Central Arguments:
The theme for this week was virtual realities (VRs) and how these relate to deeper learning. The article by Villanueva reveals how VRs can evoke empathy from users and essentially, influence social change. Similarly, Darvasi touches on the benefits of VRs as well as some of the concerns, particularly the ethical concerns with this new technology. Bailenson, Yee, Blascovich, Beall, Lundblad, and Jin’s article discusses four experiments that they conducted through virtual environments that had the goal of improving learning in classrooms. Finally, Dede’s document for deeper learning explores what is needed from the education system in order to invoke deeper learning for all students and also touches on the use of virtual realities and multiuser virtual environments (MUVEs) as tools for deeper learning tasks. Critical Response and Take Away Points When reading these articles I was most drawn to Dede’s document and to Darvasi’s article. Dede provides a compelling overview particularly for the use of augmented realities and MUVES or virtual worlds for classrooms and I appreciated the use of graphics throughout as I am not familiar with these technologies. I am especially drawn to how students can immerse themselves in the curriculum while also learning other valuable skills such as collaboration, responsibility, and organization for instance. However, my concern (as is a reoccurring issue with digital technology in schools) is access. As mentioned in Dede’s discussion of the EcoMUVE project, some teachers note that there is a difficulty with providing students one-on-one access to the technology. Moving on to Darvasi’s article, this is one that resonates with me as I have similar concerns to Darvasi in that I am concerned about possible triggers for students as well as diminished human connections. While virtual realities certainly lend themselves to incredible opportunities, I think that some of the consequences or side effects still need to be considered before complete acceptance. Perhaps the VRs would have to go through extensive ministry/board protocols in order to be approved for classroom use. Yet, even with approval, there is still the looming possibility that this type of simulation may not work for every student (just as all teaching methods do not work for every student) and we should be conscientious of this as well. I think that education and education advocates tend to want to bring in these new and exciting ideas and technologies without reviewing the entire picture beforehand. Educators have to keep in mind that even these new and exciting ideas and technologies may not totally work for students. Just because it’s technology doesn’t mean that it is foolproof or even worthwhile in some instances (thinking back to SAMR). Connections Between Readings and Previous Week These readings as already mentioned are all part of theme of virtual realities and can be connected to last week’s readings of inquiry-based learning and deep learning tasks. Specifically, virtual realities have the ability to create deep learning tasks and to embody inquiry-based learning. Key Quotes: “’If we are willing to allow ourselves to think a bit more broadly, VR may be a viable avenue for true shifts in how we think about learning’” (Darvasi) “In short, the development of more sophisticated assessments is essential for the evolution of deeper learning, and technology offers a powerful vehicle by which to accomplish this…As discussed earlier in this paper, to attain the full benefits of deeper learning, it is critical to use technology to extend and empower good teaching and learning, not to replace them” (Dede 19). “…the potential for the technology, with a mindful approach towards ethical implementation. “We need to be conscious of the psychological and physiological impacts. It is very easy to say, ‘Oh, the graphics on this one aren’t so good; they know it isn’t real.’ That is likely true, but the fascinating thing about the brain is that it still responds as if it is real. As educators, we need to be very aware of this and mindful of what experiences we choose to share with students.” (Darvasi)
0 Comments
Central Arguments:
Castell and Jenson’s article titled “Paying Attention to Attention” focuses on the idea of attention in schools and how students’ attention has been altered by various political and technological conditions (382). Additionally, they suggest that education needs to integrate new forms, frames, organizations, and structures to support active and playful engagement. The article concludes by suggesting the use of video games for this engagement. Gee outlines some of the features in video games that have the potential to provide deep learning for students. He discusses empathy, simulations, distributed intelligence, teamwork, situated meaning, and open-endedness as the six main features of video games that have the potential to be applied in educational settings to increase engagement. Gee suggests that the design of games with interactivity, customization, well-sequenced problems, as well as motivation and failure gives video games features that encourage learning and a sense of mastery. Finally, Darvasi discusses how one educator used an alternate reality game (ARG) to teach and engage with The Odyssey and explains how games can teach empathy, associative learning, cross-disciplinary thinking, and critical analysis. Additionally, Darvasi reveals how games have the ability to engage students in a way that more traditional learning cannot. Darvasi recognizes that ARG’s are often customized for specific classrooms and schools making it difficult to transfer them and says that further study, experimentation, and discussions need to be had about the use of them in classrooms. Connections between Readings: These three articles revolved around how today’s students are different in terms of attention and learning methods and need to have an education environment that recognizes and utilizes this difference. Key Quotes: In schools and in classrooms, our attention is no less bifurcated, no less hybridized, and, yet, in those places text is still precariously perched as the dominant medium of expression; this is in direct conflict with knowledge and experience of the ‘‘real world,’’ in which textual sovereignty is no longer the case. Castell and Jenson, Paying Attention to Attention If commercial video games often offer worlds in which players prepare for the actions of soldiers or thieves, could other types of games let players prepare for action from different perspectives or identities, for example, a particular type of scientist, political activist or global citizen? If games could do so, they would speak to one of the deeper problems of education: that many students who can pass paper-and-pencil tests cannot apply their knowledge to solving real problems (Gardner 1991). Gee, Are Video Games Good for Learning? Critical Response and Take Away Points Reading these articles reminded me of a quote that has stuck with me for some time now: “Research, policy, curriculum, and tradition must be scrutinized, not immortalized” (TM Christou). Education and educators still rely on traditional ways of teaching and learning which is not effective for all students. It is time for education and educators to rethink the delivery and interaction with new knowledge and video games are one way to do this. Not only are they heavily used outside of school, they also provide numerous learning opportunities as Castell and Jenson, Gee, and Darvasi reveal. I think that video games are continually thought of as merely play and not as anything serious, but these articles reveal that in fact video games can be used as “serious play” and for deep learning. |
Kayla BGraduate student at York University. Archives |