Learning—The Fourth Design Principle

Learning—The Fourth Design Principle

http://slworkshop.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/train-of-thought.jpg

When it comes to the learning principle, there are many different thoughts that come to my mind.  I have learned that design processes, as mentioned in the ABCS of activity, AeCTS, and SPD, should shape meaningful learning experiences for students.  As a teacher, you have to realize certain patterns so that you can help students make sense of information, which leads to them making meaning.  I know that from our discussion, Dr. Norton targeted these patterns and she broke them down into four parts to help us better understand the texts we’ve been reading.  With regard to Vygotsky, there are 6 main components of Mind in Society that we discussed.  To begin, I’ll highlight “culture” and “tools”.  I think it’s important to mention the fact that students have to learn through the context of the culture in which they’re present.  I know that in certain cultures, tools may have different uses and/or functions so you have to relate the information to your audience.  Also, teaching concepts is equivalent to teaching tools.  Students learn best by using tools in the context of the culture by “doing”.  First hand learning experiences that involve socializing, problem-solving, authentic activities, meaningful technology, etc… are more genuine and effective.  Application of material to the real world is vital, because students have to be able to contribute in their communities in ways that allow them to be a significant member of society.  Next, I’d like to discuss “language”, another key component of Vygotsky.  I learned that assigning symbols helps shape perception (language).  Dr. Norton stated that, “Language is thought, and thought is language.”  When a baby is learning a language, he/she draws attention to important features vs. non-important features to help shape categorization, attention, and memory.  Labels may be shaped by a culture, but they’re impacted by meaning.  We discussed that as a culture brings us symbolic tools, and we understand their true meaning, we internalize it.  This is another key part of Vygotsky’s principles.  When we internalize information, we use tools separate from what they stand for, we make them our own, and we use them for our own thinking.  I like to think of this as reflection.  I know that when I internalize things, and I reflect, I am more likely to make sense of certain notions and then I can utilize them for greater purposes.  We use tools in new and unique situations and this leads to higher psychological function.  Complete thought, complex thinking, and interactions coming from having a mind in society allows thought to develop.  I learned that we bring these thoughts and understandings within ourselves and our minds.  Finally, I will emphasize “play” and the “zone of proximal development”.  With the Zone of Proximal Development, students progress across tiers from “I can’t do it” to “I know it, I can do it, and I can use it independently.”  This occurs via modeling, coaching, and fading for all new learning experiences.  In the past, when I was a classroom teacher, these tiers of students were defined by the data that I collected and the observations that I made as an instructor.  One essential facet of this discussion that all teachers have to remember is that play is learning and “work” is application.  A worksheet is not is not meant for learning a concept, but for applying what was learned.  You can’t expect students to learn a concept by simply placing a worksheet in front of them, because they need to experiment and learn by “playing” with a tool.  Students need time to discover and investigate new standards and then they can see what they can do with certain rules or tools in various situations.  In a given hour of instruction, a majority of the lessons I presented to students involved 10 min. of direction instruction and 50 min. of “playing” with the material so they could take away more from the materials and it would be more pertinent to them.  With all of this in mind, I believe there are a few things that will definitely influence my practice in the future.  I want to analyze generalizable knowledge and the structures, processes, and discourse related to specific SOL’s.  I want to start doing this so that I can target the general skills students will need to complete more extensive projects that relate to OttW, PBL, Loudoun Creates, or other authentic learning experiences.  I want to encourage meaningful thinking, but I have to take the time to design these situations beforehand so I get students to where I want them to go with their learning.  I have jumped into projects much too early before, because I get excited about the possibilities, and then I end up having to pump the breaks.  I enjoyed breaking down the standard of “weather vs. climate”, and then determining the appropriate discourse (ex. putting students in the position of a landscaper/home designer in areas of various climates so they could apply their understanding of both standards to their “occupation”).  I’ll bring this up with my coaching conversations in the next few weeks.  Lately, I have developed coaching relationships the new Loudoun Creates teachers in my building so I’ll communicate this idea to them so they can also encourage “play” when it comes to using different movie-making apps (but with an end goal in mind).  I’m looking forward to seeing how this works out!

When it comes to the learning principle, there are many different thoughts that come to my mind.  I have learned that design processes, as mentioned in the ABCS of activity, AeCTS, and SPD, should shape meaningful learning experiences for students.  As a teacher, you have to realize certain patterns so that you can help students make sense of information, which leads to them making meaning.  I know that from our discussion, Dr. Norton targeted these patterns and she broke them down into four parts to help us better understand the texts we’ve been reading.  With regard to Vygotsky, there are 6 main components of Mind in Society that we discussed.  To begin, I’ll highlight “culture” and “tools”.  I think it’s important to mention the fact that students have to learn through the context of the culture in which they’re present.  I know that in certain cultures, tools may have different uses and/or functions so you have to relate the information to your audience.  Also, teaching concepts is equivalent to teaching tools.  Students learn best by using tools in the context of the culture by “doing”.  First hand learning experiences that involve socializing, problem-solving, authentic activities, meaningful technology, etc… are more genuine and effective.  Application of material to the real world is vital, because students have to be able to contribute in their communities in ways that allow them to be a significant member of society.  Next, I’d like to discuss “language”, another key component of Vygotsky.  I learned that assigning symbols helps shape perception (language).  Dr. Norton stated that, “Language is thought, and thought is language.”  When a baby is learning a language, he/she draws attention to important features vs. non-important features to help shape categorization, attention, and memory.  Labels may be shaped by a culture, but they’re impacted by meaning.  We discussed that as a culture brings us symbolic tools, and we understand their true meaning, we internalize it.  This is another key part of Vygotsky’s principles.  When we internalize information, we use tools separate from what they stand for, we make them our own, and we use them for our own thinking.  I like to think of this as reflection.  I know that when I internalize things, and I reflect, I am more likely to make sense of certain notions and then I can utilize them for greater purposes.  We use tools in new and unique situations and this leads to higher psychological function.  Complete thought, complex thinking, and interactions coming from having a mind in society allows thought to develop.  I learned that we bring these thoughts and understandings within ourselves and our minds.  Finally, I will emphasize “play” and the “zone of proximal development”.  With the Zone of Proximal Development, students progress across tiers from “I can’t do it” to “I know it, I can do it, and I can use it independently.”  This occurs via modeling, coaching, and fading for all new learning experiences.  In the past, when I was a classroom teacher, these tiers of students were defined by the data that I collected and the observations that I made as an instructor.  One essential facet of this discussion that all teachers have to remember is that play is learning and “work” is application.  A worksheet is not is not meant for learning a concept, but for applying what was learned.  You can’t expect students to learn a concept by simply placing a worksheet in front of them, because they need to experiment and learn by “playing” with a tool.  Students need time to discover and investigate new standards and then they can see what they can do with certain rules or tools in various situations.  In a given hour of instruction, a majority of the lessons I presented to students involved 10 min. of direction instruction and 50 min. of “playing” with the material so they could take away more from the materials and it would be more pertinent to them.  With all of this in mind, I believe there are a few things that will definitely influence my practice in the future.  I want to analyze generalizable knowledge and the structures, processes, and discourse related to specific SOL’s.  I want to start doing this so that I can target the general skills students will need to complete more extensive projects that relate to OttW, PBL, Loudoun Creates, or other authentic learning experiences.  I want to encourage meaningful thinking, but I have to take the time to design these situations beforehand so I get students to where I want them to go with their learning.  I have jumped into projects much too early before, because I get excited about the possibilities, and then I end up having to pump the breaks.  I enjoyed breaking down the standard of “weather vs. climate”, and then determining the appropriate discourse (ex. putting students in the position of a landscaper/home designer in areas of various climates so they could apply their understanding of both standards to their “occupation”).  I’ll bring this up with my coaching conversations in the next few weeks.  Lately, I have developed coaching relationships the new Loudoun Creates teachers in my building so I’ll communicate this idea to them so they can also encourage “play” when it comes to using different movie-making apps (but with an end goal in mind).  I’m looking forward to seeing how this works out!

When it comes to the learning principle, there are many different thoughts that come to my mind.  I have learned that design processes, as mentioned in the ABCS of activity, AeCTS, and SPD, should shape meaningful learning experiences for students.  As a teacher, you have to realize certain patterns so that you can help students make sense of information, which leads to them making meaning.  I know that from our discussion, Dr. Norton targeted these patterns and she broke them down into four parts to help us better understand the texts we’ve been reading.  With regard to Vygotsky, there are 6 main components of Mind in Society that we discussed.  To begin, I’ll highlight “culture” and “tools”.  I think it’s important to mention the fact that students have to learn through the context of the culture in which they’re present.  I know that in certain cultures, tools may have different uses and/or functions so you have to relate the information to your audience.  Also, teaching concepts is equivalent to teaching tools.  Students learn best by using tools in the context of the culture by “doing”.  First hand learning experiences that involve socializing, problem-solving, authentic activities, meaningful technology, etc… are more genuine and effective.  Application of material to the real world is vital, because students have to be able to contribute in their communities in ways that allow them to be a significant member of society.  Next, I’d like to discuss “language”, another key component of Vygotsky.  I learned that assigning symbols helps shape perception (language).  Dr. Norton stated that, “Language is thought, and thought is language.”  When a baby is learning a language, he/she draws attention to important features vs. non-important features to help shape categorization, attention, and memory.  Labels may be shaped by a culture, but they’re impacted by meaning.  We discussed that as a culture brings us symbolic tools, and we understand their true meaning, we internalize it.  This is another key part of Vygotsky’s principles.  When we internalize information, we use tools separate from what they stand for, we make them our own, and we use them for our own thinking.  I like to think of this as reflection.  I know that when I internalize things, and I reflect, I am more likely to make sense of certain notions and then I can utilize them for greater purposes.  We use tools in new and unique situations and this leads to higher psychological function.  Complete thought, complex thinking, and interactions coming from having a mind in society allows thought to develop.  I learned that we bring these thoughts and understandings within ourselves and our minds.  Finally, I will emphasize “play” and the “zone of proximal development”.  With the Zone of Proximal Development, students progress across tiers from “I can’t do it” to “I know it, I can do it, and I can use it independently.”  This occurs via modeling, coaching, and fading for all new learning experiences.  In the past, when I was a classroom teacher, these tiers of students were defined by the data that I collected and the observations that I made as an instructor.  One essential facet of this discussion that all teachers have to remember is that play is learning and “work” is application.  A worksheet is not is not meant for learning a concept, but for applying what was learned.  You can’t expect students to learn a concept by simply placing a worksheet in front of them, because they need to experiment and learn by “playing” with a tool.  Students need time to discover and investigate new standards and then they can see what they can do with certain rules or tools in various situations.  In a given hour of instruction, a majority of the lessons I presented to students involved 10 min. of direction instruction and 50 min. of “playing” with the material so they could take away more from the materials and it would be more pertinent to them.  With all of this in mind, I believe there are a few things that will definitely influence my practice in the future.  I want to analyze generalizable knowledge and the structures, processes, and discourse related to specific SOL’s.  I want to start doing this so that I can target the general skills students will need to complete more extensive projects that relate to OttW, PBL, Loudoun Creates, or other authentic learning experiences.  I want to encourage meaningful thinking, but I have to take the time to design these situations beforehand so I get students to where I want them to go with their learning.  I have jumped into projects much too early before, because I get excited about the possibilities, and then I end up having to pump the breaks.  I enjoyed breaking down the standard of “weather vs. climate”, and then determining the appropriate discourse (ex. putting students in the position of a landscaper/home designer in areas of various climates so they could apply their understanding of both standards to their “occupation”).  I’ll bring this up with my coaching conversations in the next few weeks.  Lately, I have developed coaching relationships the new Loudoun Creates teachers in my building so I’ll communicate this idea to them so they can also encourage “play” when it comes to using different movie-making apps (but with an end goal in mind).  I’m looking forward to seeing how this works out!