January 13, 2017
The inaugural entry!
And since it is the inaugural entry, I thought I’d play around with Padlet as an adjunct space for additional metacognitive nuggets. Check it out for a “context” video as well as a quick visual on how different the technology — and thus, no doubt, the thinking — of grad school is since last I was here. I’m not sure if these items exactly count as metacognition. But they’re at least a little fun to ponder!
Through both readings I found my thinking and learning being stimulated and reinforced by emotional responses, contextual relationships, and connections to previous experiences.
I became a bit nostalgic reading again about Vygotsky & Dewey & Thorndike. I was a bit of a geek when it came to the philosophy of education in my very first undergrad ed course. It’s been so long since I’ve read them and yet they still hold up. While I can very easily dive into details when the time calls for it, global thinking is my default mode. I can see the big picture and then zoom into the details when the time comes. Knowing this, I ought to remember to hold these scholars much closer than I usually do when I get bogged down in the weeds of daily practice. Their thinking fascinates and humbles me. So brilliant. Their big ideas and big picture perspectives provide me useful paths through those weeds.
From this higher perspective, I saw pretty quickly what I believe are a few connections this course will make. An attempt at a quick summary:
As Hoadley summarized Vygotsky, et al., technology is an artifact of culture. We live at a time that is defined by the development and ubiquity of computer technology. Computers, mobile, social media are having a huge impact on our culture. As such, these tools of the culture are changing the way we think, learn and interact.
The concept of the adaptive expert, on the other hand, is a useful one on the road towards making a shift in how we teach using these technologies, especially contrasted with that of the relative expert. I see so many teachers and administrators either actively resist or benignly — if it is possible any more to describe it as such — neglect the incorporation of digital and mobile technologies. I have seen students penalized for merely possessing a cell phone. So in order to engage students who, outside of school, are so immersed in these technologies of (their) digital culture, schools need to develop more adaptive thinking in their teachers for its use. Educators need to break out of the mere efficiencies of routine expertise in order to create learning spaces that allow 21st century students to think, process information, and interact with others in the ways the technology with which they have grown up have influenced their thinking. I believe that shift is the one to spark curiosity and a joy in learning again that is lacking in so many of our students.
Concept mapping, then, is a tool to push teachers into a more adaptive stance. When in the hands of reflective teachers and strong coaches, they can reveal levels of understanding, confusion, misunderstanding, evolving thinking. In as much as they map how teachers are thinking about a concept, they are also instruments for metacognition. I am most intrigued by the notion of using concept maps as a way of engaging in unit/lesson planning. Finally, all these characteristics make concept maps useful formative assessments. Mapping allows teachers to probe and explore their thinking, wrestle with their anxieties on the path to the adaptive expertise they need to incorporate digital technologies as the now necessary tools of teaching and learning.
Considering the contexts in which I work and my examination of the course materials so far, these are a few of the more global connections I am making through these first readings. I think I’ll hold of of analysis and assessment for another entry.