Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

Week 6 Chapter Insights


Learning With Technology: A Constructivist Perspective


Chapter 5

Creating Technology-Supported Learning Communities


Forming communities for exchanging and learning knowledge come in different interconnecting overlapping forms. The first the presented is the discourse community in which knowledge is exchanged face-to-face, through newsletters, magazines, and the media of radio and television. The emphases the community stays in contact through their interests.


A very profound statement the authors, Jonassen, Peck, and Wilson, have made in this chapter is when students own the knowledge, rather than the teacher or the textbook, they become committed to building knowledge, rather than merely receiving and reprocessing it. Knowledge building becomes a social activity not a solitary one of retention and regurgitation. Technology plays a key role in knowledge-building communities by providing a medium for storing organizing, and reformulating the ideas that are contributed by each community member.


As a people we acquire knowledge of the context and customs of where we live and with who we interact. These interactions become a part of identity. The actions are a part of the social fabric of the community, so that learning thinking and knowing are relations among people engaged in the activity. The authors refer to this concept as communities of practice.


Learning communities can consist of classrooms and schools. When a classroom can develop a social organization of people who share knowledge, values and goals then the concept of a learning community has been achieved.


Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environments (CSILES) is a computer program that develops a common information base, typically installed on a local area network. I contains a systematic model of inquiry based upon the scientific method and informed by current research in cognitive psychology. This data can be applied to various subjects, but has an emphases on science based material. The key here is students take advantage of the technology to retain knowledge in a zone absent of a teacher.

Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement


Chapter 7

Cooperative Learning


The authors, Marzano, Pickering, and Pollock, have presented another profound research-based instructional strategy, cooperative learning. They have again given the pros and cons about the techniques. Cooperative learning has become one of the most popular instructional strategies in education. Homogeneous grouping or the mixing of ability levels is the model followed by thousands of American schools today. But as the authors state this does not narrow the gap between the low ability students and middle and high ability students. It was found that homogeneous grouping was better for achievement than no grouping at all. The point of this chapter is to put students into heterogeneous classes.


According to David Johnson and Roger Johnson there are five defining elements of cooperative learning. Positive interdependence where students are given a sense of sink or swim together, Face-to-face promotive interaction when helping each other learn, applauding success and efforts are enhanced, Individual and group accountability when each person has to contribute to the group achieving its goals,, Interpersonal and small group skills which focuses on communication, trust, leadership, decision making and conflict resolution and Group processing which reflects on how well the team is functioning and how to function even better. This information was complied from the Web site (http://www.clcrc.com/index.html#essays) of the Cooperative Learning Center at the University of Minnesota.


Three noteworthy key concepts offered by the authors are intergroup competition, individual competition, and use of individual student tasks, Of these it was found that when organizing students in cooperative learning groups has a powerful effect on learning regardless f whether groups compete with one another.


Three generalizations can be used to guide the use of cooperative learning: I agree with the authors in noting the first idea that organizing groups based on ability levels should be done sparingly. Presently the state wants the gifted and talented students to be grouped together so that they can have differentiated instruction daily. This concept may present different effects on different students. The experience of students of low ability groups are quite different form middle and high-ability group students. The second idea is that cooperative groups should be kept rather small in size. I agree with this finding from watching my own class activities. Smaller is more effective. The third idea is cooperative learning should be applied consistently and systematically, but not overused. Now some real truth is recognized and shared. Students need to practice independently on the skills being taught and be able to practice what they must master on their own.


Teachers are offered a variety of criteria for grouping students in their classroom practice in cooperative learning. The generalizations remind us to group by ability sparingly. Ideal ways to group students is by using the three types of cooperative learning groups: informal, formal, and base groups.


Informal groups are exampled as pair-share and turn-to-your-neighbor which are only momentarily used during the school day. They are used to allow students to clarify themselves with a learned concept.


Formal groups are designed to ensure students have enough time to thoroughly complete an academic assignment. This method of cooperative learning has all the components for cooperative learning. Students receive positive interdependence, group processing, appropriate use of social skills, face-to-face promotive interaction , and individual and group accountability.


Base groups are long term groups that last through a semester or year. I disagree with the opinion of the researchers on this grouping strategy. Keeping students contained in groups minimizes social interaction of the whole class. Competition rises and conflicts occur beyond the norm.


Return To My Home Page

Jim's Page

Email: tjpetke@netzero.com