Reflections: Session Four (E-learning Week).

Following on from my comment on Dr Tan’s blog, I feel very fulfilled after completing the readings and tasks, but I wonder if it is possible to split the tasks into separate weeks.

In my opinion, knowledge is infinite, so no matter how much one is able to absorb and learn (n, if the amount can be quantified in algebraic terms), there will always be a bit more information to absorb and learn – in other words, n + 1.

For the purposes of classroom lessons, however, time is finite – there are only two hours in a teaching period, and 168 hours in a week. This means that teaching and learning time must be used as effectively as possible to ensure learners learn at an optimal capacity.

Nevertheless, ‘optimal’ is always a grey area because of its inherent subjectivity; one person’s bread may well be another person’s poison, so what may be just the right amount of assignments for one person may be too little for another.

Then again, this could also mean that if a student finds the workload too ‘slack’, s/he could very well engage on independent research or learning in order to add-on to what s/he already has learnt.

Thus, Dr Tan could consider either working on my suggestion or aggregating the feedback he has received and will receive from various students in terms of the e-learning workload so as to find the right balance for everyone.

In any case, it’s a win/win situation for all 🙂

To sum up my reflections for this week, I think I better understand the need for this portion of the module: when I was younger, way back when dinosaurs roamed the earth (LOL), my secondary school was part of the pilot programme to test out IT infrastructure in Singapore schools.

Back then, the only form of Cyberwellness we had came in the guise of “DON’T TOUCH THE DAMN THING, THE DAMN THING CAN’T WORK. OKAY?” – when our teacher tried to gently explain to us that he had kindly locked our keyboards and mice using a centralised system while he went through the finer points of ourl very boring lesson package, so that we wouldn’t surf the net and be led astray by unsavoury influences.

Because it was the year 1996, and the Internet was a new and exciting thing that no one really knew much about. Thankfully, though, we weren’t led astray but nevertheless, I think there could’ve been a better way to guide us along our learning journey.

Hence, I do agree that it is necessary for teachers to be educated on the issues that arise from ICT-mediated lessons, either face-to-face or online, along with the strategies to cope with said issues if they do occur.

With that, here’s looking to tomorrow’s class, where we share with everyone why Google Reader rocks!

Reflections: Session Three.

For this week’s reflection, I think I’ll depart slightly from the KWLQ format, as it might be a tad unwieldy to use said format in view of the questions we have to address.

At the same time, it’s also good to ‘shake things up’ a little once in a while: when you get into a routine, things become quite predictable, so I want to do something different – and perhaps, not-so-predictable – this week.

The Cool Tools Trap
Firstly, as Dr Tan himself mentioned, we should avoid “fall[ing] into the cool tools trap”. It’s all very fine and well to be using Web 2.0 tools to deliver lessons. However, there are some caveats to this, and this is my take on it:

  1. Don’t do it for the sake of doing it. If one is just going to be using Web 2.0 tools because one’s ‘HOD said so’, then why bother? I think we as teachers must be fully aware of the functions and objectives of any teaching tool before we use it, so here, it is of the imperative that we find the meaning in the tool we use before using it.
  2. Don’t do it blindly. Action must meet the need, so the tool we use must have some congruency to the topic or lesson we are going to teach. Bubbl.us is definitely very useful if you’re going to be teaching *cough cough* Educational Psychology, and you are going to draw extensive mind-maps for your students, but it may not be very useful in a grammar lesson, unless the link or connection can be drawn between creating mind-maps and grammar rules. I don’t doubt it can be done, but the teacher must rigorously test her/his idea before implementing it.
  3. Don’t do it, period. If the traditional pen-and-paper method works best, then I’d say: go for it. One doesn’t lose anything if one is able to be doubly effective in her/his lessons using simple tools. On the other hand, one could stand to lose valuable teaching time – and the attention and respect of the students, even – if one uses tools just because they’re cool.

Blog It!
This is a very fun section in which I answer Dr Tan’s questions, as posed on his Powerpoint slides:

  1. Have you come across any of these approaches as students?
    Of course! However, perhaps my definition of “student” in this case may veer slightly from the norm: I was exposed to the concept of Problem-Based Learning as an Officer Cadet while serving my National Service. Feedback from previous batches of Logistics Officers was that they had not been adequately trained/prepared to deal with problems ‘on the ground’. Hence, part of our course required us to find solutions to logistical problems that our instructors posed, based on actual events that took place in the Singapore Armed Forces.
  2. What is the relationship of these approaches?
    One thing that links these approaches together has to be the amount of emphasis placed on collaborative work. Regardless of whether it is through group discussions, presentations/critiques or online forums, the scope for interaction among students is very wide. This is important, as it not only encourages the distribution of knowledge, but it also flexible in that it builds upon knowledge bases that each pupil already has, so each pupil has the own autonomy to decide how far s/he may want to expand this knowledge base that s/he possesses.
  3. What roles do the various ICT tools/interactive resources play in these approaches?
    One role I see the various ICT tools/interactive resources playing is to facilitate the collaboration between students, thereby fulfilling one of the dimensions of engaged learning.

Shameless plugs

As part of the Festival Activities for the OCBC Singapore Theatre Festival 2008, I’ll be speaking at this panel on Saturday:

LIFE: To Build A **** Society: Uncharted Territories, Untested Waters.
ART: Apocalypse: LIVE!
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008.
Time: 5.30pm – 7.00pm.
Venue: Drama Centre, Level 3, Function Room 3.
FREE ADMISSION, on a first-come-first-seated basis.

In the future, an environmentally-conscious Singapore will be a multiparty democracy, supported by a free press and a vibrant civil society. In a worldwide poll, Singaporeans are reported as the happiest people in Asia. We can dream, can’t we? We speak to some young people about their wishlist for Singapore’s future.

Panelists:
Laremy Lee – Playwright, Own Time Own Target,
Choo Zheng Xi – Editor, The Online Citizen,
Bernise Ang – Founder, SYINC – a network of Youth in Singapore for social change,
Seelan Pillay – Artist and Social Activist.

Moderator: Ken Kwek – Playwright, Apocalypse: LIVE!

Do come for it if you can. We’ve been working very hard to get ready for it, as evidenced by this exchange of text messages between Ken and myself:

<Laremy Lee> …Anyway do I have to prepare anything for the panel?

<Ken Kwek> Just come naked if possible.

<Laremy Lee> Ok.

<Ken Kwek> But seriously, it would be worth thinking about the following: what do you want to see in Singapore’s future (free press, less malls, etc.). Why do you want these things i.e. why are they important. And finally, how do we achieve them. There you go. That’s the brief.

<Laremy Lee> Can I just go naked? I think my beautiful body will paint a thousand words.

<Ken Kwek> Ok. I’ll let the rest know to come naked as well.

The rest of the conversation is censored but please be assured that whatever we were talking about was said with tongues very firmly in cheeks.

Last but not least, please go get tickets to Apocalypse: LIVE! if you haven’t done so already. It’s a really funny, well-written and thought-provoking piece with killer lines, and a great director and cast to boot. More details here.

OTOT opens tonight, so wish us luck! If you didn’t manage to get tickets, there’s a waitlist for the restaging, so just let me know if you wanna be on it.