Introduction
This week's readings in my methods class differed in their content, yet I always try to tie in something about one to connect with the other. Essentially, this process is exactly what we want our students to do when they engage in reading abstract text, primary sources; all in the process of historical inquiry and analysis. The first article delved into the new and interesting topic of teaching placed-based education (Resor, 2010), while the other gave a deeply analytic and research-based delineation of mobile based learning, e-learning, and ubiquitous learning and how breaking down these types of technology-based learning into a pedagogical framework can help any teacher implement such technologies in the classroom (Park, 2011).
Why Place-Based Education???
The concept of place-based education is very new to me, and the article by Resor (2010) entitled "Place-Based Education: What is Its Place in the Social Studies Classroom?" gave a great critique and interpretive analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of using such a pedagogical framework within the classroom. The author expressed the benefits of using such a learning system based on the local sphere. Place-based education gives the students what I like to call "skin the game." They use their local context as a base and research field to learn, research, explore, and apply knowledge and service-based projects. This type of learning enhances student achievement because students have a direct cognitive and tangible connection to learning.
Reinforcing the Majority or Carving New Paths???
One of the main points that I took from this intuitive article was how many teachers use such an educational framework within their curriculum, but in the end, the results show that students (in their exploration and subsequent work) merely reinforce the stereotypes or history written by the majority. For example, when students in a social studies class "mapped out" a visitor guide for a certain township, they worked with realtors and town officials, and the final product only included the upper echelons and attractive areas of town. The authors points out that this may not be everyone's history and we as teachers, if using such a place-based curricula, must think outside the box and get students to finding avenues never explored or never written in the town's history because those who wrote the history were obviously the majority and hegemonic group in power.
Breaking Down Technology-Based Learning
The research-driven article entitled "A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types" by Park (2011) broke down three different types of tech-based and/or distance learning into further categories based on transactional distance theory. The author introduced a totally new breakdown of mobile learning into a pedagogical framework that teachers can use as a guideline and learning tool when creating courses, curricula, projects, and even lessons. I think Park's breakdown of mobile learning into four distinct categories: 1)high transactional distance socialized m-learning, 2) high transactional distance individualized m-learning, 3) low transactional distance socialized m-learning, and 4) low transactional distance individualized m-learning. I'm not going to go into the specifics, yet, one can see a scripted breakdown of the different types of mobile learning in a clear and concise manner. For example, the fourth category was used in a science class as students took their mobile devices and recorded bird-watching activities. The use of the mobile device within this context allowed students to not have to take a notebook and dually try to take notes while watching a bird. Students used their phone to take pictures, make voice comments, which also allows students to post their findings to the a class web page or forum. This process of using mobile technology instead of the traditional method has a dual function. Students can look back on their work with relative ease because their work is saved on their mobile device, and they can upload their work to a Web 2.0 app to create a presentation or simply upload to a class website to allow peer and instructor comments. Basically, this is a great way to promote group learning as well as individualized learning. I think students could use this type of mobile learning in the context of the social studies classroom with relative ease!
Conclusion
These articles differed greatly in their content, scope of research, and breadth; however, I believe Park's breakdown of distance and technology-based learning through e-learning, mobile, and ubiquitous learning can certainly be used in the classroom of a teacher who implements a place-based educational framework. Teachers can used the advice and differentiation techniques outlined by Park in how to effectively use for example, mobile devices, while students are out in the field in their own locale, of how to effectively use and manage such technology to promote learning.
References
Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2). Retrieved from http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=abstract&id=698756&recNo=4&toc=1&uiLanguage=en
Resor, C. W. (2010). Place-Based Education: What is Its Place in the Social Studies Classroom? The Social Studies, 101, 185-188. doi:10.1080/00377990903493853
No comments:
Post a Comment