Blogs and Learning

As professor, a major question with which I must deal is whether and in what ways the software technology called blogging is a worthwhile addition to the distance learning toolkit. Having doctoral students with whom to explore, experiment and question makes the investigation real and manageable. The contents of the comments received to the first three postings and the way the blog handles them provide data for tool evaluation.

Much of the anecdotal reporting sees a blog as a means of self-expression with opportunities for social interaction, a kind of public diary with peer feedback. An ongoing problem with writing is the “blank page” syndrome in which the writer stares at a blank page or a blank screen and nothing comes to mind. If the social networking value of the blog encourages non-writers to write, the blog must be given some value points.

Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/) bears testimony to the attraction of bearing one’s soul in public has for young people. Here are some of the phrases found on the homepage: “… a social utility that connects you with the people around you”, “…upload photos”, “…get the latest news from your friends”, “…post videos on your profile”, “… join a network to see people who live, study, or work around you.”

Gary Stager (http://www.stager.org/blog/) is a Logo advocate who, in 1987, visited a graduate course in Logo for Learning that I taught in NJ. Refer to his September 4, 2007 post called “Why Teachers Don’t Use Web 2.0”. Here is an example of what you will find: “No matter how cool, powerful or revolutionary Web 2.0 tools happen to be, there are few if any mature objects-to-think-with embedded in them and certainly no explicit statement that their use is designed to transform the learning environment.”

Comments to this post should be limited to

• How might thinking skills be developed or extended through blogging?


• How might the learning environment be transformed with blogging?
  

Respond only if you have come up with a new idea or have read something relevant.

Digital Toys and Learning Tools Part II

Learning as we move along, today's entry is considerably shorter than the first two (that were posted before responses were forthcoming). Having read all the comments, I decided to summarize them below for further group input. Notice the tendency to post the same unspecific statements that are commonly used to promote the tools. Do not become mesmerized by the technologies or the promises. Concentrate on the questions:

• What is the benefit to be gained by use?
• How much teaching time will be spent on learning to use the technology?

Brenda wrote that a wiki is a wonderful tool for dealing with documents that require input and/or editing by multiple people.

Robin wrote about podcasting student messages to increase social presence. The process is difficult to envision.

Avril envisions using wikis for team products.

Rick agrees that toys masquerade as learning tools.

Jen set herself the very difficult task of making all learning engaging or challenging.

Yvette sees the ability to supplement discussion boards with wikis in order to extract the best of the discussions and to encourage peer support during study.

Jeremy interprets multi-tasking as multi-sensory inputs.

Zac portrays a scary future for teachers whose students could call upon them at anytime through their cell phones.

Pressy writes about usability and accommodation of technology interfaces. Why here?

Jessie agrees that not all learning can be fun but suggests that the teacher can do his best to minimize the repetitive processes that cause boredom.

Addy suggests making the non-fun aspects of learning happen quickly.

Suki concurs with Brenda and Avril about the potentials of wikis as collaborative learning and production tools.

Sandra wrote about using podcasts to have students create their own content. Students have always created content: compositions, drawings, dioramas, collages, etc.?

Dr. Trudy observes: No one chose to use a blog. Wikis were selected for collaborative development of a printed product. Podcasts were selected for unexplained social value. Cell phones are technology not technology (think software) tools. Multi-tasking is not the same as multi-sensory, concurrent or parallel experiences. Two activities that require thinking or memorizing or computing cannot be done at the same time. Activities that require similar processing done simultaneously are not done well.

Comments, clarifications, and/or observations are welcome.

Digital Toys and Learning Tools

The editorial reproduced below is current. It was written with the winter 2008 course in mind. Read it and post a response to one of the questions that follow the editorial.


Abramson, T. (2007). Digital toys and learning tools. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems, 21(2), 3-4.

Society evolved from the industrial to the computer and then to the communications/information age in less than half a century while education, which should be grounded in society, continues to lag behind. Probably the best definition for technology is that which did not exist in one’s youth. Accepting that thinking, children should use in school the computer tools they use outside of school. But wait! Are all the home-based computer tools suitable for learning or are some just digital toys?

We have consistently opposed the perspectives that the teacher must accommodate all learning styles and that the school day should be a series of pleasurable experiences. Both may sound good but are virtually impossible to implement. A classroom teacher cannot accommodate 24-30 unique learning styles and still get the subject matter taught, reinforced and tested, not even with the support of technology. Some things are difficult to learn, others are tedious; the fun part comes with the relief of mastery, not the struggle to get there.

Technology in society during this decade has been moving at an unprecedented pace. A recently-published paper described how the net generation requires collaboration to maximize learning. The net generation, also called the Millennials, is made up of the people who were born after 1981, for whom communication technologies are natural artifacts of their society. It turned out that collaboration, a process in which people work together to achieve a goal, was not the term intended by the author. A more accurate requirement might be communication or interaction.

Our crystal ball had not anticipated social networking tools such as IM (instant messaging), texting, wikis, blogs, podcast and vidcasts, and sites such as MySpace and SecondLife. Many of the tools work through computers, tablets, Blackberries and cell phones. These technologies and applications enable two conditions that serve the emotional needs of school-age children. First, one never needs to be alone. Second, one may be anyone he wishes; truth and fiction become one in cyberspace.

Beyond the needs of children, these technologies have created an economic windfall. The devices are small and fragile. They fall out of pockets and backpacks and into toilets and washbasins; they get lost and stepped on and need to be replaced immediately if not sooner. Who, among our readers, has not wondered, “What is there to talk about so much all the time?” The answer, of course, is “You would not understand”. We do not even try. One of our colleagues observed that her nephew’s fingers move as he speaks even when there is no device in hand for texting. Another reported that highschoolers who text or IM are “talking with their fingers”, not writing.


We asked several high school students how they cope in class when (we assumed) they were detached from their technology. It was explained that phones were to be turned off and put away during class but few really complied. Phones were put on vibrate and texting could be done surreptitiously on one’s lap. If caught, the phone was confiscated but could be redeemed in the school office by making a charitable contribution, usually $5. We were about to ask whether it was worth the risk but decided not to sound additionally ignorant.

We read about multi-tasking and how brains are developing differently based upon the variety of digital experiences during the formative years. Even computers do not multi-task; they perform so quickly that, to the human eye, it appears that more than one action is taking place concurrently. There is a difference between one-way and two-way communication. The car radio broadcasts music or news but it makes no demand upon the listener; a cell-phone, even if not hand-held, is a device for speaking and listening. Driving and conversing is multi-tasking with the probability of bad consequences. A stereo or an I-Pod that plays favorite music during study times does not create a multi-tasking situation. The music helps the individual relax and be receptive to the task at hand.

A widely syndicated cartoon, Cathy, by Cathy Guiswite, on September 9, 2007, featured a mother with a daughter about to start third grade shopping for supplies. They bought a notebook computer, a printer, an electronic planner, a calculator, a cell phone and a wireless router. Cartoons are largely political statements; this one was a statement about the state of education. Reading it brings forth concern about the growing digital divide. Is education in wealthy neighborhoods to be totally different from that in areas where parents cannot provide comparable equipment? So far, according to independent assessment reports, there is not much to worry about. All the electronics on the market and in the schools have yet to raise the level of achievement as measured by state and local standards.

Returning to the title of the editorial, Is it possible to make two distinct technology piles – one for digital toys and another for learning tools? How does a technology migrate from one pile to the other? Will web-publishing tools such as weblogs and wikis become useful artifacts for learning? Will the ability to create online content including text, photos, audio and video become valuable assets in the skill set of an educated person? Will teachers at all levels devise learning experiences that capitalize upon the digital toys of today? Many answers are on the drawing boards as we write. Migration from toy to tool occurs when innovative teachers devise, use, and evaluate applications to improve learning.

The Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems has been networking in search of solutions. We hope to present many to our readers starting with this very issue. [End of editorial.]

All responses/comments should be 200 words or fewer.

1. Looking at the subject you teach, explain how is it possible for all learning to be fun and not boring.

2. Which of the new tools mentioned above appears to hold the greatest potential for improving learning within the population you teach. Expand upon your choice.

3. Looking beyond your own situation, what will the new technologies mean for the digital divide or the generation divide?

4. What is your perspective on multi-tasking and learning?