Unit 2 - ECI 517 - Keith Murphy

Due to the embodiment of so many great items from Unit 2, I wished to break it down in smaller digestible chunks for both my benefit and the reader or two who, in their wandering, chances to come across this post.


I have never been a fan of group projects...not back in my secondary schooling, pre-secondary schooling or during my undergraduate work.  But for rare occasions, I have not subjected my past or current slate of students to the facade of cooperative learning due to my personal experience with the method.  I now am beginning to see the not only why my past experiences were doomed to failure, but in seeing these caveats, where the opportunities lie in setting the stage for my future students to find benefit in doing it right.

Week 4
Before we get to the great panacea we are forming our opinion on concerning guided design process, let us look at the basics.  The strengths of such a program caught my eye as being beautiful by any measure.  There is an increase of interest and motivation, improved communication skills (interpersonal) and the application of it all helps retention (opening powerpoint).  And isn't this what we are here to do?  Apparently there is a diminishing return with the status quo lecture (but we are so good at it)...but I think a lot of teachers feel this is simply an ugly rumor that will soon pass.  As we have learned in the business world, autocratic works for the inexperienced and easily led, but is a poor substitute for the promise of empowerment.

Not to extoll the virtues and leave without remarking of the pitfalls we face with the guided design method, I am confronted with time (preparation length), Small group management (sit down and shut up doesn't fit too well in this process), the unmotivated and the propensity of the teachers to rely too heavily on lecture.

Casada and DeShazer (C&D) bring a couple of great points not just to the goal of guided design, but to the format of any guided design process.  Firstly, go engineers!  (my sister is one).  With basic factual knowledge, guided design has little purpose.  But with (in the CTE field) the introduction of the new RBT standards emphasizing problem solving, the professional world's currency of professionalism and communication, and the all important push of teamwork/networking - Guided design must be embraced.

So what did I learn?  Guided design is not passive.  One must interact with both the material and others in the group.  C&D contended if the individuals can persevere through the process, problem solving skills will result, but getting there often requires the cheerleader and encouragement role of the teacher/facilitator to see the progress maintained.

Wilson stated "that structured group problem-solving activities enhance student learning."  The relative ease of opening the book/notes and begin reading while keeping rhythm with a powerpoint slideshow is no more.  Time will be involved to properly build up to a goal mastery surrounded by its smaller required skill sets.  No! It doesn't make time sense in creating these modules, but taking this a step further - the mastery of these real world values (professionalism, communication, problem solving) will take these students beyond the academic germane and into what HR professionals really want of their workers.  Gophers and followers we have.  Factory jobs we do not.  We need a better class of graduate.  Wilson also states the breakdown in such a dream of guided design include "perceptual biases, emotional attachments, knowledge and information limitations, communication challenges, external distractions and cultural dispositions."  I guess our work is cut out for us (ha!).

In keeping with Wilson's contentions and findings, Bridges states that guided design's goals isn't to actually get a correct answer, but rather, "to know the process by which one gathers information, processes information, and arrives at an acceptable solution."  In other words, not just the one way of learning (namely the teacher's way), but the methodology of a transferable skillset the students can take with them and overlay any problem/learning challenge and either overcome or at least be in the right direction once the smoke clears.

Lastly for week 4, a quick shout out to the 200 page "The Guided Design Guidebook."  I agree with White and Coscarelli when they state "95% can learn", if (!) given enough support and time.  I sometimes think DPI forgets this small aspect.  The other takeaway was the incredible visual (Figure1.2).  So simplistic in form, but it really hit home as to "how to" arrange a guided design module.  Long, but a good read nonetheless.

Week 5

So cooperative learning is important.  In all of the readings from this week, there seems to be recurring themes.  Johnson, Millis and Haller all chime in with research stating many strides can result from Cooperative learning environments.  All three advocate for small groups, lest the groups themselves become an impediment to the learning overall.  The ideal size seems to be no larger than 5 with preference to groups 3-4.  They also agree that learning strides regardless of race, culture, sex, etc can be made in these settings...though not always.  Haller contends though that many see good results in student learning, not all students will benefit from this group learning dynamic.  The "constant student" and the "blocker" are both stumbling blocks to the groups as a whole.  The constant student's goal isn't to master/fully explore the concept, rathere, simply get close enough and allow the educational flow to take them home.  The blocker is simply in their own world and unbeknownst/known to themselves, position their work in such a way as to be above reproach...i.e. not a team player.

So my take aways for this weeks readings include:
Group Size - keep it small
Training - many students do not possess the skills to adequately behave in the group's interest inside said group.
Be clear - a follow up from training, the teacher must be explicit in their directions and expectations.  The processes can be open to interpretation, but the underlying expectations must be crystal.
Hand select the participants/groupings - ensure a balance and equitable platform
motivate - we are still the cheerleader
Evaluate at the end, each other, group effort as a whole - keeps everyone honest and working hard...regardless of the learning theory (intrinsic/extrinsic rationale) employed or believed in from the group/leader

Smith - Quick-guide - did a wonderful guide.  it is easy to follow and implement.

But the real challenge is getting all parties involved to buy into the idea of cooperative learning to begin with.

Week 6

PBL...better than Lecture, but what isn't?

Hung brings us to the conclusion that PBL can and does work as well as non-PBL interactions, but with the added bonus of higher level thinking.  The higher level thinking doesn't always improve immediate results, but does provide added value to the learning that takes place, including the transferable skills into later life.  The trouble, hung continues, is not with the learning itself,provided that one can extoll the virtues of PBL to the students, it will slowly take hold as a viable and valuable alternative to non-PBL learning.  In short, the students will begin to see the added value as they progress through real world application of what they know in life.  The other trouble is transitioning the teacher to the role of tutor (Hung & Koschmann).  Teacher connotes lecture.  Tutor helps facilitate.   Hung continues that the more of an expert the teacher is, the harder time they have transitioning to the role.

Though not read, I can only conjecture that the teacher in this spot has set their mind in the course that teachers are for teaching and tutors are something lesser on the totem pole of education.  Also not read, I see this as being a competent basis for online learning, especially for what I see the educational push (time/financial/HR rationale) being in the next 5-10 years.  Even with this push, common areas of meeting (in person or virtual) will be required to properly share/disseminate information, teach, banter, build community within the group and ultimately reflect on one's own journey and that of the group (Koschmann).

Further in Koschmann's article, it is concluded that this type of authentic exploration is vital, especially for non-linear application.  The group dynamic, brainstorming, exploration and ultimate reflection, works very well in medical learning.  Personally, I cannot see why this wouldn't lend itself to any other non-linear line of thinking and knowledge acquisition. 

In all honesty, Ryan's article did little for me.  The small take away I have from this is collaboration is paramount for the success of any PBL.  Clearly, the basis of PBL is that it is project based...I know, it's the title.  I go back to the word previously used, authentic.  This style of learning provides for the most organic style of learning I could imagine.  I think back to Week 5 material and the element of time.  PBL takes an extraordinary amount of time to properly implement and see through to the end.

Needed...yes.  As with Group based Learning, there has to be a certain mix of material, teacher/facilitator/tutor, student, and a new one...administration to see it through.

Week 7

I really like Collin's idea of Cognitive Apprenticeship.  I am fascinated by the medieval apprenticeship/journeyman/master career flow.  I see great parallels between what Collins is advocating and what the educational system was suppose to create in each student who passes through its doors.  Clearly, this has not been the case.  Mental acuity in a subject area is nice, but without being able to transfer the skill to new and different areas, it is all for not.

Cognitive Apprenticeship then is the ability to base one's own learning off of another's action.  Then in time, to separate from the other and be one's own teacher.  Self talk comes to mind as well as the process of self checking one's thoughts and actions in the course of the material one is trying to understand. Modeling, coaching, fading.  This discourse (reciprocal teaching) between the parties involved - iron sharpening iron.  Collins continues by adding that the knowledge acquired should be in some small part, in the environment that it will be seen again, tested in, expected from.  As is PBL, the group/partner discourse is key in developing the problem solving skills/strategies to overcome.  These skills and strategies are best learned from another (hence Apprenticeship).  Learning should be down for one's own sake, not for the extrinsic award afforded others.  Apparently Extrinsic motivational routes only discourage inner drive when students are allowed to their own devices.  But when left in the capable hands of the master, in time, one learns to become a master themselves. 

I enjoyed the take that De Bruijn showed us concerning the "functionally illiterate" learning environment.  In short, modeling helps those who are unfamiliar with their ultimate outcome.  The results impressed upon me the importance of showing the kids at school not just the directions, but also the how to, especially in the beginning stages of an activity.  This semester alone, I have 4 kids who for all intents and purposes, cannot/do not read on grade level.  Not just a little behind, 2-3rd grade reading levels and they are in high school.

Seeing how long this writing has become, it must be added that Darling and both Herrington articles impressed upon me the importance of scaffolding (fading from Collins).  Isn't this what was really happening back in the days of apprenticeships?  The master did not give his/her pupil the masterpiece and say "reverse engineer it!"  No!  Methodically, chunking the process down into smaller bites, mastering each one and progressing to more and more elaborate compilations did the master show his/her student how to model their style and expertise.  DeBruijn showed us even those without real reading ability can be shown and eventually model what they are shown.  From the lowest to the top performing students, this too is possible.  The real difference between the low and the high? the ability to catch on quickly or to self review into knowing once more what was fresh a few hours, days,, months ago. 

What disservice have we done by our students in our previous teaching, the administration and especially DPI a a whole for implementing all of the lofty higher level thinking goals without first allowing for the children, in their own timing, to become proficient at the basics.  Algebra before adding.  Clearly, it is the teachers fault for not being able to teach the kid.  One year behind isn't bad until one tries algebra to one who cannot do 1 step problems. 

What did I learn?  Break it down, model it, show the students what to do, not just once, but multiple times.  Train their minds, in context, and the student will follow...eventually.  Make it organic, make it PBL in reaching these goals.  "Standardized tests" falls just short of blasphemy in my mind.I know it is needed to ensure high standards, but there is a subset of the population who need retention, not social promotion to allow them to fully reach their potential, not just a limited embrace in four years.  Few will every learn outside of the constructs of education save for very specific job environment learning, but this is America, being good at just one thing still has its place...until all of the manufacturing jobs leave us.  Hey, we still have service jobs.  I digress.  Teamwork, social skills and the like will keep it all humming along for the near future.  Maybe these are the real 21st century skills.

Keith