May 27 - CDI 2008 Discussion
Posted on May 27, 2008
Filed under CourseDesign, Events
Post your ideas, comments and questions here!
Comments
30 Responses to “May 27 - CDI 2008 Discussion”
Leave a Reply
CDI Blog
Posted on May 27, 2008
Filed under CourseDesign, Events
30 Responses to “May 27 - CDI 2008 Discussion”
Leave a Reply
Test
tell the guy with the question that he doesn’t need the entire URL - (the long one) only to use the one on the board..
Great stuff! Can we get Andrew’s Powerpoint?
Will will this and other presentations be posted online after the institute? If so, where?
What are elements of a “good class?”
Engaged learners,
Everyone is an “intelligent non-expert”
Diversity in activities
Provocative
Student-generated content
Wondering how Blackboard fits or does not fit with Andrew’s idea of “co-designed” physical and virtual spaces.
facilitating learning
looking forward to re-inventing my courses
It’s only “technology” is it was invented after you were born . . .
Suzanne,
Here’s the link to the slides for my 3 pm talk:
http://www.slideshare.net/laumakis/2008-cdi-presentation-laumakis/
Mark
Generally I am a positive person, having said that. Developing virtual spaces to create student-centered learning environments can ONLY be achieved if the institution provides adequate support and resources to make this happen. Last semester I taught in a classroom where I couldn’t even play a DVD for my class.
Andrew,
How do you do these things in THIS classroom when there are 500 students present?
and gather data about your in-class experimenting…
What’s a Mach-up?
I know I spelled it wrong before - - but I am hoping someone will tell me.. what is a mash-up?
Wikipedia on mashup: “In technology, a mashup is a web application that combines data from more than one source into a single integrated tool; an example is the use of cartographic data from Google Maps to add location information to real-estate data, thereby creating a new and distinct web service that was not originally provided by either source.”
Papert on constructionism verses instructionism
http://www.papert.org/articles/const_inst/const_inst1.html
Knowing what the tools can do (what they’re good for) doesn’t have to be a solo endeavor. It actually can’t be.
Important point about paying attention to anecdotal evidence from students about learning and technology, but to do member-checking with all students before making changes.
how do i turn off the email being generated by this workshop from this comment page?
I turned it off Kris. Sorry.
Some of you have posted on another page in this blog.
The url to post here is:
http://sdsu-pict-cdi.org
Can SWoRD be used with sites other than Blackboard? Particularly, can this be integrated with an instructor-created webpage or blog?
SWoRD homepage:
http://www.lrdc.pitt.edu/schunn/sword/
Is there any reason you couldn’t use this for other than writing, for example, lesson plan projects where writing might be one criteria, but design criteria might dominate.
Could you go into a bit more detail about how peers are trained to give specific, corrective feedback?
Is this something we have access to at SDSU? Did someone say it was available via Blackboard?
Approx. what is the “training time” or “gearing up time” required to get faculty up and running with this lovely strategy?
We seem to be focused on learning outcomes, as if LEARNING is the only kind of outcome we should be concerned with.
While this is understandable for a university, it is really shortsighted if we are truly concerned about what our students DO with their learning.
We seem to be satisfied to create citizens who may understand the world perfectly, but who have no commitment, attachment, or dedication to improving that world.
We seem to be concerned that faculty will DO something with what they learn in these sessions on learning outcomes; but, ironically, that concern does not seem to carry over to making sure the students actually DO something with their “learning.”
This concern is not just about motivating students, it is about teaching them to DO, not just to LEARN.
There is much more to say about this, but it is lunchtime.
I hope we can address this critical dimension of “learning.”
@Paul - I think there are two dimensions to your question - 1: something longitudinal - did what they learn in a course make a difference in the long run in the real world, which is tough for an instructor to know. But the other seems to me to be about the nature of our outcomes. For me there is no learn without do unless you are talking about regurgitation type outcomes. I think when the outcomes move to higher levels on Bloom’s and we measure the outcomes via tasks/projects, etc., then we are asking students to DO in the service of learning.
Paul, you took the words out of my mouth. I’ve been struggling with how best to nurture (and measure!) critical thinking “dispositions” in my students, rather than just cognitive skills. I’m trying to find new ways to use existing learning environments that really fuel intellectual inquisitiveness instead of just responding. It seems getting students to ask questions is harder than getting them to answer them.