Discoveries in e-Learning

Some reflections on Selber's Functional Literacy chapter....First of all, I have to admit that I'm having a hard time understanding what Selber is trying to say. (Frankly, Vance, I was very happy to see your summary of the chapter; it helped a lot.) My vocabulary does not seem to be advanced enough. I also think that my limited background knowledge on the subject matter of the book is not helping either. Nevertheless, I will try to make sense of what I read and react to certain passages that caught my attention for one reason or another.

I certainly agree with Selber that students need to be "taught heuristics" to help them solve problems regarding technology on their own.

As for the computer as tool metaphor -- I hadn't really thought of the computer in any other way until reading this book. I certainly hadn't considered the "political dimensions" of computer use. I was a bit taken aback by the quote on p. 39 - " If technology is indifferent to its own ends, and if public policy encourages the marketplace to determine those ends, then it follows that technical experts and other elites will continue to control the shape of technology and to benefit from the effects of the tool metaphor." I feel like I've been living under a rock... I don't know what to think of this idea...yet.

I have no problem with Selber's definition of a functionally literate student. These qualities seem to be essential.

I had heard of constructivism before but not constructionism, and after looking at several websites about both 'isms', I'm having some difficulty distinguishing between the two.

My understanding of constructivism is that each individual constructs his or her own meaning when encountering new information and that the meaning constructed is based on that individual's prior experiences. For example, I am in the process of constructing my own meaning for the idea of multiliteracy, which is strongly influenced by my existing construct of literacy as 'print literacy.' I think that through my experience in this course, however, my construct of multiliteracy will evolve and continue to evolve as I am faced with more and more ideas and information about the topic.

Although others in our course have made the distinction that constructivism is what goes on inside the individual and constructionism is what happens when collaboration occurs between individuals, one website I read (http://www.edb.utexas.edu/csc/student/Dhsiao/theories.html#construct) stated that "when people work collaboratively in an authentic activity, they bring their own framework and perspectives to the activity" and "they can see a problem from different perspectives and are able to negotiate and generate meanings and solutions through shared understanding." This would suggest that our quest for meaning does not take place in isolation.

As for constructionism, Roland Hubscher explains that it is "more of an educational method which is based on the constructivist learning theory." (http: www.cc.gatech.edu/edutech/LBD/constructivism.html)

Like most students in our class who viewed Robin Good's presentation, I had been unaware of the existence of what he called the "new breed" of web conferencing tools. They look very interesting, and I would like to try some of these tools out. (Unfortunately, I can't join the group that plans to try Go To Meeting out this Friday.)

In thinking about the connection between multiliteracies and collaboration, it is clear that the teacher must have a certain level of multiliteracy to even consider using one of the collaboration tools mentioned in Good's presentation. That multiliteracy includes (at a minimum) sufficient knowledge of the available collaboration tools, the ability to choose the collaboration tool that best suits the goal of the activity (including consideration of platform compatibility and the internet connection speed of the computers used by group members), the ability to use that collaboration tool easily and effectively themselves, and the ability to help their students reach the level of multiliteracy necessary to access and use the tool to carry out the activity. This is no small challenge.

Viewing Good's presentation, brought to mind an experience that Lilia and I had with a web conferencing tool - NetMeeting - during a previous TESOL certificate course. I found out just how low my level of multiliteracy was. We were both very excited about trying this synchronous tool out and as it was already available on our computers we thought this would be very easy to do. It was anything but. We could not successfully set up a meeting. There were very few instructions about how to do it, and what instructions were available did not seem to work. We tried a variety of ways to "telephone" one another to set the meeting up, but kept getting messages about directories that didn't exist or didn't include the people we were trying to contact. Instead of giving up though, both Lilia and I were determined to make it work. Finally, we contacted a classmate of ours, who told us the secret of using IP addresses instead of email addresses to "call" people to a meeting. Of course, I had to learn what an IP address was and how to find my IP address. And wonder of wonders, Lilia and I were able to "meet" synchronously through NetMeeting. What a thrill it was when we made it work!!!!! But the experience got me thinking....would I want to use a tool (I learned shortly after this experience that Microsoft was phasing out NetMeeting) that could potentially cause so much turmoil and chaos for my students that they might give up and miss out on the benefit of the collaboration altogether? (Reflecting back on that experience, though, it seems that I improved my multiliteracy quite a bit through that trial and error process...and I learned a lot about taking risks while exploring technology from Lilia.)

I've been teaching an academic bridge course this semester that gives me the opportunity to attend a university psychology class with my international students. This week we've been learning about developmental psychology, including the ideas of assimilation and accommodation. In thinking about why I've been struggling so hard with the concept of multiliteracies, it dawned on me that I'm trying to assimilate this new information about multiliteracies into an old schema - traditional print literacy - and it's not working. It appears that I'm going to have to create a new schema to accommodate this new information, but it's going to take a while to develop one.

I feel like I've walked into a strange new world... I thought I was getting a handle on e-learning, but after listening to Stephen Downes' presentation, "Reusable Media, Social Software and Openness in Education," I realize how far I still have to go. What did he mean when he said that "e-learning is like electricity, not Legos", that it is something that flows and changes? What did he mean when he said that CMSs are killing learning? Or when he said that the open model should be favored because "new media is like a vocabulary?" Or that we need to have emergence - the wisdom of crowds? How does all of this relate to multiliteracy and teaching ESL/EFL online?

Even though I've just created a blog, I'm still not exactly sure what it is. It seems to be some sort of public online journal. I hope that when I look back on this post at some not-too-distant point in the future, I will be thrilled about how far I've come in understanding what a blog is. Until then....