So no, I have not been on top of much lately and I think I’ve expressed why that is in the few posts that I have managed to make. It’s frustrating but I’m trying to get back on top of things. Open-endedness is not a structure I do well with but unfortunately, I’m even worse at sticking to a self-set schedule. Anyway, week 3.
In week three we were looking at resource evaluation and a few learning theories, specifically, Multimedia learning theory, SAMR, and TPACK. We also started looking more deeply into inquiry, but I will delve into that in my next reflection post.
Resource Evaluation
Throughout my first degree, I was asked to evaluate the resources from which I took examples and quotes for various scientific papers and research projects. Therefore I think I have the strategies that I need to evaluate the sources that I am accessing in my own inquiry process. That being said, it is very easy to just go with what is easiest to access and unfortunately, that is how a lot of misinformation is spread these days, for example, many well-established less biased newspapers keep their resources behind a paywall whereas many far-right and extremist publications keep their articles open to anyone. This has contributed to the rise in polarization, especially to the far-right, we have seen and will continue to see not only in the US but globally.
Multimedia Learning Theory: How We Learn
It is ironic that the way I often present things does not overlap with the way I best process information. I find it very difficult to process large blocks of text yet here we are. However, I can’t say that I agree with every point made in Principles of Multimedia Learning. Specifically, I think that if we limit ourselves to teaching what is necessary, things can be a lot less engaging. Personally, I’ve been brought back into lessons that I had disengaged from because the speaker said something unrelated that caught my interest. Though maybe I’m misunderstanding what they address in terms of cognitive load theory and extraneous load.
The coherence principle says not to use graphics, text and narration that doesn’t support learning goals and not use music. Personally, these things help me engage more but it is interesting to not that that may not be the case for many.
I do however agree with the signaling principle. It definitely helps me to have things bolded, highlighted or separated to signal their importance and have and advance organizer is helpful when reviewing and being able to keep track of the lesson.
I can understand the redundancy principle. I do agree that minimizing text is ideal however because it allows learners to focus on the presentation instead of trying to take notes (whether they need to or not). However, personally, I like to be able to switch between looking at a graphic and reading text to get the full picture. However, I believe that this is addressed in part by the spatial contiguity principle and the temporal contiguity principle (despite sounding like something from Star Trek) in that related text and visuals should be kept together in time and space. This was always something that bothered me when writing scientific papers because you would say “refer to figure 3” and the figure wouldn’t appear until three pages later. Makes it frustrating to process information.
As far as going on to manage intrinsic load and germane load I think I can summarize in a sentence of two. People typically learn better when their learning is personalized and human. We are a visual species and we evolved as a species that used oral language primarily for a long time. It makes sense that we want human voices explaining things at a personalized pace with pictures to bring them together. Some people, myself included, may say that people tend to speak too slowly in certain settings which makes the involvement of technology a plus as students are ideally free to adjust the speed of a recording, at least when working asynchronously.
I think that many of my concerns are addressed in the boundary conditions sections and talking about the individual differences principle. I think that much of this can boil down to the spectrum of neurodivergency and between those who are neurotypical and neurodivergent. Overall though I think a lot of what was presented is correct or at least adaptable to most learners.
SAMR
SAMR looks at how we are using technology in the classroom. SAMR stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification and Redefinition. I definitely think that with the pandemic we have integrated technology into the classroom up to the modification level on a regular basis. Google docs is pretty standard in my experience and I would be surprised if a teacher wasn’t able to integrate it, but I doubt it is doing much more than substitution and maybe slight augmentation in some cases. There are so many cool technological tools out there but I will have to be more aware of how I use them in the future.
TPACK
From my understanding TPACK is just overlapping layers of understanding of strategies, pedagogy, your students and the tools available to you. It seems practical, useful and somewhat like common sense. We should be educated on the basics, firm in our ideas and framework and then add tech innovations. I did like that it emphasized that we should not get too swept up in something new and shiny only to forget the basics and the curriculum goals.
