Computer education study - it's bad

According to the Telegraph, a new study published by the British Royal Economic Society claims that using a computer actually reduces learning. Claiming to be the largest study of its kind, the researchers claim

"The more access pupils had to computers at home, the lower they scored in tests, partly because they diverted attention from homework.

"Pupils tended to do worse in schools generously equipped with computers, apparently because computerised instruction replaced more effective forms of teaching."

Well, this bodes well for grant requests.

CUNY GC ITP Core 2: gaming

CUNY GC ITP Core 2
According to Henry Jenkins III and Kurt Squire, "Democratizing Games," Computer Games Magazine (Aug. 2003), http://www.educationarcade.org/modules.php?op+modload&name+Sections&file=index&, Tropical America is a positive example of an educational game. I went to their site, registered and played it for a little while and got bored (it is simplistic and cumbersome, you have to click on the dialog blurb) and outraged (it has to do partly with being brought up in Spain and thinking that what went on in el Salvador (massacres) in 1981 is not a direct consequence of 1492 and mixing directly present and past as if we were talking of the same context; but also with animals appearing instead of persons and the black and white graphics when the Latino tradition in Los Angeles based on great Mexican muralists is full of color ). Then I remembered it was a student project and as the authors of the article say: they "are technically simple ... But they do illustrate how democratizing game design can result in a more diverse range of game themes, aesthetics ... " The value for me is that the students did the work but I wouldn't recommend it to teach the political situation in Central America the Cold war.
If you are interested in the game, go to http://www.tropicalamerica.com/game

Info Acquisition vs. Knowledge Construction / Human vs. Machine Learning

I had a bit of trouble dealing with Mayer's distinction between "information acquisition" and "knowledge construction". Now, before you say anything, I get the distinction, I accept it as a quality of human learning and a cognitive theory of multimedia presentation that there's a difference between rote (good retention/bad transfer) and meaningful (good retention & transfer) learning. My trouble is that I try to also think about these things in terms of machine learning. When "training" artificial intelligence software to "learn" something, "knowledge construction" seems to either not exist or solely exist in the design and programming of the system. Multimedia or no, machine learning is a different beast altogether, and often deals with completely non-human ways of processing information. It's the human input that seems to contain all the "knowledge" an AI system has - something the designers and programmers already knew, and are trying to use the computer's speed and memory to use the concepts well. We're just not there yet with "self-learning" systems. Of course, there are randomness-based techniques to "learn" things (like genetic algorithms and genetic programming) that seem to fly in the face of all of this, but they're really just certain types of heuristics.

... so this was a bit of a side track, but I think it's interesting to think about when we try to teach technology instead of the other way around.

Is "HighTech" Pedagogy really that different?

I found something curious about this week essays. They emphasize the importance of “new” approaches to pedagogy (this is especially implicit in LaMonica’s essay). Writing this précis made me wonder if “traditional” face-to-face teaching does not also requires to “structure content so that it is easy to follow, and to provide regular feedback and guidance.” I definitely think that the same pedagogy is required regardless of the medium of deliverance. What I see happening here is that perhaps web-based courses show teaching deficiencies more clearly while face-to-face teaching may allow teaching deficiency or students apathy go unnoticed.

What I mean by this is the following. In a “traditional” class the professor lecturing is not really aware of how students absorbe that information. Student participation, if any, is often limited to the same two or three hands going up while the rest remain resting on their desks. How students in a traditional class understand the lesson is anybody’s guess (until exams are taken, of course). The need to type comments for discussion requires all students to participate by posting their comments, otherwise they will be considered “not to be attending that class.” Web-based courses force ALL students to express their understanding of the class material. The problem is not that some pedagogical practices are limited to web-based courses, but rather that on a traditional class students do not expose as much the product of bad teaching techniques.

Michelle's Article Provokes Questions, and a Rant!

I think that the concepts and constructs governing diffusion and tipping point theory are potentially fascinating, and certainly powerful weapons in the war of ideas and opinions. Is it true that regardless of the new tool or idea presented, the respondents always break down into the perfect bell curve from enthusiasts to nihilists? Aren't there contrary examples in history (Jonas Salk with the polio vaccine, etc.)? Where does each of us fit into this paradigm? Are we where we would want to be - and are we always in the same role (if this is making no sense, then I am afraid you might be forced to look at my precis)?

I don't doubt that the implications of these theories for the advancement of pedagogical technology are great. It also sounds like these authors should be required reading in any marketing (or propaganda) 101 course. I guess it is this presumption that even the greatest of innovations, ideas, etc. may not be able to stand on its own merits alone that ruffles my feathers.

Now, speaking of ruffled feathers, why do people no longer proofread? This article was so rife with syntactical, grammatical, and spelling errors, as well as major content deficits, that I found myself wondering if it was Diffusion Theory for Dummies, by ......... . Oy!

Mike's question for discussion, 3/9

My question (based on reading "Object Lessons: Towards an Educational Theory of Technology"): Folding the year's work in on itself (starting with The Diamond Age and ending with this week's readings), what other forms of "dominant paradigm subversion" can be employed to teach in and about technology? I'm imagining Joanie Caucus (one-woman daycare center-turned-lawyer from Doonesbury) with a room of children on computers browsing Adbusters, which gives me a glimmer of hope for the future.

(I suggest we all post our questions separately, instead of tacking comments onto this post. The comments can be used specifically for commenting on each of our questions.)

Eat your heart out, David Crystal!

So, apparently college students (at least the ones at American University) are more formal in their IM'ing than previously thought.... and the style appears to be gender-split as well. Huh.