Category: Week 3 – Engaging the Imaginations of Digital Learners

Making Lectures Fun

When one thinks of attending a “lecture,” what often comes to mind is an old white man standing in front of a chalkboard droning on in a monotone voice about some obscure corner of existence with little real-world relevance to the lives of the audience. This does not sound fun. And, I expect, that that old white man would be pleased to know that it was not fun, for his corner of existence is serious, very serious indeed.

Exceedingly serious.

While this may be the image that still is conjured up in my mind from time to time when I think of lectures, in reality, I have had the great fortune to sit through some amazing lectures, given by engaging, enthusiastic professors, some of whom were old, white men! The enthusiasm of some of these lecturers was what encouraged a passion for entomology within me, and many of my classmates. And, as an aspiring educator-to-be, I am inspired by their example.

Unfortunately, the lecturers that have been truly engaging and exciting in my life are few and far between, their impact like shining stars engulfed by the unmemorable void of droning “educators.” I cannot speak to what would lead someone to pursue a life of education if they cannot themselves find a reason to crack a smile once in a lecture or raise their voice above a hoarse whisper.

I get it, lecturing can be hard. Sometimes it feels like you have given this lecture 1000 times and you just cannot muster the energy to be excited for this 1001st time. But believe me, if you are feeling bored, your audience will pick up on that and return it to you 100-fold. Something that has worked for me in my, admittedly brief, experience as a lecturer, is to use a common method for reengaging the audience that can also help re-engage you. Every 20 or so minutes stop the lecture. Take a break from talking and ask the students some questions, or show an interesting, short, video clip, or have an activity that can make what you are saying to the students more real and tangible.

As I said in my last post, experiential (active) learning is not a new concept for our species, and it works wonders for conveying what facts actually mean. As an example, I have been developing a class project for an intro to entomology course that revolves around the creation of a trading card game (think Magic the Gathering for insects). This game would reflect, as well as possible, how the natural world of insects works. In a basic sense, there would be predators, herbivores, and parasites and they would have to interact with each other in a sustainable way with regards to the limited resources available in whichever habitat the players have chosen for that session (jungle, desert, field, etc.). Players would gain points for such things as having their predator consume another player’s herbivore, or for the number of offspring their parasitoid fly can produce. The game would begin with a few simple interactions, and throughout the semester, students would work in teams to create cards and game mechanics that would reflect the concepts we discussed in class. The game would get continually more complex, with cards based on real-world insects and situations (such as global climate change and invasive species), serving not to frustrate the player, but to impress upon them the interconnectedness of our natural world. A couple times each lecture we would stop and discuss, by consulting the students, how this concept could be applied to our game, and what unforeseen consequences of any new interactions could arise. And, every so often, a day of class would be devoted to test-driving our game and discussing what does and does not work and why.

I have yet to implement this game-design aspect into a real-world class, but I have a pretty good feeling that it could work, in tandem, with conventional, but exciting, lectures. Games engage the human mind in a way that straight problem solving simply cannot by providing a fun, and interesting, method to reach a specific goal. Playing games can unite people from a diverse range of backgrounds that otherwise would not ever interact, and, if designed well enough, can continue to be fun for years to come. Added to that, games can be iterative, and, if the game is successful enough, I envision an online-playable version that alumni, as well as current students, could continue to add to and engage with as research in entomology develops, and new, incredible, stories of insect behavior are discovered.

 

Engaging Computer Science Students: Technology Required

This week as part of my Contemporary Pedagogy class at Virginia Tech (GRAD 5114), we were asked to read several pieces of literature regarding using technology in the classroom to engage students who grew up in a digital age. However, in a computer science classroom, the use of technology is not an option; it is required. All projects are done on a computer and may very well involve other pieces of technology, such as a mobile device, depending on the class. Students also quickly learn that StackOverflow is the computer science oriented Google: you can search for various programing-specific problems and be almost guaranteed to find an answer. And if you can’t, you can easily post your own question to ask help from the community.

What this boils down to is that computer science classrooms are a special case where technology is concerned. Students are required to use it, so it must be in the classroom. They also are already engaged– or quickly learn to be– in online communities where they help each other with programming issues and concepts. The real challenge, then, is how to best integrate the technology in the classroom. Much of this challenge originates from the fact that the material taught in the class is highly technical, which I would argue needs to be taught based on a strong conceptual foundation. That is, if a student knows the concept and can explain it well, then they could probably figure out the code to accomplish it. If they just know the code but don’t understand the concept, then they likely can only apply the concept in a limited number of scenarios at best.

This is where Robert Talbert’s “Four Things Lecture is Good For“ comes in (who I happened to actually have in a math course at Grand Valley State University way back when– small world!). Modeling the thought process behind a new computer science concept I believe is undeniably crucial to students’ success. Sharing cognitive structures, giving context, or telling stories help solidify these ideas in their heads so that they can hopefully apply them independently in the course projects and exams.

However, this creates an issue in the classroom. Concepts can often be taught independently of actual programming examples, but at some point, these examples need to be introduced to contextualize the concept. This implies a balance that is necessary to strike in the computer science classroom between traditional lecture and programming examples that require computers. Such a balance is very difficult to strike, as I found out first hand this past summer when I taught my first class. Reflecting on my own experiences as an undergraduate student, I think other professors in computer science struggle with this too; many of the professors I had seemed almost resigned to the idea that computers were going to be in the classroom and that students would get distracted by them. All they asked was that students who were more prone to such distractions sit towards the back of the class in hopes that they would be less distracting to their peers. Perhaps, though, part of this resignation was that there is always a huge disparity in abilities in any such class: some students come in knowing nothing, and others have already learned everything. How do you accommodate such a wide disparity in a classroom where technology is a necessity?

Some of the readings discussed using games to help students get more excited about the material, thus helping them be more engaged as well. While this is a common tactic used in computer science classes, I don’t think that game-based learning can be used every day in such a context. There is simply too much technical material that, while some students may have experienced previously, many have not. The sheer amount of technical material that needs to be covered make it difficult to do so while giving students an opportunity to directly engage with it every class period. The solution in my class this past summer was to have several large projects throughout the semester that were built upon the lecture material. In combination with the labs that gave them some designated time to practice, the hope was that they would achieve a mastery of the material. Some did, of course, but I can’t help but wonder what is a better balance to strike between technology use and practice in the classroom and more lecture-based approaches while ensuring all necessary material is covered…

Week 3 – Digital Learning and Imagination

In watching and reading the material for this week, it is my personal opinion that digital learning and imagination in the way we present material is required in the incoming era of education. We discussed in class how some students presently at Virginia Tech do not feel like going to class lecture is necessary, that they can gain just as much from finding videos online to understand concepts.  While I do not agree that is best method, I also do not disagree. As students in the curriculum that we are in, we are expected to learn topics in the time-frame that the class is being offered and be expected to have mastered the material by the time of the test. I cannot negatively judge a student who goes to class, fails to grasp the concept, seeks other resources (online digital learning) and decides that method is what works best for him and sticks with it.

However, as a doctoral candidate considering a future career in academia. I can’t help but feel negatively if my student’s would rather obtain the information the University has entrusted in me to provide for them, elsewhere or online. Personally, I would feel like I am not being efficient in my teaching if students found it necessary to seek other resources as the primary source of the material I cover. For this reason, I believe the pedagogy approach needs to include more resources than just the standard lecture and handout of slides presentations.

Luckily coming from the Civil Engineering discipline, I feel that most of the material we learn can be adapted to a digital platform. In my area specially of traffic systems analysis, simulation and data visualization are commonly used in class and students are tasked with solving problems in such software, thus enhancing their understanding.  Additionally, during my first two years I had access to Virinia Tech’s echo system for various courses taught in NOVA and broadcast  in Blacksburg. Having the option to rewatch, play and pause the lecture helped greatly in my learning. Especially on days where I was just too tired to focus on the class during it’s actual scheduled time.

The approach implemented at “Quest to learn” school is one that I completely agree with. Through the interviews, one can see that the students are incredibly intelligent, motivated and always have a goal while constantly thinking about improving previous ideas. That type of engagement is what I have similarly noticed when presenting labs that require the use of hands-on software or simulation. By providing students a goal, a stage and the tools to develop their learning we truly serve as the “catalyst of learning, rather than a conduit of information” as descried by John Warner of College of Charleston in South Carolina.

Video Games, Learning, and Immersion

Pokémon Go, World of Warcraft, Minecraft. Video games all get a bad rep. It can be a pleasure in which people feel guilty about. I, myself, was a huge World of Warcraft nerd growing up where my parents had to censor my computer usage because they thought that my time spent on it was useless. They thought that it was a mindless activity without any substance. It’s like when my mom would tell me that I shouldn’t eat potato chips And if I was going to eat junk food, then have it be ice cream since it contains some nutrients. The same goes for video games monitoring. Parents like knowing that their child is “gaining” something from their experience. This makes me think of children playing games from PBS kids, where the learning feels too “on the nose.” I hated those games growing up. I wanted to feel invested, a sense of purpose.

Now the question is: what are we truly gaining from the games listed in the very first sentence and how does it correlate to learning within the classroom? When I think of video games, I think of the idea of immersion. I remember playing World of Warcraft and feeling like I was emotionally invested in the character I was playing. It was a role-playing game, where my actions and decisions ultimately reflected the outcome of the game. Whatever I was putting into the game, I received a certain output. It made me think strategically because I knew I didn’t have all the time in the world. I problem solved while leveling, thinking of the most efficient way in doing so.

There was also a sense of autonomy when playing video games. I was fully immersed in this other world, but I also had control of what I’m doing in this virtual world. If I failed at a quest, then I know it’s my doing. I had to think as to why I failed and re-do it. Sometimes there were instances where in the video game I had to interact with on another. This added another layer of problem solving. This world although virtual, felt very much real. The world required mental labor where a player continually keeps finding and solving dilemmas at hand.

To have this idea of immersion and autonomy applied to the classroom, I believe there has to be some sense of purpose that is tied to a student. The space/world in the classroom has to be a place in which a student feels like they can inhabit themselves. They have to think for themselves and recognize other people live in the world. Of course, this all seems very generalized and more like a vision that can’t be put into practice. But by looking at alternative ways of teaching, we can help see that this idea can be put in use. Last week we discussed blogging and the pros and cons, but when you think about it, blogging provides autonomy when students have freedom to write about a topic of their choosing.

By giving students a world of a subject that is being taught, instructors will allow them to continually learn and grow when students are given the tools to help navigate this world.

What classrooms can learn from games

After reading Setting Students Minds on Fire and A New Culture of Learning, I reflected on my own experiences with gaming and how those principles could be translated into classroom learning. As a gamer, I tend to play either simulation games (The Sims) or peaceful-ish quest games (Pokemon, Mario,etc.). Several principles of game-learning from these games can apply easily to classrooms and improve learning and retention.

First is the way a game begins. Most games start with a little background, often in the form of a cut-scene, on why you are about to start the quest/mission. I like to be immersed in a good story, and an interesting introduction is important for setting up that story. Meanwhile, back in the classroom, if you ask any student why they are taking that class, most will just say “Because it is required for my major”. As far as motivation to finish the game, that’s pretty weak. Often, majors come with a list of required courses, but no explanation as to why those courses are necessary. I’m still not sure why I had to take an Economics course as a Soil Science major. Instructors can always see the majors of their students on the class roster, and can use the gaming strategy to start the course with a little background on what the goal is, and how accomplishing that goal can be beneficial to all players. If students can see how the objectives of the course can help them in their own long term goals, they will have a better motivation than a GPA or a piece of paper to work hard and learn the material.

Once a game has established the quest, the players have to figure out how to accomplish it. Many games have the major quest broken down into manageable pieces, and often use an expanding world system. For example, with Pokemon games, you start of in one small town, then the quest takes you to another town. After you accomplish the mini-quests there, you go on to another city, increasing your skills and the available resources as you go. Sometimes the quest takes you back to towns you’ve already visited, and sometimes you go back on your own to try to collect different types of pokemon that you may have missed. In classroom settings, some of this is already employed. A lot of lectures build on previous knowledge, and often a topic will get brought up multiples times in order to give context. However, many classrooms don’t do well with the manageable mini-quests. How many courses have you taken where most of your grade came from 1 or 2 midterms and a final? This model gives rise to the binge and purge for knowledge and very low retention. Very few games have only 1 or 2 boss battles. That would be stressful and not nearly as much fun. It would not allow players to build up their skills in an engaging manner, and most players would not stick with the game for very long.

I think the principle that most desperately needs to be brought into classrooms is the outcome of failure in games. For most classrooms, when students do poorly on a test, or don’t understand a concept, they just get a bad grade and move on to the next concept. This model does not facilitate good learning, and can be extremely detrimental to students who struggle with an early concept that later parts of the course are based on.  Whereas in a game like Pokemon, if you lose a battle, you don’t get to fail and move on. You are transported to the last town you were in, and your pokemon are healed. The worst consequence is that you lose a little in-game currency. But then you try again. Sometimes you spend a little time trying to level your pokemon up, or switch out your pokemon to try a new strategy, but then you face the gym leader again, and again, until you win. You don’t get thrown onto the next, harder quest, until your are strong enough to finish the current quest. The ability to try again and again without major consequences makes players more willing to take on a challenging game. This could easily be translated into the classroom. With writing assignments, an instructor could allow for multiple drafts. On other assessments (quizzes, tests, homework), an instructor could allow students to redo the assignment in some way that allows the student to grasp the concepts they had struggled with.

I argue that this last principle needs to so desperately come into classrooms based off my own experiences as an instructor. I have seen students, used to getting high grades, become so terrified of ruining their GPA, that the focus becomes entirely on the grade than the material. I’ve had students on writing assignments hound me with questions so relentlessly about so many minute things, it felt as though I may as well have written the assignment for them. These students were so worried about getting docked points for messing up that they were totally unwilling to take any initiative for themselves. I recognize that the more opportunities for re-doing assignments there are, the more work there is for instructors. However, I think a balance can be found that enables student learning with out paralyzing fear of failure and allows instructors to get the work done. The inordinately high level of grade stress is probably responsible for a lot of burn out and perhaps one of the reasons so many students who start college degrees do not finish them.

Week 2: Digital Learners, “Those Youths!”

One of the kids on the Digital Media video said something that stuck with me. He was talking about how his perception of lessons in school has changed from “Ugh! I have to learn this!” to “This is interesting, I want to learn this!”, and I can’t help but wonder how much the design of his courses contributed to his newfound enthusiasm for learning. Obviously, there are lots of other things that have changed (and thus an equal number of confounding variables, but it’s definitely worthy of commentary.

I mentioned the influence of design in pedagogical practice in my previous post, and I’d like to continue that line of inquiry here. I referred to the design of various classrooms and how that can contribute to improved learning outcomes and greater engagement among the students who occupy those spaces, but that concerned the built environment. This time, I’d like to look at the design of coursework, the technological infrastructures, and the integration of the two in the successful and not-so-successful examples we saw and read about this week.

One of the most successful examples were the classes featured in Setting Students’ Minds on Fire, in which the teacher made the course material more engaging by turning it into a role-playing game. It was a huge success, primarily because, as was stated in the article, “the strongest gains come from pedagogies that feature teamwork and problem solving”. The atmosphere of friendly–but rigorous–competition drove the students to improve, thereby receiving positive reinforcement in the form of increased success in the game, which caused them to become more dedicated to it, and because the game relied on a store of knowledge that could only be acquired by learning the material, the students became better strategists and also better scholars of the material. This was a fascinating study in what happens when gamification goes wonderfully right, and I would have loved to learn more about the mechanics of the game and how exactly it was played. Unfortunately, for every instance in which gamification is successful, there are several more examples where it fails. One example from my own life was the last-ditch attempt to introduce online gaming into my middle school’s English and Language Arts classes. While this was many years ago, the consistently low test scores and rankings of that particular school indicate that not much has changed. Instead of reviewing the literature and emphasizing the importance of strategic thinking, problem solving, and planning ahead, the administration merely foisted computer games on their English classes in the hope that something would stick. It did not, nor did the reading and writing scores improve.

Even in classes with strict teachers, students who were determined to text their friends, pass notes, or otherwise remain disengaged would always find a way to achieve their ends: one enormous mistake a lot of the more conservative authors of this week’s articles made was to underestimate the cunning of adolescents and young adults. The intentionally disengaged student is the primary reason why I fall firmly in the middle of the spectrum when it comes to devices in class. I believe that they can be of great use, the ADA requires that those who have disabilities be given dispensation to use devices if they aid in learning, and they can be a fun way to involve even the most aloof students. These tools are becoming more integrated into our daily lives than ever before, and I personally believe that trying to stem the tide alone is futile. We should use this newfound power for good and show our students that classes can be more rewarding than scrolling through their newsfeeds. It’s no small task, but I believe the next generation of teacher can rise to the occasion.

A Travel

Years ago I woke up in the morning and found that everything seems different than it used to be. I’m probably teleported to a random universe. How different this world is? I would say it feels like I live in the internet. I figure that the appearance and physical laws of this world probably work the same as my home universe. The major difference is that whenever I think about doing anything through the internet, what I need will pop-up or be done automatically as I think of them. This is actually not hard to figure out because the second I woke up in the morning, I asked myself where I’m I?, and the “Wikipedia” in this world somehow showed up immediately in front of my eyes.

I actually was a quite old fashion person in my homeworld, because I got annoyed when I need to learn using so many different tools for various occasions and purposes. Even though the technology was user-friendly enough and simple to learn, I still felt a lot of redundancy on all kinds of tools and manual information filtering processes. But accidentally landing on a world like this, is my first time in my life want to celebrate the existence of technology. When this kind of situation happens in the movie, the characters always want to figure out a way to go back, but I don’t, I’m thinking of living a life here.

This is my chance of starting a new life. My life back on the earth was not a decent one. I always blame that on my lack of passion for learning due to the inconvenience of technology. Now I have a perfect set up for me to learn now, I’ll figure out what I want to do and become an expert in that.

“O.K., what I really want to do?”

Well, obviously no answer would show up automatically for that question.

“What the world needs?”

“The world needs love, understanding, equality…..”

Hmm…That’s too general. Probably a doctor should still be a good occupation since I can still fell my body. “What do I need to become a good doctor?”

“Step 1: Earn a Bachelor’s Degree; Step 2: Take the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT); Step 3: Earn a Medical Degree. …”

I can’t believe even in this hi-tech world being a doctor still takes the exact same processes. Fortunately, I can finish the degrees and testes online, even those practical experiments can be done with VR availability. Wait, what if I’ll be sent back while I’m halfway of becoming a doctor? While it will happen or not is not up to me anyway. I probably just pretend it will not happen.

So I started with the thought of living a better new life. As my learning goes on, I start to think about my career as a doctor, how I should talk to my patients, maybe I can help my daughter in the future when she does not feel good. I was learning days and nights until one day the most frustrating thing happened. I woke up back to my previous world.

I was shocked sitting in my bed looking around but at nothing. I was upset about what I’ve already done, but remained my calmness by thinking “O.K., I already know what I should do, now I just need to do it over again.”. Amazingly, learning everything again does not feel like a step back or a boring repetition. I can notice new details that I didn’t have spare attention to notice before while I was learning for the first time. Although now I need to go to real college to learn and use all different tools, those things are not as bothering as they are to me before.

Programming learning resources for Kids in 21st Century

Years ago, I start teaching my son how to programming. To him, use a computer is a normal thing and he is very happy to learn it. In the Montgomery County Public Schools, all students have a Chromebook and use it to learn math and reading in class.

I share the resource I used in this blog.

  1. Scratch (https://scratch.mit.edu/): A visual programming language for children developed by MIT. My son’s school teaches Scratch in the gifted program. This is a game developed by my son.

  2. Swift Playgrounds (https://www.apple.com/swift/playgrounds/): It is an iPad app that for learning Swift. Swift is a programming language developed by Apple. You can create a mobile app using Swift. This app is very fun.

  3. Grasshopper (https://grasshopper.codes/): It is an iPhone/iPad app teaches learners to write JavaScript. JavaScript is a popular programming language during recent years.

  4. React (https://reactjs.org/): React is a JavaScript library for building the Web application. It is developed by Facebook. It is an advanced programming language, so for now, I only teach my son the basic like write HTML.

Bill Gates learned to code when he was in high school in 1969. In 2012, there was a 12 years old kid developed an app and presented it in the TED (A 12-year-old app developer | Thomas Suarez). Now is 2018, when will you start teaching your kid to code?

Source: Google

The “Googling the Error” section of the “Arc of Life Learning” chapter in Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown’s A New Culture of Learning resonated with me the most this week. Possibly because these days I am Allen and he is me. I was not always this way. When I arrived at Virginia Tech as a graduate student in June 2017, my fellow lab mates suggested I learn the program R as this allows for graphing data in the format my advisor prefers. Apparently Excel graphs are deemed a bit unprofessional in the world I only recently became a part of—who knew? I saw that there was book available to teach all there was to know about R, thus I asked if this was the best way to learn the program. I was a new graduate student eager to learn things the “right way”. In summary I was told “No. Just google anything you need to know.” They were not wrong. Even after taking a class in my department which essentially teaches R in the context of environmental sampling and monitoring—still not wrong. I would absolutely argue that the class was helpful for two of the reasons Robert Talbert lists in “Four things lecture is good for”: modeling thought processes and giving context. However, now that I am beyond the class and actually to the point where I have my own data to work with, it is nearly impossible and time-consuming to search through the course material for the specific file which contained a specific example of how to change the range on the y-axis. I try, I really do—primarily because I want to actually make use of what I learned and the work I put into the semester, but my priority is producing results not holding on to principle.

In the same section of A New Culture of Learning, a passage caused me to reflect on my understanding of what we discussed last week: “by ‘googling’ the error, he was able to tap into—and learn from—large, diverse networks of programming and hobbyists who all faced similar issues.” Networked learning. But the thing is, I often overlook the people in the process that comprise this network. Often, Google is viewed as this omnipotent being that has all the answers. Too many times I’ve seen people cite Google Images (not even going to talk about Wikipedia). In reality, Google is simply a search engine that directs us to questions and answers provided by real people. When I “google the error,” I unfortunately don’t make any attempts to be a part of the conversation. I get my answer and I get out. Really, I should be more grateful to all the people who were helpful enough to take the time to answer questions for people like me and of course, the brave answer-seekers.

Do I want a digital classroom?

Initially when I heard of the digital classroom, I'll admit, I thought ughhhh. Another way we can enable ourselves to quit interacting with each other in person. As a college student I grew increasingly annoyed? or at least frustrated with the idea that everything can be digital and that there is really no reason to sit in a room with someone and talk when you could just do it over (insert video conferencing platform here).

However, I found this week's material exceptionally interesting. The New Learners of the 21st Century Video showed ways that classrooms and teachers are engaging with students through video games. I thought of people I know who had really struggled in the traditional classroom growing up, not because they weren't "smart" but because they felt that the way we approached class through worksheets and route memorization, wasn't interesting or worth investing in. I liked the idea of "leveling up" as one does in games as compared to how we proceed in a steady, unyielding march through K-12 and I can remember instances in school where this would have been very helpful. For example, Math and Science was always my strong suit so I could have gone farther in those topics whereas English and writing was something I always struggled with and am self conscious of still today.

I was interested in the ways the concept of gaming and modern technology could apply to the collegiate classroom. By the times students have gotten to college I hope they are capable of some level of problem solving, which was lauded as one of the great benefits of the gaming classroom but I do think there are a lot of ways in which it would help convey ideas, especially in Civil engineering, where we often don't get a lot of experience with design or construction of our end products before one starts a career. I like the idea of approaching the class room as totally different from a lecture and with a freeform aspect, maybe of projects that allows students to harness whatever medium they choose. I do know from my own experience though that when a power point was an option, most would take it because it was the easiest. I'm struggling with the idea of the collegiate classroom being as energetic as some of the projects and teams I've been apart of and I think a lot of it comes from framing.

When I approached a student design team, it was always because I wanted to be there because I wanted to get involved and I signed up for responsibilities I thought I could handle. In a class, though, sometimes I was there because of the requirement and less because of my intrinsic desire. I think something that could be interesting to play with is the idea that students come with their own project and apply concepts to their project. In my example, it may be that when learning about dynamics, you apply it to analyzing how the car you designed and built throughout the previous year, still found a way to flip over in your final race. I'm appreciating the thought that this class is allowing me and look forward to our next blog.

I never really got to addressing my thoughts on the digital classroom and to be honest. I don't think I care how students take notes. I have noticed that when online lecture recordings  are allowed, a lot less students show up to classes and I would be hesitant about providing recordings to the entire audience and perhaps would give them out on a case by case basis. If students want to be on their phone throughout the class, I don't think its my right to restrict what they can do. I feel like there is a level of providing the resources and things I think will work and seeing if it engages students rather than enforcing an artificial authority that I don't think I have. 
1 2 3