Teaching in a Box
Welcome to My Classroom! (Click to enlarge)
After ten years as a "brick and mortar" classroom
instructor for a private vocational college, I transitioned to the
"virtual" classroom as online course developer and educator for
private (for-profit) higher education vocational schools, also known as
"career colleges." Shortly after entering the online realm, I
began to look closely at the content of my curriculum and the information I was
delivering to students. I questioned not only the medium through which this
content is delivered in distance learning programs through the use of learning
management systems (LMS), but also at the lack of media and information
literacy skills among enrolled adults. I began pondering if the content
delivered was truly meaningful and beneficial to all students. As students
blazed through the courses without "reading" the textbook, listening
to the audio lectures, and seemed to rarely engage with fellow classmates other
than in assignment discussion forums--I wondered, what students were gaining from
this experience? Were they in fact learning or merely going through the motions
of completing the course?
As these questions began to surface, I realized that I needed a better understanding of educational theory and pedagogy to find the answers I was seeking. Additionally, I was becoming increasingly concerned about my children's education in public school, the lack of technology used in their classrooms compared to the new media technology they engaged with at home, and their ability to become "critical thinkers." I wanted to create change in education -- whether it be in my own home, in my community, or online. These questions, concerns, and desires for change in education led to my enrollment in the Master's in Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning program at Sonoma State University.
As these questions began to surface, I realized that I needed a better understanding of educational theory and pedagogy to find the answers I was seeking. Additionally, I was becoming increasingly concerned about my children's education in public school, the lack of technology used in their classrooms compared to the new media technology they engaged with at home, and their ability to become "critical thinkers." I wanted to create change in education -- whether it be in my own home, in my community, or online. These questions, concerns, and desires for change in education led to my enrollment in the Master's in Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning program at Sonoma State University.
Why Educational Technology?
My initial goal in entering the Ed Tech program was to "learn how to incorporate user friendly technology for adult learners while maintaining and enhancing the human aspect of curriculum and instructor-student relationships" (Lince, S., Statement of Purpose, 2009). In reflection, this goal was, well...a bit naive. As Mark Beatham (2008) suggests I was "putting tool before the task." In other words, I was seeking to find the right technology (device, software, program, etc.) to build human connections and enhance student learning.
What I didn't consider, at that time, is that technology alone does not enhance the learning experience without also considering the content, pedagogy, and knowledge of not only technology but also the learning experience. Mishra and Koehler (2006) authors of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge (which has become the framework for introducing technology into the classroom), emphasize that technology, content, and pedagogy "exist in a state of dynamic equilibrium" (p.1029). One might assume that an online course developer and educator would already understand that these three aspects should not be considered separately. However, because my roles as "developer" and "teacher" were isolated as job titles and responsibilities, I believe it was easier to compartmentalize (as many educators do) technology, content, and pedagogy and fail to see the overlapping connections between these three components. It was in my Educational Technology courses that I began to see the frayed connections between the technology I used and the content and pedagogy in my courses and teaching practices.
What I didn't consider, at that time, is that technology alone does not enhance the learning experience without also considering the content, pedagogy, and knowledge of not only technology but also the learning experience. Mishra and Koehler (2006) authors of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge (which has become the framework for introducing technology into the classroom), emphasize that technology, content, and pedagogy "exist in a state of dynamic equilibrium" (p.1029). One might assume that an online course developer and educator would already understand that these three aspects should not be considered separately. However, because my roles as "developer" and "teacher" were isolated as job titles and responsibilities, I believe it was easier to compartmentalize (as many educators do) technology, content, and pedagogy and fail to see the overlapping connections between these three components. It was in my Educational Technology courses that I began to see the frayed connections between the technology I used and the content and pedagogy in my courses and teaching practices.
Enter David Buckingham
When I began my Master's degree at Sonoma State University, I entered thinking I would learn how to create meaningful curriculum that would be applicable to my online classroom which would allow students to become more adept at learning in an online environment. It didn't take me long to realize that there were deeper issues at stake when considering technology and learning. I believe I was looking to be taught the "skills" to develop curriculum without much consideration to online pedagogy.
The first article I read that applied to educational technology and media literacy was David Buckingham's (2008) Introducing Identity in Dr. Jessica Parker's EDUC 556 Technology, Pedagogy, and Society course which I took in my first semester. In EDUC 556 I was introduced to the foundations of media and information literacy. The Buckingham article altered the path of my course of study and redefined my views of technology.
The first article I read that applied to educational technology and media literacy was David Buckingham's (2008) Introducing Identity in Dr. Jessica Parker's EDUC 556 Technology, Pedagogy, and Society course which I took in my first semester. In EDUC 556 I was introduced to the foundations of media and information literacy. The Buckingham article altered the path of my course of study and redefined my views of technology.
The Light Bulb
Within the Identity article, Buckingham (2008) states that technology is often seen to emerge from "a neutral process of scientific research and development, rather than from the interplay of complex social, economic, and political forces" (p.11). . As I reflected on this article, I realized that my views of technology were in fact quite neutral. When I considered my own use of technology and even that of my children, I viewed our experiences online as a form of "information determinism" (Buckingham, 2003) – a neutral good that appeared from nowhere. The ways in which I applied technology and incorporated it into my curriculum were as if I had lifted my brick and mortar classroom into a virtual environment. I expected to see similar results in the educational processes of my online students as the on-ground students I had taught for ten years. I also had an expectation that the information was now available to populations of potential students or individuals who may not otherwise have had the opportunity to participate in higher education. As it turns out, I discovered that I was only delivering information through a new tool which allowed more people to become vocationally trained; but the delivery of the content in itself through the technology (the LMS) was not going to alter society, change the social stratification my students experienced, or create more opportunity for my students as potential employees.
"Much of present education fails because it neglects [the] fundamental principal of the school as a form of community life." |
Progressive Education 2.0
In my second year of graduate school, I began to better understand my goals as an educator and my personal philosophy of education through my coursework. I continued to question the current state of curriculum in public schools, conceptualize how curriculum and educators might best serve students, and explored the importance of introducing technology and media literacy into curriculum.
As John Dewey (1929) professed decades ago, "much of present education fails because it neglects [the] fundamental principal of the school as a form of community life" (p.36). This argument holds true nearly a century later as schools neglect to incorporate the communities students develop outside of school through new media engagement to their school learning experiences. For a final project, I used a popular culture prospective to argue that a progressive theoretical approach should be applied to educational reforms by incorporating the digital skills students acquire outside of school into school curriculum. This progressive approach recognizes these digital skills allow for increased civic engagement, networking, problem-solving, and collaboration among students. The cultural artifacts I analyzed included Harry Potter, Facebook, the Call of Duty video game, Justin Bieber, YouTube, and the television show Glee.
|
Click play above and turn up your speaker volume to view the slideshow.
|
|
Becoming a Critical Educator
Radical Approach of Media Literacy
My progressive perspectives were further deepened in throughout my Educational Media and Information Literacy courses. We discussed the origins of cultural studies, media education and media literacy, and analyzed how the liberal, critical, and radical theoretical paradigms of media literacy apply to the information age. I explored and identified with the radical approach of media literacy. It was at this point that I discovered that I was evolving into a critical educator (aspects of which have always been present) who believes at its core education and medial literacy should:
"Empower individuals to become change agents to ensure multicultural ideologies have a presence in the media, address issues of access and affordance to new media technology, and allow all individuals the opportunity to acquire the necessary skills to participate, modify, and develop new media technologies" (Lince, S. "Going After the Straw Man," 2011) I argued for the necessity of this radical approach in my "Going After the Straw Man" assignment.
|
In order to create change and resist the influence of the dominant culture, media literacy programs must educate youth to become "sophisticated citizens rather than sophisticated consumers" |
Media Literacy and Online Learning
I also began to articulate my concerns for online education and reflect on what democratic learning environments might look like online and in hybrid courses. The following reflections are taken from my "Think Piece," Media Literacy and Online Learning, from which became a jumping off point for my thesis.
As I consider the way in which educators at Sonoma State are utilizing Moodle, I fear they will build their classrooms based on current online vocational school models. Curriculum in private vocational schools is geared toward the fundamentals students need to know to be successful in the workforce.The curriculum includes prepackaged lectures and online quizzes which is often referred to as "boxed" or "teacher proof" curriculum.The courses designed by many of the faculty members resemble this boxed curriculum.The courses are packed with PDF documents, multiple choice quizzes, and lack collaborative learning components. In some instances, professors have shifted away from essay and critical thinking questions by incorporating true/false and multiple choice options. These choices have been made to ease the burden of grading. As one faculty member commented, "I am using all true/false because they are the easiest to import into the quiz, the system will automatically grade the questions, and there are no discrepancies" (Personal communication, November, 2011).
As I consider the way in which educators at Sonoma State are utilizing Moodle, I fear they will build their classrooms based on current online vocational school models. Curriculum in private vocational schools is geared toward the fundamentals students need to know to be successful in the workforce.The curriculum includes prepackaged lectures and online quizzes which is often referred to as "boxed" or "teacher proof" curriculum.The courses designed by many of the faculty members resemble this boxed curriculum.The courses are packed with PDF documents, multiple choice quizzes, and lack collaborative learning components. In some instances, professors have shifted away from essay and critical thinking questions by incorporating true/false and multiple choice options. These choices have been made to ease the burden of grading. As one faculty member commented, "I am using all true/false because they are the easiest to import into the quiz, the system will automatically grade the questions, and there are no discrepancies" (Personal communication, November, 2011).
I had additional concerns for how the teacher's role in the online classroom can shift from facilitator or mentor to manager. As one instructor noted, she felt more like an administrator of her online classroom, rather than an active participant.
The role of the teacher as now a manager, exemplifies the need to assist faculty in shifting the types of content housed within the LMS.The aim of online learning components should be to take the burden of administrative tasks such as making copies and grading away from the instructor; however, this can be achieved by incorporating assignments that foster critical and collaborative learning experiences that do not cut short the learning process.
|
Shifting Perspectives of the LMS
My final Educational Technology course, further defined my thesis and desire
to explore participatory culture in Moodle. I began my thesis research in this
course by becoming a participant observer and through focus groups with
students investigated how Dr. Parker's course lends to a participatory culture.In EDCT 552, we focused on
educational technology and the pedagogical implications of teaching and the
integration of technology into learning environments. I explored my role as a
student, teacher, and course developer and the ways in which I used technology
in my classroom and personal life.
I was also able to identify and articulate the shortcomings of my own use of the LMS, my role as a teacher and course developer, and my hopes for creating online learning spaces where students are able to contribute to the course and feel like members of a learning community.
In EDCT 552 I was required to create a technology timeline of the communicative technologies that have influenced my life in positive and negative ways. I then wrote a narrative reflection about an event from the timeline, the social context of the event, the meaning I attributed to the event, and how this event contributed to my ongoing relationship to communicative technologies. I chose the LMS as the communicative technology for my narrative because it altered the course of my career, blurred the boundaries between my work and personal life, led to my enrollment in graduate school, and redefined my views of technology.
I was also able to identify and articulate the shortcomings of my own use of the LMS, my role as a teacher and course developer, and my hopes for creating online learning spaces where students are able to contribute to the course and feel like members of a learning community.
In EDCT 552 I was required to create a technology timeline of the communicative technologies that have influenced my life in positive and negative ways. I then wrote a narrative reflection about an event from the timeline, the social context of the event, the meaning I attributed to the event, and how this event contributed to my ongoing relationship to communicative technologies. I chose the LMS as the communicative technology for my narrative because it altered the course of my career, blurred the boundaries between my work and personal life, led to my enrollment in graduate school, and redefined my views of technology.
An Instrumental View of the LMS
The way information is delivered through this LMS is reminiscent of Skinner's teaching machine or programmed instruction in that the materials are arranged in such a way that the student can "make correct responses and receive reinforcement when correct responses were made" (Saettler, 1990, as cited by Russell, 2006, p.146). The difference, in my case, being that I had become the machine through the ways in which I provided feedback. I realized that environments in which I served as an instructor and course developer did not fit my definition of "teaching and learning." |
Students also do not seem engaged with the materials or each other. Most rarely view their lectures and often go directly to the textbook or search the internet to find the answers. Students find ways to "bypass the system" (Saettler, 1990, as cited by Russell, 2006, p.147) by acquiring textbook answer keys, emailing assignments to other students, and "copying and pasting" answers to discussion forum questions by using search tools such as Ask.com. The chat rooms are not used by students to "hangout" or work together on assignments, and I rarely have more than one student in a chat room at one time. Overall, the classroom does not have the feeling of a learning community where both the teacher and student create, collaborate, and share experiences.
|
|
I wanted to explore ways to produce online learning environments that allowed for collaboration, inquiry, shared experiences, and what Henry Jenkins (2008) defines as a "participatory culture – "a culture in which "members believe their contributions matter, and feel some degree of social connection with one another" (p.5).
technology_narrative.pdf | |
File Size: | 201 kb |
File Type: |
Participatory Culture Meets Online Learning
The challenge for an online instructor and course developer is similar to that of an on-ground educator in questioning how to bring these new media experiences into the classroom within the current limitations of the system. I, like other educators, have to refine my own practices within the limitations of the system and seek ways to link students to content outside of the LMS in an effort to create collaborative and engaging learning environments that allow for deeper learning experiences.
These realizations have led me to further explore how, if at all, the use of an LMS, such as Moodle, can be shifted from an informative tool to a more relational perspective (Burbules & Callister, 2000). From the relational perspective the LMS should not be viewed as a delivery system, but as Burbules and Callister (2000) propose, a "potential collaborative space where teaching and learning activities can happen" (p. 5).
My growth and understanding of theory and pedagogy as a graduate student in combination with my reflections on my own practices as an educator and role as a student assistant in the Faculty Center have brought me to my thesis work in exploring how participatory cultures can be created using Moodle and how these collaborate learning environments can enhance the student learning experience. Visit the Thesis Proposal page to read more about my research and thesis proposal "Creating a Participatory Culture in Moodle."
These realizations have led me to further explore how, if at all, the use of an LMS, such as Moodle, can be shifted from an informative tool to a more relational perspective (Burbules & Callister, 2000). From the relational perspective the LMS should not be viewed as a delivery system, but as Burbules and Callister (2000) propose, a "potential collaborative space where teaching and learning activities can happen" (p. 5).
My growth and understanding of theory and pedagogy as a graduate student in combination with my reflections on my own practices as an educator and role as a student assistant in the Faculty Center have brought me to my thesis work in exploring how participatory cultures can be created using Moodle and how these collaborate learning environments can enhance the student learning experience. Visit the Thesis Proposal page to read more about my research and thesis proposal "Creating a Participatory Culture in Moodle."
References
Adams, M., & Marchesani, L. (1997). Multiple issues course overview. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity
and social justice: A sourcebook for teachers and trainers (pp. 261-275). New York: Routledge.
Bobbitt, F. (1918). Scientific Method in Curriculum-Making. In Flinders & Thornton (Eds.), Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd ed.)
pages 15-21. New York : Routledge, 2009.
Buckingham, D. (2008). Introducing Identity.Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Edited by David Buckingham. The John D.and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 1–24.
doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.001
Buckingham, D. (2003). Media Education: Literacy, Learning, and Contemporary Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Burbules, N., & Berk, R. (1999). Critical thinking and critical pedagogy: Relations, differences, and limits. In T. Popkewitz &
L. Fendler(Eds.), Critical theories in education. New York: Routledge.
Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. (2000). Watch IT: The Risks and Promises of Information Technologies for Education (pp.1-17).
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Dewey, J. (1929). My Pedagogic Creed. In Flinders & Thornton (Eds.), Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd ed.), pages 34-41.
New York : Routledge, 2009
Cote, J.M. (1901). France in 2000 year (XXI century). Future school. Image. Retrieved from: https://moodle.sonoma.edu/A/mod
/page/view.php?id=58183
Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. Retrieved from: http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-
E807E1B0AE4E%7D/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF
Lewis J.& Jhally S. (1998). The Struggle over Media Literacy. Journal of Communication, Winter 1998, pages 109-120.
Retrieved from: http://ssu.mrooms3.net/course/view.php?id=4686
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers
College Record 108 (6), pages 1017-1054.
Montessori, M. (1912). A Critical Consideration of the New Pedagogy. Flinders & Thornton (Eds.), Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd
ed.), pages34-41. New York : Routledge, 2009
Parker, J. (2010). Teaching Tech-Savvy Kids: Brining Digital Media into the Classroom, Grades 5-12, Thousand Oaks,
California: Corwin.
Russell,M. (2006). Technology and Assessment: The Tale of Two Interpretations Research Methods for Educational Technology,
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Spring, Joel. (2008). American Education (13th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Adams, M., & Marchesani, L. (1997). Multiple issues course overview. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity
and social justice: A sourcebook for teachers and trainers (pp. 261-275). New York: Routledge.
Bobbitt, F. (1918). Scientific Method in Curriculum-Making. In Flinders & Thornton (Eds.), Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd ed.)
pages 15-21. New York : Routledge, 2009.
Buckingham, D. (2008). Introducing Identity.Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Edited by David Buckingham. The John D.and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 1–24.
doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.001
Buckingham, D. (2003). Media Education: Literacy, Learning, and Contemporary Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Burbules, N., & Berk, R. (1999). Critical thinking and critical pedagogy: Relations, differences, and limits. In T. Popkewitz &
L. Fendler(Eds.), Critical theories in education. New York: Routledge.
Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. (2000). Watch IT: The Risks and Promises of Information Technologies for Education (pp.1-17).
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Dewey, J. (1929). My Pedagogic Creed. In Flinders & Thornton (Eds.), Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd ed.), pages 34-41.
New York : Routledge, 2009
Cote, J.M. (1901). France in 2000 year (XXI century). Future school. Image. Retrieved from: https://moodle.sonoma.edu/A/mod
/page/view.php?id=58183
Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. Retrieved from: http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-
E807E1B0AE4E%7D/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF
Lewis J.& Jhally S. (1998). The Struggle over Media Literacy. Journal of Communication, Winter 1998, pages 109-120.
Retrieved from: http://ssu.mrooms3.net/course/view.php?id=4686
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers
College Record 108 (6), pages 1017-1054.
Montessori, M. (1912). A Critical Consideration of the New Pedagogy. Flinders & Thornton (Eds.), Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd
ed.), pages34-41. New York : Routledge, 2009
Parker, J. (2010). Teaching Tech-Savvy Kids: Brining Digital Media into the Classroom, Grades 5-12, Thousand Oaks,
California: Corwin.
Russell,M. (2006). Technology and Assessment: The Tale of Two Interpretations Research Methods for Educational Technology,
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Spring, Joel. (2008). American Education (13th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.