Where did the Classroom go?

Sharing a Pragmatic Model for Open Pedagogy

Well, I see where they got the idea to build this course.

This article provides benefits of Open Learning plus a concrete and applicable approach on how to do so. Our current pedagogical paradigm has shifted away from the Sage-on-Stage idea of traditional teaching, but current teachers still struggling with how to implement and assess Problem-Based Learning. I believe a portion of this issue lies in the fact that some (ie. myself) are still struggling to assess students based on Proficiency (one’s mastery) or Progress (one’s improvement). While I’d love to discuss issues with favoring one or the other, let us return to the discussion of practical Open-Learning strategies, as well as some concerns.

  1. “If the history of educational technology teaches researchers anything then it is this: what begins as fresh, innovative and edgy quickly evolves to tired, redundant and (Brabazon, 2012).”
    • I feel this statement over-generalizes advancement and retirement of technology far too much. While the basic idea is undoubtedly true (open Wi-Fi and personal devices are the norm), that doesn’t mean “old” technology becomes moot. Michael’s and Opus would’ve gone out of business by now if all art teachers had adopted drawing software and 3D imaging technologies. Some tech never becomes redundant despite being ancient. People may enjoy the smell of freshly mixed paint, the motions of brushing across a canvas, or simply not having to look at a screen all day.
  2. Cognitive Presence, Teaching Presence, Social Presence are correlated to student satisfaction and perceived learning.
    • Cognitive presence is important? Shocking. Terrible news for my students who believe they can pass by vegetating on the chairs. However, they have succinctly advocated their supposed learning and in particular, their satisfaction of being cognitively absent.

      “Never sleeping in class had felt so good…” by ogaudemar is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
    • Teaching presence – if the way I teach has absolutely no effect on students and learning, then I should be awarded my Masters and a Ph.D now. Thank you.
    • Social Presence is a thorny issue. Working at a Distance Learning school, my students are usually a) busy with work / sport, or b) somewhere on the spectrum of anxiety. It was why they chose this program in the first place. Excluding the former (they can find the time to post if they truly try), the latter may be uncomfortable or completely opposed to sharing in any format. In this scenario, Open Learning would be devastating to them as the constant stress and fear of having to participate or show their learning would overwhelm them, or cause them to shutdown and isolate themselves. Hence, a traditional approach would be more logical in this case.
      “Shoes on the window ledge” by therealhussy is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

      **Here’s another issue: cultural difference (especially Asian). As someone whose been both a student and teacher on both sides of the globe, there is a huge cultural difference in the aversion towards any showing of ignorance or inability. People are judged severely by their actions, so the idea of presenting their failures and learning from them could cut off future opportunities. Those learners are more comfortable with individual learning and mastering, before making a public display. It will be interesting to see whether/when their pedagogical paradigm will shift away from the current closed-learning, content-driven model.

  3. Structure/Scaffold for Open Learning.
    • Some solid framework on how to setup this process, as well as caveats.
      • Open Learning Design Interventions – build relation between teacher/students -> build digital literacy -> intentional collaboration/connection/interaction -> personal learning network. Great analogy using beehive.
      • Graham (2018) suggest this:
      • I’m glad the article mentions the absolute need to create and promote a safe learning environment, including digital literacy. The issue is less likely to occur at higher education, but students in K-12 have very little awareness of having an online presence (see: Ice-cream licking suspect , why would you post that?)
      • Lacking standards and expectations around individual sharing, commenting, and constructive criticism, the model of Open Learning would quickly fall apart as students fear other’s judgement. Another possibility would be the environment becoming an echo chamber of toxicity or misinformation.
      • Another obstacle that impedes success would be parental consent and FOIPPA concerns. Successful implementation at K-12 levels requires teachers and admins to ensure protocols are followed and respected, including alternatives for those who refused to provide consent.

Closing thoughts:

Open Pedagogy is an interesting avenue to explore going forward and fits perfectly with our teacher autonomy, but how to implement it in more content-driven courses like Math & Sciences (especially Biology); and what about the standardized exams?

Where did Guidance go?

As a surviving Online / Distance Learning (DL) teacher of the 2018/2019 school year, I am ready and eager to burn through the collective garbage from the past year and hopefully plant some meaningful scaffolds to build my future courses upon it’s charred ashes.
Gone will be 30-page “learning guides” that students must complete (I’m glad you figured out there’s an answer key attached at the back)
Gone will be irrelevant “projects” that are absent of logic and purpose (make a powerpoint of your progress through an interactive game? really?)
Gone will be “unit tests” of 30 multiple choice questions (your answer isn’t listed? Gee, I wonder why?)
The reigning paradigm of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) stands tall and all shall follow suit.

“Book Burning” by Jason Verwey is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
“Superficial Learning Engagement” by ransomtech is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Teaching for Meaningful Learning: A Review of Research on Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Learning.

Barron and Darling-Hammond summarizes how the shift from traditional transmission of knowledge towards obtaining knowledge through experience, namely problem-solving. Much of their reasoning will be familiar to those who have gone through teacher education or teacher training in the last decade or two.

  • Current / future demands for employment are more complex, requires problem solving & collaboration skills.
  • Traditional instructions do not prepare students for those challenges.
  • Various research showing benefits of PBL methodology.
    • Higher (Boaler, 1997, 1998) or comparable standardized test scores (Penuel, Means, & Simkins, 2000).
    • Better mastery of transferable skills, ie. defining problem, hypothesizing, (re)testing, support & argue with rational logic
      (Gallaghers, Stepien, & Rosenthal, 1992; Gallaghers, Stepien, & Workman, 1993; Lundeberg, Levin, & Harrington, 1999; Savery & Duffy, 1996; Williams, 1992).
    • Improve social interactions & collaboration (Cohen et al., 1982; Cook et al., 1985; Hartley, 1977; Ginsburg-Block, Rohrbeck, & Fantuzzo, 2006; Johnson & Johnson, 1989).

The mounting evidence of against guidance-centered learning should be enough for most educators to re-think delivery approach, and consider trading in for the new vehicle of learning. Hush nagging doubts, numerous researchers on this topic cannot be wrong when they all reach the same consensus.

Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching.

Mistakes were made.

“The major fallacy of this [minimal guidance] is that it makes no distinction between the behaviors and methods of a researcher who is an expert practicing a profession and those students who are new to the discipline and who are, thus, essentially novices.” (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006).

I’ve often butted heads against my Faculty Associate during my teaching Professional Development Program / Post-Degree Program (PDP). While I’m happy to acquiesce to the current PBL trend, something always felt off about disregarding prescribed knowledge and content in favor of students making their own learning. After reading the article, now I know why.

  • If I were a researcher with no experience as an educator, I would obviously use standardized exams as a benchmark for scoring improvements in students’ learning based on the method of instruction. After all, these are the marks should be free of an educators’ individual bias to appear more competent, and should be more applicable across the board. Herein lies my first concern: what exactly do the standardized exams assess, and how does it relate to the teaching style?
    Past Provincials and AP Exams had more questions analogous to worked-examples and fewer problem-based varieties, where as the current Numeracy Assessment exam is the opposite. If PBL students scored comparably or higher in the former scenario, then one can conclude it to being more effectively. Conversely, if traditional guidance students scored more favorably on the latter type, then one can argue that the PBL approach may not be as beneficial as it appears. What would potentially invalidate a research would be students scoring favorably on the exams that reflect the type of learning they received.  Readers, especially educators, need to examine findings from research on learning styles more clearly to see whether the appropriate experiment and analysis has been carried out.
  • Students being researched would provide valuable feedback to help support the findings for the research of their learning from experiencing different teaching styles. However, we know the teenage brain is not fully mature until mid twenties (for some guys, even later). Therefore, student reporting contains the issue of Do they know what they know?
    Clark (1982) noted that “less able learners who choose less guided approaches tend to like the experience even though they learn less from it”(Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). It’s not surprising that students who dislike traditional guidance would view PBL to be more favorable, it’s designed to be more engaging. This is not to ignore all students’ input, but what they perceive as success may not be the same to teachers, to parents, to administrators, or to researchers. It would be noteworthy to find more recent data that correctly analyzes students’ measure of success in comparison to academic standings.
  • More about the brain (B.Sci with a Bio major here): I absolutely love how this article goes into detail about how problem solving cannot occur effectively without a large pool of resource from experience.  As a senior science teacher in high school, I’ve had to extensively grapple with the issue of content-heavy instruction to provide students the tools to solve problem (worked-examples), versus a scaffolded problem scenario for them to slowly work their ways toward the answer. As evidenced in today’s MEd orientation / information overload, the working memory can process less than a handful of novel information as once, and that information is quickly lost if not re-visited promptly. If grown, working adults are struggling to accomplish this, how do we expect our students to do the same in a limited 60-80 minute instruction time? This is why I’ve begun leaning back towards more instruction-centered designs where students need to shown at least one method or example, demonstrate their mastery of it, before being allowed to challenge the higher difficulty, open-ended scenarios; the same conclusion Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) came to.
  • Most educators would agree, expecting a class to hold a meaningful debate is nigh-impossible without participants having some background knowledge to anchor their logic or reasoning and provide supporting arguments from. Here is where the guidance comes shines, and where minimal guidance waits it’s turn.

Posts navigation

1 2 3 4
Scroll to top