Reflective Post #3

The first article, Reconsidering research on learning from media, is mainly about how the media does not influence learning.  In the first few paragraphs Clark states that, ”this article will argue that most current summaries and meta-analyses of media comparison studies clearly suggest that media do not influence learning under any conditions”.  One school, the only school, they saw improvement was in El Salvador.  This was when a television was introduced.  However, it did not have anything to do with student success.  At the end, Clark warns us about comparing media further because “we will not find learning differences”.  The research has already been done without hardly any changes in the results.  He does though say that future research should “focus on necessary characteristics of instructional methods and other variables (task, learner aptitude, and attribution)” to understand how achievement increases.

My thoughts on this are from the time this article was written to today’s world is very different.  Clark states that “it is important to note however, that teachers are entirely capable of reviewing material for anxious students…it is what the teacher does – the teaching – that influences learning”. I agree that using technology for instruction might not help the students learn and be successful all the time.  It is also about how the teacher is teaching the material in which could use media.  Allowing the students to use media and different technology can help influence their learning, especially with today’s kids.  It also depends on the subject material as well.  Using computers in physical education class is not the same as actually being able to physically run around and do the activities.  I feel that it is good to use the fitness technologies available while still getting their physical activity, but sitting behind a computer and learning about different sports won’t help the students learn how to actually play them.  I also remember back to high school when we were dissecting in biology, such as worms and frogs, or in chemistry when we had to mix different chemicals in the lab.  The use of a computer for this would not take the place of actually doing this hands on.

 

The next article, Learning with Media, is using research to respond to the previous article, Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media.  They do not agree with the writer, Clark.  This article showed different research that was done to show that the media can influence learning.  It goes on to show different research on learning by learning with books, learning with television, and learning with computers.  In conclusion, it states that “Various aspects of the learning process are influenced by the cognitively relevant characteristics of media: their technologies, symbol systems, and processing capabilities.”

Kozma explains the reasons for why each type of media can affect the learning with different media.  With all the new technology, it is mind blowing!  All of our in-services at school have been related to technology to help show the staff the uses available so we can utilize them in the classroom.  Even with the explanations, I feel that students can still learn without different media.  Like stated in the article, “our ability to take advantage of the power of emerging technologies will depend on the creativity of designers their ability to exploit the capabilities of the media, and our understanding of the relationship between these capabilities and learning”.  This means to me that you can use technology, however it ultimately comes down to the creativity and how it is delivered to the students.  With the students today, we can’t go backwards though with technology which is already in the schools today so we must keep moving forward.  This is why many of our in-services have been technology related to help keep up with the students and their media uses.

The third article, Thinking Technology: Toward a Constructivist Design Model, is discussing constructivism.  Constructivism is the way that “learners construct their own reality or at least interpret it based upon their perceptions of experiences, so an individual’s knowledge is a function of one’s prior experiences, mental structures, and beliefs that are used to interpret objects and events”.  The article also shows the difference between Constructivist and Objectivist approaches and how the environment is much for difficult for constructivist verses objectivist instruction.  For Objectivist, it states that “there are no explicit design models for prescribing the sequence of instructional events.”  This article also includes a web of constructivism, but is still a work in progress.  The web includes three elements which are collaboration, context and construction.  The article explains that it is important for constructivist lessons to be based around those three elements.

My thoughts on this are, as a physical education teacher, constructivism can be utilized and that it can be an effective way to learn.  The focus should be on how the students get there.  It may take a while for a student to learn how to do a certain skill, but it was the process on how they get there to be successful.  Once the student finally figures out the skill, that look on their face and joy is the best feeling!  The road getting there may have been tough, but it showed the student that the end result was very rewarding.

When thinking about the question, “How does Clark/Kozma debate interact with the suggestion that constructivism underlies best practices in educational technology?” I feel that when a student learns something on their own, they are motivated to keep going.  I see this all the time in my physical education classes.  When a student keeps working on a skill and finally able to do it, there is nothing better than watching them react to this because they did it on their own!  Thinking back to when I was in school, I remember many of the things we had to understand and learn was used through music or movement.  I still remember the helping verbs we sang to Twinkle Twinkle Little Star.  Or we used to do movement to be able to help us spell words – such as different exercises as we spelled out words.  This just stuck with you by using different types of mediums to help students learn.  Within educational technology, I feel that it is the same way.  It is about what resources are used and how the lesson is delivered.  

The last article, Redefining Equity: Meaningful Uses of Technology in Learning Environments, is about making sure students have equitable access to technology when assignments are required to be completed in this manner.  Equity suggests that there is fair access along with operational knowledge of technology to bridge the Digital Divide.  Some ideas include BYOD and 1:1 initiate, which our district has in place.  Anyway a school decides to organize their use of technology in school, it must be equitable.  The article also talks about how some districts can find funds to be able to purchase the technology for their school districts.

My thoughts on this are that learners can be more successful when they are doing it in a way that is relevant and important to them.  If it is something the students like to do, they are more likely to understand the concepts.  Also, as for funding, after researching and writing a technology grant for another class, I feel like there are so many technology grants out there that are not being utilized.  To answer the question, “how does the way we as educators decide to use technology make it more or less equitable?” is by making sure that all students have equal access to media if it is being used for instruction.  It also needs to be meaningful and relevant to the learner.  Our school includes a mobile lab for each grade level along with two computer labs that are available to check out.  This makes it more equitable to all the students.  Our school also allows students to bring their own device.  However, it would be less equitable if the assignment required the students to use their own device, but didn’t have one.

After reading these articles, along with the Clark/Kozma debate, and thinking about the question, “How do these ideas overlap and support one another, or how do they differ and contradict?”, I feel that each article all had different views on the influence of media whether or not it had an impact on learning.  There is no model that fits every learner’s needs or instruction.  Clark basically would just get rid of technology in the classroom altogether because he believes it has no influence on learning.  The article Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media felt that media doesn’t influence learning but the article Learning with Media argued why it influences learning.  I feel that media influences student learning, but it is also depends on how it is presented to the students.  Students today love using different technology/media, so we can connect to our students by using some of these forms within their instruction.

The articles Thinking Technology: Toward a Constructivist Design Model and Redefining Equity: Meaningful Uses of Technology in Learning Environments both discussed constructivism and support its effect on education.  I feel that constructivism is a great method of teaching.  Instead of being concerned about what type of media influences learning, like Kozma, we should be concerned if media is influencing learning.