seeing the ocean through the waves
The learning Activity Portfolio.
I regularly draw on some of the work of critical educator Dr. Stephen Brookfield. He has a wealth of resources on his website and many published books.
He has an activity developed and adapted from other educators called “Chalk Talk”. It is lesson 13 in this linked PDF. This exercise can be adapted to online courses.
Another resource I’ve utilized is the “Helping Adults Learn” resource.
And an excellent paper about “Teaching our own racism“
In thinking about my intro post, I can foresee that it might both increase and decrease social presence – or maybe, the hypothesized ‘benefits’ of social presence. For example, seeing my picture, and assuming that I am a white male might generate a negative reaction for some, which would still imply ‘social presence’ – however, is it good?
One of the challenges I see with theories of ‘social’ presence in the online learning world is that ‘social’ presences online and the tools to generate that presence, change rapidly. For example, a student (or instructor) of the millennial generation may have multiple social media platforms that could broadcast their presence.
Or, many academics have multiple published papers and books, that in turn generate a ‘social presence’. Sometimes when theories seem to fit too easily, it might mean there are some potential weaknesses. Like other theories, there are both potential advantages and disadvantages to adopting various theoretical paradigms such as COI, and related theoretical components, such as ‘social presence’.
I did not yet provide an introductory post. Here are some details about me, which links to my current doctoral studies at Athabasca University, and EdD in Online Education – and a recent presentation I gave for the Faculty of Graduate Studies: “Tensioned Interfaces: Unsettling Settler Spaces and Places in Online Education.” The link for a presentation given Nov. 20, 2018 will open an Adobe Connect window.
I also have a website, where I intend to post on my “research blog” as my doctoral research evolves.
I have explored and critically engaged in the concept(s) of cognitive presence in relation to the COI Framework, along with the topic and concept of ‘feedback’. Approaching these ideas/concepts with a notion to critically engage or interrogate, has facilitated a deeper understanding of the terms, and potential pitfalls.
I remain curious about the relation of the some of the concepts explored in this course and the relation back to a ‘student-centred’ approach. I am curious about the notion of cultural presence(s) and whether the COI framework might have some ethnocentric views. I am curious, and exploring more, the notions of what ‘learning’ is and how it is defined. The brain is a deeply complex entity – and, yet, much literature in education may be guilty of speaking in absolutes, or large generalizations.
I continue to explore definitions of ‘learning’ in relation to some of this material. I intend to incorporate some of those (e.g. Knud Illeris) into my current doctoral dissertation proposal which is due to be defended in the next 4-8 weeks.
Yes, significant. Much of my instructing experience has included isolated rural Indigenous communities. There is some reference to ‘cultural’ differences in the Hattie excerpt. However, using the three engagement questions, sometimes the ‘goal’ for students I have worked with and for in the past is to just be present at the session. In many cases, so many barriers have been imposed upon students to attend opportunities for learning and expanding credentials. For example, in many northern communities (Indigenous or non-Indigenous) a large barrier is access to good and reliable childcare. These types of links and connections to ‘learning’ are potentially lost when ‘scientific’ and ‘statistical’ measures start permeating throughout education (e.g. links to ‘big data).
There is a place for the types of analysis that Hattie explores. However, there are often more humanized and day-to-day realities that also need to be incorporated into these types of discussions.
2. In what ways can you improve the effectiveness of the feedback that you provide for your students?
Maybe this will be considered somewhat contradictory, or oppositional thinking; however, I think the effectiveness of the feedback that I can provide to students will be greatly improved by seeking more feedback on my performance and methods of instruction. For example, long-time educator and research Stephen Brookfield advocates for a Critical Incident Questionnaire.
This asks some important questions of students and provides vital feedback to instructors/facilitators. This type of tool also facilitates opportunities for students to self-reflect on their own learning process. This, in many cases, can be an even more important ‘feedback’ process than receiving from an instructor.
Curiously, the etymology of feedback (Online Etymology Dictionary) suggests that ‘feedback’ as a process, such as “information about the results of a process” is suggested to not have been common until the 1950s. Prior to that it had to do with electronics.
I am an instructor for a course on interpersonal communication and conflict resolution with the following learning objectives.
2. How is student learning assessed in the course (essays, quizzes, journals, machine-gradable tests, portfolios)?
This particular course has a combination of assignments, classroom participation and a final exam.
3. In what ways are the intended learning outcomes and the assessments aligned or not?
A combination of alignment and complete non-alignment. For example, having a final exam on a course focussed on interpersonal communication and conflict resolution is not very aligned.
_ _ _ _ _
Rather than commenting on the other aspects of this suggested post – I was quite struck by some potential stereotypes in the videos provided for this module. For example, it seemed remarkable to me that the young woman was the ‘deep’ learner and what appeared to be a young male, and potentially a visible minority at that. I am curious whether the video producers were aware of the potential stereotypes.
Furthermore, there are interesting metaphors used repeatedly in this module and in the videos, with the potential for ethnocentric views. It seems simplistic to suggest that a learner is a ‘shallow’ or ‘surface’ learner because they are a “C” student simply looking to get through a course. This seems to be far more a reflection of the education system, than the learner. Focussing on the learner, has the danger of potentially pathologizing each individual learner, as opposed to exploring how different learners learn in different ways.
_ __ _ _ _ _
Part of the pondering I highlight here is related to the fact that as of late, I instruct the above course to 100% International students and face-to-face with Moodle support and foundation. In the previous semester, I had 15 students from the Punjab area of India, 5 students from other parts of India, 1 from S. Korea, 1 from Rwanda, 1 from Croatia, 4 from the Philippines, and 2 from Mexico. The range of cultural differences in interpersonal communication styles, along with conflict resolution – was astounding at times.
Therefore, some reflection is required in linking learning objectives with the actual students, and respecting their differences and similarities. This would be part of a “student-centred” approach, no?