Sunday, December 6, 2009
BP 8 Researching 2.0 Tools
BP9 2009122 Flickr Lesson Plan
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
BP 6 2009121 Anti Teaching
CMS
Course Management Systems have been a part of formal education from the first time a teacher prepared to teach. The word curriculum comes from the Latin meaning to run a course (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curriculum). As a teacher prepares to teach he/she has a set of learning objectives in mind that relate to the chosen topic. These objectives may or may not be clearly defined. In fact, they may be tacit at first. The teacher may only have a sense that something needs to be learned and therefore needs to be taught. The belief is that whatever that learning is, it cannot be left to the whims of hit or miss experience. Perhaps the first CMS was the campfire where the storyteller told the story to the children who learned to recite the story and take the lesson of the story to heart and mind. Another example of early CMS is the one room school house.
(http://www.ronsaari.com/stockImages/schoolhouses/oneRoomSchoolhouseInteriorClintonNJ.php)
The formalization of curricula requires a place or platform to support the learning. The teacher has an intention, intentional curriculum. It defines what the teacher imagines will happen when the curriculum is introduced to the student. Applied curriculum defines what actually takes place during the learning time. The actualized curriculum is what the student actually learns and takes away from the curriculum managed system. The virtual CMS platforms serve the same purpose. They are designed to support the intentional curriculum, the applied curriculum, and the actualized curriculum.
PLE
Personal Learning Environments are more ancient then curriculum management systems. The date back to the first moment human beings reflected upon their position in the world. First Person learning environments had to do with survival. The evolution of the human person moved from survival skills to symbolic language. The meaning of meaning and the reflection of self took root in the Neocortex.
Human Persons reflected upon the unseen as well as the seen. Reality was reshaped again and again. Yet, humans continue to need a personal learning environment in order to survive and thrive. The personal learning environment for Buddha was the middle path and a seat under the Bodhi Tree. The personal learning environment for Shakespeare was the Globe Theater and his writing desk. The personal learning environment for Sister Theresa was the Poor of India and a private place to pray. There is fluency to PLE’s. Humans tend to flow to and from private space to social space. An effective curriculum management system will support that flow.
No matter what the CMS-PLE relationship, it will only be deemed effective if it enhances the life on the Human Persons participating in the learning experience. Perhaps the equation should be
CMS-PLE-RLE:
Curriculum Management System-Personal Learning Environment – Real Life Experience.
2.0
2.0 applications is an advancement allowing the student to participate in the learning experience. Ironically it is a way to get back to a time when the learning distance between teacher and student was closer than it is today. The intimacy of storyteller to audience was critical for any learning to take place. Buddha’s students walked by his side. Jesus’ disciples did the same. Socrates perfected this form of CMS and paid for it with his life. The current teacher – learning model actually predates the industrial age and has its roots in the feudal system. The privileged class taught the privileged class. The democratization of education was born in the early stages of the industrial age to train the future workforce. The blossoming of colleges in America was to educate the merchant class along with the upper class. The lower class was still not in the education picture. In the early 1800’s many merchant’s sons attended private faith based colleges studying to become pastors. Most of them returned to tend their father’s business. The model of learning was still based upon the feudal system of lecture. Teachers became professors, the new high priests of knowledge. Professor priests evolved into professor bishops and professor cardinals as they moved from B.A.’s to M.A.’s to PhD’s. The ritual of tenure was created to protect their positions as the holy banks of knowledge. A priest or a teacher has no purpose if there is no parishioner in need of saving. In the case of the priest it is saving the soul. In the case of the student, the professor is saving the student from a life on ignorance and poverty. One might argue that the history of education is coming full circle. Once there were 2.0 as storyteller and story listener participated in the learning moment. It is where morals were first discussed and reflected on. The storyteller was changed as much as the story listener. No one stood outside the story. Today students are facilitators of learning before they have a “Teacher Experience.” Students who are home schooled test as high as students who attend brick & mortar schools. They are accepted at the best colleges. They are well adjusted. They have excellent social skills. They have computers and high speed internet connections. 2. 0 works because it relates to the most ancient of human dynamics, the need to participate with fellow human persons. Learning is like breathing. It is not something anyone can choose not to do. It is how it is done that matters. 2.0, CMS, PLE are not new. The technology is new. The ability to enhance the way human persons can move from information gathering to gaining knowledge to becoming innovative / creative is new. How we learn is as old as human kind.
