Thursday, July 29, 2010
IPT July 29, 2010
Outcomes --> Assessment --> Content/Activities etc.
We can't actually know what someone knows, so we use proxy to take indirect measures to try and figure out what the learner really knows. There are so many unknown lurking variables that can skew results (lack of sleep, stress, etc.). We get over these things by increasing the sample size (assessing with lots of items lots of times).
Objectives:
• Audience - who?
• Behavior - what?
• Conditions - constraints, support
• Degree - how well/how much?
I love that this model emphasizes the foundation of outcomes, and that assessment and content are derived (or should be) from the outcomes. The only issue that I am seeing with this theoretical model is that it is telling me that the content/activities are only connected to the outcomes through assessment. The logic is that if the assessment step is done right, then the content (which is based on the assessment) will accurately reflect the outcomes. The logic is sound in theory, which is what all this really is, which is probably why it is so popular. The problem is that we all admit that it is impossible to assess learning directly. Let's bring some more "logic" into this framework. A perfect assessment needs to be direct, or else there will always be lurking variables that will skew and widen the gap between perceived performance and actual comprehension/learning. Assessing learning cannot be direct, only indirect (even though indirect assessments can get pretty close). Thus it is impossible to design a perfect assessment. Following with this logic, if our content is based on our assessment, which can't be perfect, then our content will only have the potential to be imperfect. It will always be hampered by the imperfections in the assessment. This means also that the outcomes will never fully be met. Is it possible that the content can be designed to meet outcomes that can't be perfectly assessed? I believe that it is. The task here is to use the above model first (define outcomes, design assessment, and then design content). Then, the designer should be aware of the weaknesses of the assessment and try and design the content to overcome the weakness in the assessment. One can argue that without a way to assess, there is no way that the designer can know if the content is meeting the outcome. Well, there is NO chance in meeting that section of the outcome (the section that we can't quite accurately assess) if our content design is based solely on the assessment. There is a chance in meeting that section of the outcome if the designer realizes the weakness of the assessment and tries to overcome through the content. Is this a guarantee? No. Will the designer ever know if the content meets this section of the outcomes? No (or else there would be a way to assess it). Is there a possibility that it can meet this section of the outcomes? Yes. In my mind, that possibility is reason enough to try.
Alignment
We can't actually know what someone knows, so we use proxy to take indirect measures to try and figure out what the learner really knows. There are so many unknown lurking variables that can skew results (lack of sleep, stress, etc.). We get over these things by increasing the sample size (assessing with lots of items lots of times).
Objectives:
• Audience - who?
• Behavior - what?
• Conditions - constraints, support
• Degree - how well/how much?
I love that this model emphasizes the foundation of outcomes, and that assessment and content are derived (or should be) from the outcomes. The only issue that I am seeing with this theoretical model is that it is telling me that the content/activities are only connected to the outcomes through assessment. The logic is that if the assessment step is done right, then the content (which is based on the assessment) will accurately reflect the outcomes. The logic is sound in theory, which is what all this really is, which is probably why it is so popular. The problem is that we all admit that it is impossible to assess learning directly. Let's bring some more "logic" into this framework. A perfect assessment needs to be direct, or else there will always be lurking variables that will skew and widen the gap between perceived performance and actual comprehension/learning. Assessing learning cannot be direct, only indirect (even though indirect assessments can get pretty close). Thus it is impossible to design a perfect assessment. Following with this logic, if our content is based on our assessment, which can't be perfect, then our content will only have the potential to be imperfect. It will always be hampered by the imperfections in the assessment. This means also that the outcomes will never fully be met. Is it possible that the content can be designed to meet outcomes that can't be perfectly assessed? I believe that it is. The task here is to use the above model first (define outcomes, design assessment, and then design content). Then, the designer should be aware of the weaknesses of the assessment and try and design the content to overcome the weakness in the assessment. One can argue that without a way to assess, there is no way that the designer can know if the content is meeting the outcome. Well, there is NO chance in meeting that section of the outcome (the section that we can't quite accurately assess) if our content design is based solely on the assessment. There is a chance in meeting that section of the outcome if the designer realizes the weakness of the assessment and tries to overcome through the content. Is this a guarantee? No. Will the designer ever know if the content meets this section of the outcomes? No (or else there would be a way to assess it). Is there a possibility that it can meet this section of the outcomes? Yes. In my mind, that possibility is reason enough to try.
Alignment
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Justin J - Instructional Design
Justin
• Consulting - keep it an on-the-side basis. Full time consulting results in a huge personal sacrifice.
• It has everything to do with your professional network. Personality is everything. Need to be pleasant to work with
• Its all about making a team or group of people successful.
International Audience
• Students in 63 countries, but we don't cater well to them. Most of the students are the high adventure groups, but what about the villages in Ghana? Money. Need a philanthropic organization to fund it.
Business Model
• Someone pays us to do work, and they need to make money now. Theory guides our thinking, but practicality brings us home. The employable approach is to design quick, and learn - a constant evolution. We can't sit back and take 2 years to develop a final project. Rapid prototyping, iterative design.
Vision for independent study
• Fast, prototype design. Historically, publishing was the goal. This is outdated now. Distance learning program isn't content creation anymore. There's lots of stuff out there now. Before we were building stuff that didn't exist. Now, we need to be clear what the learning outcomes are for the product, (consumer-minded) and meet those goals efficiently. Anyone can learn anything they need from the internet, but it takes them a long time to do it. 1) meet with a costumer, get to know their needs. 2) Give feedback to what is already available 3) Design a way to not just create content, but to connect people to existing content and resources in a simple and understandable manner. More than just teaching content, we are teaching how to be successful on your own.
• Consulting - keep it an on-the-side basis. Full time consulting results in a huge personal sacrifice.
• It has everything to do with your professional network. Personality is everything. Need to be pleasant to work with
• Its all about making a team or group of people successful.
International Audience
• Students in 63 countries, but we don't cater well to them. Most of the students are the high adventure groups, but what about the villages in Ghana? Money. Need a philanthropic organization to fund it.
Business Model
• Someone pays us to do work, and they need to make money now. Theory guides our thinking, but practicality brings us home. The employable approach is to design quick, and learn - a constant evolution. We can't sit back and take 2 years to develop a final project. Rapid prototyping, iterative design.
Vision for independent study
• Fast, prototype design. Historically, publishing was the goal. This is outdated now. Distance learning program isn't content creation anymore. There's lots of stuff out there now. Before we were building stuff that didn't exist. Now, we need to be clear what the learning outcomes are for the product, (consumer-minded) and meet those goals efficiently. Anyone can learn anything they need from the internet, but it takes them a long time to do it. 1) meet with a costumer, get to know their needs. 2) Give feedback to what is already available 3) Design a way to not just create content, but to connect people to existing content and resources in a simple and understandable manner. More than just teaching content, we are teaching how to be successful on your own.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Our Section of the List - Feedback
Timing and Type of feedback
* The user-response feedback should always be immediate. (CBI, 7)
o "Research has shown, for example, that immediate feedback can be more effective for decision-making and novel information tasks(Jonassen & Hannum, 1987) as well as for lower level, knowledge-based tasks (Gaynor, 1981). For higher level tasks, such as abstract concepts and application/comprehension skills, delayed feedback has proven more effective (Gaynor, 1981; Jonassen & Hannum, 1987). Other research(e.g., Gaynor, 1981; Roper, 1977) indicates that concept acquisition is facilitated through immediate feedback while long-term retention is enhanced with delayed feedback (Bardwell, 1981)."
* The program should include knowledge of correct response feedback.(CBI, 3)
o This includes response verification (is it right or wrong) AND providing the correct answer
* Low prior knowledge students need response contingent feedback. (CBI 3)
o Include why the wrong answer is wrong and why the right answer is right.
o No searching is necessary for the learner
* High prior knowledge students need topic-contingent feedback.(CBI 3)
o Directs learners to (or provides additional) information to find the correct response.
o The learner is responsible for finding the correct answer in the information given.
* High certitude responses need quick and succinct feedback
* Low certitude responses need more elaborative feedback
o Certitude can be measured during the evaluation, dictating the type of feedback, or the learners can have the choice of how elobarative the feedback will be.
+ "A potential criticism of extensive elaborative feedback is reduced efficiency of the instructional unit. This problem can be effectively addressed, however, by providing increase learner control over the type and elaboration of the feedback (CBI 8)."
* There should be periodic feedback based on tracked data according to learner goals.
o There is a way to determine learner goals.
o Learning/achievement is defined (either by designer or user - Ex. 5 correct iterations)
o The results of the latest session is related back to the goal.
* The user-response feedback should always be immediate. (CBI, 7)
o "Research has shown, for example, that immediate feedback can be more effective for decision-making and novel information tasks(Jonassen & Hannum, 1987) as well as for lower level, knowledge-based tasks (Gaynor, 1981). For higher level tasks, such as abstract concepts and application/comprehension skills, delayed feedback has proven more effective (Gaynor, 1981; Jonassen & Hannum, 1987). Other research(e.g., Gaynor, 1981; Roper, 1977) indicates that concept acquisition is facilitated through immediate feedback while long-term retention is enhanced with delayed feedback (Bardwell, 1981)."
* The program should include knowledge of correct response feedback.(CBI, 3)
o This includes response verification (is it right or wrong) AND providing the correct answer
* Low prior knowledge students need response contingent feedback. (CBI 3)
o Include why the wrong answer is wrong and why the right answer is right.
o No searching is necessary for the learner
* High prior knowledge students need topic-contingent feedback.(CBI 3)
o Directs learners to (or provides additional) information to find the correct response.
o The learner is responsible for finding the correct answer in the information given.
* High certitude responses need quick and succinct feedback
* Low certitude responses need more elaborative feedback
o Certitude can be measured during the evaluation, dictating the type of feedback, or the learners can have the choice of how elobarative the feedback will be.
+ "A potential criticism of extensive elaborative feedback is reduced efficiency of the instructional unit. This problem can be effectively addressed, however, by providing increase learner control over the type and elaboration of the feedback (CBI 8)."
* There should be periodic feedback based on tracked data according to learner goals.
o There is a way to determine learner goals.
o Learning/achievement is defined (either by designer or user - Ex. 5 correct iterations)
o The results of the latest session is related back to the goal.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Class Notes - July 13, 2010
Multi-media
• WHY - this is the big question. We can't just say if a computer can do it, lets do it!
• There is no difference when we actually compare media forms (keeping everything else the same). We can't say "online instruction is better/worse than classroom instruction." When you keep everything the same, there is no difference
• Dual-Coding theory - Is it limited to 2? Shouldn't it be more complex than that?
• I'm not sure that this has anything to do with what we talked about or read, but I have just been thinking about why there is such a problem deciding whether Instructional design is a science. It seems to me that attitude, confidence, and other characteristic and environmental factors play a large role on learning, which is why controlling for any experimentation is practically impossible.
Spacing Effect
• So basically, who cares if it’s a question of capacity or ability to receive input (input speed) - when it comes in two ways (auditory and visual) it is more effective with the amount of time given.
• WHY - this is the big question. We can't just say if a computer can do it, lets do it!
• There is no difference when we actually compare media forms (keeping everything else the same). We can't say "online instruction is better/worse than classroom instruction." When you keep everything the same, there is no difference
• Dual-Coding theory - Is it limited to 2? Shouldn't it be more complex than that?
• I'm not sure that this has anything to do with what we talked about or read, but I have just been thinking about why there is such a problem deciding whether Instructional design is a science. It seems to me that attitude, confidence, and other characteristic and environmental factors play a large role on learning, which is why controlling for any experimentation is practically impossible.
Spacing Effect
• So basically, who cares if it’s a question of capacity or ability to receive input (input speed) - when it comes in two ways (auditory and visual) it is more effective with the amount of time given.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Openness Notes - July 08, 2010
Openness in Education
Reuse, redistribute, revise, remix.
Successful educator - shares the most thoroughly with the most students
Ideas can be shared without losing them. When we express ideas, (books or cd's) only one person can have it at a time. - When we do so digitally, it becomes possible to share.
Dr. Wiley talks about how the principles of supply and demand play into digital textbooks. He says that digital textbooks have unlimited supply. I think that he might be misunderstanding the rule. To me, the question isn't how many of one product you have, but it is how many different versions or options of that product exist. If one company has the only textbook for biology, it doesn't matter how many copies they have, they will know they are the only source and sell it high. When several companies are selling the same product (and aren't organized like OPEC) they are competing, and the market and cost will equalize much less than the first scenario. The issue isn't so much that digital copies are limitless, it is that there aren't enough quality choices and options to undercut the big bad publisher.
Reuse, redistribute, revise, remix.
Successful educator - shares the most thoroughly with the most students
Ideas can be shared without losing them. When we express ideas, (books or cd's) only one person can have it at a time. - When we do so digitally, it becomes possible to share.
Dr. Wiley talks about how the principles of supply and demand play into digital textbooks. He says that digital textbooks have unlimited supply. I think that he might be misunderstanding the rule. To me, the question isn't how many of one product you have, but it is how many different versions or options of that product exist. If one company has the only textbook for biology, it doesn't matter how many copies they have, they will know they are the only source and sell it high. When several companies are selling the same product (and aren't organized like OPEC) they are competing, and the market and cost will equalize much less than the first scenario. The issue isn't so much that digital copies are limitless, it is that there aren't enough quality choices and options to undercut the big bad publisher.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Reading Notes - July 07, 2010 (barely :))
Multimedia
The ability to
transfer learning to the solution of new problems has long
been recognized as a better measure of learner understanding
than mere retention of the material (Wertheimer, 1959). (page 3)\
From generative theory, I take the idea
that meaningful learning occurs when learners select relevant
information from what is presented, organize the pieces of
information into a coherent mental representation, and integrate
the newly constructed representation with others. From
dual coding theory, I take the idea that these cognitive processes
occur within two separate information processing systems:
a visual system for processing visual knowledge and a
verbal system for processing verbal knowledge. (page 4)
He keeps using the phrase "more creative." Maybe I missed something, but I don't remember him defining his understanding of the term "creative"
Multimedia is a more effective form for helping students learn information regarding cause and effect relationships. Pictures need captions, software animations need narrations. When both are present, spatial learners are able to take both types of input, and integrate them together, allowing them to transfer the information to new contexts and problems.
Dual-Processing
A dual-processing model of multimedia learning. For
Group AN, shown in the top panel, the incoming animation and
narration initially are held in different working memory spaces. For
Group AT, shown in the bottom panel, the incoming animation and
text initially are held in the same memory space. (page 2)
Experiment 1 - Students who were engaged in the AN group did significantly better in retention, matching, and transfer that students in the AT group. This gives evidence for the dual-processing model, that when exposed to visual and audio learning, learners have more memory space to work with, and they are able to make connections. When it is just visual, learners lose focus and miss important things because they are trying to cram everything into the same memory space.
Experiment 2 yielded very similar results and conclusions. As a side note, it seems very interesting that the authors clearly aren't choosing a p value before they run their statistics, because they are presenting values from .01-.05. Although p-values are usually chosen to be .05, it seems statistically unethical to present them this way.
Third, in split-attention situations, an overload in visual
working memory reduces the learner's ability to build
coherent mental models that can be used to answer transfer
questions. In contrast, when words are represented in an
auditory working memory and pictures are represented in
visual working memory, the learner is better able to organize
representations in each store and integrate across stores.
Consistent with this interpretation, across two experiments
AT students generated fewer solutions on the transfer test
than did AN students.
These results seem very believable, and they seem to make sense. I'm not quite sure that the process is as simple as it is presented here, but I do think that the variation in modes allows the brain somehow to increase its processing power, enhancing learning. I don't know that there is evidence to support that the brain is using more or less space, and that it is getting overloaded.
Instructional Time
To be honest, I felt that the most helpful and useful part of this article was the author's descriptive definitions of the different ways that time is used in the classroom. I think that anyone with teaching experience can benefit from 1) being aware of the different ways that time is used in a learning experience and 2) reflecting on the way that time is used in their own classroom. The focus of the article was to provide a way to use these different measures of time on task to improve educational research for design, but I think the definitions of how time is used helps any educator or designer formulate an idea of how to design instruction that optimizes on the best use of time.
US Department
Studies in which learners in the online condition spent more time on task than students in the face-to-face condition found a greater benefit for online learning.5 The mean effect size for studies with more time spent by online learners was +0.46 compared with +0.19 for studies in which the learners in the face-to-face condition spent as much time or more on task (Q = 3.88, p < .05).6
The general take home message for me from these articles was the powerful statistics and arguments for the dual-coding model. Although I am not so sure that the way we learn can be fully described to a simple model, there isn't a question that when two modes, visual and audio, are presented simultaneously, the brain is better prepared to accept the information. They attribute it to memory space, but I think it could be a number of things. Maybe instead of space, the brain realizes that 2 modes of information are coming in and it works harder to prepare to receive the information than it would if just one mode were present.
The ability to
transfer learning to the solution of new problems has long
been recognized as a better measure of learner understanding
than mere retention of the material (Wertheimer, 1959). (page 3)\
From generative theory, I take the idea
that meaningful learning occurs when learners select relevant
information from what is presented, organize the pieces of
information into a coherent mental representation, and integrate
the newly constructed representation with others. From
dual coding theory, I take the idea that these cognitive processes
occur within two separate information processing systems:
a visual system for processing visual knowledge and a
verbal system for processing verbal knowledge. (page 4)
He keeps using the phrase "more creative." Maybe I missed something, but I don't remember him defining his understanding of the term "creative"
Multimedia is a more effective form for helping students learn information regarding cause and effect relationships. Pictures need captions, software animations need narrations. When both are present, spatial learners are able to take both types of input, and integrate them together, allowing them to transfer the information to new contexts and problems.
Dual-Processing
A dual-processing model of multimedia learning. For
Group AN, shown in the top panel, the incoming animation and
narration initially are held in different working memory spaces. For
Group AT, shown in the bottom panel, the incoming animation and
text initially are held in the same memory space. (page 2)
Experiment 1 - Students who were engaged in the AN group did significantly better in retention, matching, and transfer that students in the AT group. This gives evidence for the dual-processing model, that when exposed to visual and audio learning, learners have more memory space to work with, and they are able to make connections. When it is just visual, learners lose focus and miss important things because they are trying to cram everything into the same memory space.
Experiment 2 yielded very similar results and conclusions. As a side note, it seems very interesting that the authors clearly aren't choosing a p value before they run their statistics, because they are presenting values from .01-.05. Although p-values are usually chosen to be .05, it seems statistically unethical to present them this way.
Third, in split-attention situations, an overload in visual
working memory reduces the learner's ability to build
coherent mental models that can be used to answer transfer
questions. In contrast, when words are represented in an
auditory working memory and pictures are represented in
visual working memory, the learner is better able to organize
representations in each store and integrate across stores.
Consistent with this interpretation, across two experiments
AT students generated fewer solutions on the transfer test
than did AN students.
These results seem very believable, and they seem to make sense. I'm not quite sure that the process is as simple as it is presented here, but I do think that the variation in modes allows the brain somehow to increase its processing power, enhancing learning. I don't know that there is evidence to support that the brain is using more or less space, and that it is getting overloaded.
Instructional Time
To be honest, I felt that the most helpful and useful part of this article was the author's descriptive definitions of the different ways that time is used in the classroom. I think that anyone with teaching experience can benefit from 1) being aware of the different ways that time is used in a learning experience and 2) reflecting on the way that time is used in their own classroom. The focus of the article was to provide a way to use these different measures of time on task to improve educational research for design, but I think the definitions of how time is used helps any educator or designer formulate an idea of how to design instruction that optimizes on the best use of time.
US Department
Studies in which learners in the online condition spent more time on task than students in the face-to-face condition found a greater benefit for online learning.5 The mean effect size for studies with more time spent by online learners was +0.46 compared with +0.19 for studies in which the learners in the face-to-face condition spent as much time or more on task (Q = 3.88, p < .05).6
The general take home message for me from these articles was the powerful statistics and arguments for the dual-coding model. Although I am not so sure that the way we learn can be fully described to a simple model, there isn't a question that when two modes, visual and audio, are presented simultaneously, the brain is better prepared to accept the information. They attribute it to memory space, but I think it could be a number of things. Maybe instead of space, the brain realizes that 2 modes of information are coming in and it works harder to prepare to receive the information than it would if just one mode were present.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Leitner System
Leitner System
The Leitner system is intriguing. The MTC employed a similar system in their TALL language learning software. When missionaries learned words, if they learned them correctly, they were placed in a system that retrieved the words in certain time intervals and brought them back at a set interval to be reviewed. Although the MTC thought that this would follow modern research and help acquisition, missionaries hated it. For this very reason, many missionaries chose not to use TALL at all, because they felt that they didn't have freedom to learn what they wanted to learn and that they were "wasting" time reviewing words when they wanted to learn other words for a closer task at hand. Although this way might have been more effective for the missionaries, they didn't understand it and didn't use it.
The Leitner system is intriguing. The MTC employed a similar system in their TALL language learning software. When missionaries learned words, if they learned them correctly, they were placed in a system that retrieved the words in certain time intervals and brought them back at a set interval to be reviewed. Although the MTC thought that this would follow modern research and help acquisition, missionaries hated it. For this very reason, many missionaries chose not to use TALL at all, because they felt that they didn't have freedom to learn what they wanted to learn and that they were "wasting" time reviewing words when they wanted to learn other words for a closer task at hand. Although this way might have been more effective for the missionaries, they didn't understand it and didn't use it.
Reading Notes
Distributed Practice in Verbal Recall Tasks: A Review and Quantitative Synthesis
Very interesting that the spacing effect was more statistically significant for 1 sec-10 min, and then 8 - 30 days. Although it was better for all, I wonder why it was better for the ends of the spectrum.
When participants learned
individual items at two different points in time (spaced; lag of 1 s
or more), equating total study time for each item, they recalled a
greater percentage of items than when the same study time was
nearly uninterrupted (massed; lag of less than 1 s). (page 12)
Our review of the evidence suggests
that, in general, expanding intervals either benefit learning or
produce effects similar to studying with fixed spacing. (page 13)
The data described
here reaffirm the view (expressed most forcefully by Bahrick,
2005, and Dempster, 1988) that separating learning episodes by a
period of at least 1 day, rather than concentrating all learning into
one session, is extremely useful for maximizing long-term retention. (page 17)
The present results suggest that the optimal ISI
increases as the duration over which information needs to be
retained increases. For most practical purposes, this retention
interval will be months or years, so the optimal ISI will likely be
well in excess of 1 day. (page 17)
The Spacing Effect
In addition to the reasons indicated
earlier, there is the fact that the spacing effect is somewhat
counterintuitive.
I think that the obvious take home message from the reading is that the spacing effect - or the benefit in retention when instruction is separated and taught at separate times (often separate days as the first article suggests) - needs to be implemented more widely instructional design. Our activity last week with the formula that shows the best retention in how we allocate 10 instruction periods over a month showed that how we spaced the instruction mattered in the maximal retention. The first article included a convincing meta-analysis that showed the existence of the spacing effect, and the second article provided some reasons for why it isn't being implemented the way it should.
One thing that I have noticed as I work to help the teachers that I supervise improve is the amount of opinion that exists. I think intuition plays a bigger role in deciding what a teacher will do in the classroom more than any research or program. The second article mentioned this as one of the reasons that the spacing effect isn't being utilized. It doesn't make sense to everyone that learning needs to be broken up. Many teachers are so passionate about being effective and helping their students, that they wouldn't dare separate learning for fear of wasting precious time that they could be using to do something effective. I wish that the second article gave some more suggestions about how to help teachers and designers include the spacing-effect into what they do instead of just presenting the reasons why it isn't happening.
Very interesting that the spacing effect was more statistically significant for 1 sec-10 min, and then 8 - 30 days. Although it was better for all, I wonder why it was better for the ends of the spectrum.
When participants learned
individual items at two different points in time (spaced; lag of 1 s
or more), equating total study time for each item, they recalled a
greater percentage of items than when the same study time was
nearly uninterrupted (massed; lag of less than 1 s). (page 12)
Our review of the evidence suggests
that, in general, expanding intervals either benefit learning or
produce effects similar to studying with fixed spacing. (page 13)
The data described
here reaffirm the view (expressed most forcefully by Bahrick,
2005, and Dempster, 1988) that separating learning episodes by a
period of at least 1 day, rather than concentrating all learning into
one session, is extremely useful for maximizing long-term retention. (page 17)
The present results suggest that the optimal ISI
increases as the duration over which information needs to be
retained increases. For most practical purposes, this retention
interval will be months or years, so the optimal ISI will likely be
well in excess of 1 day. (page 17)
The Spacing Effect
In addition to the reasons indicated
earlier, there is the fact that the spacing effect is somewhat
counterintuitive.
I think that the obvious take home message from the reading is that the spacing effect - or the benefit in retention when instruction is separated and taught at separate times (often separate days as the first article suggests) - needs to be implemented more widely instructional design. Our activity last week with the formula that shows the best retention in how we allocate 10 instruction periods over a month showed that how we spaced the instruction mattered in the maximal retention. The first article included a convincing meta-analysis that showed the existence of the spacing effect, and the second article provided some reasons for why it isn't being implemented the way it should.
One thing that I have noticed as I work to help the teachers that I supervise improve is the amount of opinion that exists. I think intuition plays a bigger role in deciding what a teacher will do in the classroom more than any research or program. The second article mentioned this as one of the reasons that the spacing effect isn't being utilized. It doesn't make sense to everyone that learning needs to be broken up. Many teachers are so passionate about being effective and helping their students, that they wouldn't dare separate learning for fear of wasting precious time that they could be using to do something effective. I wish that the second article gave some more suggestions about how to help teachers and designers include the spacing-effect into what they do instead of just presenting the reasons why it isn't happening.
Class Notes - July 01
1st Article
○ Memorising something 10 times every day is much more effective than memorising something 100 times once.
Miller
○ Why bits? Simplify information to "it is" or "it isn't."
○ The problem of comparing information is that how can you compare decibels to meters. If we can abstract how the information is stored with a binary system, we can compare how the mind deals with these things.
○ Subitizing - what you know for sure
○ Estimation - what you do after you run out of bin space
○ Numerousness - number and types of bins to categorize
Anderson
○ Claim = Memory mirrors the environment
○ Environment
§ NY Times = 100 days
§ Utterances from parent to a child
§ E-mail
○ Frequency and recency dictate in the environment which words are likely to show up again
○ Memory follows this. The forgetting curve becomes less steep the more that we bring it back to memory and practice it. Brain is calculating some need probability for how much we will need something again. It prioritizes what we keep and what we forget
○ Research Idea. Take non-sensible utterances, examine which utterances were forgotten and see if they were forgotten because our brain decided that these sounds won't be used, aren't prioritized because the sound is not as frequent in our speech.
Activity:
○ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
○ Memorising something 10 times every day is much more effective than memorising something 100 times once.
Miller
○ Why bits? Simplify information to "it is" or "it isn't."
○ The problem of comparing information is that how can you compare decibels to meters. If we can abstract how the information is stored with a binary system, we can compare how the mind deals with these things.
○ Subitizing - what you know for sure
○ Estimation - what you do after you run out of bin space
○ Numerousness - number and types of bins to categorize
Anderson
○ Claim = Memory mirrors the environment
○ Environment
§ NY Times = 100 days
§ Utterances from parent to a child
○ Frequency and recency dictate in the environment which words are likely to show up again
○ Memory follows this. The forgetting curve becomes less steep the more that we bring it back to memory and practice it. Brain is calculating some need probability for how much we will need something again. It prioritizes what we keep and what we forget
○ Research Idea. Take non-sensible utterances, examine which utterances were forgotten and see if they were forgotten because our brain decided that these sounds won't be used, aren't prioritized because the sound is not as frequent in our speech.
Activity:
○ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)