COMPUTATIONAL THINKER
Students develop and employ strategies for
understanding and solving problems in ways
that leverage the power of technological
methods to develop and test solutions.
(ISTE, 2016)
understanding and solving problems in ways
that leverage the power of technological
methods to develop and test solutions.
(ISTE, 2016)
Coursework Artefact #1
In September 2015, I began my fifth course in the MET program ETEC 512: Applications of Learning Theories to Instruction which offered an overview of various theoretical approaches to learning. The modules of this course covered behaviourist, cognitive, developmental and social approaches to learning. One of the primary assignments for this course was to collaboratively develop a presentation on a specific learning theory. My group was given the Information Processing Theory as our topic, which is an approach to cognitive development that suggests a way in which humans process incoming information. This theory contrasts a behaviourist approach that humans simply respond to stimuli. Instead, it suggests that information is processed in stages, much like the way in which a computer processes data (Orey, 2002). Information enters the brain (or computer) through our senses (mouse/keyboard). Next, the information is processed in our working memory (processor/ram), where it is stored and recalled from specific areas of our long-term memory (hard drive). This recalled information can lead to an output response to the stimuli (monitor).
Together, my group we created an Information Processing Theory Prezi to share this theory of learning with our peers. While constructing the visualisation of how this theory suggests the brain processes information required computational thinking skills to breakdown the process into its component parts. I extracted key information from multiple readings to develop a model to better understand a complex system. I further explain the process and how it applies to teaching and learning in a screencast video:
Application to Practice
The above video outlines a simple five step routine that teachers can use to support students in the acquisition of new information. I refer to this process as the “5 R’s for Remembering” which include reception, retrieval, receive, respond and reinforce. Computational thinking was used to breakdown the complexities of instruction into its component parts. This is a routine that I shared with the teachers at my school in my role as the ICT Educational Specialist in Hong Kong and now use in my own teaching in my current role as a Language and Literature teacher. After completing my project on the Information Processing Theory, I became so convinced of the relevance of computational thinking to classroom learning that in December 2015 when the course concluded, I enrolled in Google’s Computational Thinking for Educators Course. This course went into further detail about computational thinking and required me to design authentic lessons and activities that teach computational thinking skills to students.
In March 2017, I presented what I had learned about the Information Processing Theory in a workshop called The Cold Hard Facts About Choice and Play in Learning at the 9th Annual 21st Century Learning Conference in Hong Kong. In this session, I spoke about how this theory suggests that the brain cannot process information if we are in a state of stress or boredom. I modelled how choice activities could result in better learning by challenging participants to learn about the Information Processing Theory through engaging and self-driven activities. I further teach my own students about the theory to encourage them to monitor their own learning and practice metacognitive skills.
Coursework Artefact #2
In January 2016, I began my seventh course in the MET program, ETEC 565A: Learning Technologies: Selection, Design and Application in which I examined the educational value of Learning Management Systems, instructional and communication tools and the trends and future development of technology-dependent education. A part of this class, I designed my own course on the online platform Eliademy called “A Quest in Gamification”.
Coursework Artefact #2
In January 2016, I began my seventh course in the MET program, ETEC 565A: Learning Technologies: Selection, Design and Application in which I examined the educational value of Learning Management Systems, instructional and communication tools and the trends and future development of technology-dependent education. A part of this class, I designed my own course on the online platform Eliademy called “A Quest in Gamification”.
This asynchronous course is directed at classroom teachers who want to learn more about the theory behind gamification and how to create motivating units for their students. Drawing on the teachings of Conrad (2000), I designed a course that continually emphasises the main points and tasks, conveys the relationships among instructional elements, appeals to learners’ prior knowledge and skills, as well as encourages participants to regularly reflect on how the skills will be applied after the course is completed. I also drew on the teachings of Lee and Owens (2004) when mapping out the modules of my course to balance linear and non-linear learning paths. This course embodies computational thinking by requiring participants to develop descriptive unit plans to facilitate problem-solving and employ algorithmic thinking to develop a sequence of steps.
Application to Practice
The course I designed for ETEC 565A became a prototype for the creation of a professional development online course from 21st Century Learning entitled “Gamification: A Quest in Instructional Design”. The learning outcomes and structure of the course resemble my preliminary course, but also must integrate other criteria required from the company. Through the development of this online course, I hope to make an impact on teaching and learning in the greater educator community as well as within my own classroom.
References
Conrad, K. (2000). Instructional Design for Web-Based Training. Chapter 5: Defining Learning Paths. Pp. 111-136, topics: Developing Content Outline, and Documenting Design Decisions.
Gaston, C. [HKGascan]. (2017, March 9). Mind mapping the brain's role as a learning and teaching tool [Twitter moment]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/HKGascan/status/840108987152388096.
ISTE (2016, June). ISTE Standards for Students. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students-2016#startstandards.
Lee W., Owens D. (2004). Multimedia-Based Instructional Design. Chapter 23: Developing Computer-Based Learning Environments. New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons.
Lutz, S., & Huitt, W. (2003). Information processing and memory: Theory and applications. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/infoproc.pdf.
Mahoney, A. [Adri_Mahoney]. (2017, March 10). Experiencing the cold, hard facts of play [Twitter moment]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/Adri_Mahoney/status/840110065562542081.
Orey, M. (2002). Information Processing. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Information_processing.
Turple, C. (2016, April 2). Gamification: A Quest in Instructional Design. Retrieved from https://eliademy.com/catalog/catalog/product/view/sku/c0757f713b.
Turple, C. (2016). Information Processing Theory - Computer Analogy [diagram]. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B1lwWyllyBA6N3hqY3V4M1RIYVU.
Turple, C. [Cris Turple]. (2015, November 19). Information Processing Theory - Classroom Applications [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=631r0qNYke4.