Finals Review

What are the essential differences between behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism?

·         Behaviorism:  explains learning as a change in behavior due to the presentation of stimuli.  Behaviour adapts in response to those environmental stimuli.  Learning has occurred when the learner displays the correct behavior in response to a particular stimulus. 

**The focus is on overt, observable behaviours—what learners do!

**The goal of instruction is to strengthen the relationship between stimulus and response through the use of performance cues & reinforcement.  

 

·         Cognitivism:  explains learning as a change in mental models or frameworks and the development of encoding & retrieval strategies.  Learning has occurred when the learner can retrieve information that was previously encoded.

**The focus is on internal mental processes—what learners know & how they know it or how it is represented in their mind (mental processes, strategies, etc.)

**The key focus here is changing the learner by helping them use appropriate learning strategies

**The role of the instructor is determining what mental models or structures the learner already possesses and how new knowledge can be introduced and organized in a way that allows the learner to assimilate it--how to help learners organize, store, and retrieve new knowledge.

·         Constructivism:  explains learning as the formation of personal meaning/understanding as a result of lived experiences and reflection upon those experiences.  Learning is an active process and understanding is provisional and dynamic, changing and adapting in response to new experiences, particularly exposure to varied perspectives and new experiences.  

T   The role of the instructor includes helping learners learn to construct or create their own meaning and (2) placing them in authentic environments, performing authentic tasks and (3) providing opportunities to participate in social negotiation (varied perspectives).

**

 

What are the differences between HPT, IT, & LS?

·         Instructional Technology:  Concerned with design and application—designing learning environments and instructional products that improve learning.  Are interested in learning theory inasmuch as it informs practice; however, the ultimate objective is to improve actual learning.

**  Design processes & systems with the goal of improving learning.  

·         Human Performance Technology:  Is strictly concerned with performance and explicit, observable behaviours.  Analyzes performance gaps and then develops interventions for improving performance.  Some interventions might include training; however, HPT takes a much more broad view than IT and includes job aids, rewards/incentives, physical layout of space, etc.

** Develop interventions to improve performance gaps.

·         Learning Sciences:  Concerned with developing theories that describe how learning takes place, rather than dictating how it should take place and making specific recommendations regarding pedagogy or instructional strategies, although these theories might suggest certain strategies.

** Develop conceptual models that help explain and describe learning

 

What is the difference between science & technology?

·         Science:  Is analytic and descriptive.  Seeks to build conceptual models that can explain observed effects.  Asks different questions (e.g. “Why did this happen?”), produces general principles or theories that describe effects in the natural world. 

·         Technology:  Is prescriptive (“synthesis towards a goal”).  Is synthetic in that it builds causal models that can be used to design or develop artifacts (tools, interactions, etc.) that are intended to bring about certain effects.

o   The structuring of space/time to achieve a specified purpose within within the bounds of specified problem constraints and to a predetermined level of criterion.

o   Asks different questions (“how can we make this happen?”)

**Builds causal models that can be used to design tools or processes that are intended to bring about specified effects or outcomes

 

Media vs. Method Debate

·         Clark—Media are just vehicles for delivering instruction and can be separated from method

o   Adheres to the “replaceability test”—if the media can be changed and the same learning is observed then it isn’t the medium but the method that has led to the learning.

o   Argues that research analyzing the influence of media elements on learning haven’t controlled for instructional method and are confounded.

o   Although media elements might have some impact on learning it is the “active ingredient” of method that is the key determinant in the learning that occurs

§  He argues that method is the “active ingredient” because of the replaceability test—e.g. different media with same learning results.

§  The instructional method is embedded within the medium that delivers the instruction

o   Media may influence cost or speed; however only method can influence what is actually learned.

·         Kozma—Media characteristics have an impact upon the mental models and cognitive structures that are formed by learners; thus, media do influence learning.

o   Learners actively collaborate with the instructional medium to construct learning

§  Different learning occurs depending on what medium is used

·         This seems accurate a picture would cause a learner to form a different mental representation than would a verbal definition

o   Method and media cannot be separated all of the time like Clark suggests

§  In good designs they are integrated and have a synergistic effect upon learning

Lean Management

Our conversation in class today about Lean Management was interesting and got me thinking about "production" and "efficiency".  It makes sense to me that HPT professionals in manufacturing settings would be concerned with productivity and would want to avoid waste.  And, on the surface, it seems like anything that doesn't directly impact production would be something that could be improved.  Employee down-time, side conversations, waiting, etc. could be perceived as negatives because all of those things decrease productivity.  

However, the question that I was left with was what impact things like breaks, conversations among co-workers, etc. have on morale and what impact morale has on productivity and effectiveness.  Those are probably difficult things to measure, but I think it might be a mistake to approach productivity from a strictly technical, non-human standpoint.  I guess that from a Human Performance Technology standpoint these sorts of things fall into the category of incenvites/rewards, organizational culture, etc.  All of the efficiencies in the world still don't eliminate the fact that much of manufacturing depends upon human agents and that they can't be treated just like production machines.  

I guess that the challenge in all of this for practitioners is finding that balance between efficiency and practices that promote morale.

Humility & Life-long Learning

One of the things that I have learned as I have listened to the career reports in class is that one of the things that makes a good instructional designer or instructional technologist is humility and a desire to be a life-long learner, both of which I think are closely linked.  

I  noticed that a number of the professionals that have been interviewed how important it is to be well read (some even mentioned being well read outside of your discipline).  They seemed to have a passion for learning and that was one of the things that they enjoyed most about their work--the opportunity to continue learning even after their formal education had ended.

Many of the professionals interviewed also talked about the importance of managing relationships, working with stakeholders, soliciting feedback, etc.  It seems like a certain amount of humility is necessary in all of this because designers are constantly being asked to incorporate the ideas of others into their designs.  An attitude of "I have all of the good ideas" or "No one does it better than I do" could be dangerous in doing this kind of work.  

All of this reminded me of a book that I read over the summer called Learning in the Light of Faith.  It is a collection of essays that were adapted from a lecture series that was offered at BYU back in 1995 and features essays by Pres. Eyring, Pres. Samuelson (before he was affiliated with BYU), Elder Maxwell, and Elder Oaks among others.  The theme of the essays is "disciple-scholarship" and I noticed that every author mentioned humility, meekness, or a related concept as being key in learning.  In another talk by Pres. Eyring (A Child of God, a 1997 Devotional Address) he discusses the attributes of great learners and mentions a willingness to "seek correction" as one of these attributes.   

It has just been interesting to see all of these things coming together and to realize how important this humility and passion for learning is in our field.

Conscience of Craft & Accountability

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/12/04/humanities

This is an article about a meeting that took place at the annual meeting of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges.  The meeting was focused on accountability in the humanities and a common refrain from the faculty that were present was "You can't measure what we teach!".  That got me thinking about the discussions we have had recently about conscience of craft and accountability.  For the record, I don't think that this attitude of "don't assess me because it might mean that I will need to improve something" isn't unique to the field of humanities, for some reason or another they always end up being the whipping boy when it comes to discussions about accountability.   This is a general problem in academia and other work settings--people don't want to be held accountable for their work.  I can understand the argument that outside bodies don't always know what to assess or evaluate, but that can't be an argument for throwing out assessment all together.  If humanities faculty don't want someone else assessing the learning of their students, then they need to step up to the plate and develop their own evaluations and then be able to justify the utility of those evaluations to accrediting bodies, politicians, students paying tuition, etc.  

What makes a person competent?

Throughout the presentations today and as I was researching for the presentation that Brian and I gave, I kept having the thought "what qualifies a person to call themself an instructional designer or an evaluator?" It is interesting to me that a fair number of professionals in the field do not have any formal training in instructional technology or have taken a workshop focused on evaluation.  The question that I have is that does that sort of thing harm the profession or those of us who do have formal training?  If there are people calling themselves designers but who haven't completed the training that we have, does that undermine our field or minimize the value of the graduate programs that exist?  On the other hand, if those of us with formal training aren't any more effective than those who haven't, then maybe we should do away with graduate programs all together.  

I just think that this sort of thing is important for us to think about if we want instructional technology to be a viable field that is respected.  What would happen if we had self-taught physicians performing heart surgeries?  If learning and teaching are moral acts that have the potential to help or harm individuals then it seems justified to require that those involved in those practices have some sort of credential.

Just my musings.

Collaborative Learning Tools

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/12/03/audio

This article appeared in Inside Higher Ed this morning.  The author discusses recent studies that have suggested that collaborative learning tools (especially those that facilitate the inclusion of visual images) enhance learning for students participating in those collaborative learning experiences.  Google Docs is mentioned specifically.

The other really interesting thing about the article was the mention of a new feature in Adobe software where a reader can attach sound clips to electronic documents and send them back to the author with feedback, etc.  Apparently this is being used by faculty to comment on student work and seems to have a positive impact on improving their writing.  I hadn't ever heard of this and thought it was pretty interesting.

Moral Issues in Education/Learning

I think it is important that we are finishing our course with discussions about moral issues surrounding education, specifically our work as instructional technologists and instructional designers.  It's something that I have been thinking a fair amount about recently, particularly the idea of conscience of craft and the moral obligation we have to do things that are in the best interest of the learners that interact with our designs, products, and experiences.  Occasionally, I think that we make decisions about our designs based on our own convenience.  In my work with first-year students I sit on a number of committees that are charged with developing educational programs and courses for new students at BYU.  I have noticed that quite often when ideas are presented that seem to have the potential to lead to very meaningful experiences for students the response from some is "that would complicate things too much" or "something like that would take far too much effort".  While I recognize that we all have limited resources in terms of time, budget, etc. I feel like the "it's too complicated" response is used far too often.  

I also thought that Sarah Westerberg's comments centered on "commitment" in yesterday's University Devotional Address are connected to this discussion.  When we make the decision to become instructional designers or take a position at the university that puts us in a position to impact student learning I believe that we are making a commitment to do everything we can to enhance learners' experience.  

This isn't to say that I am perfect in this area.  I catch myself drifting into the convenience mindset all of the time--I think that is human.  The important thing is that we continually remind ourself of the commitments we have made as educators and find ways to keep our working engaging enough that it is satisfying to go beyond the minimum in our work.

Second Language Acquisition

I was fascinated by the discussion we had yesterday about second language acquisition.  So much so, that I just wasted about 30 minutes messing around on Livemocha taking Spanish lessons.  Even in that short amount of time I feel like I learned more than most kids learn in an entire week in a junior high or high school spanish class.  

I've been trying to analyze what it was about Livemocha that kept me engaged and led to learning.  Part of it could be that I am a little competitive so things like questions with right and wrong answers, gaining points, etc. are things that motivate me.  That makes me wonder what a non-competitive person might think about those aspects of the livemocha experience.  It was also nice that I could do a variety of things (listen, read, write, speak).  It seems like engaging a variety of ther learner's senses is effective in promoting learning.  The other nice thing was that I could learn at my own pace and make mistakes without it being public (like what happens in a classroom).  It was also effective to receive immediate feedback regarding my answers.  

I was prompted a number of times to "find a friend" or to provide feedback on someone else's learning which I thought was an interesting concept.  I think that online or distance education often gets a bad rap for being "anti-social".  While that may be true in some cases, there are ways to make livemocha a little more collaborative and social and to capitalize on the power of social negotiation or collaboration.  I wish that I had the time to take one of these courses.  It seems like an interesting way to approach language acquisition--almost a melding of online education with social networking.

Web 2.0 and the Future of Education

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=Michael+Wesch&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#

This is an interesting video clip that was produced by Michael Wesch and a class of anthropology students at Kansas State.  Wesch was just named as one of four professors of the year by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and Support of Education.  

It's short but raises some interesting questions about education and what it could or should look like in the near future. 

Fear of Technology

The first part of our discussion in class today about Web 2.0 and the almost illogical fear of web 2.0 technologies that some people have was interesting to me because I think that it is a common problem.  It was obvious from the quotes shared by Matt and Neil in their presentation that these fears are generally the result of a misunderstanding of new technologies and their capabilities.  It raised the question in my mind of what our responsibility might be to educate people about the technologies that are emerging and what they can contribute to learning.  

It can be frustrating when we discover a new technology or application and want to make use of it but those we work for and with don't see its value.  But, we shouldn't be overly surprised when something new (or at least new to the user) isn't accepted readily because it's only human nature to be a little hesitant when dealing with new and unfamiliar things.  I think that we might shoot ourselves in the feet at times by trying to implement the use of new technology before we have helped stakeholders really understand its functionality and capabilities.  So, my argument is that, when faced with a new technology, we should not only ask "How can I use this to enhance learning?", but also "How can I enhance others understanding of this technology so that they will use it to enhance learning?".

I saw an example of this two summers ago when we were discussing the possibility of using Facebook to connect new students with each other and the University.  We made this proposal in a meeting and it was almost immediately shot down by a number of the committee members.  They were very unfamiliar with Facebook and had only read negative things about its misuse--I doubt that any of them had actually ever used it personally.  Consequently, it has taken almost two years to restart those conversations because of the knee-jerk reaction that the mention of "Facebook" elicits.  Looking back on that experience, I think we would have been much better off to have introduced the tool (Facebook) in an interactive way and demonstrated some of its uses.  That's not to say that it would have been warmly received immediately, but I do think that helping others see the value in technology and giving them time to become familiar with it goes a long way in gaining acceptance.

Gaming in Education

I really enjoyed our discussion on gaming in education yesterday.  One of the things that I found interesting were the comments that were made regarding "hiding the learning" from the learner.  I can see how a game that feels like school would be a complete turn off (and not much of a game at all).  So, designing a learning experience that feels like a game seems critical.  One of the questions that this raised in my mind, however, was how "hiding the learning" impacts transfer and retention of learning.  And, maybe the deeper question is can we learn something without being aware that we have learned?  I don't have good answers to those questions; it is something that I need to spend some more time thinking about.  

Yesterday's discussion also brought to mind a book that I read a couple of years ago (Flow, Mihaly Csikzentmihalyi).  In Flow, the author talks about the "psychology of optimal experience" and how when we are in one of these "flow" experiences we become completely immersed in the activity, time seems to stop, and we experience pure satisfaction and fulfillment.  He then talks about the conditions necessary to achieving this type of experience.  I think that a lot of the things that he shared in his book apply to instructional design and are the same things we see in gaming experiences that make them so engaging (e.g. clear goals/outcome, feedback that lets the participant know how they are doing, challenge equal to the participants ability, etc.).  

I think that Dr. Graham's question about learning/work being intrinsically motivating has a relationship to this concept of "flow".  I don't know that all work or learning is instrinsically motivating but I do think that certain conditions can lead to learning/work experiences that are.  I think that when the Doctrine Covenants talks about instances when "he that preacheth and he that receiveth understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together" it is referring to these types of learning experiences.  So, I think the big question that we should be asking ourselves as designers is "how do we create these types of learning experiences?"  because I don't think that all learning or work is "created equal".   

Professional Journal Reports--Part 2

TechTrends:  Linking research and practice to improve learning

• Association of Educational Communication & Technology
• Is designed for practitioners--How to apply instructional technology principles
• Short articles (more like a Trade Magazine than a research journal)

New Directions for Evaluation

• Published by AEA (American Evaluation Association)
• Available in HBLL
• Focuses on Technology rather than Science (Technology is not an applied science--they are two different fields and ask different questions--like Gibbons argument)

Open Learning:  The journal of open and distance learning

• What is the "Open University"?
• Contains both scholarly (research) and practical (case studies, etc.) articles
• "Predicting Success among Distance Learners"

Is this a different group than those that would not be successful in a traditional setting?

American Journal of Evaluation

• Mostly practical articles, often aimed at new evaluators
• Preparing students in graduate programs to make a meaningful contribution to the field

Computer Assisted Language Learning

• Very broad sampling of topics & articles
• Can be hard to navigate because of the wide variety of topics addressed

Educause Review

• Richard Light--Learning happens when the learner participates in the process (group learning)
• Decameron Web Project
• Bug Scope Project (students send bug to U. of Illinois and then can login to a site and view real time miscrope images of the bug they sent in to the lab

Professional Journal Reports

Educational Media International:  

What is e-learning?

Journal of Distance Learning Administration:  

The International Journal for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning:

How is CSCL used in business settings? I would like to hear about examples of that from the corporate world because most of my experience with collaborative learning has been in formal educational settings.

I would be interested in reading articles about the "barriers in online learning".

Another question that this presentation raised in my mind was the impact of distance upon decorum among learners in an online collaborative environment. Are people less civil because of the distance that is created by the technology?

Australasian Journal of Educationl Technology:

It was interesting to me to hear that Japanese schools do not integrate technology into their

educational systems very often. That surprised me because I kind of associate Japan with

technology (think t. v.'s gaming systems, etc.). Is it cultural values that lead to this

hesitancy to use technology to promote learning?

Journal of Teacher Education:

• Who reads this journal? Is it just faculty in teacher education departments or do practitioners read it

Journal of Technology

• Do focused study guides limit the learning that students experience? Do they really study content outside of what they see on the guide?

Religious Educator

• What does it mean to be an "academic journal"?  
• Is The Religious Educator "peer reviewed?"
• Outside of formal religious educators at CES schools, who reads it?
• It was interesting to hear about CES' "teaching emphasis".  I would be interested to know what brought about that change

Digital Creativity

Performance Improvement Quarterly

• 
  

Distance Education

http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/11/06/overman

This is an interesting essay written by a faculty member at Elon.  She talks about her first experience teaching an online course and the challenges and benefits that came with it.  She addresses a lot of the issues that are common to discussions surrounding distance ed and helped me see that not everything I believed about online courses is true.  

One of the most interesting things that she mentioned is that "students can learn just as effectively online as in a traditional classroom, with some tweaks."  She mentions a few of those "tweaks", but I was left wondering what the key factors are that make an online course meaningful.  I have never taken an online course or taught one, but I can imagine that there is potential for that sort of class to be something less than desirable (but I guess the same could be said for traditional courses as well).  

Might "blended" learning environments be a good hybrid?  It seems like this allows for elements of both types of learning environments to be capitalized on and maximized.

Online Assessments

It was interesting today to see how the MTC is using technology to improve the learning of their missionaries and to generate data that can be used to make well-informed decisions.  

I agree with all of the advantages that were mentioned in class today--accessability, collection of data, conserving of resources, etc.  Some disadvantages that I would cite are the possibility for oversampling (because it is easy to build online assessments we are more likely to use (or abuse) them) as well as the creation of assessments in a rushed, unthoughtful way (again, because we can hammer out a survey on survey monkey in a few minutes we may not be as thoughful as we build the assessment).  

As far as my work goes, online assessments are very useful (but also susceptible to the tendencies I mentioned above).  I coordinate new student programs on campus (e.g. new student orientation, freshman seminar courses, etc.) and we use surveys quite often.  One thing that I would like to improve upon is the use of assessments that also provide feedback or promote learning for the student.  We have started to do that with our assessments, but it is something that I would like to keep working on.  One assessment instrument that I have just started to explore is Qualtrics which is a 360 degree survey tool that can lead to a lot of learning and improvement for those that are surveyed or assessed.  It is used heavily in corporate settings, but is also employed by a number of universities including some big names like Harvard and Carnegie Mellon.  BYU has just started to use it a little bit (it was actually created by a BYU faculty member and we are able to use if for free!).  It looks like it will give us the ability to improve our assessments tremendously.  I'm excited to learn more about it and use it in the future.

Ghosts, Skylines, & Shuri's Ph. D

So, this is just a random assortment of clips and photos.

The video clip will show the school (Gypsy Rose) that I would like Shuri to attend for her Ph. D.  

The "ghost" can be seen in the picture with the round ball of light (for those of you that are not familiar with the paranormal, this is called an "orb" and (according to the crazy drunk man that led our ghost tour in Jacksonville, FL) is evidence of the presence of "paranormal beings".  So, it turns out that my hotel room is haunted.  

The picture of the Skyline isn't great, but is a picture of the sunrise this morning from my hotel window.

The Boston Sports Scene

So, within the last 24 hours I have visited two of the most historic sports venues in the world--the Boston Garden (now known as the TD Banknorth Garden) and Fenway park.  I thought I would post a couple of pictures so you could see a little bit of what I saw.  The Garden was amazing.  I've never been at a sporting event with more energy and this was a regular season game that was never even very close.  Boston was up 5-1 late in the 3rd Period but the fans stuck around and were as loud then as at any point in the game.  I felt like it was an "experience" rather than just watching a game.  I also sat next to some season ticket holders which gave everything a very authentic feel (I think I heard more f-bombs in those 3 hours than I probably have my whole life).

Fenway was just about as cool.  We got a personal tour and then got to have dinner up in one of the lounge areas (all we could eat dogs, sliders, fried mozarella, and dessert, plus drinks).  They were doing some renovation of the seats in the infield area so we didn't get to see much down there and they didn't have the field lights on, but I managed to sneak down onto the infield area and stood right behind home plate which was pretty cool.  Both the Garden & Fenway were much smaller than I expected.  It gives a really intimate feel to being there, like you're part of an elite club that most people never really get to experience.  

Hope you enjoy the pictures

Trip to Boston

After one mishap after another I finally got to Boston safe and sound last night (Halloween).  I'm staying at the Park Plaza Hotel & Towers on Park St. which is right across the street from Boston Commons if you're familiar with the area.  The conference hasn't been all that great, but Boston is a great city and I've had a good time wandering around for the last day.  Today I ate lunch at the original Cheer's pub which was kind of fun and tonight I went to a Boston Bruins game (I have been a lifelong hockey fan and this was my first ever NHL game which was fun).  

I have posted a few pictures of the game as well as a video clip or two (but I'm not sure if they'll work).  Enjoy!

Social Networking Sites & Learning

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/30/social

This article reports on a few sessions at the Educause conference in Orlando, FL that have focused on the potential for social networking sites to be used to promote learning among students in higher education.  It sounds like people have pretty much accepted the fact that things like Facebook are not going to go away, so the question for educators is "how to we capitalize on students interest in web 2.0 to promote learning?"  Some educators fear that it is naive to use sites like Facebook as learning environments because students will become distracted by everything else that is there and fail to engage in any meaningful learning.  Others think that students will just stay one step ahead of the academic machine and switch to other social networking venues to avoid contact with faculty, etc.  They may not appreciate being "friended" by professors, TA's, etc.  

As much as I agree that social networking and other web 2.0 features can be abused by students, I think that we have a responsibility to have some sort of academic presence there and to capitalize on the opportunities that are presented by social networking sites.  To take the approach of "we'll ignore it and hope that it goes away" seems irresponsible and lazy (think about the stance the church has taken in the world of the internet by having a presence and using lds.org and other sites to be a positive force on the internet).  It will be interesting to see how BYU responds to this trend--it seems like we are a little slow in adopting tehnological innovations at times.  For instance, I work in New Student Programs here at the University and about a year and a half ago we were tossing around the idea of creating Freshman Facebook groups prior to New Student Orientation to help students get connected with each other and to post information, events, etc. that would be useful for first-year students.  When that idea was presented to a committee of administrators it was quickly shot down.  Another example would be our desire to hold on to LMS's like Blackboard for as long as we have when there are a number of more attractive alternatives available.   I guess it just takes time for people to warm-up to things.

Media vs. Method

Our discussion about media and method and their influence on learning has been very interesting.  I was in the pro-method group and although I definitely believe that media has an influence upon learning, I think designers, especially new designers have a tendency to focus too much on media at the expense of being thoughtful about method/pedagogy.  Andy Gibbons describes this as "media-centrism" where designers place great emphasis on a particular medium but aren't very intentional about method or strategy.  Gibbons suggests that media should be viewed as plastic and invisible channels for learning.  I'm not exactly sure what side of the fence I fall on in all of this, but I do think that as designers we need to be careful to not get overly wrapped up in new, fancy media and forget about basic learning methodologies.   If the media support those principles of learning, all the better.  But, brand new media, employed badly will never lead to good learning.

ISETL Conference

This last weekend I attended the annual conference for the International Society for Exploring Teaching and Learning (ISETL) in Las Vegas.  I was attending as part of my responsibilities as a University employee, but I was amazed at how closely related what I heard in the sessions was to the things that we are reading about and discussing in our 520 class.  I was part of discussions about learning theory (mostly cognitivism & constructivism), metacogntion, Web 2.0, and a whole host of other things that I really didn't know anything about before September.  It was fun to be able to see the things we are learning in class applying in authentic settings.  

Also, we have talked about how with just a little experience in instructional technology, we become "experts" in the eyes of people outside our field.  I could see how that was true because about half of the conference attendees (most of whom were university faculty members) had never heard about "web 2.0", situated learning, etc.  It helped me realize how valuable the training we are receiving is and will be when we graduate and start looking for jobs.

Ruminations About the Issues Assignment

One of the things that I noticed being mentioned in a number of articles that I reviewed in Performance Improvement Quarterly was the relative effectiveness of project groups or collaborative teams that are assigned to work together to produce a product, develop an innovation, problem-solve, etc.  I also have some personal experience with this as a former coach and now in my work here at BYU where I often find myself leading or being parts of committees that are charged with producing certain things (usually ideas that can be implemented).  I have seen both the blessing and burden of working in groups and am interested in those factors that push a team in one direction or the other.  Based on my quick review of some of the recent PIQ issues, it seems like this is something that is receving a fair amount of attention in the corporate world.  I also feel like it is an issue that has implications for almost any setting, from the church, to families, to corporate America.  There seems to be a lot of power in using groups of people to generate solutions to problems (especially performance problems), but I feel like there are critical factors that are sometimes quite subtle that can make a big difference in group effectiveness.

Competencies

Our conversation today about competencies for careers in instructional technology, design, and human performance technology was quite interesting.  I was a little surprised by the reports from each of the groups about what companies/organizations were looking for in terms of those that they hire.  We tend to assume that highly technical knowledge or tangible skills are what will get us our dream jobs.  But, as I listened to each of the groups it seemed like it is our broad, transferable skills (e.g. written communication, ability to function as a  part of a team, organizational skills, etc.) that are what will make us most attractive.  That isn't to say that we should not be focused on developing technical expertise; however, an expert that can't communicate or get along with anyone isn't very useful to an organization.  

I am learning that the "broad liberal arts education" that we try to "get out of the way" is a little more important than we probably realize as undergraduates.  

Difference between Learning Sciences & Instructional Technology

The biggest thing that I have taken away from our readings and the discussion that we had in class today was the difference in these two fields (IT & LS) is the intentions and objectives of practioners.  While both are focused on learning and even on design of learning, there reasons for asking questions pertaining to these areas are different.  

Learning Sciences:  In the learning sciences researchers are concerned with understanding what happens within the learner so that they can explain it and describe the way in which learning occurs.  So, although they may design learning environments or learning systems, they do so with the hope that it will be a means to the end of understanding the learning process more deeply so as to confirm a theory or develop a new way of understanding the way in which learning occurs.

Instructional Technology:  People in IT do not necessarily disregard learning theory or work that has been done that helps describe the process of learning; however, their ultimate objective is to design learning systems or products that result in learning.  So, they do research, investigate theory, and even describe learning.  But, at the end of the day they want to see improved performance or improved learning, not just a new theory or a new way of understanding how learning might occur.

While there will probably always be a divide between folks in these two groups, it would be nice if they talked to each other a little more often and recognized that they can collaborate in ways that will help both groups reach their objectives.  For the two to live in "parallel universes" (as Edelson describes it) seems quite silly and childish to me.

The Learning Sciences

We didn't talk much about it today in class, but I am going to discuss implicit, informal, and formal learning in this posting so that I can get my thoughts down on paper.  Then I'll jump into our discussion of routine vs. adaptive expertise.

Implicit Learning:  This is learning that happens almost effortlessly and without any real intentionality.  A lot of this learning happens through observation and interaction with others.  Because this learning is not something that we consciously seek after (or are even aware of) it can be hard to articulate what has been learning (this makes me think of our discussion of "making the invisible, visible" from last month).  The text talked about how a lot of what we learn about culture and tradition happens this way.  For example, family traditions and ways of doing things are probably things that we learn implicitly.  Social attitudes and stereotypes are also often acquired this way.  One simple example of this might be the ways in which a family celebrates holidays.  A particular family might have a set of holiday traditions that they carry out each year.  A small child observing this will implicitly learn about what happens at Christmas time, but they may not be able to tell someone why, for instance, their family decorates the Christmas tree on the first day of December.  This has been learned unconsciously and without any real intention.  A lot of this learning might also be classified as "imitative learning".

Informal Learning:  This is learning that generally occurs outside of a formal educational environment and it is largely driven by the learner.  Informal learning is based in authentic contexts and is closely related to actual performances and practices.  There is no set of institutional practices, facts, or pieces of information that have to be learned; rather, the learner and "instructor" arrive at this understanding on their own, developing a personalized learning curriculum.  Like implicit learning, this is often observational learning; however, the learner is much more aware of the learning that is taking place (making it easier to articulate) and more intentional about pursuing that learning.  An example of this is the relationship that develops in the film Finding Forrester (http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1571029273/) where the character played by Sean Connery befriends a young man and becomes a mentor of sorts.  There is no set curriculum, but the two of them work to improve the young man's writing.  Interestingly, there is also a great deal of learning for Sean Connery's character.  

Formal Learning:  This is learning that happens within a structured educational system or institution.  There is a set of things to be learned and information is often transmitted from the instructor to the learner quite explicitly (generally through language).  Additionally, formal learning  is generally decontextualized.  This is the type of learning most students are familiar with experiencing in schools.

Routine vs. Adaptive Expertise:  The biggest thing I took away from the reading and our in-class discussion was the idea that routine expertise is mostly concerned with efficiency--we learn to do the same things much more quickly and with fewer errors.  Adaptive expertise does not necessarily exclude efficiency, but there is an element of innovation such that what has been learned can be applied in a variety of situations.  An excellent example of routine expertise is the way that a factory worker might approach their work on an assembly line.  They probably don't look for ways to be overly innovative because that isn't what is rewarded; their concern is with doing their work more and more quickly.  Adaptive expertise can be seen in an entrepreneuer who starts a business in one field, using a set of business principles, and then applies those same principles to achieve success in completely unrelated fields.  They have "adapted" their expertise to be useful in a new setting.  

My experience as a student provides examples of both types of expertise (and it sounds like this is common among our class based on the discussion we had today).  As a high school student (and for about 1/2 of my undergraduate experience) I took a very superficial approach to learning doing as little as I needed to in order to get by with good grades.  I figured out how the system worked and then refined my ability to get the reward (the grades) with minimal effort.  I was becoming more and more efficient at getting "A's".  At some point during my undergraduate experience I changed my approach and "learned how to learn" (I think this is what we are talking about when we discuss "metacognitive approaches").  I started to understand how effective learners went about acquiring knowledge and I could apply that to a variety of settings (work, school, religious studies, etc.).  I wasn't just doing the bare minimum, but I was engaging in the learning process and using what I was learning as a student in a lot of different areas of my life.  

Human Performance Technology--Part 2

I read an interesting article for class this morning that broke Human Performance Technology into a series of steps or processes.  At its foundation, human performance technology is concerned with improving performance and the author of the book chapter (Human Performance Technology--Marc Rosenberg) discusses three key steps in bringing about these types of improvements.

1.  Performance Analysis:  The goal of this particular analysis is to determine the gap between what people are supposed to be doing or achieving and what they are currently able to do.  This step is critical because it helps us to know what our focus will be and what needs to change or improve.

2.  Cause Analysis:  This is a step that is often skipped over, but is also critical if improvements are to be made.  This analysis allows us to move beyond the symptoms of the performance problem and get at the root cause.  

3.  Selection of Intervention(s):  This is the step where actual interventions are selected for implementation (e.g. training, change in organizational culture, new workplace design/layout, etc.).  The author pointed out that often more than one intervention is called for in order to close the performance gap mentioned above.  Individual, isolated interventions may produce some results, but a set of well-aligned interventions (e.g. training + improved job aids) will often have a synergistic effect and bring about greater improvements in performance.

There were a few other key points that I pulled from the article:

• It is important for HP Technologists to thoughtfully consider "change management" and how proposed changes to an organization will be received.  New ideas can be hard to swallow for people within an organization.  Consequently, one of the important tasks of a practioner is to not only make suggestions for improving performance, but also work to help changes to be implemented smoothly and with buy-in from all levels of the organization.
• Learning is not always the solution to performance problems.  There are a whole host of other factors that can come into play (e.g. organizational structure, incentives, work environment, etc.)

E-Textbooks

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/07/ut

E-Textbooks are becoming more and more common on campuses.  The advantages are that they, in theory, will save students a lot of money because production costs would decrease significantly.  But, the question I am left with is how this will impact learning.  Personally, my learning improves when I am reading from a paper copy that I can mark up, highlight, underline, draw diagrams on, etc.  But, I recognize that that probalby isn't the case for everyone.  I really don't have much experience with e-textbooks, but I have heard that some of the newer versions have note-taking, highlighting functionality.  My big question in all of this is will learning be impacted?  

Human Performance Technology

I was really interested in the field of Human Performance Technology after reading the Wile article, mostly because of the breadth of areas that HPT addresses. Human Performance Technology differs from Instructional Technology in that HPT focuses on specific outcomes, without an overt concern with learning (although a HP Technologist would recognize that learning has an influence upon the outcomes or performance that results).  Instructional Technologists are more concerned with learning (or "what goes on inside people's heads" as was mentioned in class today).  

In addition to problems of learning or training, HPT also tackles issues surrounding external factors like organizational systems, incentives, tools, and work/performance environments.  Learning or training would be an internal factor that HPT might attend to.  Accordingly, potential interventions from an HPT standpoint would include improved training programs, but also things like improved use of office space, more attractive incentives, improved tools (e.g. computer software, media, etc.), or the modification of organizational culture.

I like this field because it recognizes that all problems are not instructional problems, but does not minimize the importance of learning and its relationship to performance.  I feel like HPT allows professionals in our field to look at the big picture, which is exciting to me.  I am also interested in working in a corporate setting and HPT seems to lend itself well to that type of work.  

http://docutek.lib.byu.edu/eres/docs/44876/grahamcha502.y.pdf

(HPT Chart)

Can technology enhance decorum?

http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/10/03/kirschner

I read an interesting article this morning (linked above) about a faculty member at Lewis & Clark College that has had an interesting experience in her courses.  She is hearing impaired and has had a difficult time hearing her students in the past.  It was especially problematic in her seminar courses because they are discussion-based; she couldn't hear what was being said, which prevented her from facilitating meaningful discussions.  After trying a number of different approaches (special rooms, changing the format of the discussions, working with acoustics specialists), she was getting frustrated and decided to try one last thing, a "sound field system".  That term didn't mean anything to me, but from the article it seems that there is somesort of FM system within the classroom that includes 2-3 handheld mics that can be passed around among students.  This faculty member reported that, although she could hear and follow the discussions more effectively, there were some even more important unintended benefits to using the system.  Because the students made all of their comments into microphones (there were only 2 for her class) the discussions were a lot more civil and organized.  The students listened to each other, paused in between comments (as the mic was being passed to the next participant), and articulated their thoughts more clearly because they were "hearing themselves speak".  In the end of semester feedback that was provided by students they mentioned the fact that the microphones helped them be more reflective, more respectful, and ultimately learn more from the course.  They didn't use this term, but it seemed like this particular technology promoted metacognition among the students, which I think was a big reason that their learning was enhanced.

I just thought this was an interesting example of how technology can often open up new avenues or ideas that we wouldn't expect.  In this case, I would imagine that both the students and the faculty member will be more thoughtful about the way they participate in discussions in the future and that their personal learning theories have adapted.  So, in some cases it seems that technology does drive science or theory.  The use of these sound systems will probably lead to an enhanced understanding of metacognitive processes.  Technology isn't always the step-brother of science.

Diligence & Obedience

BYU's Devotional Speaker on Sept. 30th (Robert Steuer) mentioned a verse from the Doctrine and Covenants in his remarks (D&C 130:19) that got me thinking.  The verse implies that there is a connection between the "knowledge and intelligence" that we gain and our personal "diligence and obedience".  

That made me wonder if there are things that instructional designers can do to illicit "diligence and obedience" in learners and what that would look like.  Does this verse apply to all kinds of learning or just spiritual learning?  I'm still trying to figure this all out.l

EndNote & Zotero

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/30/qt

This is pretty interesting and raises questions about open source.  Apparently EndNote is suing the creators of Zotero over a new version of Zotero that can convert Endnote files into Zotero files that can then be freely shared.  I'm curious to know how people feel about this.  Does EndNote have a case?  Is Zotero a Robin Hood of sorts? Or, are they destroying capitalism?

Factors Influencing Learning (Part II)

Our group discussion was very helpful for a couple of reasons. First, it solidified in my mind that the two factors I have chosen to focus on (motivation of the learner and authenticity) are critical in the learning process (although I admit that my view as them being the "top 2" isn't necessarily gosepl truth). As we talked about each of our individual views, we kept coming back to the same theme--differences among individual learners and the context that the learning is taking place in. I also realized that we had a lot of the same ideas, but that we sometimes used different language or terms to describe those ideas.

At times we discussed particular strategies that would lead to effective learning and attend to the factors that we believe are most influential (e.g. if we believe that emotion has an influence on learning we should do things that bring the learners emotions into the process); without fail, we would think of times when a particular strategy would not be effective or even detrimental. Usually these "catches" had to do with situations in which a particular strategy would not be effective for a particular learner. I am realizing more and more that it is nearly impossible to design a learning environment or learning activity that is a perfect fit for each and every learner. It seems like part of the challenge of a designer is "satisficing" or deciding what strategies will be an adequate fit for the majority of the learners (given that this is some sort of group learning environment like a class or seminar).

Factors Influencing Learning (Motivation & Context)

This was a really difficult question for me to address because I feel like learning is impacted by so many factors and that many of those factors are very interrelated.  But, to narrow it down to two factors I started by trying to identify my most significant learning experiences and then thinking about what they might share in common.  The things that I believe about learning have largely been shaped by experiences that I have had.  Interestingly enough, neither of the experiences that I will focus took place in a formal educational environment.  

The first was my LDS mission to Toronto Canada (yes I realize you just rolled your eyes thinking, "how cliche", everyone at BYU would say that--I would agree with you, a lot of people would say their mission was a tremendous learning experience and I think that there are good reasons for that which I will try to articulate here, so keep reading!).  No one forced me to leave home and spend two years in Canada riding dog sleds, living in igloos (just kidding, but it does get extremely cold) and talking to complete strangers about religion of all things.  I made a conscious choice to be a missionary and that led to a whole host of behaviours that enhanced my learning (I woke up early, read and studied, and then went out and tried to apply the things that I was learning whether that was specific doctrines, teaching methods, or the language--eh!).  There were a lot of what I would call sub-factors that helped my learning, but most of them were driven by my personal motivation.  The other thing that made my mission experience powerful in terms of my learning was that it was contextual and authentic--I was learning to be a missionary by being a missionary.  That didn't mean that I was thrown into the deep end without a life-jacket (although it felt that way at times), but it was a cognitive apprenticeship of sorts where I started as mostly a passive observer working with a seasoned missionary and then progressed to the point where I was the seasoned missionary.  The important thing was that the things I learned in my studies were things that I could use in my missionary experiences; likewise, my experiences drove my learning as well by helping me refine my ideas and raising questions in my mind that took me down new learning paths.  There was no real formal system for this learning, but it happened and happened much more effectively than I had ever experienced in a class I had taken.

The second experience that came to my mind as I considered learning was a job that I had as an undergraduate student here at BYU.  From my Sophomore to Senior year I worked as peer mentor in the Freshman Academy program at BYU (the same program that Brian Chantry in our class works for now as an administrator).  During my last summer as a peer mentor I was asked to assist three faculty members in doing research for a book they were planning to write focused on mentoring relationships.  While this was a formal assignment and I reported back to these faculty members, I was given all of the freedom in the world in terms of what I read, how I organized the information, and the questions that I pursued in my research.  So, essentially, I still had a great deal of choice and that impacted my motivation to learn.  Additionally, because I was also working as a peer mentor during this time I was able to let my research impact the way I carried out my mentoring role.  Specifically, I was working on developing a peer mentor training program to help new mentors understand their role and "become mentors".  So, the things that I was learning in my research had direct application to this other project that I was working on.  I read and wrote more during those 4 months (by a long-shot) than I ever did during an academic semester as a formal student, but I enjoyed it because I was in control and I was using what I was learning (I was also going to be teaching/coaching in a high school setting that fall and felt that what I was learning had a lot of implications for that work).  

So,  from these two stories, I have decided that the two factors that I believe have the most significant influence on learning are (1) the motivation/desire of the learner and (2) the context that the learning takes place in--it needs to be authentic.  I believe that there is plenty of literature to support me in those views (and probably plenty that would say that I'm wrong), but it is my experiences that have led me to this belief more than anything.  

In terms of citations relating to those views, one that comes to mind immediately is the Regeluth reading we were asked to do for next week ("What is Instructional Design Theory and How is it Changing?).  Part of this chapter is devoted to a discussion of what Reigeluth terms instructional conditions.  Two of the conditions addressed are the nature of the learner (including motivations) and the learning environment.   As far as contextual learning goes, the theory of situated learning (Lave & Wenger, see their book Situated Learning) has a great deal of support as well.  There is also a lot of support for this view in the article "Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning" that we read for class last week.

Behaviourism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features

This article was extremely helpful in differentiating among the three theories that we have been discussing over the last few weeks.  I appreciated the focusing questions that Ertmer & Newby used to help give structure to their discussion.  I could explain the learning that I experienced as I read the article along cognitivist lines:  The 7 questions helped me organize information around the 3 theories and provided me with a framework around which I could build my understanding.  I'm not sure that I am all that adept at applying that knowledge at this point, but reading the article at least helped me clarify the ideas in my head.

Behaviourism:  Learning occurs as stimuli are introduced in a strategic way with the objective of illiciting a specific or desired response.  Behaviourists are concerned with what people do (observable behaviours).  Factors influencing the learning include the various stimuli that are presented, the sequence and timing in which this occurs, and the environment in which the learner finds themselves because these all have a bearing on the type of response that occurs.  Behaviourists explain transfer in terms of the learner's ability to generate the desired response in an environment similar to the original "learning environment".  This is sometimes referred to as "generalization".  The objective is for the learner to have a generalized response that occurs in a variety of environment sharing key features.  Behaviourist theory suggests that there is no real role of memory in learning because learning has to do with observable behaviours, not necessarily cognitive processes of storage, recall, etc.  Learning such as repetitive motor skill acquisition or other types of procedural tasks are easily explained by behaviourist theory.  In terms of structuring instruction, behaviourists would be likely to focus a great deal on the environment in which learning is taking place (e.g. what are the stimuli that can be controlled? How should they be introduced in a way that will elicit the desired response).  Providing the learner with opportunities to practice making the proper response would also be important.  For example, a PE teacher who views learning through a behaviourist lens would structure their class so that students have opportunities to practice particular skills and would be very intentional about providing feedback (the stimulus) in a way that would encourage the student to perform the skill to the instructors specifications (the desired response).

Cognitivism:  According to cognitivist theory, learning occurs as individuals receive, organize, store, and then retrieve information or knowledge.    Cognitivists are concerned with what learners know and how they organize that knowledge and then retrieve it.  Factors influencing learning include the cognitive processes/strategies employed for organizing, storing, and retrieving information.  This is a more learner centric theory than is behaviourism because the learner is seen as having an active role in the learning process.  The big focus here is on employing effective learning strategies.  The role of memory is critical in this learning process because it is the storing and then retrieving of information that is the measure for the success of the learning process.  According to Constructivist theory transfer occurs as learners receive information in one environment and then recall & apply it in a new or different environment.  This can only be accomplished as the learner develops rules or sets of guidelines for when and how to apply information.  So, transfer can only occur if the learner has a strategy for making judgments about new environments (e.g. their characteristics, the type of knowledge that might be needed, etc.) and then recalling information useful or pertinent in the new environment.  Learning such as reasoning, problem solving, and information-processing is easily explained by this theory.  For example, a cognitivist would say that a child who is very good at the game "Memory" experiences the success that they do because they have learned to structure and organize the layout of the game (i.e. where the various cards are) and can recall that information at the appropriate time to make "matches".  According to cognitivist theory, instruction should be structured with a heavy emphasis on the learning strategies employed by the learners.  Instructors would assist students in organizing new information and connecting it to existing information ("chunking") and might then help the learner develop strategies for effective recall.

Constructivism:  According to constructivists, learning occurs as individuals make meaning from their lived experiences.  Essentially, what we "know" stems from the experiences that we have and the way that we interpret these experiences.  Thus, our knowledge is dynamic and highly influenced by subsequent experiences.  Factors influencing learning include the learners environment and the context in which it takes place, as well as the cognition of the learner and how they make sense of their experiences (e.g. reflection upon experiences).  A constructivist would view memory as always under construction and that there is not a well-defined "known" that can be remembered.  Rather, we remember past experiences and use what we know from those experiences to make sense of new experiences.  Transfer is facilitated by opportunities for the learner to practice and learn in authentic environments that closely parallel the setting in which knowledge will be used or applied (Situated Learning dictates that the learning & application settings should be identical).  Constructivist theory best explains advanced, nuanced learning like that experienced by individuals as they develop expertise.  Learning that occurs in ill-structured or dynamic environments is also easily explained by Constructivist theory.  Instructors who have constructivist leanings would be very mindful of the context in which learning is taking place and would do all they can to make sure that learning takes place in an authentic way with opportunities for the learner to be exposed to multiple perspectives and a diversity of experiences so as to develop a more refined knowledge.  The instructor would also need to help the learner develop metacognitive skills to facilitate more effective reflection and meaning-making.

Private Universe

The film clip that we viewed in class today, Private Universe, was fascinating.  In it, there are various examples of individuals being taught concepts or ideas, but then holding onto their previously held "private" beliefs.  One of the interesting questions that was raised in class was "How do we tell people that they are wrong?".

That question seemed critical so I found myself thinking about it for the rest of our discussion.  As I listened to the comments and suggestions that were made it seemed to me like our first mistake might be assuming that we always have to tell a person that a belief that they have is incorrect.  After hearing some of the suggestions that were made and seeing how this happened in the clip I decided that a better alternative would be to help individuals see that the beliefs they are holding need to be modified.  That way they are coming to that conclusion on their own rather than having it forced on them (which I think generally leads to rebellion or discouragement--like the red-faced teacher in the clip).  

It probably isn't possible to have learners see their errors in every case, but we could do a lot more to place learners in environments and engage them in activities that could help them uncover their private beliefs and see how they match up (or do not match up) with the ideas of others (classmates, the instructor, experts, observed reality, etc.).   Aaron mentioned that rubrics can be a way of doing this when it comes to writing.  A novice writer could compare their writing to samples of more expert writing and an accompanying rubric that illustrates what a "skilled performance" looks like.  This will probably not lead to tremendously improved writing overnight, but having the opportunity to see how more advanced writers communicate could go a long way to helping a novice improve their performance.  I think the same thing can be seen in athletics when coaches tape their athletes performances and then review the tapes with the athlete so that they can actually see what their performance looks like; this may also include watching footage of more skilled performances.  I think that this is especially common in highly technical sport-skills (e.g. the discus & javelin throws, swimming strokes, gymnastics, etc.).  

A personal experience that I had that I think is related to this concept was a time-log activity I saw used in a St. Dev. 158 course taught here at BYU.  First-semester students participating in a Freshman Academy learning community were asked to, on a sample weekly planner sheet, map out how they would use their time in an "ideal week" and then were asked to track their actual time usage over the course of a week and then compare it to the ideal.  This was eye-opening for most students because they were not aware of how they were using their time (usually it was quite ineffectively).  This changed their "belief" about how they used their time and was much more effective in initiating change in time-use than I believe a "time-use lecture" might have been or if a teacher or peer mentor had tried to convince the student that they needed to change the way they organized their time.

Metacognition & Self-Regulation

Today we discussed the concept of metacognition and its implications for learning & instruction.  Metacognition is commonly referred to as "thinking about thinking" and involves making plans for how to learn, monitoring progress towards learning, and generating or eliciting feedback that can be used to improve learning or performance.  Someone who practices metacognition asks questions like "what do I want to learn? "how will I learn it?" "how am I doing?" and "how will I know if I have been successful?"

It seems like one of the foundational goals of education should be to help learners develop these metacognitive skills.  Acquiring these metacognitive habits seems to be one of the initial steps in becoming life-long learners.  It is interesting to me that lifelong learning is one of the Aims of a BYU Education; however, I'm not sure that very many of the courses that are taught on campus attend to this issue of metacognition.

I also thought that Bransford drew an interesting connection between metacognitive abilities and the transfer of knowledge to new settings and events.  From an instructional design standpoint this seems critical.  A good test of whether or not our instruction has led to metacognition is what happens to the learner once they leave our formal learning environment (e.g. do they keep learning?).

A thought that just came to me is the partaking of the sacrament each week is an opportunity to engage in metacognitive practices.  We reflect on how we are doing in terms of the covenants we have made and resolve to improve in certain areas.  Just a simple thought.  

Situated Learning, Legitimate Peripheral Participation, & Families

Yesterday during a a church meeting I got to thinking about situated learning theory and its connections to a lot of the things that Latter-Day Saints believe and practice, particularly with regard to families.  The theories of Situated learning and legitimate peripheral participation suggest that learning occurs as individuals become members of communities of practice and participate in those communities as viable members (although there role will likely be very minimal to begin with).  This allows learning to be contextualized and encourages the application and use of knowledge in authentic environments.  

The speaker I was listening to yesterday focused on families and their role in our spiritual development and I started to see a lot of connections to these theories that we have been discussing in our 520 course.  In families we each have roles, some more substantial (mother/father) and others more "peripheral" (a child who has responsibility to make sure that all of the garbages get taken out the night before trash day).  But, each member of the family contributes to the overall success of the family through their role.  A child learns how to be a member of a family, and ultimately how to be a parent, by being a participating member of a family when they are young--observing, asking questions, chipping in with family work, etc.  As time goes on, they assume more responsibility within the family and may play more of a role in decisions that are made within the family.  Eventually, they leave the home and begin to establish their own community of practice where they enter into the roles of mother or father and begin to apply things learned from their parents/siblings and build on this knowledge by making sense of their own experiences as parents.  

This idea of legitimate peripheral participation, I think, can also be seen on another level.  We as Latter-Day Saints also believe that we have a Heavenly Father and that his greatest desire for us is to become like him and be part of an eternal family.  We become legitimate peripheral participants in this plan or process as we take responsibility for children as parents and help them to grow and develop.  In this process we are learning and, ideally,  becoming more like our eternal father.  There is still much we don't know, but the opportunity to take part in the divine plan provides learning experiences for us that we could not have in any other way.

I am a dad of two weeks, so I guess these things are on my mind much more than they have been in the past.  I just thought it was interesting how the things we are learning in class have implications for so many aspects of our lives, and maybe particularly in our spiritual lives and in our families.