Analysis of learning styles and ICT

Analysis of learning styles questionnaire and how it might affect how you learn or teach generally and in an ICT learning environment in particular. Do you agree with your profile?

After taking the VARK learning styles questionnaire (http://www.vark-learn.com/english/page.asp?p=questionnaire), I got the following results:

• Visual: 6
• Aural: 8
• Read/write: 3
• Kinesthetic: 9

Apparently my learning preferences are multi-modal. I was surprised that I scored so high on kinesthetic learning, but the more i reflect on it the more it makes sense. It also makes sense that lectures work well for me because I'm a strongly aural learner. It could also explain why I like taking tutorials so much, because it involves conversation. However, my low score in read/write preference could be a problem for someone in academia who is required to do volumes of written research.

On reflection, my stronger preference for visual and kinsethetic learning is evident in the way that I teach. I prefer conversation, oral explanation, the occasional diagram/scribble and, when, I can, physical activity.

It is perhaps a good thing that my style is multi-modal because I am naturally inclined to use more than one teaching style. This also for the moment works well because read/write learners are also being catered to outside of the classroom (as the classroom is not their preferred place for learning anyway). Perhaps the reason I am attracted to teaching in the first place is my preference for these learning styles.

I am inclined to be enthusiastic about ICT because it seems to address the deficiency in tertiary teaching which is currently read/write and aural based. ICT allows for more visual and kinesthetic learning tools to be available - video and the creation and publication of video, tools like mindmeister that allow visual representation of ideas, even the act of blogging, which makes reflection a visual (colours, schemes design etc) as well as written exercise. Interactive websites that require students to move things around etc will also address kinesthetic learners to some extent (when they cannot be involved in physical space, they can be involved in virtual space).

The Onion - by request

Are Violent Video Games Adequately Preparing Children For The Apocalypse?

ramblings/ideas on the course

So many ideas - have to get them out somewhere

1. Wikis -

(a) use them for students to create notes collaboratively (see this video)




(b) use them in contract law for students to create a contract online - each week they have to add elements to the contract as they learn more about contracts nad the risks they are written to avoid.

(c) get students to create a page on a wiki on contract law - contribution to the global commons! (http://en.jurispedia.org/index.php/Main_Page)

2. Webquests

(a) use them for contract students to read and analyse an online contract (http://questgarden.com/60/05/2/090325050420/index.htm)

3. Blogs

(a) advertise them as resources for students (if there are any good ones out there)

4. Blackboard

(a) have chat open during consultation hours
(b) more active moderation of discussion boards
(c)create learning units with sets of tasks for students to complete
(d) think about the set up of course folders

Entry 2: Digital Natives Debate

The material for today on "digital natives" (Bennett, Maton, Kervin 2008) has caused me be to reflect on the different levels of technological literacy that must exist in my students. While Bennett et al criticise the 'moral panic' associated with the tech-savvy of the 'net generation', I am not convinced that the phenomenon of digital natives is not real. I agree with the authors that the generation gap is not as severe as some others (eg Prensky) suggest, but I think there can be large differences in the levels of familiarity and competency that different students have in regards to particular technologies. However, I think these differences can probably (as Bennett et al suggest) be more often attributed to socio-economic and cultural factors rather than age.

On the other hand, there appears to be some research suggesting that those belonging to the tech-savvy group may actually be changing the information processing habits by the level of their interactions with technology and multiple tasks (see the NY Times article in the previous post and also http://gazzaleylab.ucsf.edu/). Adam Gazzaley, a neuroscientist at the University of California certainly seems to think so. It will be interesting to see how this research develops and informs the way we think about education as reforming the pathways of the brain to process deep learning.

In the meantime, today’s class has shown that while this unit is directed towards how to integrate recent technology into our teaching, we need to reflect on whether there is an additional value to our students (who have different levels of technological engagement) in using such technologies over traditional teaching methods and avoid using technology "because we can".

Entry 1: Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World

In preparing to start ED6114, the scope of this learning experience has become clearer to me. As i see it, there are two main issues associated with the relationship between technology and higher education:

1. What impact is the more generalised use of technology (the experience of the Internet generation) having on the way that students learn, and how should we as educators be either adapting to that change OR counteracting that change?
2. What technologies are available to enhance existing teaching methods and increase student (especially those students familiar with IT) engagement?

The study from the University of Melbourne (Educating the Net Generation) suggests that we can continue to use the same teaching methods. It also addresses the fact that many students are not as technologically savvy as we might assume. They also continue to value face to face interaction most highly (Hughes, 2009).

However, a recent article in the New york Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/07/technology/07brain.html) suggests that not only are modern technologies being integrated and synthesized with our lives to an unprecedented level, but use of these technologies may even be changing the way that we process information, by affecting our attention span and ability to process information analytically. If this is the case, this could have a serious impact on how we must adapt our teaching to either model this way of learning or attempt to remould the learning pathways. The readings for today pointed out that the skills that technology literate people tend to lack are those involved in critical thinking and analysis. I think the challenge for us is to use learning technologies in a way that enhances those skills, rather than catering to surface learning approach as advocated by the speed and volume of delivery of information in the Web 2.0 world.

At this early stage of the course, it seems that perhaps online activities which draw students step by step though a learning process may be the most effective way of integrating online content and deep learning.