Are you a good Internet Researcher? November 17, 2008

The blogging task for this week was to read through the online session “Internet Research” on our VCT-platform and to write a blog entry about what we consider important, what we have learned or what has been striking to us.

The first point to mention is that this online unit about “Internet Research” did not only give new useful ideas about research to me, but also deepened my prior knowledge on how to use the Internet appropriatly for myself but as well as a future teacher with my students.

 The online session opens with a general overview of the advantages and disadvantages of Internet Research. I would like to start my entry by commenting on these “two sides” of Internet Research.

Nowadays, more and more students do use the Internet in order to collect information on a certain topic. It happens that consulting books for gaining information becomes subordinate. Lots of people, and especially students, like the idea that material can be collected easily, that the access is simple and that you can work independant of time and space. Using different search engines helps to look for information more precisely and helps to avoid an overflow of data.

But at the same time it also should not be forgotten that Internet Research bears lots of dangers and therefore has also got some disadvantages. By doing data collection via the Internet, the student (or user in general) has to be aware of the fact that given material could be outdated or questionable.

Furthermore, it might happen that you are flooded with information and that you cannot really separate the relevant from the irrelevant. Besides, most of the time the given information is not evaluated and that might lead you on the wrong track. Another big danger and disadvantage of Internet Research is plagiarism, which may happen easily if students only collect data without citing its sources.

As already hinted at, there are several different tools in order to search information, such as search engines, meta-search engines and catalgues. Each of them might be useful, depending on the topic you are doing research on. The online session from the VCT-platform also gives an overview of other means of research tools, such as linklists, Wiki-websites or online dictionaries.

The second big part of the online unit deals with the extra skills students should have in order to gather data correctly and easily. Firstly, students could use the Boolean logic, meaning the three operators: OR, AND, NOT (f.ex.: dogs OR cats, dogs AND cats, dogs NOT cats) . With this method it becomes easier to look for specific material, because you can sort things out. Another useful skill is doing research with specific symbols, such as +, – or ” “. The latter is quite useful when searching whole sentences.

But there is more to it than just knowing how to browse for infomation. Students should also be aware of the quality and reliability of the shown content. In other words, they should know how to evaluate information. While collecting data, it is important to know: who is the author? what is his/her opinion? which sources have been quoted? and how updated is the shown information?

What might also indicate a good source is the correct language or orthography. If a website is weak in its language, its also rather nonprofessional and unreliable. The last important skill is how to quote sources correctly. As future teachers we have to inform our students that it is their duty to indicate their sources, because otherwise they might commit plagiarism and get into trouble. It will also be a big part for them in their future life; at least if they want to go to university and have to write term papers. There are still lots of students who commit plagiarism, because they do not quote appropriately.

The last topic of the online session deals with the methodology of Internet Research. This means that teachers have several possibilities to teach data collection. We as future teachers can decide whether we want to use guided, half-guided or free research. It may depend on the knowlegde of the class concerning the usage of Internet or on the time period of teaching (i.e. research as an introduction to a certain topic).

In a nutshell, I have to say that it was quite helpful to read through the online session in order to deepen my knowledge and to get some new ideas. What I consider the most important aspect is that we as future teachers have to inform our students about the pros AND cons of Internet Research. It may always be good to consult books and magazines as well in order to get a wide range of different points of views. So an encyclopedia may also help to find information; not only Wikipedia which may also contain wrong ideas.

 

Furthermore, the Internet is not always necessary, for example if you only need general aspects such as history dates, country description (i.e. spoken languages, size etc) And finally, students have to get a helping hand on how to evaluate and quote sources. But we as future teachers have also to be skilled in “Internet Research” in order to show our pupils how to work correctly. So everybody should ask himself/herself: Am I a good researcher? I would consider myself a researcher, who can still improve a bit.

Today-Buy a Poster at the university?! November 10, 2008

In our last in-class meeting, we were asked to work in groups on specific questions concerning internet usage and the usefulness of certain learning methods. Afterwards we should go around and have a look at each of the other posters. (Like in a gallery )Our blogging task for this week was to write an entry on the posters we had created.

As I started to think about the four different posters I had seen, two of them came to my mind quite quickly. The first one was the poster concerning the “Drill&Practice” method in learning situations. The task of that group was to explain why drill & practice software is still distributed. And secondly, they should clarify if they think that it is useful.

Firstly, I really liked the animations of a heart and a lightbulb. It was not only a great idea, but also a helping hand in understanding what they tried to convey. As far as the content is concerned, I would say that it was good to indicate the two kinds of learning. I would agree on the fact that the “drill&practice”-method is useful when it comes down to vocabulary, history dates and anatomical terms. This “learning by heart” does not really demand a deep understanding on the subject. As a learner you just have to internalize facts, but you do not have to “waste time” in trying to understand them.

The group tried to illustrate with the lightbulb that the “Drill&Practice”-method is not useful in all contexts. I also think that not every subject in school can and should be “learned by heart”, but on the contrary with a sense of understanding. The group mentioned topics such as maths, text work and grammar. Others like chemistry or physics should also be learned “with understanding”. There has to be an overall knowledge and understanding of what is important in order to transfer it to other exercises (like in exams).

When it comes to languages, I would say that it might be right on the one hand that pupils can learn vocabulary with the “Drill&Practice”-method, but that on the other hand grammar cannot be learned like this. They have to understand the rules in order to produce correct sentences. We ,as teachers of at least one language, have to bear in mind that we explain to our pupils that they cannot always learn for exams by doing dull memorization of facts. Sometimes it is important to understand complexes and not only little parts. This method still exists, because it has some good arguments such as less time consuming, one can learn things by heart and the teacher might be less stressed.

All in all, I think that the group did a very nice job with their poster and it became clear that the method should be used wisely. Not every subject/topic is appropriate to be learned by “Drill&Practice”. So I would “buy” their poster.

The second poster I remembered dealt with the question whether computer skills are more essential than knowledge, social problems, reading etc.

The first point to mentioned is that the structure of the poster was quite clear. But I remembered this poster because of its content. I think that the group is right to say that new media is becoming more and more important and that computer skills are often required. But it is also important to know what is going on in the world, how to behave with others and to have other skills. What is worth having computer skills, when I do not know what had happened in the past (history of countries). To my mind, we have to bear in mind that other skills in literature, history, maths and others are way more important than computer skills. The latter might be a plus, an addition, but they cannot replace general knowledge. I would agree with the group that computer skills should not be overrated, but I would go a step further by saying that we do not want to become “experts in computer, but idiots in social behaviour and general knowledge”.

In a nutshell, I liked the ideas and the illustration of the group. They succeeded in showing the important aspects of both sides.

Learning Theories and Principles- my point of view November 4, 2008

The second online session of our cours “New Media in Foreign Language Education” mainly deals with three different approaches about learning, which are: Behaviorism, Cognitivism and Constructivism. After having read through the whole session, I wondered which of these three theories would be my favourite. They differed in many aspects and I was not sure if I could define one as “my favourite”.

So firstly, I started to think about the Behavioristic Approach, which focuses on “objectively observable behaviours”. That means that behaviorists only take into consideration what they see as a reaction to a certain stimulus. Consequently, they do not examine what is happening inside of the individual; meaning the processes in the brain.

Furthermore, the Behavioristic Approach prefers the method of “Drill and Practice” and this one suggests that an individual will only learn something by repeating it all the time. The brain is considered as a “tabula rasa” or “black box” which has to be filled with information.

The second theory is the Cognitivistic Approach and this one mainly focuses on thinking and comprehension processes. This approach argues that one individual may acquire information best, if he can built it upon prior knowledge. Different to the Behaviorists, the Cognitivists focus on the sef-reflecting processes, problem-solving and reasoning abilities of an individual. A person should understand the information and not only memorize it. As the “explorative learning” is the most important method in this approach, it becomes obvious that the individual and his learning is in the center of interest to Cognitivists. This particular form of learning demands curiosity and interest of the learner and lets him explore and develop on his own.

Thirdly, the Constructivistic Approach explains learning by saying that the individual constructs his own understanding of the world by reflecting experiences. Moreover, supporters of this theory argue that one should not learn isolated facts, but on the contrary should see parts (facts) in the context of wholes. The Constructivists also claim that knowledge is constructed by the learner and NOT instructed by the teacher. (Rather learning is arranged by the teacher)

After having seen all these different theories, I come to the conclusion that the Behaviorism is too old-fashioned and limited when it comes to learning. We cannot consider our mind as a black box, which has only to be filled with information. Besides, we could only use the material we have already repeated and nothing new.

What I support about the Cognitivism is that it does not only rely on the observable facts, but also notices the mental processes of the individual. Additionally, this theory puts the learner in its research center and makes us aware of the fact that one has to memorize AND understand information.

When it comes to the Constructivism, I have to admit that I agree on the one hand with the fact that one should not learn isolated facts, but putting them in a context, but on the other hand I would disagree with the statement that one constructs knowledge out of own experiences. I think it is dangerous to argue in this way, because errors may occur and without any “external reflection” (other point of view) these might stay forever.

In a nutshell, I would say that every theory had its pros and cons depending on its time. I would prefer the theory of Cognitivism, because it sees the external and the internal processes of the learner.