Rewind with MultiMedia

In grade school, which for me was long before personal computers existed, we occasionally had to do role playing speeches and I was once assigned to give a famous speech of John Kennedy's..."Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." I remember thinking I did a really good job and had memorized the speech perfectly. What I did not realize is that I delivered the speech in a perfect monotone and rocked from side to side like a metronome from beginning to end. I couldn't understand all the chuckling because I knew I had it down. Afterwards my friend told be what had happened and I was embarrassed because I had no idea and could have done much better. We did not have video recording equipment readily available and VCRs did not even exist back then (outside of television studios). Today's multimedia tools would have allowed recorded rehearsals, critique and refinement of such a speech in an excellent learning experience and a constructive environment and the assessment of the work could be done in stages from initial research, to preliminary work, to final polished delivery. We could even use PodCast from home to prepare the speech and when we are ready to post it, all students could access each others' work via a WikiSpace.

Do I feel that Eric Langhorst's article After the Bell, Beyond the Walls encompasses the Essential Conditions for Technology Integration?

Well, I think it does. Certainly one of the most telling points, at least. on the success of Langhorst's "StudyCast" program was in the feedback from students that they listened to test reviews while walking the dog or doing chores around the house. Another was in the feedback from parents on how they too listened to the "StudyCasts" and in doing so felt more empowered to help and a supportive part of their child's education. These are evidence of Shared Vision, Access, Student-Oriented Teaching, Assessment, and Community Support.

But, I suspect that these are as much a result of Langhorst's efforts as they are evidence of a supportive environment. In other words, I think Langhorst deserves enormous credit for pioneering such a program--he saw a need and willed it into being. And, yes, he had the basic support he needed to make it stick. The theme I want to exercise here, is that other individuals in the same exact situation as Langhorst, may not have had the will, determination, energy, and wherewithal to get the program off the ground. In fact, it may well be that Langhorst would or could have failed in other situations. But I bet he would have kept trying. I think it comes down to the sheer will power of an individual or a small collaborative group of individuals, in the final analysis, to make a program like this grow and flourish---that coupled with the right set of basic conditions and then at some point the program gets a critical mass and takes off.

The fact that the program appears to have been a sort of grassroots seed program that received good, but not extensive, support in starting out, but that mostly bootstrapped itself is also encouraging in that it proves, as in so many reform efforts, that concerted efforts of a dedicated individual with really basic support AND A GOOD IDEA can, in fact, turn a success story. Essentially, this good idea caught on, received the support of students and parents, and thus parlayed itself by reaching outside of the classroom to other schools, colleges, authors, and other interested parties.

I guess what I am concluding it that I think they left one item off of the list of Essential Conditions for Effective Technology Integration that really needs to be there...you need a dedicated individual, or a core group of collaborative individuals, that will painstakingly, relentlessly, energetically, creatively, and willingly apply themselves to bring such a thing into existence even when there are times that they may have felt like giving up or falling back to safe patterns and status quo.

In considering whether this example encompasses the Essential Conditions for Technology Integration, I would say yes, but follow that quickly by stating that these conditions weren't just laid out on the table for Langhorst...it seems that he reached out and made sure he had those conditions and did a great deal to foster them himself. Whenever we talk about the system providing us conditions for something to take place, all very important, we need also to remember that at the heart of change it usually comes down to individual efforts. As Margaret Mead said, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

As an interesting corollary to this theme, I was wondering to what extent teachers can reach out for the same resources they want to use to help their students, but help themselves with issues and concerns they may have in establishing the "essential conditions" for their initiatives with technology integration (and otherwise). I found the New Teacher Hotline podcast...there, Dr. Glen Moulton, a supervisor of instruction and lifelong teacher trainer, and Michael Kelley, the author of Rookie Teaching for Dummies, provide a means for teachers to submit your questions to be addressed via their bimonthly podcasts for teachers: New Teacher Hotline Podcast

Web 2.0 Reflection

Web 2.0 Tools are opening up the Web as the place to create. It becomes the work space with tools at our fingertips. The applications themselves are there. Many of these are recasts of off line resources in a web environment, but that in itself creates leverage.

Accessibility, I think, is the prime advantage in that work can be accessed from virtually anywhere, enabling enormous collaboration, perspective, and robust evaluation.

It will always be a challenge to separate the wheat (good stuff) from the chaff (not-so-good stuff) and I guess all of that forces and encourages social networking and collaboration to decide what is the best of the best in terms of tools and resources. In the long run, that is what will survive.

Websites like TeachersFirst are excellent buffers to mediate the good and the bad and provide a clearinghouse for tools ready for the classroom. I think we need that intermediary.

Actually, from my perspective, it seems to me that Web 2.0 Tools are one giant step closer towards intuitive applications on the Web, thus more likely to unite Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants. I do not think these tools are driving a divide. There are still many competing forms that I think over time will result in the dominant, most used, best-of-the-best ones become the defacto standard---this is a lot like how computer "hardware" technology itself was a number of years ago before the PC and MAC became household words. Anyway, by way of illustration, I added my Gliffy concept map on the "Digital Divide"...

EDUC 522 EVAL INST: Project Notes for Team Rvw.

Project Question Prompt: What is the Fundamental Structure of the Teaching/Learning/Education Process?

Mary, Renay, and John,
In a constructive analysis and synthesis of all of our readings, projects, and class discussions so far, and after considerable reflection on it, here is a DRAFT response for your review. I will update this with a notional graphic that I hand sketched and plan to scan after I post this initial text. The graphic is purely intended to complement the response and not necessarily my view on how to present this. Please kick this all around and post your comments and notions for how to modify this and turn it into some form of a presentation of our team response as we work to converge for Monday's 2 PM Meeting at Haggerty Library. Keep in mind that I have an very analytical, engineering perspective and would welcome creative views into this and how to turn it into an interesting package for presentation in class. I will follow the format of Dewey's Pedagogic Creed.

I believe that the fundamental structure of the Teaching/Learning?Education Process consist of a social ring of students, that mimics all of a society, surrounding an inner ring of essential questions and performance tasks that joins the student society around an inner ring of understanding that is composed of big ideas and subject matter structure for all of life's subjects.

I believe that the teacher, all teachers, should position themselves at the very center of this subject matter ring and never position themselves between the students and their understanding. The teacher at the center should rather be like a lighthouse or beacon to draw the students from all surrounding perspectives toward understanding.

I believe that the social ring of students surrounding life's subjects should be a freely open forum where ideas, concerns, views, and understandings are shared from each vantage point and maturity level among all student as this gives a fuller 360 degree, top, and bottom, and all angles view of truth. Only when we synthesize all perspective to we gain the fullest understanding we may achieve. And all views count.

I believe that this concentric set of rings that compose the structure of the Teaching/Learning/Education Process is not static nor two dimensional, but rises upward and outward with time like a great cyclone in time with ever expanding rings of larger and more comprehensive understanding as we mature and grow in this spiral of understanding.

I believe that we are never truly done. We are and should be lifelong learners. We continually circle and rise up the spiral viewing again and again any and all subjects with a deeper and more expansive view..

I believe that the teacher--any teacher at any time--for we are all teachers at some point, can and should remain at the center of this spiral, mutually sharing views and taking on the role of facilitator, mentor, role model, and guide. The teacher can be the axis, the prime mover at the vortex, but never should come between students and their constructive performance tasks quest for understanding.

I beleive the classroom should be the gateway to the world and in itself provide the safe, structured environment to nurture the upward and outward growth of the spiral cyclone of learning.

See Graphic:

Multimedia Project Cognition and the Spiral Curriculum

"Multimedia Projects in Education - Designing, Producing, and Assessing" (third Edition) by Ivers and Barron is turning out to be a pretty good introduction to the foundational educational and cognitive benefits of multimedia projects. Really, multimedia as a concept is not all that new, it is just that today's computer and internet tools have greatly facilitated multimedia in the classroom and have put these tools within ready access of the students. Combine that with the simple fact that the today's students have grown up with these tools, at least the fortunate ones, so the tools come almost as second nature and we have a confluence of great opportunity. One thing that must be considered is that not all students will be at the same readiness level when brought together for a group project, but if done correctly all can flourish.

This particular blog entry is a personal reflection of the themes of Chapters 1 and 2 of this book in the context of the Spiral Curriculum. How do we implement, assess, and nurture multiple intelligences well in individual students through group project work when we know not every child will be ready for every aspect of project work at the same time?

Chapter 1 "The Impact of Multimedia on Student Learning" centers on the theory of multiple intelligences that include but are not limited to Linguistics, Logical-Mathematical, Spatial, Bodily-Kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, and Naturalist and how we can draw on and develop these intelligences in our students with such projects. It is enlightening to see this from the perspective of a student who has had good success with very traditional lecture methods (as well as hands on laboratory work) in an engineering/science steeped background and to realize that there ARE other intelligences that can be drawn on and developed in very complementary ways to traditional lecture methods that will actually benefit all students and may actually save some. Some students who perhaps struggled and floundered in these traditional environments may flourish when the other intelligences are drawn upon. So, if individual students are able to bring their particular talents to a project, maybe all benefit. Clearly there is a careful balance to be maintained and the teacher must be carefully engaged to see that the project benefits all of the students and not just a dominant few.

Incidentally, if you find multiple intelligences interesting, there is a great text reference called "Teaching to the Brain's Natural Learning Systems" by Barbara K. Given that explores this topic in depth. There is also a related website from George Mason University's Krasnow Research Center (I think where Given works). From this site you can explore several good links on this topic and related research: http://krasnow.gmu.edu/aalrc/index.htm

Constructivism, another key point from the opening chapter is all about taking charge of your own learning, and being an active learner. Down with Bench-Bound Passivity! So while project based learning is not new--good multimedia projects can blend the best of modern computer learning technology with age-old truth, that we learn the best when we are active learners, take ownership of our education, engage with the world around us and others in the educational adventure, and be an actual constructor of knowledge instead of a passive receiver. Multimedia can facilitate this when well applied. Again, we must be wary that our bench-bound passive students don't get left on the sidelines.

Chapter 2 is all about the "well-applied" part and presents one good model called the Decide, Design, Develop, and Evaluate or DDD-E Model. Coming from an engineering project management background with 22+ years of project experience, I have to say that once again, there is nothing new here. DDD-E is a simplified version of standard project management schema in use in industry "forever". What is enlightening and exciting is to see how multimedia tools have enabled us to bring basic project work in a fun and educationally stimulating manner to students with broad access to resources largely unattainable before the advent of this technology. That is the real success story---or potentially so. But as pointed out in the text, there are good implementations and not-so-good implementations. Poorly launched, poorly guided projects can be fundamentally destructive to education and can be a de-motivating social experience too if a young workgroup is not nurtured and properly guided in their work. This is where the DDD-E model comes in---it facilitates inclusiveness and good group projects. So, it is definitely worth exploring for use with student workgroups on any project, including multimedia ones.

So, if we successfully engage all of our young students in good multimedia-based research and project development in the elementary years and if we "spiral back around" on this throughout every grade level, we are quite naturally developing a foundation in constructivism, active learning, the thrill of discovery, and all of the social group interaction skills that ultimately support more advanced work such as true frontier research, development and, as just one example, engineering project management, that normally are learned much later in life.

So, how do we implement, assess, and nurture multiple intelligences well in individual students through group project work when we know not every child will be ready for every aspect of project work at the same time?

I guess the key point is that when we implement a group project among young students, especially in the elementary grade levels, we need to assign work appropriately where they can all contribute, they all can learn from each other, and on the next project, maybe a new skill can be developed and acquired, and maybe after the third or forth project...they can do all phases. This requires a very well "plugged in" teacher who knows where each student is at emotionally and educationally. And, fact is, no matter what we do, some students (many) will gravitate towards the parts of a project with which they are most comfortable and leave the other parts of a project to others. That is quite natural in life. The demands are high, but so are the rewards. How to assess student development and readiness in project-based learning should be an interesting topic to explore.

For some perspectives on what to expect in dealing with different readiness levels for learning in a spiral curriculum checkout: http://specialneedseducation.suite101.com/article.cfm/lp4.

I think there are definite connections between these thoughts on implementing a Spiral Curriculum and what we should expect in implementing challenging group multimedia projects, especially among young learners.