510

I don’t think multiple choice questions reflect constructivist values. However, the response that WISE provided gave you explicit feedback that would aid the learner’s understanding. This is more constructivist than a check mark.

In constructivist learning environments, students become more self-aware through reflection and goal setting. “Helping learners to become more aware of their thinking processes is thought by many, including Gagné, to be essential in the development of mindful, strategic behaviour or cognitive strategies.” (Driscoll, 2005). The notes you mentioned provide opportunities for reflection throughout the process which I prefer over writing one reflection at the end. Of course, the fact that you were able to brainstorm with a partner allows you to test your understanding against theirs which is a constructivist value. I think the program or teacher could add goal setting to the lesson.

It’s great that the program allowed you to go back and make revisions because after further learning, you may reject your original thoughts and want to reconstruct your assumptions.

That is strange that the program allowed you to move on without having completed a section. Perhaps, that aligns with the constructivist value that says learners have the final responsibility for their learning (Matthews, 1994). However, I’m sure a grade five student would be happy to finish the lesson without having to write out what he/she learned.

In terms of what Steve is saying, I think students need to be coached and have their learning scaffolded because ultimately, they need to meet the provincial learning outcomes. If they’re given a problem and allowed to take it any which way, they may not cover the material needed to meet those outcomes. I understand Steve is saying that as educators, we might be acting as too much of a crutch. When I think about the MET program, I appreciate that we are given assigned readings at the beginning of every week and specific questions to answer. If we were given a more open-ended problem without guidance, I would get lost in the sea of information. I also think the coaching helps students connect new information with prior learning which is necessary when beginning a new task.

Assessment of constructivist learning environments still confuse me, though. Luckily, I teach grade 2/3 so I have a large area to write comments on my students report cards where I can describe their progress and specific tasks they need to work on. They’re not given marks but have a bar which says, not yet meeting, approaching, meeting or exceeding expectations. This type of evaluation makes it easier to report on constructivist learning assignments. From grade 4 on, students receive marks which would be harder to give for problem based learning. The only thing I can think of to do would be to make some sort of rubric.

It’s unfortunate that many teachers who believe in constructivism are still forced to give exams or standardized tests to their students. That would be very frustrating for both teachers and students. Imagine being told you can collaborate and work on authentic problems in class but have to write long and boring multiple choice tests individually.

Driscoll. M.P. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (pp. 384-407; Ch. 11 – Constructivism). Toronto, ON: Pearson.

Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Rutledge Publisher.

Many online locations could be profitably utilized as a significant element in a constructivist learning environment. Our job, as educators, is to think about the affordances in any given artifact. Take another look at the questions listed above that pertain to affordances, and learning environments. Take a look at one (or more) of these sites, and think about the construct of affordances.

What does Flickr enable?

Flickr enables visual snapshots into the world of others. Users can represent their understanding of an idea by tagging it appropriately. Users can search any vocabulary word to view variations of that object/place/person. For artists, photographers, graphic designers etc., Flickr is a place where they can share their thoughts by displaying their creations.

Viewers can engage in discussion or provide feedback about the images. Being married to a painter, I know Flickr can serve as a place of inspiration for creative work. Some Flickr users are motivated to create and upload one picture/painting etc. per day or week because they know that it’ll be seen instantly by their contacts and others. Users can add or invite certain images to groups they create thereby building bigger concepts with individual ideas.

What is educationally significant about how Flickr is designed?

Flickr has privacy settings which benefit teachers who plan to share student work or pictures of students. Flickr warns you that you are leaving their site when clicking on a link. This keeps students away from unwanted content. Flickr’s site is easy to navigate.

Think about how you could use this to support learners. How would you structure a project-based learning activity that would include this site as a major resource?

Students could follow a webquest about pioneers. One section could ask students to search pictures on Flickr and upload them to groups categorized by work, entertainment, food, etc. Students would have to add a comment to describe what is happening in the picture. I would ask them to comment on each other’s photos, perhaps including a modern alternative to what they saw depicted in the picture.

What kind of problem manipulation space could be created that includes this site?

Other problem manipulation sites could be Moodle or a blog. I could ask students to use pictures from Flickr to create a story using digital story telling tools like on CogDogRoo.

Go take a look at this particular design of a technology-enhanced learning environment. Spend some time critically reading about how this learning technology is represented on the MIT OLPC website, and on the Wikipedia OLPC page (listed below). Think about (a) the affordances construct, (b) the discussion of the role of values in determining what is prioritized in any educational design, and (c) about the relationship between theories concerning how people learn and the kinds of affordances that are built into specific learning technologies. What is significant, educationally, about this design? What does this design tell us about the values that matter to its designers? How have the designers taken into account the cultural setting where this educational technology will be used? Is constructivism a learning theory that can span across cultural borders without risk? What critical questions might educators ask about this design and/or this initiative.

What is significant, educationally, about this design?

I was initially struck by the way the screen turns to easily enable small group or partner work. The laptop has speakers, cameras, and a mike. This would allow for hands-on or interactive learning. The laptop is small so it can be transported by small hands back and forth between school and home. Therefore, family members can use the laptop for their own learning.

What does this design tell us about the values that matter to its designers?

The designers wanted to make a low-power laptop considering that the schools wouldn’t have many resources to charge the computers on a regular basis. The laptop needed to be durable because it is intended for small children who will have the laptop in a variety of weather conditions. Cost seemed to be the biggest concern since the laptop is for schools that can’t usually afford computers. Wikipedia mentioned the laptop’s GUI is an open source program, “called Sugar that is intended to help young children collaborate.”

How have the designers taken into account the cultural setting where this educational technology will be used?

The following is taken from Wikipedia:

-the keyboard is customized according to the language spoken in each country.

-the GUI Sugar uses icons instead of text which is more user-friendly for students who can’t read.

-the designers expect the users to add/remove software according to their needs and local laws.

Is constructionism a learning theory that can span across cultural borders without risk?

I think it would be harder to teach using constructivist methods in developing countries. I think teachers need to be competent in their subject areas in order to scaffold learning properly. Sometimes teachers in developing countries are not educated or even literate. They may not have the resources to provide “just right” material at the appropriate time or manipulatives with which students can explore problems. Using constructivist techniques requires students to work collaboratively as the teacher goes from group to group. I’m not sure these children possess the necessary skills to work independently. Some of my students can’t even do that.

What critical questions might educators ask about this design and/or this initiative?

The first question would be, “Can we afford this laptop?” According to N. Jesterponte, (actually Kentaro Toyama) Indian public schools spend $70-200 per student each year so a $188 laptop is unaffordable (as cited by Vota, 2011). I think some of these countries would be better off spending $188 on regular breakfasts than laptops.

The second question would be, “How are we going to use this laptop?” It is sometimes vexing for me, an MET student with a passion for technology, to determine how I would use a laptop with my students. I think it is an arduous task to ask teachers, who may have zero computer knowledge, to use these laptops with their students. How much training do they get?

Vota (2010) says that in Afghanistan, 25% of the teachers are illiterate. I think the OLPC program should have assessed teachers’ needs first before dropping laptops in their hands. Yujuico and Gelb (2011) said that, “The product and OLPC’s marketing did not match purchasing priorities of governments in developing nations” ( as cited by guest writer on the OLPC//News Blog, 2011).

I was shocked when I watched the youtube video, “Nicholas Negroponte on the latest success of One Laptop per Child”. In it, N. Negroponte, the founder of OLPC says that students are using the laptops to teach their parents to read and write when the students can’t read and write.

Davidspark (2010). Nicholas Negroponte on the latest success of One Laptop per Child. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9JoyyTSQQ8&feature=player_embedded.

n.a. (2011, January 6). Cautions from OLPC’s experience in marketing technological innovation to LDCs. [Web log comment] Retrieved from: http://www.olpcnews.com/

n.a. (2011). OLPC XO-1. Retrieved from the Wikipedia Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$100_laptop

Vota, W. (2011, January 7). Laptops work but is that education? [Web log comment] Retrieved from: http://www.olpcnews.com/

Vota, W. (2010, December, 22). New negropontism: You can give kids XO laptops and just walk away.[Web log comment] Retreived from: http://www.olpcnews.com/

n.a. (2011). OLPC XO-1. Retrieved from the Wikipedia Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$100_laptop