Reflection 4:  Emerging Theories and Strategies

We have to be knowledge seekers in this generation in order to survive the constant changes that happen daily.  My focus of this reflection is on understanding the difference between Transactional Distance, Social Cognitive and Connectionivism theory. 

“Essentially, research evidence shows that in spite of the many efforts that researcher and educators invested over the years in preparing teachers in the educational uses of technology, teachers still lack the skills and knowledge needed to be able to teach with technology successfully” (Angeli & Valanides, 2009).  This thought has been a constant thought since I have started the EdTech program.  After thinking about this topic for year and half now, it still seems clear to me that we need to allow the students to teach teachers and that schools need a real IT application departments.    In order for transactional distance to be meaningful to the learning experience, teacher must have dialog and/or interaction between their learners and have a good design instruction and autonomy.  Autonomy means to work alone and still understand meaning with little input.   Is that what students need to learn?

The authors, Rita Kop and Adrian Hill, conducted a critically analysis of the Connectivism theory and the approach to teaching students.  They analyzed if web applications would enhance learners experience with collaboration and communication related to the theory of Connectivism. Connectivism is thought as a [“learning process is cyclical, in that learners will connect to a network to share and find new information”] (Kop & Hill, 2008).   I found this article to be in aligned about my thoughts about Social-Cognitive theory.  However, do not think Connectivism and Transactional Distance theory can stand alone as a theory for learning. 

 I believe social-cognitive theory allows for creating individual learning.  “Social-cognitive theories emphasize that teaching and learning are highly social activities and that interactions with teachers, peers, and instructional material influences the cognitive affective development of learners (Kim & Baylor, 2006).” 

Learning can be done a variety of ways for any student, but it’s important that as teachers, we understand that people learning style is always going to be different based on if we are auditory, visual, tactile, or kinesthetic. That why having teaching has to allow for highly social activities and interactions with peers of the same learning style.

 I also, believe if schools had their own IT application department it would meet the needs of Transactional, Social Cognitive and Connectivism theories.    The more I find out about how little our education system spend training teachers on new technology it does not amaze me that children are flying by them with a better know how.   In the business world the vendor spend so much more time with the staff to make sure they understand the application.  Many of my classmates in this program have informed me they never even see the vendor in their schools.  Why is that? 

This really makes me re-think about why I feel more business should be involved with our education system.    Not promoting food and drinks, but taking the time to educate our teachers and students on the technology they work with in the field.  It seem like if our companies just had one employee take a day to go teach to a group of kids would do wonders for the teachers in our communities and students.  We don't need the best of the best of the business world teaching our students we just need knowledge people with valid insight communicating about the little things they use to improve their jobs.  I am always amazed how we all use Word every day but in the scheme of things we know very little about all the bells and whistles.   Just last semester, I have learned how to build table of contents that works with all my page numbering.  Yeah, it problem something I learned five-years-ago but I had forgot it overtime.  Creating an environment of learning and modeling based off the Social Cognitive theory for the future leaders is better for our culture as a whole in the long run.

 Lindy

References:

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2008). A Social-Cognitive Framework for Pedagogical Agents as Learning Companions. Computers & Education, 52, 154–168.

Kim, Y. & Baylor, A. (2006). A social-cognitive framework for pedagogical agents as learning companions. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 54(6), 569-596.  Retrieved February 18, 2012, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 1211218511).

Kob, R., & Hill, A. (October, 2008.). Connectivism: Learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/523/1137