I had an interesting semester this term. It wasn't easy, but I learned a lot - more than I bargained for in fact. I'm going to break it out into two posts because I had very different experiences in my two classes.
I'll start with Java programming which was an online class. I'm a believer that online learning can work when done right. I've taken three online classes in this program so far. One was great, two were not. I'm sure it's just a coincidence, but the class that was great was in Moodle, the other two were both in Blackboard - I'm just sayin!
The good experience was a class in Moodle about Online Learning. In that class there was a big emphasis set on discussions and participation at the outset, and I think it set the tone for the rest of the semester. There were a lot of great readings in that course, but what stood out even more were the discussions. I remember my greatest challenge that semester was trying to manage my time, I was spending too much of it in the discussion forums keeping up with, and contributing to, really interesting conversations that were going on. It was a bit all consuming, but in the best possible way.
The other two classes - Java I, and Cognition and Learning - were more solitary classes. There was an attempt to prompt discussion, but it didn't take. My suspicion is that it was due partly to the implementation of the class - directives given in terms of expectations of contribution - and partly due to the discussion forum functionality. In Blackboard it seemed a bit clunky to me, and it was more robust in Moodle.
While I'm a believer in online learning in general, the online class I took this semester was not a good experience for me. I had no prior programming experience and by surveying the student profiles, it seemed that about half of us did and half did not. Interestingly, the class started with about 24 students and by week two we were down to 12. My father who is a computer science professor said a high drop out rate in programming classes is typical. [Insert angst about STEM skills here].
In terms of learning how to program, reading the text book and watching voice thread videos didn't cut it for me. I started looking at youtube to find videos that might help explain these new concepts to me, I went to Barnes and Noble to buy every book I could find - particularly those with "For Dummies" in the title. Ultimately, I turned to my father for tutoring.
This was not the first time I had asked him for extra help. He helped me with math all through school (I always knew he knew more than my teachers) and he gave me all the interesting back stories that they don't tell you in the history books. When I complained that I'd never make it through my Melville course in college, he had me send him the reading assignments, he got the books and we had a weekly book group by phone. :)
Interestingly, these weekly tutoring sessions in Java brought me right back to childhood math. The pang of panic when asked a question for which I was expected to have some semblance of a reasonable reply. The deer in the headlights look that I knew was on my face but I couldn't erase. Oh the horror! I tried to breath deeply, tried not to panic. It wasn't easy and it wasn't comfortable. I thought to myself that I should try to embrace the uncomfortable feeling and use it to remember how it feels for my kids and other kids when they feel overly challenged or taxed.
I got through it - but only because of the weekly tutoring sessions. I was left thinking about my other classmates who also didn't have any programming experience and who most likely did not have someone like my dad around to help them. How did they fare? I have to admit that I couldn't help but think - how is it that here, in an educational program, this is the best that can be done to teach programming? Especially in light of how much in need we are to develop these skills, and foster more students to start and complete STEM programs. We have to do better than this.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Video games in education
Recently we were asked in class to consider the role of video games in education, a really interesting topic, and a very popular one! I think there is tremendous possibility in this area, but I also think that there is so much for us to figure out in order to do it right.
A classmate used the analogy that some games are just like chocolate covered broccoli. Game design is so important. The barrier approach - do these drill and kill style problems in order to go do this fun game - won't cut it. The learning and the game play have to be engrained and purposeful.
Some of my favorite research articles are by Squire and Barab and are related to this topic. You can find Electromagnetic Supercharged! and History Replayed on Google Scholar. One thing that both their studies found was that while it was assumed that students would naturally embrace game play, some students pushed back and were uncomfortable with the idea. Some students asked - why are we doing this - and others made comments like - we're not used to talking in class. What I took from those articles, in addition to the fact that there is so much potential to using games in education, is that the role of classroom culture is a huge factor in the success or failure of these programs. We need to better understand how to create an environment or community where this type of learning can thrive.
Last but not least, my favorite topic: how do we measure success? That kids are engaged in a game isn't enough. What are they learning by virtue of the experience. How can we evaluate what learning is happening and to what degree. How do we decide what games to invest time and energy into and which games don't measure up - what is the yard stick?
These are the really interesting questions that I see surrounding the issue. Like I said, I see huge value in using video games in education, but also see a lot of thinking and planning that needs to happen in order to be able to do it right.
A classmate used the analogy that some games are just like chocolate covered broccoli. Game design is so important. The barrier approach - do these drill and kill style problems in order to go do this fun game - won't cut it. The learning and the game play have to be engrained and purposeful.
Some of my favorite research articles are by Squire and Barab and are related to this topic. You can find Electromagnetic Supercharged! and History Replayed on Google Scholar. One thing that both their studies found was that while it was assumed that students would naturally embrace game play, some students pushed back and were uncomfortable with the idea. Some students asked - why are we doing this - and others made comments like - we're not used to talking in class. What I took from those articles, in addition to the fact that there is so much potential to using games in education, is that the role of classroom culture is a huge factor in the success or failure of these programs. We need to better understand how to create an environment or community where this type of learning can thrive.
Last but not least, my favorite topic: how do we measure success? That kids are engaged in a game isn't enough. What are they learning by virtue of the experience. How can we evaluate what learning is happening and to what degree. How do we decide what games to invest time and energy into and which games don't measure up - what is the yard stick?
These are the really interesting questions that I see surrounding the issue. Like I said, I see huge value in using video games in education, but also see a lot of thinking and planning that needs to happen in order to be able to do it right.
Is programming the new literacy?
There have been a couple interesting articles recently on the current and future importance of programming skills.
Clive Thompson had an article in Wired a few months ago called coding for the masses:
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/st_thompson_wereallcoders/
Marc Prensky also wrote an article called Programming is the new literacy:
http://www.edutopia.org/programming-the-new-literacy
Thompson's take is that software affects almost everything we do, and therefore more of us need to become acquainted with the field of programming. In addition he says that understanding programming changes the way you look at things. It makes you realize that every problem is comprised of many smaller problems. This understanding of how to approach problem solving might enable people who use software to be less passive users ( accepting whatever a software company builds and delivers) and more of an educated consumer (it's not impossible to change this, and it's not even hard to do, so fix it to enable users to do X). The book Program or be Programmed by Douglas Rushkoff is cited in the Wired article, I'm planning on checking it out, I'll let you know if it's good.
The Prensky article argues that so many things we do in everyday life qualify as programming something. From setting up your universal remote to changing your settings in facebook or blogger. I do not believe that the fact that I change settings in a software I use makes me a programmer. I don't even necessarily agree that everyone will *need* to be able to program, say in C++ or Java. I do, however, think that there will be more instances where the barrier to entry for programming skills are lessened, and things like scratch, alice, flash, even android's app inventor are early examples of what I think will be an ongoing trend.
What I think is at the heart of the issue in this programming literacy conversation is to achieve agility in learning - to realize and be comfortable with the fact that for the rest of your life you will continually be learning new, and sometimes hard, things. I don't think the key is whether someone can program in one language or another per se, but that they have the attitude to roll up their sleeves and get dirty learning something new, even if it's hard and/or scary at first, for the sake of being able to do more things and be more of an active empowered participant, and less a passive receiver. Maybe we should design some sort of game to promote programmatic and hacker thinking in kids!
Even if someone does become proficient in one programming language, new languages come along and other languages fall off. I think it is the mindset to continually learn and challenge yourself that will be increasingly critical in our world.
Clive Thompson had an article in Wired a few months ago called coding for the masses:
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/st_thompson_wereallcoders/
Marc Prensky also wrote an article called Programming is the new literacy:
http://www.edutopia.org/programming-the-new-literacy
Thompson's take is that software affects almost everything we do, and therefore more of us need to become acquainted with the field of programming. In addition he says that understanding programming changes the way you look at things. It makes you realize that every problem is comprised of many smaller problems. This understanding of how to approach problem solving might enable people who use software to be less passive users ( accepting whatever a software company builds and delivers) and more of an educated consumer (it's not impossible to change this, and it's not even hard to do, so fix it to enable users to do X). The book Program or be Programmed by Douglas Rushkoff is cited in the Wired article, I'm planning on checking it out, I'll let you know if it's good.
The Prensky article argues that so many things we do in everyday life qualify as programming something. From setting up your universal remote to changing your settings in facebook or blogger. I do not believe that the fact that I change settings in a software I use makes me a programmer. I don't even necessarily agree that everyone will *need* to be able to program, say in C++ or Java. I do, however, think that there will be more instances where the barrier to entry for programming skills are lessened, and things like scratch, alice, flash, even android's app inventor are early examples of what I think will be an ongoing trend.
What I think is at the heart of the issue in this programming literacy conversation is to achieve agility in learning - to realize and be comfortable with the fact that for the rest of your life you will continually be learning new, and sometimes hard, things. I don't think the key is whether someone can program in one language or another per se, but that they have the attitude to roll up their sleeves and get dirty learning something new, even if it's hard and/or scary at first, for the sake of being able to do more things and be more of an active empowered participant, and less a passive receiver. Maybe we should design some sort of game to promote programmatic and hacker thinking in kids!
Even if someone does become proficient in one programming language, new languages come along and other languages fall off. I think it is the mindset to continually learn and challenge yourself that will be increasingly critical in our world.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
