As a lead, the first article of "eLearning & Digital Pedagogy" was a good review of things that I knew and a great reminder on how teaching adults (our colleagues) is different and needs to be approached in a different fashion then how we are teaching our students in our regular classes. It was also really nice to see the information reviewed in a graph as a visual learner.
As a Teacher, I found the second article "Education 3.0 and the Pedagogy (Andragogy, Heutagogy) of Mobile Learning" was addressing the future direction that we are at and heading in the education world even though some of our colleagues are dragging their feet along the way.
I know as a teacher that I am trying to create an education 3.0 environment for my students to have an opportunity to learn from me, each other and constantly teach me things. I have found with my bi weekly research pages students have already taught me about new cultural exemplars in the art world, and continue to teach me on a consistent basis.
As far as mobile learning in all of its categories of pedagogy, andragogoy and heutagogoy,; as educators we do not have a choice in mobile learning. We can fight it all we want, but we will not get anywhere fighting mobile learning; this is how our students are learning now, we have to accept this as a reality. There is a quote I got from a speaker at a recent conference that rang with me in this situation "Who's future are we teaching to, ours or theirs?"
We have to be conscious as educators of the changes in learning which these articles are referring to be effective in the classroom, otherwise we risk being an ineffective educator of a class that students are not mentally present in.
Good perspective re: the kids and their future- NOT OURS- being addressed in the classroom. I think that as a lead it as an important point for you to see your colleagues that choose not to address media lit./ digital literacy. So, how do we bring these teachers along for the ride of better utilizing tech. in their classrooms.
Sharing your independent research with your art journals perhaps and how it consistently challenges you to be a better art teacher via tech.might be a useful discussion with your VPACT crew. Perhaps they also can identify what needs to be done to better their tech. skills and curriculum?
Thanks for the response.
As I read through the first article, "eLearning & Digital Pedagogy," I found myself read through the lens of teacher leader. I found myself constantly saying "yes, that is what I am trying to accomplish." As a lead I am trying to push other teachers out of the teacher-led instruction model. The more our teachers in Sonoma Valley expand the interactions in the classroom, the more engaged the students become with the content.
I struggled with many of the ideas discussed in the second article, "Education 3.0 and the Pedagogy (Andragogy, Heutagogy) of Mobile Learning." I started off the article very engaged in the content. I like the idea of education 3.0. I agree with the slide comparing education 1.0 to education 2.0 and education 3.0. That slide resonated with me significantly. I feel like that slide really breaks down the disparity between the real world and education in the U.S.
However, the more I read the article the more I found myself questioning the ethos, pathos, and logos of the article. I found myself focusing in on the grammatical mistakes and redundancy in the article. I found myself significantly disagreeing with the article, so much so that I did not want to finish reading it.
One idea that stood out to me was the discrepency of getting rid of pedagogy and then saying later that direct instruction is need in some classes. Instead of getting rid of pedagogy I think the definition of pedagogy needs to change and deepen. The definition needs to encompass all of the different styles of teaching that are described in the articles. Good pedagogy means that teachers know when instructivism is needed, when peer collaboration is best, and when connectivism will enhance learning greatly. The teacher then needs to seamlessly move between those styles. The second thing I disagree with is this notion of adult learners being self-directed in the learning process. I would greatly disagree with that. The majority of adult learners are also extrinsically motivated. Adults learn something new because there is a need to learn that new thing. Most of the time it is financial. Adults learn something new to save money or make more money. My concern with heutagogy is this notion that students will be self-starters to learn things. This may be true at the early elementary level when students want to learn how to read and write in order to communicate but eventually takes a back seat to social interactions.
I do think it would be interesting to read a case study/see a school that uses heutagogy as their method of learning. Part of me wonders if adults would have more of a thirst for knowledge if they got choice when they were younger.
I seemed to go back and forth between reading as a lead and reading as a learner when reading the first article. I found myself agreeing with much of what the author said when I approached it my a lead standpoint. However, when I switched into learner mode, I often thought that I would end up completely side-tracked if given the opportunity to follow the self-directed learning approach entirely. I couldn't help but think of the occasions when I open my computer to search for something and end up at a completely different thing all together. Now, it's possible that this is the point of heutagogy, or at least one of it's blessings and possible curses, but from the learner standpoint, that would leave me frustrated. I don't want to end up so far off base that I miss the focus of the learning entirely. To sum it up, while I like the heutagogy approach and believe that it would work very well for adults, I do think that there needs to be some focus or guidelines to keep the learning on track.
I definitely read the second article from the teacher standpoint and came to a similar conclusion as I did after reading the first article. While I like the idea of the open learning atmosphere and "teaching" occurring between all parties involved, I think that there are some basic fundamentals that society has identified as necessary to know and students must learn. I want students to see the world as their classroom as much as the next teacher, but I also believe that we have a responsibility to teach these students basic skills to function in society. I would also go so far as saying that they cannot really engage in the "world as a classroom" scenario until they have developed basic skills - reading, writing, basic math and science, etc. This isn't to say that elementary school children cannot somehow embrace this theory, it's more that we cannot only embrace this theory. I think it has to be weaved into an education framework that includes learning the basics.
I find the idea of heutagogy to be what we ultimately strive for, and the chart that is found in both articles does a great job of breaking it down and explaining it. As a teacher and a learner, it appeals to me.
Combining my perspective as a teacher and a lead, I find the distinction between pedagogy and andragogy to be unnecessary. Maybe my problem with it is that when we lead teachers in common core, eld, or any other topic, they are required to be there just like our students.
Adults are internally motivated and self-directed - not when they are at required ccss meetings, at least not any more than the students in my classroom.
Adults bring life experiences and knowledge to learning experiences - so do kids.
Adults are goal oriented - aren't grades a goal?
Adults are relevancy oriented - try teaching something relevant vs not relevant to your students; it is the same outcome as doing it to adults
Adults are practical - debateable
Adult learners like to be respected - and kids don't?
I think whether you are teaching adults or children, there are students who want to be told every move they are supposed to make, and there are students who thrive with autonomy. Students who learn because they are forced to, and students who learn because they want to. Maybe it's the NGSS in me, but the more I read from these articles, the more I think we are already moving our students into the "adult learning" categories.
In the learning module entitled "eLearning & Digital Pedagogy," I couldn't help but note the portion on Project Based Learning (PBL), which really correlates with this idea of huetology. While students are engaged in PBL, the ultimate goal is that the learning is self-guided. In other words, that while they are completing the project, that they figure what they need to know or figure out and do so on their own. In the graphic organizer that compares pedagogy, andragogy, versus huetagogy, it states that when it comes to learning resources, "teacher provides some resources but the learner decides the path by negotiating the learning," and I find this compelling. How can I make this particular circumstance happen in my classroom more often? While I do act as one of the teachers for the PBL project called the Porkfolio, I want to look more into how I can get my students to this level of learning in my own classroom, and especially so when it comes to their research papers.
The idea of education 3.0 is also something that I think about quite often especially now that I will (hopefully) have Chromebooks in my classroom full time next year. How am I going to my curriculum, which fortunately already has elements of tech, and transform it keeping Education 3.0 in mind? In the blog called "User Educated Education: Education 3.0 and the Pedagogy (Adragogy, Heutagogy) of Mobile Learning," it paints a beautiful picture about how meaning is ascertained when it comes to Education 3.0. It states, "Meaning is socially constructed and contextually reinvented." Focusing on the part that says "contextually reinvented," how do I take that idea and bring it into fruition in my class? Something to ponder during our PD days over the summer.
The e-Learning & Digital Pedagogy articles were certainly thought provoking. Both Fels and Gerstein claim that mobile learning is moving from the teacher-centered instruction to learning from “everyone, everywhere”. (Gerstein) Pedagogy as the art of teaching is shifting toward Adult Learning Theories – Andragogy and Heutagogy – the idea of “the management of self-managed learners” where “learning is not necessarily based on need but on the identification of the potential to learn in novel situations”. There is a shift from the “teacher determining what, how and when anything is learned” to where the “teacher provides some resources but the learner decides the path by negotiating the learning” (Gerstein) I was doubtful about the reliability of this theory for high school students. To fully understand these articles I had to “manage my own learning” (Gerstein) and to fully “realize the potential to learn” (Gerstein) in this very novel situation. I was deciding my path as a teacher by negotiating my learning.
These articles were difficult to read initially because the theory presented extreme changes to my current teaching methods. Suggesting that “parents view schools as daycare” instead of “a place to learn” was insulting and humiliating. I wondered about how students would guide their learning if it is to be in a “discovery” mode with the numerous apps and information available on the web. How do they navigate their way through a process of learning? How hands off des Gerstein expect teacher to be? What are the students expected to learn from outsiders?
I wondered if this kind of learning be a beyond activity? I teach advanced drama according to the Andragogy principle, and it is proving to be very difficult. The students do not know enough to be able to guide their own learning, even with the tools they been given. I’m disappointed. These articles seem irrational, naive and need more research. Which teachers did Dr. Gerstein interview for her study? Anyone?!!
I am concerned about the students who are afraid to write for fear of being wrong? Is this method only for the top students? How do we scaffold this type of learning so that everyone can participate? Does Andragogy assume the same ideology of SVUSD school district goals that all students should be college and career ready at the end of their high school education, irrespective of student ability? Which “gogy” or type of learning works for students who are unmotivated?
But then I read the articles again, and again and I can see how the whole system of education is being reimagined. It is daunting to read the tables in these articles, and yet, I feel like we are already using much of the Edu 3.0 model of education already.
The Teacher as Learner:
The learning curve for me as a teacher is to study the range of teaching tools that can heighten the learning in the classroom, and engage the student. I need to “delete” the lecture/dictated style of teaching and replace it with Social Constructivism, and Projected Based Learning as the focus of the classroom.
To begin using technology as a teaching strategy, I need to examine my current non-technical teaching strategies, and start to replace them with interactive teaching apps. One example is using the interactive app, Kahoot, where students design their own learning game. Instead of using a pop quiz at the beginning of class, I can use Kahoot. I will use Google classroom, where student can submit their assignments as soon as they have completed them, and I just signed up for Schoology! With the introduction of Chrome Books for each student in the classroom in the 2016-2017 school year, mobile and e-learning is inevitable and I have to adapt to e-Learning.
Implementing the Social Constructivist structure, where according to Gerstein teaching moves from pedagogy to heutagogy or self-directed learning, is an essential part of this shift to mobile learning for me. Socratic Inquiries, pair-share, and student led discussions replace teacher driven instruction and shift the direction of teaching to “student to student, student to teacher, teacher to student, and people-technology-people”. (Gerstein) However, students need basic information on the topic, frontloading information, before they can develop or construct a deeper understanding of the topic through discussion, so that powerful learning can take place through Social Constructivism activities.
According to the article “15 Tools for Better Project-Based Learning”, students still brainstorm, plan, collaborate, and publish, when using Facebook, Twitter, DigiSocial, Blogs, Edmodo, Instagram... The students are very familiar with social media and are proficient in this area of technology. This is where the students can teach the teacher, and dr
Nancy Case Rico