Blogpost 4 - Case-Based Learning Methods, Cognitive Flexibility Theory, and Learning Objects

1. Similarities or differences between the theories/models? Do they share common foundations or principles?

The two similarities in the Case-Based learning unit is the focus on learning in context (obviously) and learning by example or from other people's situations.  Both of the learning theories place a strong emphasis on learning in context based on the experiences of other people.  Students are working through various cases or different interpretations of content to learn, explore, find solutions, debate, discuss, etc.  Likewise, many learning objects can also place an emphasis on learning in context.

The Case-Based Methods and Cognitive Flexibility Theory share many common principles and foundations.  Obviously, they are both centered around cases (examples of stories or situated learning plots) and students learning in context.  Both of these learning theories can be focused to produce multiple outcomes regarding the case or cases or utilize multiple cases as well.  With multiple outcomes, lesson learned, or conclusions, students then learn from each other as they are able to discuss, debate, compare, and analyze the cases and the outcomes.  However, both Case-Based modules can also be created to direct students to a certain conclusion and away from open ended options thus really eliminating the discussion piece but still emphasizing learning in context.  Likewise, both of these learning theories if adapted for online learning would require extensive set up and very complex learning units to make sure that learning is constructed and connected and knowledge is used, adapted, and manipulated.

To me, Learning Objects is the odd man out of these three models.  However, Case-Based Units and CFT units could be learning objects upon design and completion.  Many learning objects have been created that are case-based where the emphasis is placed on learning in context.  

2. Initial reactions to learning theories/models? Barriers to their use? Benefits to overcoming the barriers?

Initially, I thought CFT and Cased-Based Methods would be difficult to create and adapt for online learning.  The discussion piece of Case-Based Learning and Reasoning is vital and would be hard to authentically recreate online.  Not too mention, creating an effective online learning module would take quite a long time to make sure the learning is connected, grounded, and contextualized.  

Another barrier would be that I do not see many K-12 students succeeding in case-based learning models.  I think this is best served for graduate students or extended learning classes for workplaces or career-based employees.  K-12 students do not have the experience needed to learn from cases that may or may not apply to them.  Learning in context is important, but creating cases surrounding the content that K-12 students are learning about would prove to be challenging.  Likewise, many younger students would have a difficult time comparing different points of view on the same content and drawing on other cases as they apply to future case studies.  While that skill is important, K-12 students have to be taught how to think in that manner, and thus would not be successful in case-based methods until they have mastered that skill.

Obviously, there are many benefits to overcoming these barriers for K-12 students because the skills needed to analyze cases and others' experiences and then learn from it can help students succeed in a 21st century environment.  Drawing on prior knowledge to assess current situations entrenched in context and content would help students to be better prepared to think critically and problem solve.

The greatest barrier to Learning Objects would be on the side of the teacher, as they would have to search through hundreds of thousands of options for students to use.  Teachers would have to decide ahead of time what they want to teach before trying to locate a learning object to use with their students.  However, a lot of great enrichment and remediation learning objects could be made available to students who are struggling or looking for a challenge. In the classroom, remediation and enrichment is key for lots of students.  They are either struggling or they need to pushed.  Learning objects could provide just that opportunity. 

3. Would you attempt to use any of these theories/models with the students you are currently teaching or hope to teach in the future? Why or why not? Could elements of the theories/models be modified so that they would work with your current/future students?

I would not attempt to use CFT, Case-Based Learning, or Case-Based Reasoning in their entirety because of the complexity required on my behalf and on my students’ behalf.  The set up time does not outweigh the results in my opinion, but I simply think that only applies to various grade levels.  My 8th graders do not have the societal understanding or the intellectual development to make some of the connections needed for CFT and Cased-Based activities.  Likewise, I think CFT and Case-Based Learning could potentially be subject-based.  I could easily see how CFT and Case-Based activities could be used in Social Studies and Science classrooms.  I think it would be more difficult to make these learning theories work in Language Arts and Math simply due to the subject matter.

I think the models are similar enough to Document Based Questions that I do think they could be modified effectively to work in a middle school classroom.  The idea behind Document Based Questions is similar to Case-Based examples we have read about during class.  Analyzing documents to determine outcomes or learn about an event.  The skills can be translated and taught to be applied to Case-Based activities. The same goes for the Cognitive Flexibility Theory as well. The skills needed to make connections between various types of articles, situations, and cases can be taught through Document Based Question activities, and then the tenets of CFT and Cased-Based Learning could be slowly integrated in throughout the year.

Learning objects on the other hand could potentially work well in just about any classroom albeit traditional, hybrid, and online. While I understand that Learning Objects could be used in these theories or within any of these theories, I think Learning Objects have the most potentially as stand alone units of instruction for students who are struggling academically or need an extra challenge.  The key is finding sufficient learning objects that fit your curriculum and your objectives.

4. Since we're taking learning theories/models that were not necessarily created with the Web in mind & turning them into Web modules, what Web-based tools/resources could be leveraged to carry out these learning theories/models online? Please spend some time identifying tools and resources for this last point, as this background research should help you complete your projects more efficiently.

I actually took a class in grad school that implemented many tenets of Case-Based Reasoning and Learning using Moodle.  The cases were provided online and then discussion boards were used to discuss the information.  It worked pretty well and I felt that I, along with my classmates, was successful using Moodle for this online learning experience.  Below is a list of some other tools that I think would work well:

TodaysMeet - Could be used for the discussion board piece for either of these learning theories.  This tool could be used synchronously or asynchronously.

Wordpress - Could be used as Moodle was used for my previous grad school class.  This tool could be set up to and store the content as well as using the comment stream to hold discussions.  Students can also upload work and turn in information to their teachers.

Blogpost 3 - Goal Based Scenarios, Anchored Instruction, STAR Legacy, MOST Multimedia

1. Similarities or differences between the theories/models? Do they share common foundations or principles?

In my opinion, the largest similarities between all four theories/models is that the instruction is delivered within the context of the problem or story and they all four use extensive multimedia components.  The idea of learning in context is an important component to learning that a lot of traditional and online classrooms leave out.  If the learning does not seem authentic or meaningful to a student, they are less likely to participate, engage, and retain the information/knowledge.  By focusing a student's mind on a problem, issue, goal, story, etc., a student is less concerned that they are "learning" and are more drive to solve the problem or issue, accomplish a goal, or re-create or re-tell a story.  Likewise, all four theories use extensive multimedia components to help facilitate instruction.  Instead of relying on "old school" approaches to learning, the theories incorporate multimedia activities, which are more likely to engage all types of learners but especially struggling learners.  The multimedia can be a variety of tools such as videos, websites, simulations, discussion boards -- whatever can be used to enhance the instruction within the context.

Another similarity is that the STAR, GBS, and Anchored Instruction could all be implemented in group scenarios.  Students could work together in groups to accomplish a task or solve a problem by developing one or multiple solutions.  The unit could be structured similar to the tenets of cooperative learning, or all students could be tasked with completing the assignment individually and then coming together in the final stages to brainstorm solutions based upon their findings.  The MOST Environment model is tailored to more individualized instruction or one on one scenarios.  Students could share their final products and receive feedback from peers, but the instructional portions of this model are best suited for individual learning.

The biggest difference between all four models is that STAR, GBS, and Anchored Instruction can be used for almost any subject area that a problem can be created or a goal can be set.  However, the MOST Environment model is designed to improve various literacy-based skills.  The readings or multimedia components could be saturated with content from other subject areas to enhance the instruction.

2. Initial reactions to learning theories/models? Barriers to their use? Benefits to overcoming the barriers?

My initial reaction to these theories and models are very similar to the Group-Based Collaborative Instruction and Multimedia models.  All 8 of these models share very similar concepts.  For example, GBS and Guided Design are very similar in that they share the same idea of progressing through a series of steps to solve a problem.   Likewise GBS, Guided Design, STAR, and Anchored Instruction are all models that require problem solving skills and force groups or individuals to solve a problem and generate solutions.  Long story short, the last two units go hand in hand and share many of the same tenets, underlying principles, and outcomes.

Also, I felt that these models would work very well in today's learning environments.  Each of these models could easily align with the Framework for 21st Century Learning as well as the standards and outcomes provided by the new Common Core curriculum.  STAR, GBS, and Anchored Instruction require students to think critically, problem solve, and communicate with peers and experts.  All of the models in this unit are deeply rooted in context thus simulating real world problems where students learn the content through various mediums.  Similarly, Common Core stresses that students should graduate high school ready to succeed in college or contribute successfully to a career of their choice.  The Common Core Standards "are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world" (http://www.corestandards.org/).  All four models could be created into units that incorporate the standards and outcomes associated with Common Core.  In fact, I would go as far to say that these four models will flourish under the Common Core curriculum and the Framework for 21st Century Learning because they naturally include many of the principles of each.

I foresee many time-straining barriers (turn-offs is probably a better term) with these four models because they require a lot of heavy duty set up for the instructor especially if the instructor is going to create many of the of multimedia components from scratch and incorporate context experts to help guide the problem solving processes.  However, if instructors are willing to be in the work at the front end for the STAR, GBS, and Anchored Instruction models, the students take responsibility for their own learning throughout the rest of the unit as they investigate and problem solve.  In the MOST Environment model, instructors have a heavier workload as they have a more individualized instructional unit and they are potentially guiding their students through literacy strategies even after the work they put in at the beginning to create the unit.

3. Would you attempt to use any of these theories/models with the students you are currently teaching or hope to teach in the future? Why or why not? Could elements of the theories/models be modified so that they would work with your current/future students?

I would use these models in the future if I was creating online environment for my students.  I think some aspects of each model could be implemented in the classroom, but I feel that all four all best served in either hybrid learning environments or 100% online environments.  Many projects in my traditional classroom could be set up using some of the tenets from each model.  For example, I could create an Electoral College project where students research the basics of the Electoral College and then begin to assess the effectiveness and fairness of the system.  They could work in groups or individually to determine areas of need in our current voting system.  Then they could work in groups or individually to develop an alternative solution to the our current system or develop fixes that we could implement to improve the Electoral College as a whole.

In my school right now we have an isolated program called Academy of Reading that utilizes many of the same concepts and strategies in the MOST Environment model to help improve reading literacy skills for students who are struggling or have disconnected deficits in their own reading process.  The program utilizes video, games, simulations, online reading prompts to help students improve their reading skills.  As they complete each step, the students then work with the teacher to extend their learning and demonstrate that they have mastered the concept.  While it's not exactly aligned with every tenet of the MOST Environment model, the program shares many of the same attributes.

4. Since we're taking learning theories/models that were not necessarily created with the Web in mind & turning them into Web modules, what Web-based tools/resources could be leveraged to carry out these learning theories/models online? Please spend some time identifying tools and resources for this last point, as this background research should help you complete your projects more efficiently.

Obviously,  if we are spending time creating multimedia components for many of these models we are going to need a place to store them.  There are plenty of online tools that teachers can use to host these component pieces of each model such as Google Drive, YouTube, Vimeo.  A nice compliment to those tools would be Google Hangout if you were to set up one of the first 3 models in an online environment with groups.  Students could meet in a hangout to problem solve and brainstorm.  In addition, if you are creating a unit with GBS, STAR, or Anchored Instruction, you might want to consider some sort of social bookmarking tool like Delicious or Diigo to help students save websites or tools they may use throughout the steps or problem solving process.  For the MOST Environment, I could see how comic strip creaters like ToonDoo or BitStrips to help students create a final product once they work through whatever literacy skills that need to complete and master.  Some of the more obvious storytelling tools would be VoiceThread, StoryBird, and Glogster.

Blogpost 2 - Cooperative Learning, Problem-Based Learning, Situated Cognition and Cognitive Apprenticeships, and Guided Design Process

1. Similarities or differences between the theories/models? Do they share common foundations or principles?
The four models we have studied this week share many similarities and differences, but they are all grounded in the idea of collaboration, group work, and social constructivist ideals.  During my undergraduate work, I took a class that required us to research social constructivism and my findings really resonated with me.  I saw a lot of value in many of the social constructivist principles that could really benefit a lot of students.  All four of these theories have tenets of social constructivism that require collaboration, discussion, creation, etc. among students, small groups, and teachers.  Although not necessarily direct components of Cooperate Learning, all four theories can be based on problem solving and generating possible solutions from research and many other ways to gather information to solve the problem. 

Likewise, all four models value group work and collaboration, which aligns very well with the shift to common core standards. Developing online modules based around these models and standards would pose some challenges when working in group work, collaboration, etc., but the modules are much better off if they are developed with student collaboration in mind.  Also, Guided Design, Situated Cognition, and PBL are better off if the objectives/problem/task are embedded with context to real-life situations.  While Cooperative Learning did not directly mention embedding the content with context, all four of these strategies are greatly enhanced when they utilize meaningful context and make the learning for students more personal and realistic. 

Even with all of those similarities and common principles, there are some differences between the four models.  As stated previously, even though Cooperative Learning would benefit from problem solving ideas and meaningful context, it does not require either to be successful.  In addition, all four models vary regarding the types and amount of feedback, the amount of solutions needed for problems, and the types of problems (ill-structured and well-defined) presented at the beginning.

2. Initial reactions to learning theories/models? Barriers to their use? Benefits to overcoming the barriers?

After I read through all of the learning theories/models, my initial thoughts were that these models would be very hard to implement in online modules due mainly to the time constraints associated with creating a model based on one of these theories.  Not that any of them would be impossible, they just require a lot of upfront planning and preparation -- way more than the other modules from the previous weeks.  Each of these theories, if implemented online, require the teachers to allow for collaborative environments like Blackboard Collaborate, Skype, Google Docs, etc.  Likewise, students need places to put their thoughts and share planning guides, research materials, and final products.  While Google Docs seems like the obvious choice, it's not always the best option for the class or the most convenient.  Overcoming the collaboration barrier for planning, creating, and finalizing would allow these theories to be successfully applied in online environments, which would make those online classes more meaningful for students.  

Another initial reaction...How do you create authentic discussion based learning using the discussion tools available in an online environment?  While the small groups in each of these models would be learning within their groups, I think it's important to bring the entire class together at some points throughout the class to discuss what they are learning so other groups can benefit from all the lessons learned throughout the course.  However, from first hand experience, generating discussions in online environments, while essential, can seem forced thus rendering the discussion pointless because students are only sharing what they think they need to share or what the teacher is looking for.  Overcoming the authentic discussion barrier is very possible if the teacher works carefully to craft questions that require meaningful answers and higher level thinking.  Likewise, the teachers in these online modules have to monitor and contribute to the discussions to guide their students' thought processes and challenge their students' thinking.  If one is able to overcome discussion barriers, all of the students would greatly benefit from enhanced discussions because now they are able to not only learn from themselves and their group but also from the experiences of the entire class.

3. Would you attempt to use any of these theories/models with the students you are currently teaching or hope to teach in the future? Why or why not? Could elements of the theories/models be modified so that they would work with your current/future students?

I think everyone uses Collaborative Learning on a regular basis in most classrooms.  Many of the strategies listed in the powerpoint such as Think-Pair-Share and Jigsaw are staples within many classrooms.  They are great strategies when trying to cover a large topic in a short amount of time and also when you really want students to take responsibility for their own learning.  However, and this could have been discussed in the previous section, Cooperative Learning scares me a little bit in the classroom.  If I design Cooperative Learning units and projects, it's difficult to grade students fairly because I work hard to assess my students only on the mastery of the content and not their work ethic.  While their work ethic is valuable to me and to them, my job is to assess students ability to succeed within my classroom using the content and the level at which they achieve and nothing more.  I think Cooperative Learning has a place in the classroom in many formative instances, but I find it difficult to work in all facets of Cooperative Learning in most summative instances.  


Unfortunately, I do not utilize PBL enough in my classroom, and I wish included more PBL projects and units. As an 8th grade SS teacher, I could create many authentic problems that our nation has faced, is facing, or will face throughout my class.  While some of the initial problems would only have one solution that we as a nation chose, the students could easily offer up alternative solutions that could have worked in addition to researching the chosen solutions from the past.  Obviously, I could front-load prior knowledge using my flip videos, and then my students would actively work in groups to solve the problem I created for them.  With all of the primary documents available for U.S. history, providing resources for the PBL project or unit would be easy.  Students could use those documents to research solutions used in the past by our nation to solve problems and compare them with the problem our nation is facing today and their potential solutions.

4. Since we're taking learning theories/models that were not necessarily created with the Web in mind & turning them into Web modules, what Web-based tools/resources could be leveraged to carry out these learning theories/models online? Please spend some time identifying tools and resources for this last point, as this background research should help you complete your projects more efficiently.

I know there are many web 2.0 tools out there that could be used to support the collaborative piece in these theories/models.  I am also fully aware of Google Docs, Blackboard Collaborate, DimDim, Skype, etc.  However, I have used in my class for the past couple of years a technology called etherpad.  The idea behind etherpad is that users are provided a blank word document that they can write on individually or as a group.  The document is stored at a unique URL that students make up or can be randomly generated.  As long as the students know the URL, they can access the document any time.

It's a great tool for collaborative lessons, projects, or units.  Students can share their thoughts, resources, and conclusions all on one or multiple documents and they never have to worry about saving.  The document saves automatically, and you can manipulate it very similar to a wiki in that you can move back drafts or see who is editing.  However, you don't have to worry about multiple users editing the document at once as you do with wikis.  Some of the etherpad websites even have built in chatrooms as well.  I have used this in class to write collaborative essays or just simply as a planning guide for students doing collaborative projects.  

Below is a list of possible options: 

http://piratepad.net/front-page/

http://typewith.me/

http://openetherpad.org/

Personalized System of Instruction vs. Audio Tutorial Approaches

      1.     Similarities or differences between the theories/models? Do they share common foundations or principles?

      The glaring similarity between the Personalized System of Instruction and the Audio Tutorial Approach is that most units are modeled toward mastery of specific objectives set forth by the designer or teacher.  The learners have to be self guided and motivated in order to master the objectives and move on to the next section.  Another similarity is that while these types of models do have a place in education, they are best suited for higher level education as they both seem to be difficult to facilitate in most K-12 public schools.  They can both be very effective learning management systems if they are implemented with the right group of students who are highly motivated and self-directed.

The obvious difference is between the two models is that one uses a learning management system that is text based supplemented by additional materials and the other uses audio recordings supplemented by additional materials.  Also, the Audio Tutorial Approach does allow for time when students and a teacher can meet to discuss face to face any issues that may be hindering their achievement of each objective.  Likewise, the Audio Tutorial Approach creates a slightly more collaborative environment where students use jig-saw type activities to review and revise their understanding of the objectives.

      Both systems are deeply rooted in common principles.  The idea is that in both systems the more efficient, knowledgeable, skilled learner is not held "captive" because he/she has to wait for others to achieve or the teacher to allow them to move on.  The models are set up to allow for self individualized instruction.  Also, in my opinion, the systems are set up to overcome the fear of failure because you simply work to achieve before you can move on.  The goal of each system is for the learner to achieve, and the learner must be motivated enough to continue to move forward even if it means re-learning and reviewing certain ideas a little bit longer.

2.     Initial reactions to learning theories/models? Barriers to their use? Benefits to overcoming the barriers?

      My initial reactions to both of these learning theories is that they will not work in a K-12 setting, especially at the middle school level.  Then I realized that with the right students that aspects of these models could work well especially the Audio Tutorial Approach, which is very similar to the flipped model.  If I asked students to listen/watch a recording of a short lecture such as this one then complete a set of tasks and a take quiz in class, the set up is very similar to the Audio Tutorial Approach where students listen, work, meet, assess,  and move on.

      The biggest barriers with both approaches at the K-12 level is that both models are designed for students who are self-motivated, and they require a lot of up front work that lacks the ability to build in differentiation.  As a teacher, sometimes I have an idea of what I want to teach the next day, but my students needs may require re-teaching or me to go in different direction.  The PSI and ATA models are very structured and do not allow for that type of flexibility.  Likewise, I would probably have to add in additional motivating factors to get certain students to engage in either of these learning management systems.

      However, if you are able to overcome the barriers, then most teachers would probably be able to teach many more students at a much more efficient pace.  One teacher could teach many students at once that would allow for more students to enroll in the class.  I'm still not sure how this would look  at the K-12 level, but I know there are examples of this out there in today's classroom, but until I see a successful model that reaches all types of students, then I'm not convinced either of these models are best suited for K-12 classrooms.

3.     Would you attempt to use any of these theories/models with the students you are currently teaching or hope to teach in the future? Why or why not? Could elements of the theories/models be modified so that they would work with your current/future students?
      
      I do not see myself using these models to replace anything that I already do in my classroom.  The increased need for high motivation and a strong work ethic are so important in each of these models that not all of my students would respond well to either model.  However, I could see myself using both of these models to help my students review towards the end of the year in just about any subject or grade level.  If they know the material, they review and complete the assessment to move onto to the next objective.  I could mix in elements of the ATA models with the PSI models to increase collaboration and mastery of the objectives.

As I stated earlier, I could see how elements of the PSI and ATA models could be modified to work with my current students.  I am in the process of flipping my 8th grade SS classroom, and I am using some of the same principles that each of these models use.  For example, I have my students watch a video, perform a task in class to apply the information they learned, and then they are tested to see if they are ready to move on.  It's the combination of motivational principles, self-guided work ethic, and objective based learning that makes ATA, PSI, and flipping very similar.

4.     Since we're taking learning theories/models that were not necessarily created with the Web in mind & turning them into Web modules, what Web-based tools/resources could be leveraged to carry out these learning theories/models online? Please spend some time identifying tools and resources for this last point, as this background research should help you complete your projects more efficiently.

To transition these models to web-based modules, my favorite tool of all time, Wordpress, would be a great web-based tool to teach any content.  There are so many plugins that allow you to manipulate the pages and posts within each blog that you would be able to create modules that students learn in, complete a task, and then are assessed before "unlocking" the next unit.

Some other great tools would be Google Sites, Edmodo, Glogster (for younger ages).  Google sites would work very similarly to Wordpress and many other blogging or website building platforms.  Edmodo is similar to Facebook and has plenty of tools that teachers could use to create a web-based learning environment that allows students to master objectives as they move throughout the online module.  Glogster would be neat - and unique - to try and attempt to create an online module for a younger audience if you are modeling your module after PSI or ATA models.  You could simply create multiple, linked glogsters that allow you set up a learning management system similar to that of a web quest.  Students would only be allowed to move onto the next glog after completing a series of tasks and mastering the set objectives.