Week 8-9-10 - "It's Fab to Collab"

Weeks 8 and 9:
 I have to give credit to my AEDT buddy, Laura Eng, for that this blog entry's title.  She would say that whenever we were in a group together (which was often - AEDT has a lot of group work due to the PBL-centric design).

Weeks 8 and 9 spent collaborating asynchronously on our PBL assignment, but that doesn't mean there wasn't learning to reflect on or HPL elements in play.  First and foremost was the collaboration (group work).  My group met several times in week 8 (we took week 9 off for March Break) in Adobe to work on our Google Doc.  We collaborated asynchronously as well via email, where ideas were shared, documents were fine-tuned, and decisions were made.

The process to arrive at a problem statement was convoluted - reinforcing to me how much learning is NOT a linear process.  Learning for me is rarely from A (not knowing) to B (learning).  Rather, learning is from A-Z, passing through all sorts of (seemingly) unrelated contexts, experiences, and knowledge before arriving at Z. And the best part about "Z" is that it may or may not be the learning required for the class, but it is guaranteed to be relevant to me.  Learning is a VERY personal exercise, which means learning HAS TO BE learner-centered.

We met twice before submitting our plan to Dr. Robertson.  The first meeting was to decide on the problem, which we did, and then we went away for 48 hours to individually consider and reflect on which learning theories applied to the problem.  This type of consolidation is so common by now that we almost overlook it or take it for granted.  The second meeting we proposed our theories and discussed which ones were most applicable.  Chad agreed to aggregate our findings and decisions into a mind map and share with us prior to submitting for feedback from the professor.  Click here for a copy of our Google Doc thus far.

As you can see from the document, I proposed the idea of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and 21st century learning.  I proposed the latter theory in part because it applied to our problem and in part because it was new to me.  I have discovered that I am drawn to topics that I do not understand very well - maybe I see it as a weakness?  But I suspect it has more to do with my love of learning and wanting to have the answers.  Yes, there might be some vanity there, but hopefully only a little bit.  :)

Our feedback from Dr. Robertson on our proposed PBL problem was very positive, as she stated that ours was one of the top submissions.  She liked the decision to use branches to connect the problem, the elements of the problem, the stakeholders, the theories, and even some possible solutions.  While this document was by no means a polished product, Dr Robertson was able to see our direction and general approach along with our ideas to tackle the project. This struck me as an excellent example of the Gradual Release of Responsibility we have been discussing in class.  the professor is slowly letting us take responsibility for our project (and our learning) while still remaining present to encourage and assist.  This approach would resonate with my adult students.

Here is an image of our mind map.  I apologize if it is hard to read - Blogs don't allow for much real estate!!

Learning outcomes from this week:
- LO#1 by way of considering our prior learning in the PBL project, and the implications to course design are discussed in the course design are discussed in the blog past above.
-LO#2 regarding demonstrating a critical awareness of learning theories by way of our PBL group discussions on which theories best apply and why
- LO#3 regarding approaching complex educational problems was addressed by the process of arriving at and composing our PBL problem statement.
- LO#4 (producing a well-informed and rigorously researched educational artifact) was met by the creation of the mind map.
- LO#5 was met by the group discussions and collaborative decision-making that occurred during both of our group meetings.

More meetings to come, Week 10 is next!


Week 10:
Collab Learning Theories, Assistive Tech, and Differentiation

This week in the tutorial we discussed collaborative learning theories, differentiation, and assistive technologies.  The last hour was devoted to meeting with our PBL groups.  This time was VERY well spent as our group had decided not to meet over the reading week.

Breakout groups this tutorial were fun.  We were given a scenario that involved collaboration and cooperation and our group chatted about these two concepts.  While clearly different, we ultimately arrived at the "let the students decide!", I realized that our professor, Dr. Robertson, was actually doing the same with us.  We were being empowered to choose our own method and Dr. Robertson was helping us understand the elements of each decision.  It was a meta-exercise for me as I was both the teacher (in the scenario) and the recipient (in real life).  Nicely done!

A very cool thing happened in the breakout group, in that I was asked to share the story of my daughter, Alexa.  We were talking about differentiated learning and I thought about my daughter, Alexa.  Alexa (not to be confused with Amazon's AI) is in senior kindergarten and is ambidextrous.  She writes, eats, catches, and so on with both hands.  The irony of this is that when Alexa was born we were told her brain had not developed in-utero and she would likely be challenged.  She is the smartest kid in her class.  I thought about differentiation because Alexa - who is exceptional - didn't WANT to be different.  She wanted to write with her right hand like everyone else.  She wanted to read like everyone else (she currently reads at a grade 2 level despite being in SK).  My point was that differentiation needs to allow instruction to be different but still INCLUSIVE.  My group loved it and I got to share that story with the whole class.

Upon reflection, I am struggling to differentiate (pun intended) between Differentiated Learning and Personalized Learning.  I suspect one is more student-centered than the other?  Maybe Diff Lrng is about the teacher identifying the different needs for instruction but personalized learning involves the student in the decision-making as well?   Not sure, but I will find out.

In breakout groups there were two students who had strong knowledge of differentiated learning.  After they shared their opinion they listed to the other group members struggle through a concept these two had already learned.  Despite the fact that we were all peers, those two were still "more knowledgeable others", who could guide instead of tell.  To their credit, that is exactly what they did - respectfully corrected me when I shared an incorrect statement about the theory, and guided the group to a clearer understanding.  My ah-ha moment was that peers - not just profs - can scaffold and use ZPD, and that collaboration among students is not always a group feeling their way around int he dark.  Every so often one of the students can be the light.


Ok, so Learning outcomes!!  L.O. #1 involves considering prior learning and its impact on the course design.  I mention in this blog post that I am enjoying the design of the course where we get the last hour for self-directed activity (such as PBL groups).  I continue to appreciate this practice for several reasons:
1. It is predictable and that kind of routine brings comfort
2. It is useful and I use this time wisely.  Students with less investment in their learning could misuse this time - I do not.
3. It allows the learner to sort of decrease and decompress from the cognitive load involved in tutorials (often new content being learned) and bounce ideas off peers while those ideas are still fresh in everyone's minds.

L.O. #3 surrounds the learning theories.  I paid special attention in this blog to the theories discussed in class because they were somewhat new to me (Diff Lrng and Collab) and I included a learning theory NOT discussed in class (Personalized Learning).  This theory stuff is great!!

Next week we will be presenting our PBLs.  I am very excited for this, especially after tonight's meeting.  My group is going to rock it.  We have (and continue to) work hard on this project.  I am creating a case study video based loosely on Kyle's wife (she is a teacher).  Her story inspired our PBL.



James