"The goal of instructional simulations is to stimulate the creation of mental models within the learner by having them discover rules and principles through experimentation. Designers should constantly be asking themselves, "How do I help the learner discover this principle and then veryify that they know it." -- James Hadley (Aldrich pg 217). Essentially, the goal of instructional simulations is parallel with that of education. How can I get the students to learn the material, and then, how do I assess whether or not they have learned it.
As I began reading Aldrich's Ch 22, Designing A Simulation," I had the though, "Good, this will give me some idea about how to create a simulation, or at least give some ideas about how to get started." Midway through the chapter I decided I should start re-reading, as I seemed to be missing some important information. I got the use of "slates" and how they were used in the building of a simulation; they are the framework. I even understood each slate's function and how to translate that into education speak.
On Aldrich's pg 220, there was a list or order of "steps that needed to be taken in order to design a simulation. So far so good, in terms of my comprehension level. Then things turned ugly. By the time I made it through the end of Ch. 22, I was left with a sense of confusion. What the heck was he talking about. Had I only read the 1st four pages and left it at that, then I would have felt better, and possibly understood more.
Until this point I had found Clark Aldrich to be more entertaining than your average garden variety educational textbook author. Funny how fickle it appears that I am. After reading the introduction to Chapter 23, I have the urge to hit Aldrich in the head with a shovel. "In case you weren't paying attention in the last chapter, let me try again" (Aldrich 241). Now, its not like me to have an emotional response to reading in a textbook, but Chapter 22 was more frustrating to me than I originally thought. I was irritated enough to almost quit reading. But I am compliant, so I kept reading. And in the end, I guess I am glad I did.
Chapter 23 did a better job of actually defining what the four slates were and how, specifically, they are used in the creation of simulations. So it seems that by "trying again," Aldrich did a better job the second time around. In slate #1 the students are exposted to the material and given the objectives. Slates #2 and #3 provide the needed scaffolding for students to begin working with and understanding the material. Finally, slate #4 is where the students show their mastery (or not) of the material. "These 4 slates are critical to successful skilling and upskilling" (Aldrich 251).
Educational Simulations, as defined by Aldrich, "are a variety of selectively interactively representational environments that can provide highly effective learning experiences" (Aldrich pg 270). I find it interesting that he also states "Good educational simulations, as we are seeing, will increase productivity by 20%-30%" (Aldrich pg 274). The connection between business and education is one that I just can't seem to make. How do I increase my students' "productivity?" Am I increasing their recall of the material? Is this what productivity refers to?
As I reflected on this book as a whole, I realized that there was some very good information given; particularly Chapter 8, Three Essential Elements to Successful Educational Experiences. However, as this book began covering the actual creation of simulations, it became unclear and scattered. Will it help me to create my own simulaton? Probably not. However, it does have some good points of reference.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Monday, March 12, 2007
Week #8 Reflection Post
There was a lot of information in the 3 chapters read this week. I especially liked Chapter 16 and its beginning quote from the Matrix, " Follow the White Rabbit." Not only did it make me laugh, it made me think about assessment and how we, as educators, are forced into assessments that are not of our own creation and what that does to education.
Sitting here watching my students on the first day of our annual CAT 6 testing, I am faced with a reminder of how important assessment has become, in whichever form is deemed appropriate by the almighty who make those decsions. "Stakeholders (e.g. parents, principals, administrators and policy makers) remain steadfast in viewing test scores as the main indicator of learning" (Gibson 328). It is interesting that Gibson's Chapter 16 revolves around assessment, considering what is going on at my school this week.
How did we (education) become this? At what point did standardized testing become the grand assesment that it currently is? We now exist in a "test score oriented educational culture" (Gibson 328). Why? I am curious what it is that everyone else thinks. Here is my uneducated theory: It has to do with the use of Standards. As soon as defined Standards became common in education there needed to be a way to assess whether or not students have met the Standards. The answer came in the form of Standardized Tests, which, unfortuntately, have become the driving force in schools. Not whether the kids have actually learned what they need, but can they do well on the state tests.
According to Gibson, "there will need to be some ways for the educators to record and report on the students' progress when playing games, so as to justify to the stakeholders that gaming is a leditimate way of learning, and not a waste of precious classroom time and resources" (Gibson 328). In terms of using games and simulations, "it is important for educators to work with game developers and instructional technologists to incorporate appropriate learning objectives into the games" (Gibson 333). Backwards planning anyone?
Last thought: Authentic assessment is neccessary to shape what comes next in curriculum. Too often, assessments are inappropriate or are used to give a grade, not to show what children really know.
Sitting here watching my students on the first day of our annual CAT 6 testing, I am faced with a reminder of how important assessment has become, in whichever form is deemed appropriate by the almighty who make those decsions. "Stakeholders (e.g. parents, principals, administrators and policy makers) remain steadfast in viewing test scores as the main indicator of learning" (Gibson 328). It is interesting that Gibson's Chapter 16 revolves around assessment, considering what is going on at my school this week.
How did we (education) become this? At what point did standardized testing become the grand assesment that it currently is? We now exist in a "test score oriented educational culture" (Gibson 328). Why? I am curious what it is that everyone else thinks. Here is my uneducated theory: It has to do with the use of Standards. As soon as defined Standards became common in education there needed to be a way to assess whether or not students have met the Standards. The answer came in the form of Standardized Tests, which, unfortuntately, have become the driving force in schools. Not whether the kids have actually learned what they need, but can they do well on the state tests.
According to Gibson, "there will need to be some ways for the educators to record and report on the students' progress when playing games, so as to justify to the stakeholders that gaming is a leditimate way of learning, and not a waste of precious classroom time and resources" (Gibson 328). In terms of using games and simulations, "it is important for educators to work with game developers and instructional technologists to incorporate appropriate learning objectives into the games" (Gibson 333). Backwards planning anyone?
Last thought: Authentic assessment is neccessary to shape what comes next in curriculum. Too often, assessments are inappropriate or are used to give a grade, not to show what children really know.
Sunday, March 4, 2007
Week #7 Reflection Action Project
"No Child Left Behind," while a major, bureaucratic pain in the rear, has possibly one good consequence that I can think of. It may be driving teacher education programs to move away from content knowledge and into preparing teachers to teach more effectively. "Teacher preperation has not been immune to this pressure, as teacher effectiveness has been targeted as a direct route to increasing student performance. As a result, the teacher preperation communty is working harder than ever to prepare teachers who can affect learning in all students (Gibson 207).
I wonder about the validity of the above statement. Well, not really the validity, but whether or not it is true. I can't speak for all content areas and all universities, but I know that my teacher training program was less content and more these are the things you should do and why. I was under the assumption that that is how they all were. It made sense.
I actually was confused when first reading the Teacher Work Sample Methodolgy (TWSM) my brain made the following statement, "Isn't that what you should be looking to develop in teacher candidates?" It is not as if this is a new and grand revelation, right? Upon continuing reading, however, I discoved something new. The idea of using a simulated setting in which students can practice "the skills necessary in the design and implementation of a teacher work sample" (Gibson 209).
The "Cook School District" is a facinating creation. I had no idea such things existed. While it is limited in its lack of behaviors ( I am guessing the simulated child is unlikely to refuse to do something), it seems to be as realistic an experience as possible. I am curious how this really affects teacher development.
Anyone know? Or had experiences with such "professional developmen?
I wonder about the validity of the above statement. Well, not really the validity, but whether or not it is true. I can't speak for all content areas and all universities, but I know that my teacher training program was less content and more these are the things you should do and why. I was under the assumption that that is how they all were. It made sense.
I actually was confused when first reading the Teacher Work Sample Methodolgy (TWSM) my brain made the following statement, "Isn't that what you should be looking to develop in teacher candidates?" It is not as if this is a new and grand revelation, right? Upon continuing reading, however, I discoved something new. The idea of using a simulated setting in which students can practice "the skills necessary in the design and implementation of a teacher work sample" (Gibson 209).
The "Cook School District" is a facinating creation. I had no idea such things existed. While it is limited in its lack of behaviors ( I am guessing the simulated child is unlikely to refuse to do something), it seems to be as realistic an experience as possible. I am curious how this really affects teacher development.
Anyone know? Or had experiences with such "professional developmen?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
