This post is my response to an article that involves a diverse population.
I found this article by Elise Temple very interested, in part because I just finished a class in special education in which a large part was devoted to learning disabilities. One thing that is interesting about learning disabilities is that in the vast majority of cases, the cause of the disability is unknown. Researchers have known for awhile that different activities use different parts of the brain, but with equipment such as MRI's, they can see brain activity while the activity is being performed.
The research Temple cites is a study that involved fMRI to investigate changes in brain function before and after children with dyselxia received reading instruction. The subjects recieved instruction using a curriculum called Fast ForWord Language. The subjects showed improved reading ability after training, but also changes in brain function. The changes were both normalizing and compensating. By normalizing, the researchers mean that after instruction, the brain activity of the test group more closely resembled the brain activity of the control group. By compensating, the researchers mean that in sometimes the brain showed compensatory activity in a part of the brain that was not usual for that sort of activity.
This research is one of the things that paves the way for further study of brain function in children and it also potentially sheds light on a variety of interventions and educational strategies. More importantly, it shows that brain dysfunction (in this case dyslexia,) can be ameliorated, or lessened. This is definitely good news for those stuggling with dyslexia and possibly other learning disabilities.
Temple, E. (2003). Changes in Brain Function in Children with Dyselxia after Training. Computers in Education, Twelfth Edition. Annual Editions
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Digital Game-Based Learning
There seems to be growing interest in using games (specifically, video games) as learning tools. Proponents have generated some public interest through their research and advocacy. Another factor is that the current generation of "digital natives" have become "disengaged with traditional instruction" and require multiple streams of information. In other words, they don't respond well to having a book shoved at them and being told to sit quiety and read. Along with this factor is the huge popularity of games. The public perception of games has been slowly changing. We are moving past the idea that games are all play and therefore have nothing to do with learning. So we just getting to the point where educators and the general public are getting ready to accept the integration of digital game based learning with more traditional education.
Richard Van Eck argues in his article that proponents of digital game-based learning run the risk of creating the impression that all games are good for all learners and learning outcomes. He argues for a more research, better communication with the public about the strengths and weaknesses of digital game-based learning, and striking a balance between entertainment and education. What I found particularly interesting was his description of "Shavian reversals:" offspring that inherit the worst characteristics of both parents. In the case of digital games, this would be something like drill and kill learning (worst educational practice,) in a boring game (worst game practice.) Despite the risk of this happening when designing an educational game, the author stresses that the answer is not to privilege pedagogy over entertainment, or vice-versa, but to shoot for the synergy of the two fields.
I was also very interested in Van Eck's analysis of DGBL as a model of learning. DGBL enbodies situated cognition, which has been the focus of a lot of current research about how we learn. He cites research that indicates that play is a primary socialization and learning mechanism for all human cultures and even for some animals. Play involves a cycle of hypothesis, formulation, testing and revision. I can definitely see where some games fit into that learning model. I think I would need to see investigate more games further, though, before I become convinced that they would work in a language arts classroom. I can see the application in math classes and history classes, though. Maybe I need to conduct some research of my own. Please excuse me; I'm going to take a break to bust into my son's The Sims game.
Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital Game-Based Learning. In Computers in Education. Twelfth Edition: Annual Editions.
Richard Van Eck argues in his article that proponents of digital game-based learning run the risk of creating the impression that all games are good for all learners and learning outcomes. He argues for a more research, better communication with the public about the strengths and weaknesses of digital game-based learning, and striking a balance between entertainment and education. What I found particularly interesting was his description of "Shavian reversals:" offspring that inherit the worst characteristics of both parents. In the case of digital games, this would be something like drill and kill learning (worst educational practice,) in a boring game (worst game practice.) Despite the risk of this happening when designing an educational game, the author stresses that the answer is not to privilege pedagogy over entertainment, or vice-versa, but to shoot for the synergy of the two fields.
I was also very interested in Van Eck's analysis of DGBL as a model of learning. DGBL enbodies situated cognition, which has been the focus of a lot of current research about how we learn. He cites research that indicates that play is a primary socialization and learning mechanism for all human cultures and even for some animals. Play involves a cycle of hypothesis, formulation, testing and revision. I can definitely see where some games fit into that learning model. I think I would need to see investigate more games further, though, before I become convinced that they would work in a language arts classroom. I can see the application in math classes and history classes, though. Maybe I need to conduct some research of my own. Please excuse me; I'm going to take a break to bust into my son's The Sims game.
Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital Game-Based Learning. In Computers in Education. Twelfth Edition: Annual Editions.
iPod, uPod
Podcasting is apparently a big thing. I have to admit that I do not listen to them, although they seem to have many wonderful applications for education. I probably don't listen to them because I am not really that aware of them. Do I have to sign up for them? Do I listen to them on my cell phone or computer? Or either?
Apparently they are not hard to create. It seems to use minimal equipment: a computer with a microphone jack and a microphone (and of course, the internet to post it on.) And you don't need top-of-the-line equipment. So I could probably do this in my classroom. I can imagine tons of applications for this in a language arts classroom.
One thing that seems particularly appealing about using creating podcasts for language arts is that it is centered around listening. I sometimes wonder if listening isn't kind of a lost art in a world where so much is in print. I think creating podcasts would address the spirit of the Washington State Learning standards that not only require students to read, but to present sometimes, also. Part of language arts is about oral communication, not just reading and writing.
I was talking to my dad the other night about what it was like to listen to shows on the radio, before there was television. It made me reflect a little on what is unique about hearing and listening that may be lost when we read. I absolutely love to read; in fact, I prefer reading print to listening. But maybe I haven't been trained in the art of listening; learned to really savor it or something. I think getting my students to record themselves reading their own writing in their own voices could be a small step toward preserving the seemingly vanishing art of listening.
Butterfield, G. (2007). Tech Teacher: iPod, uPod. Edutopia. Retrieved August 4, 2009 from http://www.edutopia.org./node/3949
Apparently they are not hard to create. It seems to use minimal equipment: a computer with a microphone jack and a microphone (and of course, the internet to post it on.) And you don't need top-of-the-line equipment. So I could probably do this in my classroom. I can imagine tons of applications for this in a language arts classroom.
One thing that seems particularly appealing about using creating podcasts for language arts is that it is centered around listening. I sometimes wonder if listening isn't kind of a lost art in a world where so much is in print. I think creating podcasts would address the spirit of the Washington State Learning standards that not only require students to read, but to present sometimes, also. Part of language arts is about oral communication, not just reading and writing.
I was talking to my dad the other night about what it was like to listen to shows on the radio, before there was television. It made me reflect a little on what is unique about hearing and listening that may be lost when we read. I absolutely love to read; in fact, I prefer reading print to listening. But maybe I haven't been trained in the art of listening; learned to really savor it or something. I think getting my students to record themselves reading their own writing in their own voices could be a small step toward preserving the seemingly vanishing art of listening.
Butterfield, G. (2007). Tech Teacher: iPod, uPod. Edutopia. Retrieved August 4, 2009 from http://www.edutopia.org./node/3949
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
