Self-Evaluation Mid-Term

ASSIGNMENT #2A
Self-Analysis of My Postings
Ed_5183



















vincent p lahey
for: Victor Hendricken
Due Date: 10 February 2005

Introduction

“Participation in online discussions, as in regular classroom discussions, includes effective listening, reflecting and speaking - or in the case of online communications - writing.” Victor Hendricken

Being part of an online community is a very time consuming and intellectually draining endeavour. This educational format requires a constant “checking-in” to review postings by classmates in order to stay abreast of the discussions taking place. Long absences by classmates are noticed by all and can result in a type of “empty space’ because they are not adding to the thread.

My Community

In a distance education environment, there is a certain amount of “netiquette” involved as well. Even though we are not in a classroom, we should still all be respectful of each other. When I prepare my responses to a particular topic or am returning a reply to another student, I am always mindful of how the message I am posting might be interpreted by someone I don’t really know. I do not want to offend anyone and try to take every precaution that I will not cause discomfort in my postings. The one thing that I have done is to withdraw from the discussion if I feel that I am under “attack”. This will sometimes explain my own absence in a discussion.

As a community, we should also be practicing compassion and tolerance towards one another and it is up to each of us to be responsible to the well-being of our fellow classmates. Because of the asynchronous nature of DE, we must look out for each other and provide assistance when we can. The last thing we want to do is to alienate a fellow learner.

Learning Styles

According to Kolb’s learning style I am a Diverger and have a preference for concrete experience and reflective observation. I am very interested in people, have a vivid imagination, good at brainstorming and coming up with ideas and have varied interests across a wide variety of areas. These are preferences for learning that I feel are actually hampered when it comes to DE for I do not have the contact with my fellow students in a face to face (f2f) environment. Even though I am learning to enjoy this form of course delivery, it is not quite the same as a one on one or group discussion in the physical sense. (Link to Kolb article http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-explrn.htm#learning%20style )

Now this is not to say that the discussions that we have been having have not been meaningful. So far we have touched on topics such as multiple intelligences, learning styles and learning style assessment instruments and the input from everyone has been quite enlightening. There are many different perspectives coming through and experiential learning has played a large part of in the direction the discussions have gone.

Analysis

I have noticed that my own contributions to the discussions so far have been mainly those of information sharing combined with well thought out ideas and suggestions. Message number 86 is a good example of information sharing. In response to a posting by a student, I was able to respond to the post using references from the course reader. In Message no. 66, I have pulled some quotes from other readings (Hiemstra and Guild Davis) in this program in order to support the stance I was taking on a particular discussion thread. I feel that when my adult education vocabulary enlarges, I will be more able to say what I would like more succinctly, in the meantime, my posts can be reather wordy.

One of the things that I could change to improve the quality of my learning would to be a little more critical in my thinking. Although I have been somewhat reflective in my postings, the one thing that I try to avoid is confrontation. Where this has come from I do not know but it is something that I need to take more control over. I have always believed that when in discussions, the idea is to attack the argument and not the person. For example, I could rephrase what someone has said in the discussion in order to fully understand the point they are trying to make, critique the argument being presented and then defend my own point of view with supporting references taken from the sources I am referring to. I also believe that I should be using more references than I use now in order to effectively back up my own argument.

Another change that I could make to improve my postings is to change my routine in the way I answer. For example, I usually make my first posting a thoughtful, well planned response to the topic at hand. (Message no. 179) It might be more helpful if I were to include the complete reference to the article(s) being read and the page numbers to the quotations that I am pulling for the defence of my posting. Once this posting has been made I then tend to follow with several responses to postings by other students in the class.

Conclusion

In reading over the postings that I have made, and doing a comparison to those of other students in the class, I see how I am able to cut down on the length of my responses (through the use of effective vocabulary). Having the ability to keep a record of the postings will also help my growth in this area for future classes.

Mamchur

...So What?

Gardner

...A Rounded Version

I have been reading along with all the postings and thinking about the whole idea of multiple intelligences and there are several things that have come to mind. A couple of them I have touched up previously and I will add a new twist to the discussion.

First of all, I agree with Gardner that there exists several “intelligences”. I have a problem with this term but will use it for the sake of this discussion. I prefer to think that each of us have several “abilities” which can be determined through the taking of LSIs. In his definition of intelligence on page 15, what Gardner has said in my opinion is that intelligence is culturally bound. “an intelligence entails the ability to solve problems or fashion products that are of consequence in a particular cultural setting or community.”

If someone from one culture comes into the environment of another, how can their intelligence be viewed as being the same? I shall use Yao, as an example, and I hope she does not mind. We all are aware that Yao is very intelligent. She is struggling within our culture to master the language however when she first arrived here, I am sure the intelligences that she would have excelled in at home in Beijing were not shining through in our culture. This then becomes a limiting factor for determining MIs—they are culturally biased.

On page 37, Gardner goes on to say “the individual has developed the potential to deal with specific contents in her environment”. He doesn’t state what that environment is and this poses another problem. Does this problem-solving ability only work in one environment or will it work across various environments? Under what circumstances? If the problem-solving ability changes according to new environments, what changes in behaviors then are factors in influencing these intelligences? If behavior is as Guild and Gagner state, a combination of cognitive, conceptual and affective domains then what part does behavior play in MIs?

Brian talked a bit about Gardner’s idea of intelligence being biopsychological. Having studied anatomy and physiology in Nuclear Medicine, I have learned that there are both sympathetic and non-sypathetic functions in the brain. The mapping of the brain to show where these intelligences occur do show that they are separate in that it is the brains way of “protecting” itself should there be injury. By having different locations for each, an injury to a particular part of the brain does not mean a loss of all these intelligences. The other incredible part to this is that when an injury does occur, other parts of the brain can SOMETIMES take on the functions that have been lost. This is not in all cases but it has been documented.

Finally, another problem that I have with MIs is the fact that they could have the potential to be used to re-introduce educational streaming. I remember back in my high school days that there existed two routes, academic and general. These existed in two separate provinces where I attended school. If you were planning on attending university, you took the academic route which included maths, sciences, languages etcetera. In the general stream, for those not planning on university but perhaps trade school or vocational colleges, there were accounting, marketing, auto-body and the likes of these more “practical” courses. If by determining MIs, could we not start encouraging students to go into music, or gymnastics or science? I was told to follow the arts, which I resisted until my very late years, but my appreciation for the arts never swayed. I am concerned that MIs would be used to start filling the gaps in professions that will become vacant as a result of the large number of baby-boomers who will be retiring soon. Should we use MIs to label and then pigeon hole these students to pursue areas of study they may not be interested in based solely on the fact that they are “good at something"? I think not.

Silver, Strong & Perini

...Multiple Intelligence Indicators for Adults

I definitely have a problem with the use of the word intelligence as it denotes something that is up on a pedestal that we should aspire to obtain. The Golden Fleece as it were. I don't mind using the word abilities or skill sets because each of us knows that we can't be good at everything. There are areas where we are better (Interpersonal--38) and ones where we suck (Naturalist--15!). I think that when we label someone with an IQ score, we fail to take into account many factors. Where for example do cultural biases come into play? Are we not stigmitizing someone or categorizing them as "potential failures" because they don't score well on a standardized IQ test as perhaps "the WASP kid from the middle class home" that lives down the street? I would feel better knowing that my abilities lie in relating to people and music than in being able to name all six quarks in physics....

James & Blank

...Learning-Style Instruments for Adults

In the James and Blank article, they talk a great deal about how complex the learning process is and the external and internal factors that affect effective learning. Like James and Blank, I prefer to use the term learning style because it is much broader than cognitive style.

To understand the best way with which to reach your learners, it is important to try and understand the various styles of learning that do exist. It is also important to know which learning style instrument to use in order to measure the facet of learning style that you are interested in. That is, cognitive, affective or physiological. According to James and Grant, it is often the case that “they [educators] may often be seeking answers to questions cutting across two or even all three dimensions”. (p 48)

Two of the three most important factors to consider when choosing the Learning-style Instrument are its validity and reliability. The data being collected must be true to the dimension being measured and accurate over time compared to other instruments. “Test developers and measurement specialists believe that the validity of an instrument is the most crucial aspect to consider when evaluating its appropriateness”. (p 50)

With so many different instruments for testing learning style available, it is difficult to know which one to use. As someone with no experience whatsoever in conducting these sorts of measurements, I can only rely on input received from those with experience. I think that in doing this we open ourselves to being influenced by the biases of others. One co-worker may have a preference for one instrument as compared to another co-worker. Which one do you choose? It is important to try and become aware of as many as possible for ourselves and to perhaps take each questionnaire personally in order to try and understand how each one works. The problem becomes, which one do we actually use as the gold-standard or benchmark? If we have a benchmark for each of the dimensions, why not just use that particular one all the time?

In my opinion, it is more important to understand the different learning styles that learners exhibit in order to try and reach as many as possible. There is no way that you can use all of them in a classroom unless it is spread out over time. Classes can be varied according to the various styles that exist in the class (and they may not all be present) and this helps to reach as many as possible. It is also helpful to be aware of your own teaching style to be sure that it does not stifle the learning of any of your students. All these instruments are meant to be guides and not to be strictly followed. We need to keep this in mind when trying to determine the best way to teach.

MacKeracher 2nd Edition

...Styles in Learning

Cranton

...Considering the Learners

I think there are several points to be made here. First, the onus for learning does not rest solely with the instructor or the learner. Everyone is correct that there are many styles of learning and it is important to be aware of as many as possible. I don’t think that teaching to an “ideal” is the way to go. And you are right in that you can’t teach to each individual’s style of learning—for that they may as well hire a tutor (and even then, if the tutor isn’t aware of learning styles then the student is still not being reached). Gross Davis (1993) states ‘no one style of learning has been shown to be better than any other and no single style leads to better learning”.Again, Gross Davis says “an understanding of learning styles and orientations may enhance your teaching effectiveness: students may be more satisfied and more productive if they are studying with methods compatible with their styles”. This enables them both to take advantage of every possible opportunity to learn and to each. It is impossible to reach every student by trying to teach to their particular preference for learning. The diversity that a classroom offers can be a very exciting addition to the class dynamic. Not only do the students get exposed to different learning styles, they can actually see different teaching styles at work as the instructor tries to reach everyone. Feedback from the students can aid in deciding the direction that the class is headed and which preferences for learning exist within that class. If the instructor can incorporate many ways of teaching into the lessons, then they are doing their job as a good teacher to. It is when they only teach one way—their own—that the process fails. Students should not be categorized as only learning one particular way for depending on the circumstances and the situation, they may move from one style of learning to another.

I guess in reading the Hunt article I was thinking more about trying to understand how to reach all of the learners and not about labels. I will agree that “learning style models are based on myths” but I can also believe that the label is only an indicator of the best way to reach that learner. If the label is placed on the learner, then the learner can be stereotyped as being only able to learn in one particular way but I think that as we grow, and learn, our learning styles change to reflect that growth and acquisition of new knowledge. In my opinion, learning style is about trying to understand the best way to reach the learner for as Hiemstra (1990) states “they [the learners] bring to the learning situation a combined set of emotional, physical, mental and social characteristics that makes each one of them unique.” Keeping each style of learning in mind, and trying to get past the ‘label’, which I feel is only temporary, then this understanding of how each student learns, enables us to explore many possibilities to reach the greatest number of learners. Gross Davis (1993) says that “no one style of learning has been shown to be better than any other and no single style leads to better learning.” The onus to learn/teach does not rest solely on the teacher yet as teachers, we need to help students recognize their individual learning styles and in turn we need to know and understand our own style and the way that it influences our teaching. By doing so, we can vary our teaching strategies and assignments to include all styles of learning thus getting the lesson across to as many students as possible. In relation to the car analogy, I think of it this way. Although I may be driving a “Pacer” according to my bumper sticker, “My other car is a Mercedes”.

Guild & Garger

...Style What and Why

First of all, I am in agreement with everyone that not all students will be reached by changing or including different learning styles. Perhaps that is why it is suggested that one teach to the lower ten percent of the class—at least you can reach most of them.

As an instructor, it is important to be aware of as many of the learning styles as possible in order to understand in what ways you need to change the way that you would present the material to the class. This obviously can be difficult as Guild states that “even as we verbally accept the existence of diversity, we also recognize how often it is ignored in practice”. (Guild p5) It is also stated that “accepting diversity of style can help us to create the atmosphere and experiences that encourage each individual to reach his or her full potential”. (Guile p5)

We all agree that teaching/learning is a two-way street and that it is not solely the responsibility of the instructor. Administering a questionnaire, and I don’t call it or refer to it as a test at all, is a good thing. I do believe that the purpose should be fully explained to the learners in that it is an aide to help deliver the course content in the best possible ways. There should be feedback from the students, often and their suggestions to help improve the delivery of the course material should be fully considered. Until I enrolled in this program, I never truly understood the idea of stating objectives. Now, I definitely see the benefits and I also believe that these should be explained in full—not just read over as though with a glance. If we actually start to think as the students think, then perhaps we really do have a chance to be the best teachers that we can be and at the same time, help the students become more than they think they can be.

As for my muddiest point, I would agree with Arlene that in the Cranton article, pp35-36, the explanation of Conceptualizing Styles is somewhat ambiguous. In general, I found the article to be pretty straight forward and gave me much insight to various aspects of my own styles.

To expand upon that—well, I think that using the tests to determine your learning style should only be a guideline. I don’t want to say that I can only learn one particular way because it depends on other factors, such s the teaching style, course content, my own self-doubt, the classroom environment, whether I feel it is a safe place to be or not, the attitude of the teacher, how I perceive my own place in the class etcetera. To say that I can only learn one way is misleading and I would much rather do the tests as a way to indicate what is best for me. It would also allow me to see what other learning style there were and to work on changing how I assimilate information. I’ve said it before that our styles will change as we learn and grow. Most of us have not been locked in a closet all our lives and have been exposed to various learning environments growing up. I am sure that the way each of us learn now is not the same as when we were in grade 2 or grade 12. Guild and Garger say it best when they state “to understand styles and their implication for education, it will be helpful to think about these categories while always keeping in mind that all the characteristics are integrated in the total personality of a real human being. (Guild p6)