Cyborg
I’ll begin my reflection over the first three learning theories. I must admit the most extreme, and most unsettling learning theory is the Cyborg theory, especially as it borders science fiction and trending reality. Holding Christian beliefs close to my heart makes the cyborg theory most disturbing. To me, it crosses the lines of playing God and making what we’ve been given, better. I can see how this can be helpful to those who really need neurotic help. I’ve seen too many people suffer due to their neurological structures; whether it is developmental, emotional, or mental. What scares me the most is if this technology is used for the wrong purpose, there could be some serious repercussions we could not recover.
Also, what if the technology truly advances? When Professor Warwick mentioned how certain systems could be unimportant, specifically not needing universities or school by simply downloading information [taught in schools] into the brain. The “human upgrade” he speaks of could almost literally make us all robots. That’s the beauty of our current society. There are those superior to others in many different fields, whether it is athletics, academics, and many other vocational roles. The meaning of “superiority” would be lost because we all would be equals of superiority. This could really change the human evolution…and I don’t think there would be any good from it.
Reference:
- Warwirk, K. (nd). Cyborg Life [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB_l7SY_ngI
Connectivism
To me, this is the most complex theory because it is sharing the idea that knowledge exists in the in the outside world and not within one’s mind. The only I could relate to this was by remember what a college professor said to his class. He said a true genius can apply new knowledge to the mechanics of something he already knows. Meaning, I may not know exactly the purpose of all the body systems, or how they work, but if I can compare and relate them to a car engine (something I know about) then I can understand it more. Self-reflection is important to this learning theory and that just because the knowledge is obtained differently, it doesn’t mean its wrong.
Reference:
- Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education, 7-44.
- Siemens, G. (nd). The Changing Nature of Knowledge [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMcTHndpzYg
Constructivism
When I was first watching the video over constructivism and read some of the brief articles about it, three letters came to my mind, K-W-L. I complete related it the ever popular KWL chart used in classrooms all over the country. It’s all about building on top of something one already knows; taking each piece of new information deeper. I can see how connectivism can be connected to constructivism. It’s now connecting the information one already knows and bring it to others. Utilizing the importance of external factors in order for connectivism to occur, it eventually has constructivism as a foundation.
Beyond the Learning Theories
I felt the majority of readings just set a blaze my already fired-up passion of implementing technology in the classroom and how it has to be emphasized in the classroom. I’m sure when students are at home, especially during summer break are wishing they had worksheets and textbooks in front of them to entertain their boredom. Yet this is what we still constantly feed and in the end of the process try and program them to take properly take a state mandated test.
My most favorite phrase of all the readings from this week was the “tipping point.” “At what point will new tools and new methods catch on enough in schools to reach the tipping point?” (Solomon & Schrum, 2007). I feel we’re in the middle of this tipping point. I’m scared that we are currently not doing enough to make it through this point. I feel we don’t just have a generation of teachers dealing with a different generation of students. To me it looks like we have multiple generations of teachers, administrators, and politicians deciding what’s best in our steam train process how to teach the generation of the bullet trains. We have the generations of the “but’s” teaching to the generation of “and’s”. (It almost look like a bad Coke Zero commercial). I’m fearful and excited all at the same time of the skills I have to teach a generation like this. I hope to be a part of this answer to the “tipping point.”
Reference:
- Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education, 7-44
No comments:
Post a Comment