As the Yukili Evolve...on planet Newtonia

The semiotic domain of video games is new to me, but I started to get my feet wet this week playing Spore as a class assignment for the graduate class I am taking. I began playing the game in a frustrated state of mind as it took at least 30 minutes to install the game. After installation, Spore downloaded update after update before I could play. I spent the second 30 minutes alternately thinking "What? There has to be more than this. It's too easy," and "Why can't I get my creature to do this? I don't understand that." I did not read the manual at first. Manuals never make sense to me until I have already seen and touched the product. However, as I progressed through the first hour of play and began the second, I picked up the manual and read the sections that pertained to the stage of the game I was in. The game itself has a built in system for leading the player through each new thing. There are many pop ups that display at the appropriate time. The manual simply added a few things I hadn't noticed. And, I have a feeling I'll look at it again as I get to new stages. (Or maybe I should say IF I get to new stages.)

After hour 1

During the second hour of play, I was pulled into the game. It became more difficult. I graduated from the cell stage and became a creature and walked out of the sea.
The progression through the creature stage is taking quite a bit longer than the it did through the cell stage. More thought about what features my creatures need to achieve different tasks is required. It's as if the game was designed to let the players mess around and learn in the cell stage, but makes them get serious in the creature stage. (And, it probably was designed that way.) Once creature stage ends, I will no longer be able to vary its physical features. The next stage is the tribal stage and there will be different concerns. So, it's important to make the right decisions now, because those decisions will affect how my creature survives during the rest of the game.

After hour 2

In his book titled "What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy," James Paul Gee talks about the Design Principle on page 41. I can see why this is so important as I begin to play this game. If I become too frustrated with not figuring things out, I may just give up on the game. And if it is too easy, I will be bored and also give up. It's a fine line to walk between the two. And, I think a successful game (and classroom lesson) finds that line.

Playing Spore reminds me of another simulation I've mentioned on the blog before, Oregon Trail. I have a goal and I have to make decisions that affect my success in achieving the goal. One difference is the quality of the simulation. I loved Oregon Trail, but I never did quite figure out what the right combination of food, tools, etc. was in order to make it. It never connected for me. In Spore, I am already learning how to read the clues around me to make the right decisions.

I also started playing World of Goo which is a delightful game. I will post more about it another time. Meanwhile, here are some screen shots and videos from my experience so far in Spore.




Evolving in the Cell Stage from Heather Dowd on Vimeo.


A Siren Call from Heather Dowd on Vimeo.


Eating Meat from Heather Dowd on Vimeo.

Web 2.0 and Diverse Learners

How does web 2.0 address the needs of diverse learners? I asked my PLN on Plurk:

From Ed Tech Learning Reflections

Our class discussion started with the following voice thread. Feel free to add your own comments.



For some of our classmates, it was the first time to participate in a collaborative environment outside of Blackboard. Others were more familiar with web 2.0, but learned about a new tool. But, I think we all agreed that the tools we discussed have value for learning. They are not without disadvantages. Not all students have access to using these tools. Some students are not willing to do what is necessary to gain access (come early or stay late at school, walk to the public library, etc.) But, as one teacher put it, "my students somehow find access to look at MySpace and Facebook." So, maybe if we engage our students in the same way, they will also find a way to access the Internet for homework!

I truly believe that web 2.0 tools can help teachers differentiate learning in so many ways that we are not able to do without the tools. I challenge teachers of all levels to allow your students to use these tools to demonstrate their knowledge. A written solution to a math problem or an essay are not the only ways we can do this anymore.

Readings and resources:

• Meeting Needs of Diverse Learners with Technology
  Joyce Pittman, Ph.D.
• Web 2.0 and Emerging Learning Technologies/Learning Styles
  Wikibooks
• ETT 552: Diversity and Web 2.0
  Our project wiki for class (This wiki is a perfect example of a teacher differentiating learning. Our final project is supposed to be a paper, but we are allowed to create a wiki instead. This has increased my own motivation for completing this project! Web 2.0 and differentiation works at the graduate level also.)
  

The Nomadic Learner

We attended class last week at the local Panera to simulate being nomadic learners. We ate, enjoyed wi-fi, and learned. Although, I will say that we didn't really have to simulate nomadic learning. Most of us do it all the time. We learn anywhere, anytime.

With the proliferation of mobile devices, learning anywhere, anytime is becoming easier. But, Bryan Alexander (see article link below) says there is another reason that fuels anywhere, anytime learning.

But mobile machines become personally intimate; they are held close to the body—in a purse, on the lap, in a pocket, on the floor next to the user. Their screens are easily hidden from prying eyes. Emotional investments increase, even with shared devices. Michele Forman, the 2001 National Teacher of the Year in the United States, notes that her high school students became very attached to their wireless laptops. They significantly increased their personal writing and composition. Such machines become prosthetics for information, memory, and creativity.

Perhaps the growth of mobile devices, public wi-fi spots, and technology use in schools is blurring the line between what people have traditionally thought of as learning and what learning really is. My response to that is - it's about time! If I see (or hear) one more movie clip, commercial, or song lyric that depicts learning as students in rows with teacher pointing finger, I think I will scream! While I know that still exists, I think learning gets a bad rap from modern media. As we discovered in our class last week, learning is so much more. Students have these devices, so let's teach them to learn with them. One of my goals as a teacher is to inspire life-long learning. I think that job is now easier with the help of mobile devices and widespread wi-fi access.

Here are some of my recent examples of learning anywhere, anytime:

• I learned a lot about the economy by listening to podcasts in my car this week.
• I read blog posts and newspaper articles on my iPod touch while in a waiting room with wi-fi access.
• I looked at resources posted by friends in Facebook while sitting in my grad class at a break.

How have you taken advantage of learning anywhere, anytime this week?

Recommended reading:
Going Nomadic: Mobile Learning in Higher Education, by Bryan Alexander
Breaking the Barriers of Time and Space: More Effective Teaching Using e-Pedagogy, by Peshe Kuriloff
Lectures on the Go, by Brock Read

Ethics and Diverse Cultures

In my very short study of ethics and ethical codes in the field of instructional technology (or any field for that matter), there always seem to be more questions and fewer answers. In fact, the authors of "Reflecting on Ethics, Ethical Codes, and Relevance in an International Instructional Technology Community," Bradshaw, Keller and Chen write a whole paragraph of unanswered questions on page 13. Here is an excerpt:

Is it possible to identify, construct, or specify beyond vague generalities, a definition of ethics that would be universally credible and appropriate? Can a hypothetical universal ethical code be equally relevant in diverse contexts? Were one to be constructed, would the fact that it is interpreted by individuals socialized in different contexts of reality and truth, render it less relevant or even irrelevant in some contexts?

It is sometimes difficult for my logical, physics-math brain to accept that a discussion about ethics does not result in an answer that can be scientifically tested. Don't misunderstand me. I don't think science always leads to one right answer, contrary to how most students in K-12 learn science. But, science can be tested and contested and better answers can be found. Things are different when trying to agree on answers to questions about ethics.

I'm not sure that it is possible to develop a code of ethics for any field of study that all parties can agree on. As the article states, the more diverse the group of people, the more difficult it becomes to agree on a code of ethics that is applicable to everyone. But, does this mean we should give up? NO. I believe the discussion is more important than the answers. As our workplaces and schools become flatter, we are forced into a global society. Even though our discussion about ethics becomes difficult, we stand to gain a global awareness and sensitivity that we may not have had before by continuing the discussion with the diverse people we encounter.

3D Full Spectrum Unity
Holding Hands Concept
Originally uploaded by lumaxart

As we deal with diverse cultures and writing codes of ethics, the article gives two frameworks within which we could work. Ethical universalism is what I call the I'm-right-you're-wrong framework. I view myself as above you, so I attempt to teach you my right ways. The second framework is cultural relativism. With this framework, "they do not come to teach or to transmit or to give anything, but rather to learn, with the people, about the people's world," (Freire, as cited in this article). I love this quote. If we all made a pact to learn from each other, we may not agree on a universal code of ethics, but I bet the discussion would be worthwhile.

Can E-Learning Strategies Help Us in Face to Face Classrooms? (part 2)

From lecturer to facilitator
Online learning changes the role of a teacher. If the online class is designed properly, the teacher becomes a guide on the side instead of a sage on the stage. We know already that this is how a face to face classroom should be too, but lecturing still seems all too prevalent. Again, in a face to face classroom, we can have the best of both worlds. There are times when the best way to convey a piece of content is with a short lecture, but it doesn't have to be the main teaching strategy. Ironically, by looking at the design of online courses, we can gain many ideas for how to make the face to face classroom more interactive.

Do what you can't do without the technology

I am Here for the Learning Revolution
Originally uploaded by Wesley Fryer

I listened to a NECC 2008 session by David Thornburg posted as a podcast by Wesley Fryer at Moving at the Speed of Creativity this week. When teachers are first given technology to use, they tend to use it to do things they normally do without the technology like word processing. We need to do more as teachers. We need to use technology to do things that we could not do if we didn't have it. Droste and Droste say that each year at Virtual High School "6,000 students have gotten to know other students and teachers from around the globe, exchanging knowledge, ideas, and perspectives in ways that can't happen in a traditional classroom," (p. 57). A teacher in Ohio said that online learning should "not only supplement, but transcend their normal high school experience," (p. 62). Our challenge as face to face classroom teachers is to use technology to do things with students that we could not do otherwise. We need to transcend their normal classroom experience and give them much more. But, we also must remember that learning is about learning, not about technology. "The technology will face into the background as a catalyst to a learning revolution," (Maeroff, p. 70). Technology is "nothing more than the world's fastest school buses," (Droste and Droste, p. 59).

The Cultural Impact of Computer Technology

In The Cultural Impact of Computer Technology, Sheldon Ayers discusses two technology revolutions, the industrial revolution and the information revolution. The industrial revolution was characterized by more efficient manufacturing, which led to a demand for better infrastructure for transportation of goods, which led to a "spirit of innovation" in road engineering, which led to a decreased travel time between London and Birmingham from 2 days to 19 hours, which led to "reduced rural dullness".

I can't help but see some parallels between this and the information revolution we are currently experiencing. Our increased need for multimedia and sharing of large files has created a demand for better infrastructure. As our infrastructure improves, our "spirit of innovation" is kicking in and we are finding better and more interesting things we can do with our increased bandwidth. And lastly, I live in a rural area, and I think I have experienced a reduction in dullness. :)

edu-tained
Originally uploaded by shapeshift

But what does all of this have to do with learning? The author notes that our progress will require us to rethink many things including how we learn. Recently, my cousin was lamenting the fact that she has to buy her freshman daughter an expensive graphing calculator. Being the math and science teacher that I am, I reassured her that yes, it is expensive, but is an important tool for learning math. Another cousin interjected, "Why? We never had those." This is a valid question to which I didn't have a ready response. It is difficult sometimes to see the benefits that technology brings. What I wanted to explain to my cousin is that a graphing calculator is like a better road. Except, not only can it decrease the learning time between points A and B, it provides a deeper understanding of a new concept.

I experienced another example of rethinking how we learn this past week. Ginger L. of the Turning Point Learning Center in Kanses invited me via Skype to her classroom of 5th and 6th graders. As we talked about sextants and how they are used, questions arose. When students did not have a convincing answer to a question, Ginger sent them to their computers to research. My cousin might say, "We didn't have macbooks. Why do they need those?" Well, we had to memorize information or rely on our one textbook. Considering that we forget 90 percent of what we learn in class within 30 days (Brain Rules, p. 100), what's the point in memorizing. And, our one textbook was limited in the information it could give us. The Internet, however, is a vast resource that can deliver a lot of good information if used effectively. If Ginger's students do happen to forget 90 percent of what they learned last week (which I doubt!), I bet they will remember how to research and get it back.

Along with the information revolution, I think we are experiencing a learning revolution. We must rethink how and why we are doing what we are doing in the classroom. We must evaluate the new tools technology is giving us and use them to increase ours and our students' learning.