositories of knowledge. I cannot subscribe to the theories of graded knowledge in which I may possess a more 'superior' knowledge than another. If I am able, I could have the capacity to learn infinitely from others. The human element in education provides the context for the knowledge. The praxis of life is the validation (3PP model sense) of the educational process.
My question: How can we more effectively use technology to enhance, rather than minimize, the human element of educational experience?
I think most of the answers come from the same one we would use to make our teaching more effective. First, teach learners to be learners--responsible for their own learning. Second, teach them to teach others, capture, etc. Third, and lastly, the teacher should be most worried about how the student learns, not about planned obsolescence and making more money on the near-identical 8th edition of their textbook. Textbook writing isn't as hard as people make this out to sound, and online programming isn't bad either. In fact, online textbooks are just textbooks on steroids. They are textbooks with built-in quizzes, video clips, and excitement. They can also have the personal touch by having one professor to be the 'host' of the program and lead you through things (think Norm Nemrow if it helps.) Having online TA's could be a simple thing too--skype is changing the world.
I want to clarify a bit as I have thought more on the problem. The fact that we have this particular blog set up is evidence in itself that 3PP principles can exist online. I think it depends on the format or layout of the class. What I mean by that is the way that the class is facilitated. Is the class conducted asychronously or synchronously? How are captures submitted and validated? One of the great dilemma's of the online environment is the ability to validate the authenticity of someone's work, whether it is original or plagiarized. While this problem exists in physical classroom courses, it becomes increasingly easy for individuals to use the online environment as a pseudo-reality. This principle harmonizes with what you mentioned, Susan, regarding the reality and unreality of game dynamics. When we are face to face with people, it is easier for us to read body language and facial expressions. These physical communications, while they may be transmitted over the internet through Web 2.0 tools, is still a representation of physical proximity as opposed to 'the real deal'. There is a need in the 3PP model for 'total' communication, by which I mean the physical, emotional, social, intellectual, and environmental communicaitons occurring. As I see it, all of these communicative elements form the structure of the 'role' of L/T and are essential to building the relationship that enables knowledge transfer. So if there is a way to transcend the communication issues of online environments and build trust through student relationships, then yes, I believe that the 3PP model can be replicated via Web 2.0 interactions.
ReplyDeleteI would just add this: a well-written textbook ought to be able to communicate as clearly and powerfully as a well prepared teacher. As this is the case, I don't see how the web--which has significantly more resources than a mere textbook--should be considered anything less than a wonderful tool in assisting students to learn.
ReplyDeleteThere is a sentimental reluctance to let a teacher go--something to do with presence in the classroom, love, and other warm fuzzies--but there is also a more sinister one: teachers don't want to be replaced by websites. If a textbook is written to communicate well, or if a website is designed to enlighten students understanding, isn't this just one more medium to be used? Would students really be at a disadvantage due learning something from a textbook instead of from a teacher, or, from a website instead of a textbook?
Given what I have learned in the class, (and while I still feel that a teacher's presence is important) I wonder if having someone for the students to teach would be more helpful than to have someone from whom the students could learn.
Here you have for examples the great texts of literature and scripture which do communicate on many levels and change lives. Do you think the scriptures can do their job if they are not mediated by the spirit? A lot of people have gotten a lot of rotten relgion from the Bible. This is something we still have to bat around.
ReplyDeleteI think the spiritual dynamic is really critical to learning. Like Benjamin, I have felt in many classes I have taken that I could have learned and taught the material more effectively without the teacher I had. Perhaps the online experience could have replaced the physical teacher scenario for me. But the other dynamic is the simple interaction between students in the classroom. I feel that the difference between good instruction and poor instruction is the instructor's ability to to enable students to discuss and learn from one another. My paradigm of others has totally changed in this class. I now see others as infinite repositories of knowledge. I cannot subscribe to the theories of graded knowledge in which I may possess a more 'superior' knowledge than another. If I am able, I could have the capacity to learn infinitely from others. The human element in education provides the context for the knowledge. The praxis of life is the validation (3PP model sense) of the educational process.
ReplyDeleteMy question:
How can we more effectively use technology to enhance, rather than minimize, the human element of educational experience?
I think most of the answers come from the same one we would use to make our teaching more effective. First, teach learners to be learners--responsible for their own learning. Second, teach them to teach others, capture, etc. Third, and lastly, the teacher should be most worried about how the student learns, not about planned obsolescence and making more money on the near-identical 8th edition of their textbook. Textbook writing isn't as hard as people make this out to sound, and online programming isn't bad either. In fact, online textbooks are just textbooks on steroids. They are textbooks with built-in quizzes, video clips, and excitement. They can also have the personal touch by having one professor to be the 'host' of the program and lead you through things (think Norm Nemrow if it helps.) Having online TA's could be a simple thing too--skype is changing the world.
ReplyDeleteWhat would online TA's do? Would they just stimulate discussion or would they do something more? This is a fascinating idea...
ReplyDelete