Through researching my blogs, I believe that there are two main areas where teaching is flawed. Firstly the focus of the class is more on goals than learning. Secondly the idea every class can use the same model to fit all situations in learning.
Ralph Waldo Emerson once famously said, “life is a journey, not a destination” (Emerson, n.d.). I feel that this quote has great precedence in education. Due to the extrinsic motivation, the current educational system is fixated upon the destination but does not focus on the learning experience.
I have come up with two models, which observe higher learning and teaching. Teaching follows a cyclic model, while learning is an upward spiral. The model of higher education uses an upward spiral because education is continuous, and every level increases understanding. Each level of the spiral represents a level of knowledge based on Wheeler’s (n.d.) pyramid (figure 1). The part of the spiral, which I am presenting in this blog, will only observe the transformation stage of learning. It seems the transformation stage is more representative of higher learning. This is because transformation refers to “knowing why” thought analysis and evaluation (Wheeler, n.d.). According to Knight & Yorke (2013) analysis and evaluation are forms of higher learning.
Fig 1. The different stages of understanding.
According to Barr & Tagg (1995) in the current education system there is a fundamental difference between teaching and learning. These new models will look at how the cycle of teaching and the higher learning stage of the spiral model of learning (higher learning stage) occurs. As well as how the higher learning stage is a more effective way of educating university students as shown on my previous blogs.
Another theme, which has been concurrent, throughout my blogs is technology. This blog will observe how technology can help implement the higher learning spiral segment.
Fig 2. The cycle of teaching.
The cycle of teaching (figure 2.) starts when students are given goals, which will lead to reward or punishments. Rewards cause students to learn the information (psuf10, 2013; Barr & Tagg, 1995). When the students reach the end of their goal, they gain feedback. Based on this feedback they are punished or rewarded. After receiving their rewards the information which they have learned is perceived as useless (psuf10, 2013; Cooke et al., 2011). Thus after the reward is gained, students will discard information they gain (psuf10, 2013; Huizenga et al., 2009). This procedure will occur again for a new goal. Motivation from the rewards occurs throughout this cycle. New goals and rewards renew this motivation.
According my blog (psuf10, 2013; Glover, 2013) current learning is based on rewards, goals and feedback. In many blogs in science of education there has been emphasis to the negative effects of extrinsic learning. These negative effects are decreased implicit motivation and creativity (psuf10; Eisenberger & Shanock, 2003). Students are motivated by extrinsic rewards, thus when not given a reward they tend to not complete tasks (psuf10, 2013, Barr & Tagg, 1995).
Fig 3. The higher learning stage of the model of spiral of learning.
When students have enough understanding from the pervious stage they progress to the higher learning stage (figure 3.). The higher learning stage starts when students are given a broad interpretation goal (BIG). A BIG is a non-specific goal given by teachers, which doesn’t have strict guidelines on how students approach the goal. This allows for integration of the BIG into students own personal goals. BIG is based on research by Deci and Ryan (2004) on Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) I have mentioned in my previous blog (psuf10, 2013). The idea behind using a BIG comes from the part MUSIC model (psuf10, 2013; Jones, 2009) called empowerment. Empowerment allows students to learn independently while the OIT allows for teachers to give some structure to learning.
After receiving a BIG, students will have to learn the topic. How students can learn such information is through cognitive skills, which is mentioned in a blog of a fellow classmate (Wilkins, 2013); Yang et al., 2011). All of these skills can be observed in figure 4.
Fig 4. List of cognitive skills (Yang et al., 2011).
Examples of these skills have been mentioned in my blogs: investigation (psuf10, 2013; Garrison, 2011), creating (psuf10, 2013; Leland & Kasten, 2002) etc.
Many of these cognitive skills (figure 1.) are based around intrinsic learning, which according to (psuf10, 2013; Eisenberger & Shanock, 2003) is better for learning information.
Throughout the higher learning stage, students are kept engaged by aspects of the music model (psuf10, 2013; Jones, 2009). In the model the main aspect is interest. If a student is interested in the topic, they are motivated to do work (psuf10, 2013; Jones, 2009). Thus they will be willing to complete another BIG, starting the cycle all over again. This occurs until the students understanding reaches a point, where there is no need for a BIG, the learning is all internalised. I believe this should be one of the aims of learning, giving a student an interest in learning.
Another aspect of my blogs have been that how technology has affected the classroom environment. Technology has two main impacts on a classroom, change in organisation and change in mentality. As I have mentioned in my blogs, technology allows for a more student centred approach. A is key for cognitive skills in the higher learning stage. Examples of this are the use of smartboards for student presentations (psuf10, 2013; Preston & Mowbray, 2008), the internet as medium for student based learning (psuf10, 2013; Simpson, 2013), etc.
Secondly technology has caused a shift in mentality towards technology enhanced learning environments (TELE) (Lim & Chai, 2008). TELE is mentioned in my blog about learning environment (psuf10, 2013). I mentioned a paper by Campbell et al., (2013) who clearly stated that the introduction of technology is changing shape of a classroom. This shift will hopefully improve the shape and layout of classrooms to be more appropriate for group and implicit learning (psuf10, 2013).
I have observed throughout my blogs that technology is allowing for such ideas to be introduced. However it cannot solely fix the current education system. There is a requirement for a complete change in the mind-set by personnel in education in the way students should be taught (psuf10, 2013).
Overall the main point which I have drawn from blogs and reading, is there needs to be a drastic shift towards a dynamic model of student education. Technology can help for this shift to become a reality.
Emerson, R. (n.d.). Ralph Waldo Emerson > Quotes. In Goodreads. Retrieved November 29, 2013, from http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/12080.Ralph_Waldo_Emerson
Psuf10. (2013, November 22). Boulevard of broken theories: User-centred gamification [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://psuf10.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/boulevard-of-broken-theories-user-centred-gamification/
Wheeler, S. (n.d.). Learning Theories for the Digital Age [Online Slideshow]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/timbuckteeth
Knight, P., & Yorke, M. (2013). Learning, curriculum and employability in higher education. Routledge.
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change: The magazine of higher learning, 27(6), 12-26.
Cooke, L. J., Chambers, L. C., Añez, E. V., & Wardle, J. (2011). Facilitating or undermining? The effect of reward on food acceptance. A narrative review.Appetite, 57(2), 493-497.
Huizenga, J., Admiraal, W., Akkerman, S., & Dam, G. T. (2009). Mobile game‐based learning in secondary education: engagement, motivation and learning in a mobile city game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(4), 332-344.
Glover, I. (2013). Play as you learn: gamification as a technique for motivating learners.
Jones, B. D. (2009). Motivating students to engage in learning: The MUSIC Model of Academic Motivation. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(2), 272-285.
Wilkins, C. (2013, November 1). Are current assessment methods beneficial to the student? [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://christopherjwwilkins.wordpress.com/2013/11/01/are-current-assessment-methods-beneficial-to-the-student/
Yang, D., Richardson, J. C., French, B. F., & Lehman, J. D. (2011). The development of a content analysis model for assessing student’s cognitive learning in asynchronous online discussion. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(1), 43-70. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9166-1.
Eisenberger, R., & Shanock, L. (2003). Rewards, intrinsic motivation, and creativity: A case study of conceptual and methodological isolation. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2-3), 121-130.
Leland, C. H., & Kasten, W. C. (2002). Literacy education for the 21st century: It’s time to close the factory. Reading &Writing Quarterly, 18(1), 5-15.
Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. Taylor & Francis.
Preston, C., & Mowbray, L. (2008). Use of SMART Boards for teaching, learning and assessment in kindergarten science. Teaching Science, 54(2), 50-53.
Simpson, O. (2013). Supporting students in online, open & distance learning. Routledge.
Lim, C. P., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Rethinking classroom-oriented instructional development models to mediate instructional planning in technology-enhanced learning environments. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8), 2002-2013.
Campbell, M., Saltmarsh, S., Chapman, A., & Drew, C. (2013). Issues of teacher professional learning within ‘non-traditional’classroom environments.Improving Schools, 16(3), 209-222.
Psuf10. (2013, October 4). Handwritting vs. Typing when taking notes [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://psuf10.wordpress.com/2013/10/04/handwriting-vs-typing-when-taking-notes/
Psuf10. (2013, October 11). How technology has changed teh face of education [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://psuf10.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/how-technology-has-changed-the-face-of-education/
Psuf10. (2013, October 25). Boulevard of Broken theories: MUSIC model of academic motivation [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://psuf10.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/boulevard-of-broken-theories-music-model-of-academic-motivation/
Psuf10. (2013, November 1). Boulevard of broken theories: An introduction to teh inquiry model. [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://psuf10.wordpress.com/2013/11/01/boulevard-of-broken-theories-an-introduction-to-the-inquiry-model/#comment-105
Psuf10. (2013, November 15). Boulevard of broken theories: Moos’ Model of Learning Environments. [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://psuf10.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/boulevard-of-broken-theories-moos-model-of-learning-environments/