Has that day arrived?

Image retrieved 26 March, 2013, from http://www.flero.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/world-have-a-generation-of-idiots-1.jpg

When anxiety is a significant factor in adult literacy and numeracy learning, how can anxieties about the technology tools we use be overcome?

Computer anxiety

Computer anxiety and literacy learners
Most of us have experienced anxiety and those feelings of dread, embarrassment and wanting to hide, along with the physical experiences of rapid heart beat, sweating and shaking hands, nausea, trouble breathing, blushing, panicky thoughts, lightheadedness, agitation and nervousness. 

Coryell and Clark (2009) state that doing something new can cause anxiety and self-consciousness to “arise unbidden” (p.499) and that it is a common experience that “can be viewed as an asset or an obstacle” (p.499).  In the case of an adult learner, Coryell argues that these emotions can act as a motivator, especially if the emphasis is on collaborative and interactive learning rather than giving the message that success is dependent on “perfection” and “getting it right” (p499). 

For an adult learner with literacy needs, anxiousness can also occur from feeling “left behind by a too-hurried pace in classroom lessons” (Coryell & Clark, 2009, p.485), as well as concerns around feeling ridiculed, embarrassed or not being understood.  Alternatively,  adults undertaking e-learning can overcome the “‘shame’ of repeated underachievement in literacy, because they can refer to their class or study as computer or ICT learning” (Fletcher, Nicholas and Davis, 2010, p.17).

E-learning and anxiety

I use the term e-learning to include learning using computer related technology, including on-line learning, internet, hand-held devices and social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Skype etc.

e-learning

 The prospect of learning both course content and new technology can be a daunting proposition for a literacy learner, particularly for an older adult or someone who hasn’t been in the workplace for sometime.  Therefore, planning e-learning lessons should relate to the learners life as well as being collaborative and non-threatening as possible.  Using K. Virginia Hemby’s paper, “Designing programs for computer-anxious adults: The trainer’s dilemma” (1999), as a basis, I list the some e-learning strategies for computer anxious adult literacy learners:

Find out prior knowledge

Find out what exposure your learners have had to computers.  What do they already use?  How are these different or similar from what will be used on the course?

Use humour and empathy

Adults learn best in non-threatening and informal environments. Give examples of your own experiences of “computer anxious moments” and describe how you felt; e.g. sweaty palms or shaking.  Bring humour into the story to lessen the learners’ anxiousness and let them know they are not alone.

De-mystify the computer

Many learners fear they could “break” or “crash” the computer.  Some consider the computer “alive” and controlling the information rather than us controlling the computer.  Open the computer casing (if possible) to show and touch the components. Explain the workings and what the various keys are for.  

Address learners’ fears

In group sessions, share fears around using computers.  Explore what error messages and beeps mean.

error message

Take small steps

Go through the basics such as starting and closing the computer. Show where a DVD is inserted. If a learner indicates that they know what the basics are, have them demonstrate some of the activities.  Give time for learners to practice the new knowledge.

See http://www.cbal.org/computer-training.html for literacy resources.

Avoid computer jargon

Use card matching activities and worksheets to introduce new terminology.  Don’t overload learners with computer jargon.

Learn together

Not everyone will learn at the same speed.  Have learners collaborate together in pairs or groups using a computer and share knowledge.  Group work allows a learner see others grappling with similar problems and challenges to themselves. 

Learn together

Avoid technology overload

Avoid using multiple technologies at the same time such as videos, computer monitors, handheld devices and overhead projectors. Assure learners that they don’t need to learn everything and that they can look up workbooks or find information online.   




Use positive instructions

Avoid warnings that can exacerbate anxiousness around e-learning such as “you must not turn off the computer without ‘shutting down’ first”.  Learners can easily fear they will do costly and irreparable damage.

Encourage practice

Give “brief presentations of information with demonstration and practice” (Hemby, 1999, p.34).  Allow plenty of time for hands-on practice.

Create learning partnerships

Learning partnerships can be with fellow learners, at the nearest learning centre, at home with a family member or friend.  “Learning with  the support of the church is common in the Pasifika community” (Fletcher, et. al, 2010, p.24)

Allow time for reflection

Give session time for reflection to discuss problems and issues as well as celebrate successes and victories.  Give learners plenty of reassurance and positive feedback.

Reflection

Conclusion

Fletcher et al (2010) suggests learners are more likely to succeed when “e-learning is embedded in literacy learning, the context relates to the students’ backgrounds and workplace needs, and the wider family structures support them” (p.19).  Other areas to consider for engaging learners are using game-like activities, “drag and drop” question and answer sites and the use of visual clues.  Bolliger (2009)  finds that learners “respond positively to using visual clues” (p.106) such as emoticons which can contribute to the “clear expression of meaning and emotion and therefore, support the formation of relationships” (p.106) to increase “the level of social presence and feel of community” (p.106) often lost with e-learning.

References

Bolliger, D. U. (2009). Use patterns of visual cues in computer-mediated communication. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(2), 95-108.

Coryell, J. E. & Clark, C. M. (2009). One right way, intercultural participation, and language learning anxiety: A qualitative analysis of adult online heritage and non-heritage language learners. ProQuest Central. Foreign Language Annals. 42(3), 483-505.

Fletcher, J., Nicholas, K. & Davis, N. (2010). Supporting adults to address their literacy needs using e-learning. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 15(1), 17-29.

GCFLearnFree.org Word 2010 Tutorial App [Video file]. (2013, February 1). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llPFjYmKJqs&feature=player_embedded

Hemby, K. V. (1999). Designing programs for computer-anxious adults: The trainer’s dilemma. TechTrends, 43(6), 32-34.  Retrieved March 21, 2013, from: from AUT website http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/docview/223123552.

Queens Library Adult Learner Program Computer Literacy [Video file]. (2009, July 31). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkvfeSD20HU&feature=player_embedded

Images:

Computer anxiety [untitled painting]. (n.d.).  Retrieved March 21, 2013, from: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVt78Ih3NXCpU18OylLTGmijt0_rREU99LmyB5-CslhsK8LssN9PGT4NX9dXbwBnzrHVoxiVTEMPaXhltBAZadwMb6ixvdCb1WIPTFxLdM3bnAuwLd03OaQ_Zj9UBo6hI8kSyGOHEIeu4/s320/Tame+Computer+Fears.gif

Error message [untitled drawing]. (n.d.). Retrieved March 21, 2013, from: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIF1vAF0n8xZ3FnrY1HJhhYXZ7io_NzzZThVMZoTaBlqylx17GVeZ6bpHesLBkVOTmV4lm0ZwN6O70AbQsxh_tiYj-UVo0bLI0w3LXikFhOQkgZMXH3gYlP23ILvVLiVy7IFsK9uS9yks/s1600/gorilla+rage+on+computer+meme.png

E-learning [Untitled painting]. (n.d.). Retrieved March 21, 2013, from: http://shelleywright.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/254126209_e34a70abcc_o.jpg

Learn together [Untitled photograph]. (n.d.). Retrieved March 23, 2013, from: http://edutech.uni-saarland.de/uploads/12/IMG_4772_klein.jpg

Reflection [Untitled photograph]. (n.d.). Retrieved March 23, 2013, from: http://www.indiana.edu/~icy/resources/tutorial/images/reflection.jpg

My teaching philosophy

Teaching philosophy and technology

When asked to identify my philosophy for teaching, I look back to my own education and recognise that I have had the influences of many philosophies.  As a receiver of education, my early education began with a cognitive approach.  In the 1970s when teachers began experimenting with new philosophies such as constructivism/humanism, strategies such as “group interaction” started to be enacted. 

As I have gone on and continued my learning as an adult through various courses, I have experienced many approaches and teaching strategies.  Some have been spectacularly successful and others have left me questioning what, if anything, I had learned?

Now, I am on my second fully online learning course of study delivered through tertiary institutes.  I have the opportunity to view both organisations and their differing approaches. I analyse them to guess at the possible philosophies each teacher brings to the learning.  Naturally, I have my own learning preference, so I can feel challenged by some strategies and not by others.

What I do find, as a receiver of education, is that I have an opportunity to really question my own teaching delivery philosophy, especially in relation to the online learning environment.  Kanuka (2008) maintains that we need to consider “our interrelationship of philosophy and the choices we make about e-learning technologies” (p.93).  I try to match myself to the different philosophies: Liberal/Perennial, Progressive, Behaviourist, Humanist, Radical, and Analytical, however, I find fragments of myself in all of them. 

To assist me in my search for clarity of philosophy, I consider the philosophies of technology and how I resonate with each one.  Kanuka (2008), gives example of three technology philosophies:

Uses Determinism

The idea that technology is a neutral tool to “serve the aims and objectives of agents (e.g., educators) employing them”(p.96) is an attractive idea.  However,  I believe the assertion that “as individuals, we have control and autonomy of the technology” is questionable and a narrow focus on technology “neglects the social embeddedness of these systems and their uses” (p.97).

Social Determinism

Integrating technology with social and cultural contexts resonates with my social constructivist and critical leanings.  However, I also agree with the view that social contexts do not “manipulate education systems” as there is a “dynamic mutual shaping between the social, technology and the users’ environment” (p.98). 

Technological Determinism

Technology is viewed negatively as a “distracting and potentially even harmful component of education systems” (p.98); a view I disagree with.  The growing use of e-learning by educational organisations and industries has had positive effects, however, I do share the concerns of others that “modern technologies and growing neo-liberalism are creating a rising capitalistic climate that includes political-economic interests such as comodification, commercialisation and corporatisation of education” (p.99).

As time goes on, I become more politically aware as I see the social inequalities in our capitalist society.  Increasingly, my guiding philosophy is critical/radical: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory. 

I strive to allow my learners’ to create their own learning and question their place in society. However, I also recognise that “the methods used to achieve perspective transformation are not doable in most educational environments” (p.109).

Along with a radical/critical perspective, I also have a humanist/constructivist approach to teaching. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_education, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(learning_theory)

My teaching supports “individual growth and self-actualisation” (p.106) and my teaching strategies include group work, experimentation and self-direction.  When viewing on-line learning though, taking this approach is more difficult, particularly when trying to instigate group work.

When I view my teaching practitioner history, I find that in many instances, I have been ‘channelled’ in my teaching approach to suit my employer organisation and the often time-pressured demands of the curriculum I am required to fulfil.  However, as my teaching experience has increased, I find that I now seek employers that support my own philosophies and shun those that do not.  I also find ways to work my own teaching philosophies into the often limiting curriculum and assessment regimes necessary for government funders ongoing support.

Self knowledge underpins all my education philosophies, and I agree with Kunuka (2008) that “reflecting on and becoming aware of our philosophical orientations is important” (p.111) for choosing how and what we use in e-learning technologies.  I hope these insights gained can guide me through all the changes technology has still to deliver.

Reference

Kunuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies–in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118). Edmonton, Canada: AU Press

The Implications for Teachers using Online Social Media

Social Media School

The Implications for Teachers using Online 

Social Media

Since the year 2000, technology has moved at a significant pace.  Schick (2008) defines Web 2 technology as “a space for interaction and knowledge construction also accessed by PC” (p.214) and Web 3 as “an interactive space accessed through mobile technology” (p.214).  On the webtrends.about.com website, Nations (Nations, n.d.) believes Web 3.0 will be appearing around 2015, with some suggesting Web 3.0 could include computers understanding stored information or even humans interacting in virtual worlds.  What is clear is that “we will experience a lot of change before it [Web 3] emerges” (Nations, n.d.) and the internet is becoming “the centre of both our work and our play” (Nations, n.d.).   

(ASCO, 2011)

I contend that the use of technology and specifically, social media, (see http://www.gcflearnfree.org/socialmedia) must become a part of everyday classroom practice, but also acknowledge that there are barriers and implications by adopting online information and communications technology (ICT) for educators.

Sticht (2011) sees the use of using ICT with literacy learners as a way to develop social capital and defines social capital as “the social connections and understandings between people that enable them to work together, live together and learn from each other” (p.1).  The numerous digital technologies provide social capital through “discussion groups, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other social media sites” (p.1) and allow learners to study outside as well as inside the classroom.  For an educator, Schick (2008) believes this interaction means moving on from “dutiful adherence to curriculum” (p.212) by engaging learners with “real-time online conversation” (p.212) and creating opportunity for learners and educators to engage with innovation, communication and real-world issues” (p.218).  Casey and Evans (2011) analysis of online learning show that both the educator and learner must learn to work together in “nonlinear ways” (www.irrodl.org).

On the Campus Technology website (Campustechnology.com ), Lederer (2012) highlights some of the benefits for educators using social media in the classroom:

• As an educational tool to “foster collaboration and discussion, create meaningful dialogue, exchange ideas and boost student interaction” (Lederer, 2012).
• Increase student engagement. E.g. allows students to engage with others that wouldn’t normally because of shyness or intimidation.
• Communication improvement between educator and students by sharing information, websites or educators answering questions on Facebook.
• Employment preparation.  Using sites such as LinkedIn or Twitter to improve employment success

Changing to ICT in foundation learning can be viewed with both excitement and trepidation for an educator.  However, it is not just educators who must make change.  Organisations must budget and plan for the use of ICT development for online courses and ensure that their computer systems have the capacity to handle the added burden online learning creates.  Although online learning can be seen as long term cost saving for the organisation, “what appear as efficiencies at a system level are not necessarily experienced as efficiencies at an individual level” (Schick, 2008, p.209).  For teaching practitioners, “ICT use may be an additional burden on top of current workload and professional development requirements” (Schick, 2008, p.206).  Schick (2008) identifies several key areas educators must address (p.210)(adapted from Rogers, 2007):

Emotions

Fears and motivation: Can I do this? Do I feel supported or coerced? Will I feel embarrassed if my students know more than me? Do I feel safe learning this?

Information approaches and strategies - Cognitive

Calvin, T. B.

“I already know enough to do my job fine – this is just an extra.  It isn’t really part of my subject area” (p.210).

Power/Organisational/Social relationships

What if I make mistakes – will I be blamed? Will I get acknowledgement? What’s in it for me? Is there time to do this?

“Technical – Is this practical?” (p.210)

Content resources. Approaches needed to teach and aids to use. Courses, coaching and mentoring.

Social media is changing at a rapid rate, and “‘early adopters’” (Tyler-Smith, 2006) led and forged the use of ICT in foundation education.  However, organisations are more conservative with experimentation and pushing the boundaries, so therefore “tend to constrain most individuals’ practice” (Schick, 2008, p.208), making it difficult for educators to break into new areas of ICT.  Schick (2008) identifies some major challenges for educators, including time to learn and become familiar with the technology, time to develop the courses using ICT along with the “conflicting philosophies and approaches to teaching and learning” (p.212).  Also, educators often have to contend with rolling enrolments, different languages, ages and abilities which makes it difficult to foster “learner-centered instruction” (p.211) that using social media encourages.  Educators themselves may also have similar “variable and spiky profiles of ICT skill and knowledge” (p.213) to their learners and conflicts of their own as teachers being “confident authorities and holders of knowledge” (p.213).

Ledder (2012) also brings up areas of concern that educators must plan for when using social media in the classroom:

Distraction

SOS_Wordle

Students are easily distracted from the learning content through using Twitter and Facebook.

Cyberbullying

Educators must intervene to prevent bullying episodes.

Lack of Face-to-Face communication

Students reliance on Social media for communication undermines valuable social skills needed for classroom interaction.  

  

Conclusion

I believe it is crucial for educational organisations to give educators time and support to manage the new technology as we head towards the Web 3.0 era.  Not only do educators need support to learn the technology, overcome fears around technology, but they must engage with social media and incorporate it in their planning.  Along with organisational support, educators need professional development to assist them to move from a teacher centered teaching approach to a learner centered approach.  Or, in the words of Casey and Evans (2011), educators must “find innovative ways to construct disorder and flow with chaos and build resilience to the traditional training that instinctively drives them to take control” (www.irrodl.org).

References
ASCO. (2011). Students like social media [Painting]. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from http://edudemic.com/2012/01/students-social-media/

Calvin, T. B. (2012). Pros and cons of new technology for employers and employees [Photograph]. Retrieved from http://www.orato.com/tech-games/social-networks-pros-cons

Casey, G. & Evans, T. (2011, November). Design for learning: Online social networks as a classroom environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1011/2021

Lederer, K. (2012). Pros and cons of social media in the classroom. Campus Technology digital magazine. Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/articles/2012/01/19/pros-and-cons-of-social-media-in-the-classroom.aspx

Murray, D. E. (2000) Changing techologies, changing literacy communities? Language Learning & Technology, 4(2), 43-58. Retrieved from http://autonline.aut.ac.nz/bbcswebdav/library/Library%20Content/murray.htm

Nations, D. (n.d.) What is Web 3.0?. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from http://webtrends.about.com/od/web20/a/what-is-web-30.htm

Rogers, P. (2007, July). ‘Thanks for pointing out my failings in public’ – and other things you’ll never hear in evaluation. Paper presented at the Aotearoa New Zealand Evaluation Association Conference, Masterton, New Zealand.

Schick, R. (2008). Many ways to communicate: Using ICT in foundation learning.  In J. Benseman and A. Sutton (Eds) Facing the Challenge: Foundation Learning for Adults in Aotearoa New Zealand, 17, 206-219.

Social media school [untitled painting].  Retrieved March 15, 2013, from http://edudemic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/social-media-school.jpg

SOS_Wordle [painting]. (n.d.). Retrieved March 15, 2013, from http://www.bgfl.org/bgfl/index.cfm?p=2576

Sticht, T. (2011). Social capital, social media and adult literacy education: commentary. National Adult Literacy Database. Retrieved from http://www.nald.ca/news/0216116938

Tyler-Smith, K. (2006, September). The first time e-Learners journey: an examination of attrition and withdrawal issues in the workplace-based programmes. Paper presented at the eFEST 2006, Wellington, New Zealand.