My background in technology is extensive, and oddly enough, it is a hinderance in this course. I am trying to engage my peers in discussions, but find it hard to not "take over," or in critiquing their work, overwhelm them. We shall see on the next activity.

My background is that I worked for Broderbund Software/Learning Company (now a part of houghton mifflin, but think kidpix, Carmen Series, Printshop, etc) on direct to consumer sales and marketing, Harvard Graphics (which then was supplanted by MS's Powerpoint) demonstrating and selling, and selling integrated online and print marketing campaigns.

I can give numerous examples of technology misuse or myths that I see happening in the education field. Technology is a tool. When a new tool comes along it is used in every concieveable way. Sometimes, it just doesn't work.

One example is a good friend who tried to start a "virtual" church. He is a Methodist pastor in a mid-sized urban church. It was a great experiment, but didn't work. The on-line experience is too ephemeral and individual. Community and immediacy just was not there. People will start relationships online, but they still meet face to face. In my opinion, church still needs to meet in person.

Anyway, technology is simply a tool. A nifty presentation or slick newsletter that lacks good educational content is still a poor teaching tool. I can't tell you how many times I saw or participated in a presentation that was "pretty" and was a complete and utter waste of time. I also think a more effective presentation tends to be one that does not focus on "bells or whistles." It does not detract from your educational objective.

Online discussions

My first experience as an online discussion and as discussion leader did not go well. The group was late selecting a group leader, people did not adhere to deadlines and then I lost my connection to the internet right at our deadline and had to buy a new computer before connecting back to the group. As a leader and a teacher, I was not quick enough to identify that our group was not going to be able to pull this together, and losing my connection caused the group to miss our deadline.
I should have identified there was a potential challenge when we were unable to chose a leader in a timely fashion. The first post regarding next steps (or process) was from Rebecca asking "Has anybody decided if they would like to be our leader?? "
I replied the next morning on the 9th
"I will volunteer to be leader for group.
1) Everyone will need to check in with an OK to proceed- or provide alternative.
2) If this is OK with everyone, then we can agree on process to evaluate it list and then discuss classification."
3 of the group out of 4 responded their approval in 24 hrs. On the morning of the 1oth, with just 3 approvals I wrote "
I will proceed as if you are OK with me leading. If not or if you prefer to lead then let us know. I will be happy to relinquish the reigns of power.

First, we need to decide on the IT list we will use. Read everyone's and submit your votes here. begin thinking how you want to organize the list."

One person submited categories or ways to organize. I attempted to refocus group to task on chosing a list, and begin to organize the list.

One person responded in a timely fashion. I was unable to access the discussion group on Saturday and only one person was concerned we did not have anything to post. I pullled together the information available and submited our list for Greshem late organized according to software/hardware and by instruction or non-instruction.

I will hopefully lead this group again, assign specific tasks with deadlines far in advance, and identify leverage or motivation to get this done in a timely manner.

My Theory of Learning or Getting Students to Ask Questions

Herbert (Tad) Brickson
Basically, people learn when they ask questions. My more formal definition currently is that Learning is a multifaceted event centered on the individual. Learning has four basic parts: question, answer, test, and refine.
I have had two real challenges. One regarding a situation where you don't have adequate prior knowledge. The second challenge focused on small questions and small integrated learning events.

So I will set up two comment areas
First:
For the lack of prior knowledge, I reflected on how someone in a concentration camp is faced with an unthinkable situation. I proposed Victor Frankle’s book “Man in Search of Meaning” as a way people “asked” questions about an impossible situation or a situation that one had little prior knowledge.
Victor Frankl arguing against reductionism and importance of meaning
A discussion of learning with little to no prior knowledge
Tell me what you think below

Subject	Author	Replies	Views	Last Message
No Comments

Second:
The second question focused on small learning outside the class room and no real question to ask. My current thought is when learning gets to such a simpe task, then it isn't learning until it makes some "sense" or connection with other information. My example is a computer that memorizes data and doesn’t understand. Issac Asmov I, Robot and Star Trek's officer Data are not real computers. We are getting closer, but I don't think computers learn.

Everything Asimov which includes I, Robot

MIT and Artificial Intelligence
Feel free to comment below: