Month: October 2017

While participating in a group discussion during residency at Royal Roads, I used the term “learning styles”, and was quickly informed by my instructor that the nature of this long standing assumption has been greatly argued as of late. I wasn’t quite sure what she meant but knew that it would come up later in my studies.

Alas, here we are a few months later, and this discussion is now at the forefront. The article by Kirschner argues that although “learning styles” is considered to be common knowledge, there is really no evidence or proof that people are restricted to a certain type of learning style.  It seems as though he has brought forth these arguments out of strong frustration with the educational field as a whole. He claims that educators are taking the easy way out by assuming learning styles and creating content based on these assumptions.  

Before I even considered this topic, or the concept that learning styles could be a myth, I had always assumed that everybody had different preferences to learning. After evaluating this literature, it has caused me to conclude that it really is JUST that, a preference. Simply because we think we are stimulated visually for example, does not necessarily mean that we are in fact learning any better through visual stimulation. The concept that really struck me was how Kirschner articulated that learning should be measured through cognitive abilities and not learning styles. Rather than tailoring to the self-diagnosed learning styles that are really only personal preferences, teachers should be focusing on the intellect and capabilities of the learners instead of what they proclaim to be the way in which they learn best. This would avoid classifying students at a young age and withholding exposure to different ways of learning. 

With my continued focused on the millennial learner, this insight has been eye opening for me. I would often generalize the millennial learner based on traits like “they want information in short bits, they are technically savvy, or they want social learning opportunities etc.” After further consideration, it feels like those traits are more like learning preferences that really have no substantial backing or proof to being more or less effective than traditional learning models. This literature has given me some food for thought in terms of the quick assumptions that we as a training department have been making. We would be providing our employees a disservice if we simply cater to their wants and desires rather than taking the time to evaluate if these methods in fact work.

Kirschner, P. (2017). Stop propagating the learning styles myth. Computers & Education, 106, 166-171.

The resource that I would like to share with the cohort is an article I found before I decided to apply for the DipLat program. In fact, it was one of the reasons that solidified my interest in exploring this field more, and have since been using this resource throughout my studies and while at work. The article is a detailed report called the Disruption of Digital Learning. The Disruption of Digital Learning _Bersin (3)

This report was conducted by Josh Bersin for Deloitte. It outlines all of the key trends within corporate learning and particularly highlights the past ten years.  In this course, we spent time studying the history of learning technology and how that can influence the future. The trends clearly outlined in this report examine what the traditional way of learning was, and shows concrete examples of new and enhanced learning technologies (Bersin, 2017). For example, the report outlines how the traditional learning management system technique is now a baseline system for online learning. Bersin (2017) explores microlearning platforms, program experience platforms, content libraries and delivery tools as the future of educational technology and provides valid suggestions in these areas, making this a resource for myself and my team when exploring new opportunities and vendors to work with.  This report can be used in a corporate setting to highlight key trends happening in the industry, the clarity and delivery of the information is helpful when proposing new partnerships and directional changes to an executive group. The most important piece of information from this report (that I have personally used in numerous presentations) is the “Understanding Macrolearning versus Microlearning” (p.9) chart. This visual aid help demonstrate the change in content delivery, giving you a better tool to articulate the foundations of learning and technology and how it’s changed.

 

Resources

Bersin, J. (2017) The Disruption of Digital Learning: 10 Things we’ve learned. Retrieved from Deloitte Consulting LLP

This week a few members of the Royal Roads University Masters of Arts in Learning and Technology (MALAT) cohort met virtually to debate whether media affect learning outcomes. We each read seminal works that outlined each side of the debate: Clark (1994) argued media absolutely do not affect learning outcomes while Kozma (1994) argued we have not yet found the link between media and learning, so he does not agree with the bold statement put forward by Clark (1994).

After grounding ourselves in both sides the education technology media debate, we each sought out an article published recently in the mainstream media and evaluated how each article related to the arguments put forward by Clark (1994) and Kozma (1994). Below are our findings.

Museums Test New Technology, Interactive Exhibits

Terra A.

The video “Museums Test New Technology, Interactive Exhibits” looks at the implementation of digital tools by museums across the globe.  In an effort to make the museum experience more engaging and informative, many prominent museums are implementing digital tools such as interactive displays; 3D videos; and movies accompanied by smells (e.g. gunpowder), moving sets and seats, and weather simulations (e.g. snow and wind). It is implied, though not explicitly stated, that the museums believe the use of these digital tools and accompaniments will help to increase learning in their visitors – children and adults alike.  The museums’ belief that digital tools will increase the engagement and learning of their visitors is in stark contrast with Clark’s (1983) assertion that media are “mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement”.  

Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.

Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088

Wall Street Journal. (2015, Oct 15). General format. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32pqI1dod8A

How Americans Get Science Information

http://www.journalism.org/2017/09/20/science-news-and-information-today/

Katie B.

In the article “How Americans Get Science Information”, social media would be considered the medium to delivering the content of science information with the intention to educate the public on such issues like climate change or engineered food. This article claims that social media or “the media” for the sake of the argument we are debating, plays a modest role in actually educating people. The article depicts the usage and delivery methods of the content, stating that the medium is used by people to check in or be updated on what’s going on (with regards to science in this article particularly). This supports the claims made by Clarke (1983) when he says that the media is simply a “vehicle that delivers instruction” or in this case information. If learning occurs, it is not the media in this case that has caused a cognitive change in the brain, the information itself is not specific to the vehicle used to deliver it. In other words, if the information about science could be delivered in different ways (books, TV, newspapers, etc) then it can not be declared that the social media was, in fact, the result of a person learning (Clark, 1983). It could be argued that the means for social media use, in this case, was a cost-effective medium to deliver the information, therefore supporting Clark’s claim that delivery technologies influence the cost and access of instruction and information.

Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088

Funk, C., Gottfried, J., & Mitchell, A. (2017, September 20). Science news and information today. Paw Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org

zyBooks

Darin F.

zyBooks is a company that creates and sells interactive digital books for pedagogical purposes. The subject material of zyBooks, a new media format, focusses on material that deals with STEM education. Drew (2011) outlines that STEM education is an initiative to stimulate the learning of students in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. The purpose of zyBooks is to replace traditional textbooks and static ePub/PDF digital volumes with a more richer, intuitive, and interactive educational experience that are “proven to better prepare students” (Why zyBooks section, para. 5).

The information provided on the website for zyBooks illustrates the confidence that the creators have in their dynamic educational book series. This level of confidence is showcased on the company’s website page listed under Research. According to zyBooks (n.d.), “zyBooks improved student performance by 16%” (Research section, para. 1) and ”letter grades up to ⅔” (Research section, para. 2). The company continued to show that “students learned 118% more in a single-lesson with minimal text” (Research section, para. 3) with “fewer than 3% of students ‘cheat the system’” (Research section, para. 4). These statements indicate that the company zyBooks perceives that their new media has influenced learning. This assumption by zyBooks directly challenges the theory set out by Clark. Clark (1994) iterates that the influence of education is based on the method of delivery and not the media. To reinforce the company’s claim, zyBooks has supplied non-peer reviewed articles which are written by employees of zyBooks.

Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088

Drew, D. (2011). STEM the tide. Retrieved from https://muse-jhu-edu.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/chapter/35261

Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299087.

zyBooks. (n.d.). zyBooks. Retrieved October 7, 2017, from http://www.zybooks.com/research/

This Play Dough Will Teach Your Kids All About Electricity

Amber M.

This article explains how using conductive play dough as the medium for learning can help children understand how electricity works. The article says, “Children can grasp technical concepts, but they need the right tools” (para. 1). If “tools” is a synonym for “media,” the statement directly contradicts Clark (1994), who argues media do not affect learning outcomes. But if “tools” is a synonym for “methods,” the statement aligns with Clark’s position (1994), who states media and methods are different. The article provides clarification on its position, stating, “It’s allowing children to solve problems through self-motivated learning” (para. 6). Here, the article explicitly aligns itself with Clark (1994) by indicating learning theories such as a problem-solving orientation and motivation are what drives learning outcomes, implying the media used is a secondary consideration.

Stinson, E. (2017). This play dough will teach your kids all about electricity. Retrieved October 6, 2017, from https://www.wired.com/2017/06/play-dough-will-teach-kids-electricity/

8 Important Reasons Why YouTube Should Be Part Of Your eLearning Course

Dugg Steary

In the article “8 Important Reasons Why YouTube Should Be Part Of Your eLearning Course”, the author Christoforos Pappas (2015) explores how YouTube can benefit eLearning students through a focus on integration, community development, promotion of discussion, mobile learning potentials, note-taking skill development, comprehension of complex concepts and contribution through creativity.

Pappas outlines how YouTube videos can be created to introduce, explain in detail, or summarize most subjects or skills for students.  Additionally, students and educators can create or consume content as part of a closed or open community while generating discussions within the YouTube platform or within the classroom.  YouTube videos can be viewed from locations convenient to the student and at the student’s pace to help ensure engagement and retention.  Additionally, YouTube videos can be created with the intention of viewing in short segments which “ensures that complex procedures and demonstrations of specific skills are delivered in small quantities, which enhances knowledge retention” (Pappas, 2015).

Through his exploration of the eight reasons to integrate YouTube videos in eLearning, Pappas supports Kozma’s (1994) assertion that media will influence learning.  Pappas (2015) summarizes that “visual contexts help learners to easily acquire and retain knowledge, as well as develop specific skill sets, as demonstration is the most effective way to get a message across.”

Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088

Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299087.

Pappas, C. (2015). 8 important reasons why youtube should be part of your elearning. Course Retrieved October 6, 2017, from https://elearningindustry.com/8-important-reasons-youtube-part-elearning-course