Unit 1

Technology is ever changing and having an opportunity to investigate several models of self paced learning has me even more excited about this course.  Prior to starting at NCSU, I was unsure about online learning.  My first experience with taking a distant education class was far from fantastic.  I vividly remember feeling extremely confused and lost.    Unfortunately, these feelings left me making a tough decision of dropping the course.  Since this first experience, I have had a change of heart for distance learning.  Learning how web based classes are constructed, I figured my change of heart came with the maturity and patience I have gained over the years.  However, it has been made clear that the construction of the class has a HUGE impact on  one’s success. 

            In Davis and Ragsdell’s article, I was most struck by the notion that traditional learning encompasses a feel of making someone learn RIGHT NOW!  However, this is not the case.  Davis and Ragsdell state “…we should attempt to design learning environments that facilitate asynchronous learning experiences for all students” (n.d.)  What a great idea; however, it seems to assume that the learner is motivated and committed to the learning the content.  Being a 5^th grade teacher, this is a common battle I face with students.  In order to help motivate the students, I create hands on learning activities and opportunities that help students see their success.  As I was reading, I started to understand how this same idea is encompassed within the Keller model.   It seems that this type of teaching relies heavily on a student’s reading ability.  I would be interested to learn how students with learning disabilities are impacted in a web based learning environment.

   Using the Keller model to design a web based learning environment focuses on the notion that a student works at his or her own pace and will not move on until mastery is made.  This is strongly encouraged in the elementary classroom, but seems more feasible in a web based instructional approach.    Therefore, I can see how constructing a Personalized System of Instruction (PSI) model for a variety of units could be beneficial to my students since it is self paced. While reading Koen’s article, I found myself pondering ways to incorporate it into my own classroom.  As I was reading made connections to particular units that I teach, such as ecosystems.   Providing students with an opportunity to learn and be assessed frequently with an integration of remediation has a profound impact on student achievement.  I can see myself using this model of teaching with my own students.  However, the problem in implementing this lies within the lack of available technology access I have during the day.  Therefore, I would rely heavily on students using the unit outside of the classroom for homework.  However, my concern is whether the students would have enough time to effectively use the tool at home.    

The notion that “PSI accommodates the former group and let’s them finish quickly with a minimum of personal contact while providing a maximum amount of personal help to the latter group” allows student learning needs to be met (2005).  Using PSI in an elementary classroom would require knowledge that foundations of the concepts were learned.  If this has not occurred, I can see this style of learning to cause frustration for the student, thus impacting their success of learning. 

                Moreover, reading about audio technology made me feel like I was being taken back in time to the first attempts of distance education.  Moving from the web based learning PSI model, I was surprised by the Audio Technology (AT)pproach.  As I was reading, the impression that I received was that this approach may have been the catalyst for the PSI model.  The striking difference between the AT and PSI model was the task oriented isolation brought on by the AT model.  With the PSI model, there was this strong push for presence; however, there was little discussion about presence in the AT articles.  Both models of learning represent the same idea that “ …learning is an activity done by an individual and not something done to an individual” (Kozma et. al, 1978).  However, the learning seemed very isolated…student get a tape, listen to it, record time spent listening.  Between both theories there is this sense of helping the low and average students succeed without holding the brighter students back.  Essentially, this same idea is expected in the classes that I teach.  The idea of differentiation is extremely important for students in order to keep them motivated and committed to learning.  However, I do not see myself using the AT model in my own classroom.  This seems outdated and lacking in motivation for students that I teach.  

            In order to carry out any of these models, it is important that time and space with regard to technology is available for students.  My teammates and I have found that using online resources is difficult at the elementary level.  Many resources that we want to use require students to be 13 years or older and have a working email address.  While many students have an email accounts, using these at school can be difficult.  Implementing a PSI model, would require access to testing software that can allow students to take different tests countless times if necessary.  Furthermore, there would need to be a communication tool available to students and teachers that allow for regular communication.  Additionally, one would need access to countless information in order to extend and remediate student learning.  Thus knowing how to evaluate materials and websites in order to provide the best instruction to the learners would be an important skill needed by the creator/facilitator.

Davis, R. L., Ragsdell, K. M., The audio tutorial system (n.d.)

Kozma, R.B., Belle, L.W. and Williams, G.W. (1978) Instructional Techniques in Higher Education. Educational Technology Publications, New Jersey.

 

Koen, B. V., (2005). Creating a sense of ‘presence’ in a web-based psi course: The search for Mark Hopkins’ log in a digital world. IEE Transactions on Education 48(4), 599-604.

Montelone, B. A., Rintoul, D. A., & Williams, L. G.M (2008). Assessment of the effectiveness of the studio format in introductory undergraduate biology. CBE- Life Science Education, 234-242