I don’t wish for there to be any miscommunication.
with the risk of being harsh: this is the paradox of many committees in university settings: formed, and served by members with no true interest in what the committee SHOULD be about in the first place. In this case, one would assume the opposite of "calibrating" voices. But encouraging diversity, encouraging strong voices and transparency.
a little strange to bring up
what a choice of words. I can't help but see such statement almost as admittance of guilt. One immediately thinks that the message delivered already is unfair and compromises personal integrity.
the tone of COLTT
I am just really curious to how would the director and the committee members would explain what the "tone" of COLTT is?
It is disturbing to learn that the COLTT Program Committee privileges a calibrated “tone” among participants over the diversity of individual expression, and that Twitter — in particular — is seen as a threat to such group-think.
considering that the introductory statement of COLTT is: "COLTT engages participants in learning about teaching practices and technologies, challenging the way they think about both." - emphasis on "challenging". Maybe they should edit to "moderately challenging" or "challenging and censoring".
But back to OER. David’s point is that the chance of any one faculty member producing their own end-to-end course out of free materials that they stitch together is admittedly quite small, but when you look at the numerator (the vast amount of course creation that happens anyway each semester in a discipline) it’s not only possible that these open works will emerge — it’s highly probable, even when you plug in fairly pessimistic filters.
Such a far stretch with the Drake's equation and yet such a beautiful analogy. I couldn't help but smile and think of the famous reply in the film Contact to the question whether we are alone in the Universe: “The universe is a pretty big place. If it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space.”
Daily Create
Daily Create
First Daily Create: Thunderstorm in Bolivia Meets Rain in Granada: Five Sounds of Nature
Daily Create
First Daily Create: Thunderstorm in Bolivia Meets Rain in Granada: Five Sounds of Nature
It’s regular human communication astride a new medium.
so well described. Especially when we think about technology in terms of extensions of ourselves: "who we are is due to the feedback loops between us and our tools as part of our cognitive arsenal "
But it would be a mistake to think that what I do is digital, because what I really do is human.
It really resonates with Kevin Kelly’s : "technology is the real skin of our species"
This meant that highlyskilled students could move on, and others could dwell and work on skills smack dab in themiddle of their ZPD. Not only did I enjoy grading more, but I could get a visceral feel of thebrass ring of meeting students right where they struggled and pushing them with clearguidance – and it all was anaturaloutcome of a fairly simple course design shift.
So feedback was added and students' success increased. Didn't have to write 16 pages to come to this conclusion...
Google Suite
There is an Adobe Suite but not Google Suite. May be Google tools, apps.
six master’s level courses attempting to appropriatea quest-based learning approach to classroom design.
Here is the inconsistency: the author is exploring Vygotsky's social theories that are applied to children's learning to master level courses for adult learners. Does anyone see something wrong with this?
digital systems
as opposed to analog systems?
Looking at ZPD from the teacher’sperspective can be intimidating if not impossible. But what if instead of having the teacheridentify the student, the teacher creates a more game-like space where students canquickly identify their own ZPD?
This is quite inaccurate. The whole concept of learning styles has been qualified as a neuro myth and completely disproven (see Pashler 2008).
Looking at ZPD from the teacher’sperspective can be intimidating if not impossible. But what if instead of having the teacheridentify the student, the teacher creates a more game-like space where students canquickly identify their own ZPD?
Isn't the whole point of ZDP theory - the social context of learning?
"playification"
or as we call it: "'coz it's cool"
around those goals. These communities of learners can share experiences and increase their learning around the non-game activity, which OIT suggests is a method more likely to create truly internalized experiences
So according to the OI theory, a system that is designed to be fun for the users, allows for user's input and certain level of control over, different paths to achieving outcomes, and the ability to participate in the generating and creating of the content, results into transforming external motivation to internal. Thus, it increases the system value to the user and consequently, the learning experience. Did I get it right? .....In essence it sounds familiar coming from andragogy principles addressing value and motivation as necessary for the adult learner's experience.
Actually, did Malcolm Knowles derived the principles (or assumptions of the Adult Learner) from that theory?
By being transparent about the constraint process, the users can learn about why constraints are in place, become more informed about learning outcomes, and then see how the game elements are connected to the learning outcomes
It is true that there is a constraint of users defining the course objectives because of curriculum and accreditation needs but how about if users participate in determine lower level unit objectives or milestones? That may be something to consider in the designing and teaching of a course....well no. They have to be subject matter experts to determine that. So never mind.
What is common in these games is that the game designers created not only a game, but developed a system to allow others to create and modify the games. Allowing player-developed content extends the life of a game and allows the designers to see how creative users can be with the toolkits provided.
I think Remi's wiki pages in the course are a great example of this. It is an instructor generated content that provide students with the opportunity to add, edit, modify or in other words: generate their all content to contribute to the learning process. Right?
OIT
I am still not very clear on the essence of OIT theory.
gh, that "once you start giving someone a reward, you have to keep her in that reward loop foreve
I am quite fascinated by this study/statement. I wonder what are the brain mechanics for this necessity to occur in the brain? How does the brain process and works through the motivation factors to create such a dependency? IF anyone have a good source of information on this, I would be really interested (and if it not too complicated to read :)
Doesdesigning virtual cities inSimCityprovide a starting point for a career designing real cities? Isthat starting point different in any substantive way from building cities with wooden blocks?
So, in my opinion these are fundamentally wrong questions to ask. An example of transferable skills may be:"Does playing the game teaches on tactics or how to build a strategy". I think finding out which skills are being practiced during the game and then formulate the question of what is being transferred.
we do see video games as an important type of human activityagainst which to pose the basic question of transfer
I am not sure I agree with the way the question of transfer is situated here. It seems way too broad.
We really do want to know whether playing first-person shooters actually teachesplayers how to use weapons in real life.
Reading just this sentence makes me excited reading the rest of the article. It is like asking if one would be able to learn to swim by taking a course on swimming without even trying to get in the water. So if the conclusion of the article is playing first-person shooters teaches players how to use real weapons, I would be extremely surprised!
School grades may be misleading because the problems students learn to solve in school may not be the kind of problems they face after they graduate
I think the problem is the transferability of what students learn and not necessarily as Goodman states that the problems are different after graduations. Grades are a common instrument for measuring success on how information is retained or applied or analysed. Every information is valuable. It's a matter to connect it to prior knowledge or experience and make it relevant to students.