My
personal definition of learning design is the creation of engaging,
learner-centric environments that provide opportunities for genuine learning
and the application of knowledge. I view
this as a creative process, which involves a thoughtful combination of
instructional strategies, multimedia elements, and interactive components to
cater to the needs of diverse learners. Technology plays a central role in my
approach to learning design by serving as an enabler of innovation,
interactivity, and accessibility. It is not merely a tool but an integral
component that enhances the overall learning experience. Through the integration
of various technological tools, learners can engage with content in dynamic
ways, fostering deeper understanding and application of knowledge.
To provide
an example of the crucial role of technology, consider the “traditional” math
course that you (or perhaps your parents or grandparents) took in high school: it
is likely you are imagining a chalkboard with some instructions and examples, a
textbook filled with lessons and problems to complete, and painstakingly
writing out questions and answers on blank sheets of paper. Today’s math classrooms are wildly different,
though. Although you may still see some
handwritten instructions on a whiteboard, old textbooks beneath desks, and
by-hand worksheets here and there, the real substance of the course is interacted
with via technology; not only that, but it is also created with technology
(development of textbooks and other online resources) and shared with
technology (colleague meetings use email, shared documents, and other methods
to align their lessons). Students can
access materials outside of class by using a Learning Management System. They can take their math skills to new
heights by employing advanced calculators and graphing tools. They
can even compete to test their skill with online educational games. In a world where you cannot obtain basic
necessities without utilizing some form of technology, there is no reason why
it should not be a pillar of education.
My
approach to teaching with technology is the same as my approach to teaching in
general—because the two concepts are virtually inseparable. As a result, the key concepts that someone
would need to understand are those that form my own pedagogical pillars:
Mastery-based Grading, Authentic Learning, Social-Emotional Learning.
Mastery-based
Grading: Also
known as “Standards-based Grading” is often negatively associated with the
concept that a teacher is teaching to dictated standards with little or no
regard for the nuances of individualized instruction. In reality, it is more akin to grading with a
rubric: each level is matched with a state of proficiency (i.e. No proficiency,
Some proficiency, Proficient, and Mastery).
Assessments are designed so that there are opportunities for the student
to demonstrate skill at every level in some way. Then the rubric score is entered into the
gradebook. In my experience, this system
produces far better results—both with knowledge acquisition and student buy-in—then
the traditional “count each question” tactic of grading assessments. Although my personal preference is to give
these assessments as paper/pencil quizzes, they must be first developed using
technology. Then, once I (the
instructor) knows how the assessment looks and feels, I am able to design
interactive activities that allow students to explore the skill as they learn it. They also need to be well-versed in
calculator skills to be successful on many of these assessments.
According
to Ellen Wagner, “Designers engage in process of determining the form,
function, appearance, or application characteristics of something.” (2011) This is especially true of Mastery-based
grading, because the assessments become the foundation of all other lessons and
activities. Designing these assessments means
providing opportunities to reach the targeted standard, setting up questions
that can be quickly “scored” to determine the students’ overall level of
mastery, and creating at least one opportunity for “Full Mastery” in some way—a
method for the learner to truly demonstrate that they know the concept thoroughly. Once this assessment is crafted, all other parts
of the unit are much easier to craft.
Authentic
Learning: This is
the Big Question for students in any math class—“When are we going to use this
in real life?” Authentic learning
provides students with opportunities to use the math in a real life scenario. It goes beyond a typical dry word problem and
pushes more into the territory of a science lab. Students will need to collect data, compare
results, and develop ideas about how and why they will use certain skills or
formulas. Calculators are a must for
these activities, even when they are hands-on.
Many of them also will need a place for students to track and enter
their data, such as a spreadsheet or online form. The ability to share ongoing work with their
peers is incredibly useful as well, because not every student will be able to
complete these types of activities within the time allotted in class.
When
discussing the applications of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), Gronseth,
Michela, and Ugwu emphasize that the content should be presented in a variety
of ways—including the way students interact with it, the way it is represented,
and the way that the learner is assessed (2021). Authentic learning is an example of providing
an alternative presentation of the content.
Social
Emotional Learning: Learning
of this type integrates the needs of the learner that go beyond the
classroom. A student’s personal life can
become an obstacle to academic learning if they are unable to effectively
process social and emotional events. A
meta-analysis of research into the effects of SEL approaches was conducted in
2011 by Joseph Durlak, Roger Weissberg, Allison Dymnicki, Rebecca
Taylor, and Kriston Schellinger and they concluded that there was a
statistically significant correlation between the implementation of SEL
approaches and increases in positive social behaviors as well as increased academic
performance (Durlak et al, 2011). SEL
can be developed in a classroom in many ways, but technology is a fantastic
support; by implementing surveys, check-in screens in online activities, and
opportunities for one-on-one emails, I am able to make connections with many
students who would not otherwise discuss a significant issue that is keeping
them from learning.
A great example of SEL is the incorporation of “culturally relevant teaching” (occasionally and unfortunately referred to as CRT), which means that the instructor includes details about all students’ varied cultures at some point during instruction, to allow each student to feel included. These details are built into the pre-existing material—for example, changing the name or location in a math word problem, or adding some extra time during the Social Studies unit about a particular war to discuss specific cultures that were involved. In “Designing for Diverse Learners,” the authors explain that this practice allows students to make stronger connections to the material because it becomes more relevant to themselves (Gronseth, Michela, & Ugwu, 2021)
References:
Durlak, J.A., Weissberg, R.P., Dymnicki, A.B., Taylor, R.D. and Schellinger, K.B. (2011), The Impact of Enhancing Students’ Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta-Analysis of School-Based Universal Interventions. Child Development, 82: 405-432. https://doi-org.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
Gronseth,
S. L., Michela, E., & Ugwu, L. O. (2021). Designing for
Diverse Learners. In J. K. McDonald & R. E. West (Eds.), Design
for Learning: Principles, Processes, and Praxis. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/id/designing_for_diverse_learners
Wagner, E.
(2011). Essay: In search of the secret handshakes of ID. The Journal of
Applied Instructional Design, 1(1), 33-37.
No comments:
Post a Comment