Posted By Mark on May 18, 2020
My initial thoughts into critical inquiry were based on the overarching idea that you must delve deep into the topic at hand in order to suck out all the useful information. As long as one paid serious attention to the topic, researched it thoroughly, and added meaningful discussion, you successfully engaged in critical inquiry. I believe there is truth to my initial thoughts, but perhaps clarity of understanding is needed, particularly in the context of learning technology. Selwyn (2010) proposed that critical study within the field of learning technology has been engrossed, although not completely misplaced, in explaining issues on how effective learning technologies are designed, developed and implemented. I believe these topics of study are clearly important, but suggest Selwyn’s case for critical study is not the downgrading of past studies, but rather an upbringing of more personal critical thought and application to future studies. Selwyn’s (2010) further reflections suggest that learning technology studies need to apply critical study into the social scientific, self-reflective, and self-analytical sphere of inquiry. This is where I believe I am starting to understand a different side of critical inquiry, one that is more personal and socially reflective. For example, in asking the question pertaining to my individual learning plan, “is online summative assessments appropriate for phase one terminal or tower air traffic control students?” critical inquiry from a social scientific viewpoint may look at some of the psychological aspects for a student within the air traffic control learning environment. Further critical inquiry might look into aspects of air traffic control culture and the contributions it may have on the air traffic control learning environment, good or bad. Whatever the inquiry may detail, Selwyn has given me pause to make sure I have some type of social scientific or cultural research within my paper to give greater substance into my critical inquiry.
Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: Notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 65-73. Retrieved from
https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00338.x
Read More
Posted By Mark on May 11, 2020
Please see the following link to see Team 4’s final Blog Post & Infographic:
https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0113/team-4-final-post/
Read More
Posted By Mark on May 6, 2020
As I continue to research different journal articles and other reference material for my topic, I find myself surrounded by many great resources. My topic is currently on: Feasibility of online assessment in high stress learning environments: An air traffic control perspective. As with much of my research, I try to look at what has been done in the past or at least learn from it. As George Santayana (2020) would say, “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (para. 3). I decided to take a good close look at Weller’s (2020) book: 25 Years of Ed Tech, in order to see if history can provide insights into my critical inquiry.
Although hoping for some direct primary research to my topic, it was difficult to find relevant material within this book. However, instead of finding information directly linked to the potential feasibility of online assessments, I was able to find secondary applications that could aid in the effectiveness of online assessments within air traffic control. One of these such applications was the use of digital badges. Digital badges are a “good example of how ed tech [has] evolve[ed] when several other technologies…[have made] the environment favour[ed] for their implementation” (Weller, 2020, p. 151). Air traffic control contains complicated operations that are difficult to become proficient at, simply due to its increasing complexity in each stage of training. For the student, complexity increases in many areas such as, but not limited to: knowledge, understanding of air traffic control principles, ability to maintain situational awareness, communications, visual and auditory acuity, advanced problem-solving, and the ability to perform exceptionally well under numerous pressure variables (time, risk-factors, weather, multiple sensory inputs etc.). Assessments are done routinely and the standard passing marks for each test usually lies between 85-95%, any marks lower than this are considered an auto-fail. Weller (2020) does suggest that digital badges do have the potential to be effective within digital learning environments in which they are employed, particularly due to “help[ing] to structure courses into manageable chunks, with convenient awards along the way” (p. 154). Iafrate (2017), a writer for eLearning Industry, stated that, “badges have been successfully used to set goals, motivate behaviours, represent achievements and communicate success in many contexts…badges can have a significant impact, and can be used to motivate learning, signify community and signal achievement” (para. 5). Within a pure military context, the recognition of personnel has been a long-standing and significant part within all levels of the military, regardless of rank. I truly wonder if digital badges can be a new endeavour to assist in military digital learning environments?
The incorporation of digital badges within specified stages of air traffic control learning, particularly following successful digital online assessments, deserves further research and thought. I am contemplating even having a meeting on the topic with my fellow supervisors. I can definitely see the benefit of looking at the history of Ed Tech – I am very glad I read Weller’s book. The past is filled with many failures and successes, but sometimes you just need to apply past inventions with some fresh innovative ideas. Who knows what positive outcomes you will see?
Reference
George Santayana. (2020, April 29). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Santayana#Quotes_about_Santayana
Iafrate, M. (2017, November 06). Digital badges: What are they and how are they used. Elearning Industry. Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/guide-to-digital-badges-how-used
Weller, M. (2020). 25 years of ed tech. Veletsianos, G. (Eds). Edmonton, AB: AU Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771993050.01
Read More
Posted By Mark on May 1, 2020
My current topic I am pursuing is the feasibility of online assessment in high stress learning environments: An air traffic control perspective. This topic is unique to my vocation, the Chief Terminal Air Traffic Controller at 19 Wing Comox, and difficult to pursue with the lack of current literature on air traffic control training. Within these research entry log-posts, my goal is to give a snapshot into my critical inquiry sojourn into this topic whilst supplying insights from particular references I am using. It is my hope through these log entries I also get help from you, the reader, to add comments to further aid me in my critical inquiry sojourn.
One of the constructive criticisms I received in Part 1 of the assignment was my overall explanation of critical inquiry. Although, I am confident in my understanding of critical inquiry, my own military ‘way of thinking’ was getting in the way. In this case, my striving to always demonstrate effective outcomes – thus, missing the importance of the process. In my Part 1 paper, I referred to my critical inquiry as a reasonable way to ‘demonstrate’ potential effectiveness, when in actuality, critical inquiry seeks to ‘interrogate’ potential effectiveness. At first glance, the diction of these particular word choices seems inconsequential; however, ‘demonstration’ often will define an outcome whereas ‘interrogation’ often will define a process. The process may in-turn lead to an outcome, but the process, hence interrogation, lends itself to the term critical inquiry more appropriately than demonstration.
It is through this interrogative lens which I must pursue my topic – with the hope to demonstrate or perhaps suggest even, an outcome to my paper’s problem being addressed. One unique reference I am currently reading is “Ghosts of the Machine,” by Owen (2017). Owen (2017) elaborates that “the title ‘Ghosts in the machine’ is used here to draw attention to how organisations comprise people who in turn shape – and are shaped by – their ways of organizing” (p. 2). As I seek to find the feasibility of online assessments within air traffic control learning environments, I must bear in mind the ‘ghosts of the machine.’ Individuals and organizations are complex and interconnected in many ways. Perhaps part of my sojourn needs to address the underlying presuppositions and/or culture within the air traffic control community in order to better understand the feasibility of online assessments?
Reference
Owen, C. (2017). Ghosts in the machine: Rethinking learning, work and culture in air traffic control. (2017). New York, NY: CRC Press. Retrieved from: https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/lib/royalroads-ebooks/reader.action?docID=4938445
Read More
Recent Comments