I saw Jill for a guidance session today, and she truly is clever, staying focused on the positive parts of your work, and then carefully direct you towards what needs to be done. In this essay I'm writing about ICT&Learning, I'm going to use Bloom's taxonomy amongst other things (the 2001 revised one, by Anderson and Krathwohl), and yesterday I made my own PhotoShop version of that chart, as I wanted to have the text in Norwegian. And also because I needed to do something very practical, PhotoShop is therapy for me.
Anyway, as I studied this taxonomy a little closer, it suddenly dawned on me where my own learning problems lies.
I think it's easy to be misled by the visual hierarchy of the chart, 'cause the lines are very fine, and sometimes even blurred, between the levels. And I also get the feeling that it implies that you have to master one level before you're ready for the next one. So what has this to do with my learning problems? (Or should I rather say "challenges"? A much more optimistic and constructive way of expressing it.) It's simple really, I tend to skip the basic level of knowledge! I linger in between, think I understand everything, and then end up having huge problems in explaining why! I know I know, but can't back it up with facts.But if it weren't for these exams and deadlines I wouldn't mind, 'cause I believe this actually is my (and most likely not only mine) way of learning, and I mean even getting the basic knowledge. Have never been any good at cramming, but by playing, assuming, guessing and construct I will eventually also have learned the basic facts. If it works, I must have got something right?
Also found this link today, lots of interesting stuff there... and a nice quote:
"Technological change is not additive, its ecological. A new technology does not change something, it changes everything"
[Neil Postman]
2 comments:
Knowledge is about reflection, and I've had my nose, mind and soul in the very issue for weeks now. Instructors feed us huge bulks of information, and expect us to create new knowledge structures from the verbally and textually transmitted information. BUT that's not how it works - unfortunately - Mitchel Resnick proposes that
"Teachers cannot simply pour information into the heads of learner; rather, learning is an active process in which people construct new understandings of the world around them through active exploration, experimentation, discussion, and reflection. In short: people don't get ideas; they make them."
I don't know how many times I've thought I understood something, but low and behold, when I need the information in a different context I realize I haven't understood it at all!! It's all just a loooong blur of words, sentences and paragraphs without meaning!!
Imagine your PhotoShop skills if you hadn't actively created and re-created photos, pictures, figures or anything else personally. How would you have mastered all its intricate details, obstacles, and possibilities if you hadn't actually put a lot of time and effort into physically mastering it????
Knowledge, in my opinion, is all about learning while actively conducting the activity and socially collaborating with other human beings either in the physical space of other people/students or in a virtual space with peers or indeed strangers who share your interests. Only then are we able to trigger the curiosity and motivation that enable us to open up new doors and new crossroads to new knowledge chambers where new knowledge structures are understood and eventually created :)
Did I get slightly carried away here??
In here, you're always welcome to carry away as you please. For you my room is as limitless as the net itself.
Appreciated, they are. Comments.
Post a Comment