References

Annetta, L. (2008). Video games in education: Why they should be used and how they are being used. Theory Into Practice, 47(3), 229-239. Retrieved January 28, 2009, from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405840802153940

Barron, A., Harmes, J., & Kemker, K. (2005). Authentic instruction in laptop classrooms: Sample lessons that integrate Type II applications. Computers in the Schools, 22(3/4), 119-130. doi: 10.1300/J025v22n03-10

Bosch, N. (2001). Guardians of Freedom. Retrieved on April 2, 2009, from http://connections.smsd.org/veterans/

Bosch, N., & Moffitt, C. (2008). C.S.I. Cemetery Scene Investigation. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://connections.smsd.org/csi/index.htm

Bruce, B. C., Carragher, B. O., Damon, B. M., Dawson, M. J., Eurell, J. A., Gregory, C. D., et al. (1997). ChickScope: An interactive MRI classroom curriculum innovation for K-12. Computers & Education, 29(2-3), 73-87.

Davis, V. (2009). Flint River Project. Retrieved April 1, 2009, from http://flintriver.ning.com/

Galileo Educational Network. (2002 – 2008). Inquiry rubric. Retrieved February 6, 2009 from http://www.galileo.org/research/publications/rubric.pdf

Joplin, L. (1981). On defining experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 4(1), 17-20. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from www.summercamp.com.my/image/On%20Defining%20Experiental%20Education.pdf

Kemker, K., Barron, A., & Harmes, J. (2007). Laptop computers in the elementary classroom: Authentic instruction with at-risk students. Educational Media International, 44(4), 305-321. Retrieved March 11, 2009, from EBSCOhost database.

Knobel, M., & Wilber, D. (2009). Literacy 2.0:Let's Talk 2.0. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 20-24.

Lombardi, M. (2007). Authentic Learning for the 21st century: an overview. Educause Learning Initiative. Retrieved April 1st, 2009, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf

Malaguzzi, L. (1994). Your image of the child: Where teaching begins. Child Care Information Exhange, 52-56. Retrieved March 31, 2009, from Education Full Text database.

Metiri Group – Commissioned by Cisco Systems. (2006). Technology in Schools: What the Research Says. Retrieved on March 31, 2009, from http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/TechnologyinSchoolsReport.pdf

Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G., (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership 50(7), 8-12. Retrieved on February 25, 2009 from EBSCOhost database.

Piazza, G. (2007). On the wave of creativity: Children, expressive languages and technology.International Journal of Education through Art, 3(2), 102-21.

Pratap, P., & Salah, J. (2004). The Effectiveness of Internet-Controlled Astronomical Research Instrumentation for Education. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 13(4), 473-484. doi: Article.

Reeves, T.C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. Retrieved February 22, 2009, from http://www.ecu.edu.au/conferences/herdsa/main/papers/ref/pdf/Reeves.pdf

Richardson, W. (2009). Becoming Network Wise. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 26-31.

Rinaldi, C. (2003). The teacher as researcher. Innovations in early education: the international reggio exchange, 10(2). Merril-Palmer Institute.

Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (2003). Beyond brainstorming: Sustained creative work with ideas. Education Canada, 43(4), 4-7. Retrieved March 24, 2009, from http://ikit.org/fulltext/2003BeyondBrainstorming.html

The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2006). 7 Things You Should Know About Remote Instrumentation. ELI7 Things Series (pp. 1-2). Retrieved March 31, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/ELI/7ThingsYouShouldKnowAboutRemot/156816.

Titanic in the Classroom. Retrieved on April 2, 2009, from http://connections.smsd.org/titanic/

Wagner, T. (2008). Rigor defined. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 20-25. Retrieved March 24, 2009, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/oct08/vol66/num02/Rigor_Redefined.aspx

Warlick, D. (2009). Grow Your Personal Learning Network. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(6).

Videos

YouTube - Blogs in Plain English. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN2I1pWXjXI&feature=channel

YouTube - Podcasting in Plain English. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-MSL42NV3c&feature=channel

YouTube - Wikis in Plain English. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dnL00TdmLY&feature=channel

 

Ted Talks:

Jonathan Drori on what we think we know | Video on TED.com. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_drori_on_what_we_think_we_know.html

Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity | Video on TED.com. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

YouTube - The Authentic Learning POEM. (2009). . Retrieved April 6, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbR_mkRSOCs

 

Music/Audio

ccMixter - admiralbob77. (n.d.). . Retrieved April 4, 2009, from http://ccmixter.org/people/admiralbob77

 GarageBand

Web 2.0 and Authentic Learning

With the advent of "Web 2.0" technologies like wikis, blogs and podcasts, the scope of our students' personal learning networks(PLNs) have extended far beyond those that were available to prior generations. These technologies enable students not only to find an unlimited wealth of information, but also collaborate with an unlimited number of peers. Through this collaboration they can produce a work that is of more substance and significance than any single author could produce. "Literacy 2.0 recognizes that although there will always be varying levels of innovation, producing something truly new or original is impossible; all our cultural resources build on what's gone before. The success of sites like Fanfiction.net speak directly to the pleasure that many people obtain from working collaboratively to produce written texts that build on or remix existing texts"(Knobel & Wilber, 2009, p. 21).

David Warlick (2009) identifies three main kinds of PLNs: Personally maintained synchronous connections, these include instant discussion tools such as telephone, Skype and instant messaging; personally and socially maintained semisynchronous connections including Twitter and cell phone text messaging; and dynamically maintained asynchronous connections such as blogs, wikis, discussions, and podcasts(Warlick, 2009, pp. 13-14). These tools are freely available to our students, many of who already use at least one or two of these tools for social networking.

As Will Richardson (2009) points out, one challenge that our students face is that since these technologies are barely five years old, students and teachers of this decade are charged with discovering meaningful ways of leveraging them for learning. "Students will be—and to some extent already are—living in a world of online interactions for which they currently have few learning contexts or models. Like it or not, we must begin to prepare them for their connected futures online. To do that, we must be willing to embrace these new technologies in our own practice and add an important expectation for learning to our curriculums and classrooms—namely, that by graduation, students will be able to create, navigate, and grow their own personal learning networks in safe, effective, and ethical ways"(Richardson, 2009, p. 29).

This is where authentic learning fits in. By providing meaningful learning experiences that enable students to ask rich, meaningful questions of their PLNs students are able to define the terms of their own learning. They are able to collaboratively build personal meaning with peers on a global scale. These transparent and global discussions ultimately contribute to the shared knowledge of the community making the learning purposeful far beyond the scope of the classroom.

Authentic learning requires access to personal learning networks (PLNs). An authentic experience is about asking questions. Our PLNs define who we ask those questions of. This is the paradigm shift of the 21^st century. The challenge is not technological but pedagogical. How do we structure our learning so that students can make the best use of their already familiar PLNs? "Literacy 2.0 is grounded in achieving authentic purposes and completing meaningful tasks. Unfortunately, it doesn't mesh well with such practices as book reports, comprehension questions, leveled reading tasks, and weekly spelling tests that students are asked to do in school"(Knobel & Wilber, 2009, p. 23).

Knobel, M., & Wilber, D. (2009). Literacy 2.0:Let's Talk 2.0. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 20-24.

Richardson, W. (2009). Becoming Network Wise. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 26-31.

Warlick, D. (2009). Grow Your Personal Learning Network. Learning & Leading with Technology, 36(6).

Authentic Learning - One of 5 types of Learning

The Metiri Group's Technology in Schools: What the Research Says (commissioned by Cisco Systems) is a publication that analyzes research on educational technology. 

It presents a representational, rather than a comprehensive, report of trends in research findings that are organized around some specific types of technologies.

The authors of the report hope to provide the reader with insights into the effect of technology on learning.

The 'TECHtypes' discussed are:

-Television and Video, 

-Calculators or Graphing Calculators 

-Engagement Devices (i.e. Interactive Whiteboards, Quick-response devices - as a non-techie, I am not sure what these devices are... so if anyone can shed some light...?), 

-Portable ICT Devices (like PDA's, tablet PC's), 

-Virtual Learning (Distance learning, Videoconferencing,...), 

-In-School Computing (Computer Labs, In-Class computers, Library computers)

-One-to-One Computer Initiatives

This report's most direct link to our discussion of Authentic Learning is found in its organization of the technologies around categories of learning. The authors note that much of what we know about how people best learn is due to the advances of cognitive sciences. They identify five areas that are "all important aspects of a student's learning experiences". 

The five all important types of learning are:

Automaticity

Content expertise or knowledge

Information processing and visualization

Higher-order thinking and sound reasoning

Authentic Learning 

I find two things particularly interesting with this article.

First, it separates Higher-order thinking and Sound reasoning from the category of Authentic Learning. In my mind, the two are integral parts of one another. 

Secondly, it showcases how few studies there are in current research that discuss Authentic Learning.

According to Table 1, the authors were unable to locate any studies utilizing Rigorous Research Methods (read Quantitative) on this topic very few using Descriptive Methods (Qualitative or Correlational). I would guess that the reason for this is that sometimes those things in life that are of most worth and value are difficult to quantify.

What do you think?

Authentic Learning in One ESL Classroom

In Newmann's article "Five Standards of Authentic Instruction", he and his colleagues identify characteristics considered to improve learning because students engage in thinking more developed than simple memorization. With regards to teaching English As A Second Language (ESL), I have unknowingly implemented these standards into my classroom without the known support of educational research but simply have been trying to create a beneficial place of learning. I'd like to look at these criteria closer and reflect upon my own practices to reveal for myself successes and potential for improvement.

Karen's reflections continued...

How best to assess authentic learning tasks?

Assessment of authentic learning tasks -- I am still struggling with how to effectively evaluate such tasks.

The CSI: Cemetery Scene Investigations project invites students to look at cemeteries as primary sources. Students use technologies like GPS and digital cameras in order to explore the question - Why is the preservation of local cemeteries important? From what I can tell of this project, it appears to have a great deal of potential as an authentic learning experience. The assessment piece of this project, however, was quite disappointing -
Cemetery Scene Investigation Evaluation Rubric .

Students are giving marks for the number of items listed within a chart, and the length of their background information (ie. 1-2 paragraphs - meets expectation, but 2+ -exceeds expectation). In their reflective essays, students are given 'exceeds expectation' if their reflective essays contains "many unique insights". I wonder if the students know what this means!

In a project with so much potential for learning, is it right to evaluate the quantity of work that the student produces? Should the guidelines be more specific to the intended learning outcomes? Does this type of assessment reflect 'real world' methods of assessment?

What would be a better way to assess the student's learning?

Authentic Learning through Remote Instrumentation

"Students say they are motivated by solving real-world problems. They often express a preference for doing rather than listening. At the same time, most educators considerlearning-by-doing the most effective way to learn. Yet for decades, authentic learning has been difficult to implement. Certain experiments are too dangerous, difficult, or expensive to conduct in the classroom; many are simply impossible to perform"(Lombardi & Oblinger, 2007).

Lombardi and Oblinger identify a number of ways that technology can support authentic learning including simulations, student created media and peer reviews, but one that I felt was underultilized was the concept of remote instrumentation. They discuss MIT's Remote instrumentation Program (ELI, 2006). Using web accessible remote instrumentation, students can conduct and analyze real scientific experiments using nothing more complicated than a computer. The literature provides a variety of examples of this type of technology available to students. For example, ChickScope (Bruce et. al, 1997) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign allowed students from a variety of kindergarten classes were able to observe and control experiments examining the development of a chicken egg inside an MRI. The Haystack Radio Observatory (Pratap & Salah, 2004) has used the web to let Undergraduate astronomy students make real scientific observations and calculations of deep space objects.

Not only are students able to view the results of past experiments, many of these tools allow students to design and plan the experiments. They get the answers to questions that they ask. I see no truer way of being a scientist. Have any of you run across these types of technologies in your work?

Cheers,
Doug

Bruce, B. C., Carragher, B. O., Damon, B. M., Dawson, M. J., Eurell, J. A., Gregory, C. D., et al. (1997). ChickScope: An interactive MRI classroom curriculum innovation for K-12. Computers & Education, 29(2-3), 73-87.

The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2006). 7 Things You Should Know About Remote Instrumentation. 7 Things Series (pp. 1-2). Retrieved March 31, 2009 from http://www.educause.edu/ELI/7ThingsYouShouldKnowAboutRemot/156816.

Lombardi, M., & Diana G. Oblinger. (2007). Authentic Learning for the 21st Century: An Overview. The Educause Learning Initiative. Retrieved March 31, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf.

Pratap, P., & Salah, J. (2004). The Effectiveness of Internet-Controlled Astronomical Research Instrumentation for Education. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 13(4), 473-484.

Beginning with the image of the child

Loris Malaguzzi the founder of the Reggio Emilia schools in Italy speaks to our image of the child. Perhaps we need to begin with our image of the child before we answer the question of "how do we make learning authentic?." In the article On the wave of creativity: Children, expressive languages and technnology  Giovanni shares the idea that "operating from a socio-constructivist perspective, the educators act as careful observers and co-authors of children’s experience. Before any educational activities take place, they discuss and develop ideas that have arisen with children in class. In this context, lesson planning takes the form of arguing an individual point of view, examining the views of others and sharing and comparing individual and group hypotheses about how knowledge emerges and how best to make use of exchanges between children about what they know. Diverse forms of communication interact in this dynamic, stimulating and releasing creativity in individuals and the group.