Reflection of ‘Computer as Mindtools for Engaging Learners in Critical Thinking’

The more and more integration of Technology in classroom setting and learning affects the more and more increasing responsibility towards teachers and Pedagogy. Today’s teachers need to use technology as a tool to help student read, write, apply critical thinking, synthesize information and put together in a structured way. They have to think about that how technology can be applied to the learning process. Pupils should use computer as a facilitate tool to enhance the effects of learning knowledge and cultivate their mind in thoughtful way.
Jonassen, chad Carr and Hsiu-Ping Yueh describes Mindtools as a ‘way of using a computer application program to engage learners in constructive, higher order, critical thinking, about the subjects they are studying.’ The learner enters an intellectual partnership with the computer and begins to access and interpret information and organize personal knowledge in new ways. Mindtools are computer based tools and learning environments which serve as extensions of the mind. For example, databases, spreadsheets, semantic network (concept map), computer conferencing, Hypermedia construction. As I believe in constructivism, it is the Mindtools that helps knowledge construction, in which learner organize and represent what they know and foster creativity and higher order thinking skill through collaboration. Constructivist learning environment provide a question, problem or project learner attempts to solve. In the perspective of Cognitive process, by using computer as Mindtools, learner becomes more self reliant thinker and problem solver and help learner transcend mental limitations. Actually learner provide intelligence not computer and learner compel to engage in deep thinking. In pedagogy, the semantic organization tool can be used to represent knowledge in different subjects which engages learner in critical thinking and creative thinking about subject.
Therefore, Mindtool represent all effective and efficient way of integrating computer in a school setting. They can be used across the school curricula to engage students in thinking deeply about the subject they are studying and they can act as an intellectual partner that facilitates knowledge construction and reflection by learners. Mindtool softwares are readily available and affordable and they can provide variety of scaffold.
According to “Gardner, individuals are creative in specific domain”. He suggested that providing students with ways to be creative allows them to find and solve problems and communicate ideas in various forms’. Therefore, by providing different Mindtools to the students, teachers let them enhance their creativity through hand eye coordination, mental rotation, mental mapping, spatial visualization.

References

Jonassen, D., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking: Tecktrends, 43(2), 24-32.

Jonassen, D. (2000). Computer as Mindtools for School: Engaging Critical Thinking.2nd edition.(Upper Saddle River, NJ. Prentice Hall) www.chss.iup.edu/jrmcdono/ED455-methods/mindtools.htm.

Jonassen, D. (2000). Mindtools for Engaging Critical Thinking in Classroom. www.coe.missouri.edu/~jonassen/courses/mindtools/mindtools/html.

Reflection of the article ‘A word of Learning’

Seymour Papert mentioned explicitly about the principles of learning. Usually Schools are encouraged to follow certain rules. Teachers need to focus on how students are able to solve the problems or to find out the correct answer, not to focus on rule or the way. Child can think about how they can solve problem individually. Student can able to solve a problem, when they spend little time to think about that. So, it is the thinking that fosters learning.
Papert suggested that school have to think more carefully about standard approaches to special education. Teacher has to think more profoundly about those disabilities and find the way to solve them. Motivation always does not work. Constructivism is built on the assumption that child will do best by finding for themselves the specific knowledge they need.
Everybody might have some learning difficulty in some area like author’s difficulty to remember the name of the flower or flower dyslexia. Learning explodes when one stay with it. The more connection means the more depth in that area. The new connection supports one another more effectively and those are long lasting and go in many direction. In my view, cultivation of knowledge is the key to someone’s success. The more someone cultivate something, the more he or she gains knowledge. Therefore, even though knowledge passes through a pipeline from teacher to student, interconnectivity of knowledge play a vital role in learning.

References:

Papert, S. (1993), The Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. New York, NY: Basic Books

Reflection of the article “Now more than ever: Will High-Tech Kids Still Think Deeply?”

The authors consider the advantages and disadvantages of information technology on children. Before flooding school with technology, critical thinking skills should be used to consider how technology will be affecting the way people think and the modes people need for learning. Now with modern technology, two dimensional quality of linear thinking is being replaced by multidimensional thinking. If we use technological tools well, we will be enhancing our modes of thinking and our capacity for critical thinking. So, it is necessary to developing a new literacy that will incorporate all the types of literacy, circular, linear and multidimensional. Today’s children are not learning with books. It could be disastrous for higher education and research. In my view, as a teacher, I should include oral tradition through plenty of physical activity, singing, making things with hands, listening to and reading literature, drawing pictures with crayons and paints, sending and receiving letters and pretending, as part of our literacy program. Otherwise, they will never develop reading and writing skills. I think, in accordance with traditional literacy, digital literacy has to be developed in children. It is a special kind of mindset, a special kind of thinking. It also involves retrieving data from the web, which requires the user’s knowledge. In the past, we have used manipulative to visually represent mathematical ideas. The possibilities provided by new technologies to represent ideas continue to expand; some include graphing calculators, spreadsheets and interactive geometry programs. In this way, today’s children will develop a new literacy which incorporate all types of literacy, circular, linear and multidimensional.

References

Tarlow, Mary-Claire & Spangler, Katherine L. (Nov 2001). Now more than ever: Will High-Tech Kids still thinks deeply? The Education Digest, PA Research II Periodicals. 67(3), 23-27
Pearson Greg and Yong Thomas (2002). Technically speaking: Why all American need to know more about Technology. Washington, D.C. National Academy Press.

Reflection on the article ‘An Evaluator Looks at Cultural Diversity’

The author of this article, Thomas C. Reeves considers cultural diversity as a serious issue in the evaluation of Instructional programs and products in the national and international level. Cultural sensitivity is the essential elements in the evaluation of education and training. He also suggests strategies for culturally sensitive evaluation and gives examples of cultural sensitivity and cultural bias and provides a rating scale for multicultural sensitivity in instructional products. In my view, cultural sensitivity is a delicate issue. Therefore, it is necessary to identify less obvious sources of cultural bias. Evaluators need to be familiar with different cultural knowledge, cultural characteristics, history, values, belief systems and behaviors of the members of ethnic group. Evaluator need to be able to adopt to cultural differences and to adopt approaches that lend themselves to cultural sensitivity. Evaluators should involve groups of evaluation that are important in policy and programming, particularly when evaluating issues of social responsibility. I think that through intensive study focusing on cultural sensitivity, Evaluator can overcome the shortcomings of instructional programs and products. As a result, the products could be acceptable to everybody irrespective of color, religion, race gender and disable through out the world.
According to Author, the ultimate goal should not design culturally neutral instructional materials, but should create learning environments that are enriched by the unique values that are inherent in different cultures. New millennium’ new challenge to the Evaluator is a new concept of ‘emancipatory evaluation’. Last of all, I think that Evaluators working in a different country or in a different cultural setting will find that their first important task is to learn about their culture and its implications for the program evaluation.

References:
Reeves, T. C. (1997, March-April). Educational Technology. An Evaluator Looks of Cultural Diversity, p. 27-31
EDD Publication, Canada. (2000, March). Evaluation Forum Newsletter.