Teachers MATRIX Reloaded

Education usually takes a reactive approach towards the dynamic changes in the economy. The changes that took place during the past decade were very rapid and sweeping in nature, which put most educators in a very confused state. Moreover, educators don’t seem to be sure about the nature of the new technology tools in offer, mainly Web 2.0 and the expected Web 3.0. These are two clear reasons that would make anybody defensive, hence the resistance of educators and as a result the continuation of traditional practices in teaching.

This makes me recall the argument that my group developed during Module 1 project regarding 21st Century teaching and learning practices. In our paper “Social Media in Teaching”, we thought that teaching profession is ancient occupation and a lot of its practices are therefore profound. Consequently, it made no sense to us that the excitement associated with the new technologies is barely leaving any room to emphasize the importance of filtration process to isolate and clearly define best practices to continue. At the same time, this very same process should emphasize the importance of ineffective teaching and learning strategies to stop/replaced. A big opportunity for innovative educators to initiate creative pedagogies that combine the strength of both: traditional best practices, as well as new trends that reflect the pulse of the job market.

Here comes Arthur C Clarke wisdom: “A teacher that can be replaced by a machine should be”… and I say “INDEED … a machine to replace every replaceable teacher” … by the way … this reminds me of MATRIX and MATRIX Reloaded :)

I see this as a change of role rather than a change of job. It is another way of saying: “work smarter than harder”. Teachers need to make a shift in their role from instruction, to mentoring and facilitating. Mitra’s (2007) “Hole in the Wall” experiments, proves the fact that educators can classify good number of skills for learners to learn on their own. This was always my opinion in teaching IT applications for example, I never agreed with standing to show students where to click!!! Even the basic language required to perform the task can be developed by the learners themselves. This is a proven method in English language teaching, titled, “Task based learning”. However, couple of underlines goes under the word “basic”. I think teachers in their new roles as mentors/facilitators will still be required as learners attempt to go with their skills to the next level. Mitra’s highlighted that children in his experiments developed the basic vocabulary required to perform the task, but with lots of pronunciations errors. Common sense says that this is only one type of errors spotted, and more thorough analysis most likely would lead to the discovery of more types of errors. In addition, the more complex the task gets, the more likely the amount of errors with this “self-organized” pedagogical approach to emerge.

In conclusion, I think 21st century educators will be capable of designing learning experiences that:

1. Start with the basic concepts in the classroom

2. Gradually move the students outside the classroom to investigate a real life scenario (i.e. structured independent learning activities)

3. Bring the students back together to share the outcomes of their investigation (i.e. structured peer tutoring through social media tools … probably!!!)

4. Provide feedback on developed knowledge and/or skills (i.e. error correction phase, which is missing in Mitra’s proposed model)

5. Evaluate the depth of achieved learning at the end of the learning experience

6. Develop a structure that guides students efforts towards targeted learning outcomes

7. Mentor the learning experience by bouncing ideas and providing detailed concepts as solicited by students situational needs

8. Facilitate the admin/logistics requirements of the overall learning experience

Teachers, whom fail to make this role-shift from instruction of basic concepts and skills, to become facilitators and mentors, that empowers students to take ownership of their learning through structured independent learning and guided peer-tutoring opportunities, will certainly find themselves fighting machines that are trying to take their places!!!

In my “Digital Narratives” project, I found myself playing the role of the instructor (f2f delivery of basic concepts) … designer (Assignment Outlines and Marking Scheme) … mentor (checking on students understanding and bouncing ideas to help them reflect on their decisions and get back on track) … facilitator (admin work required to identify companies, communicate the requirements to the people in charge in those companies and get the required permissions … arranging workshops for the required technical knowledge on video editing tools … following up to resolve technical issues arise during the project) … evaluator (finally, to test students achieved learning and fill the gradebook :)).


References

Mitra, S. (2007). Hole in the wall. [video online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_shows_how_kids_teach_themselves.html [Accessed: 5/14/2012].

wanting + liking = rewarding --> engaging

Learner’s engagement is a target that every educator is trying to meet. The reality of affairs is that it is quite challenging target and requires a lot of innovation and creativity on the teacher’s part. Majority of learners are mainly interested in the formal reward of a learning experience represented with grades and eventually a qualification. However, crafting learning activities in a way that learners might like would engage them in authentic educational experience. Raymer (2011), defines engagement as the product of combining two components, those are: wanting and liking. Tracing back to the reference that Raymer base his argument on, many interesting insights were covered by Berridge (n.d.) on applying the wanting and liking research finding in treating addiction.

It would be quite interesting if the same research findings apply on education in a reverse manner to make learners get addicted to learnin! The students already “wants” the grades that would lead to the desired qualification, so if the educator can provide them with a learning experience that they like then this would lead to rewarding perception and engagement as a result.

Raymer proposed many aspects to enhance learners’ engagement within the context of eLearning gamification:

1. Setting Goals and Objectives that are short, medium, and long term
2. Provide Frequent Feedback to avoid confusion and make your users feel smart or clever
3. Measure Progress to motivate learners
4. Reward Effort (not just success)
5. Follow a Reward Schedule
6. Utilize the power of Peer Motivation

A nice idea to enhance the Digital Narrative assignment can be utilizing the power of peer motivation as recommended by Raymer. This can mainly done as part of the peer discussion component that takes place for one week following the publication of the students digital narratives.

As described in the third component of the shared marking scheme (Yousuf, 2012), the students are expected to exercise peer-tutoring by individually view every Digital Narrative and ask at least one question about it’s content or make a comment. A rating requirement can be added here where each student is expected also to rate the DN. Moreover, students can rate the answers provided by the DN authors.

The game concept is very much inspired by Raymer’s strategies for enhancing engagement. This can be achieved by combining the power of peer motivation to the powers of: measuring progress and rewarding efforts. The game can start with every student having a basic “Character” next to his name. with every rating added by a peer, the “Characters” for all students gets updated and the one that achieved the best rating stand gets a “Character Upgrade”. Raymer’s presented example of character upgrade figures can be very effective in the targeted engagement among our students.

To further enhance the concept and free it a bit from the expected biases, the students can be requested to only rate the work of peers in other sections. This will even open another opportunity for cross sections competition.

The reviewed article articulated very clearly the potential that gamification has for improving students engagement in the learning process.

References

Berridge, K. (n.d.) Affective Neuroscience & Psychology of Liking & Wanting. [online] Available at: http://www.lsa.umich.edu/psych/research&labs/berridge/research/affectiveneuroscience.html [Accessed: 5/3/2012].

Raymer, R. (2011) Gamification: Using Game Mechanics to Enhance eLearning. [online] Available at: http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=2031772 [Accessed: 5/3/2012].

Yousuf, B. (2012) A Reflection on the Reviewed Literature. baraayousuf, [blog] SUNDAY, APRIL 22, 2012, Available at: http://baraayousuf.blogspot.com/2012/04/reflection-on-reviewed-literature.html [Accessed: May 3, 2012].