YOU ARE DOWNLOADING DOCUMENT

Please tick the box to continue:

Transcript
Page 2: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Goal

To share some of my personal philosophy of ICT in education. (I have been working in ICT in education for a long time.

To encourage you to further develop your own personal philosophy of ICT in education.

Page 3: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Four of my beliefs

Many of our world’s problems can be addressed through better education.

All children deserve the opportunity to gain a high quality education.

Educational systems can be much better.

ICT will prove to be fundamental to achieving better educational systems.

Page 4: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Being loaded down with the world’s problems

I have been interest in problem solving throughout my professional career.

Page 5: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Problem Solving

Recognizing, posing, clarifying, “doing”questionsproblemstasksdecisions

Using higher-order, critical, creative, and wise thinking.

Produce, performance, presentation.

Page 6: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Words of wisdom

Every teacher should have a philosophy of education. (Message from my graduate students.)

Every teacher should have a philosophy of ICT in education. (Message from Dave to his students.)

Page 7: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

“Computers are here to stay”

In my opinion, this is about as trite as saying:Math is here to stay.History is here to stay.Reading is here to stay.

Surely we educators can do better than that. (My tolerance for dumb statements has decreased as I have grown older.

Page 8: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Information and Communication Technology

ICT includesComputers (both large and small)Internet and WebCell phonesDigital still & motion cameras.iPods and the equivalentRobotsEtc.

Page 9: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

ICT is a powerful change agent

Perhaps comparable to the development of agriculture?

Perhaps comparable to the three Rs?Perhaps comparable to the industrial

revolution?ICT is driving the information age. A change agent -------->>>>

Page 10: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

My personal professional work environment

Page 11: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Open “paper and pencil” tests

How about:Open notes test?Open book test?Open computer with word processor and spell

checker test?Open computer and Web test? (And, without

severe time pressures.)

What is your “authenticity” philosophy?

Page 13: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

I read a lot

Page 14: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Thomas Friedman:The World is Flat

Increasing “smallness” through improved transportation.

Increasing “flatness” through improved telecommunication.

Increasing worldwide knowledge about how green the grass is on the otherside of the fence.

Worldwide competition forresources, and jobs.

Page 15: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

I think a lot

I try to make complex things simple.Example: We do problem solving all of the

time—what’s the big deal about that?

I tend to make simple things complex.Example: In school, students study many

different disciplines. But, what is a discipline?

Page 16: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Academic disciplines are defined by:

Problems, tasks, activities addressed.Tools, methodologies, evidence, recording

and sharing results.Accumulated results.History, culture, language; methods of

teaching and learning.Sense of beauty and wonder.

Page 17: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

ICT affects each discipline — some more than others

Level of learning required on part of the user.

Accumulated knowledge about the uses of ICT to do a significant part or the work needed to solve some of the problems within the discipline.

Procedural thinking, where ICT systems can carry out the procedures.

Page 18: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Expertise in solving problems and accomplishing tasks

Page 19: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Expertise in a discipline

Discipline-specific Content Knowledge

Discipline-specific Maturity

Low

(Novice)

Expertise: A combination of Knowledge and Maturity

World Class

Page 20: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Three key questions: Within a discipline, what things can

Educated people do a lot better than ICT systems?

ICT systems do a lot better than educated people?

The combination of educated people and ICT systems do a lot better than either alone?

Page 21: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Five eras

1. Hunter-gatherer2. Agriculture3. Industrial4. Information5. Knowledge:

Contained within people Contained within machines

Page 22: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Knowledge

Data Information Knowledge Wisdom

Moving toward increased

understanding.

Data: Raw, unprocessed facts and/or figures, often obtained via

use of measurement instruments.

Information: Data that has been processed and structured,

adding context and increased meaning.

Knowledge: The ability to use information tactically and

strategically to achieve specified objectives.

Wisdom: The ability to select objectives that are consistent with

and supportive of a general set of values, such as human values.

Page 23: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Computer and:

Data processingInformation processingKnowledge processingWisdom processingWhat might it mean to say an ICT system has

knowledge or wisdom, or that it processes knowledge or wisdom?

Page 24: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Key philosophical issue

I assume you believe a human can gain knowledge and wisdom.

Do you believe that an ICT system can have some sort of knowledge and wisdom?

What is your philosophy about educating students for a world in which ICT systems are growing in machine-like knowledge and wisdom?

Page 25: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Six languages (Robert Logan)

1. Natural language

2. Written language

3. Mathematics

4. Science

5. Computing & computer languages

6. Internet and Web

We can also talk about the language of various disciplines such as music, football, etc.

Page 26: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Fluency philosophy

Fluency in a language is one measure of expertise in the language.

What is your philosophy on the level of fluency students should be helped to achieve in various types of languages?For example, is it OK for a child to grow up

with very little of no fluency in art and music?

Page 27: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Human intelligence

Learn Pose problemsSolve problems. This includes solving

problems, accomplishing tasks, and fashioning products. It includes critical thinking and making effective use of one’s overall knowledge and skills.

Page 28: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

This has long been one of my favorite topics.

What “intelligent-like” things can machines do, and what are their limitations?

How should AI affect:Curriculum?Instruction?Assessment?

Page 29: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Creativity and Intelligence

Humans are very good at creativity.While creativity requires intelligence, high

levels of intelligence (high IQ) does not imply high creativity.

My philosophy: foster creativity (in contrast, for example, with “just tell me exactly what I need to do, and I’ll do it”).

Page 30: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

What really bugs me …

I think that in recent years our educational system has moved strongly in the direction of producing students who want and expect to be told exactly what do do and who are “lost” without a high level of detailed, explicit instructions.

Page 31: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

My philosophy

With appropriate education, people get more intelligence.

ICT systems are getting more intelligent.Human intelligence and machine

intelligence overlap, but are quite different.Students should learn about both, as well a

about themselves.

Page 32: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

CAI example

A machine can have the intelligence to provide drill and practice, provide immediate feedback, adjust the questions presented in an appropriate response to errors being made, switch into tutorial mode if it (the machine) decides this is needed, keep detailed records, prepare reports,and etc.

A machine may well have more intelligence than a human in this limited area.

Page 33: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Increasing human productivity

AgricultureIndustrial productionInformation Age:

Data processing productivityInformation processing productivityKnowledge processing productivity

What about the productivity of students and teachers?

Page 34: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Robert Branson’s Upper Limit Theory

100.00%

50.00%

0.00%

Upper Limit Theory

Timeline

Page 35: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Education is at an upper limit

Based on national test results, our schools have improved very little over the past 40 years.

Branson argues (and I agree) that with current methods and levels of expenditures, we are close to an upper limit.

Page 36: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Work harder and longer, versus work “smarter”

We can increase:Length of school day, counting homeworkLength of school weak and school yearNumber of years of educationTesting, requirements, and so on.

However, these changes are modest relative to a doubling of totality of human knowledge every five or ten years.

Page 37: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

We need a paradigm shift

100.00%

50.00%

00.00%

Time

100.00%

50.00%

00.00%

Paradigm Shift “Jump”

Page 38: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Individualizing by

Increasing effort to have students learn to learn and to take more responsibility for their own learning.

Use of HIICALUse of asynchronous distance learningProviding strong support for lifelong

learning—especially learning in contexts and situations deemed relevant by learners.

Page 39: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Learn faster and better

From work of Benjamin Bloom and others:Mastery learningIndividual tutoring

ICT version of this: Highly interactive intelligent computer-assisted learning, perhaps delivered in an asynchronous distance learning mode.

Page 40: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Some students learn faster & better than others

Students with IQs of 75-80 tend to learn half as fast as average.

Students with IQs of 130 and above tend to learn twice as fast as average.

In my opinion, we are not doing nearly enough to accommodate to these individual differences.

Page 41: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Flat earth, revisited

Categories of workers difficult to outsource or off shore:

Sports stars and entertainersHighly specialized, doctors, lawyers, accountantsAnchored, barbers, nurses, plumbers, direct

service people, child care, lawn & garden careReally adaptable, versatile, broadly capable, “Jack

& Jill of many trades”

Page 42: Developing A Philosophy of Computers in Education David Moursund University of Oregon NCCE 2006.

Final Remarks

Change: You can bank on it!


Related Documents