Authentic learning opportunities are key motivational and transformational aspects of the COVA approach which you can read about on this website or in the COVA eBook.
Learner’s Mindset – a state of being where people act on their intrinsic capacity to learn and respond to their inquisitive nature that leads to viewing all interactions with the world as learning opportunities. This state enables one to interact with and influence the learning environment as a perpetual learner who has the capacity to use change and challenges as opportunities for growth.
When you are in the learner’s mindset everything is about learning. Being in the learner’s mindset can be likened to Csíkszentmihályi’s (1990) state of flow which is where a person is performing some activity fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus. This notion of not being aware of something that is basic to everything is not a new notion according to the philosopher Alan Watts:
As the fish doesn’t know water, people are ignorant of space. Consciousness is concerned only with changing and varying details; it ignores constants-especially constant backgrounds. Thus only very exceptional people are aware of what is basic to everything (Sreechinth, 2017, p. 56).
This is why we argue that the learner’s mindset is a state of being where people act on their intrinsic capacity to learn and respond to their inquisitive nature which leads to viewing all interactions with the world as learning opportunities. When you are in the learner’s mindset you are like a fish in water. You don’t think about it because it is basic to everything that you do. Moving into or using this state of being requires that you change your thinking about learning, your approach to helping yourself and your learners learn how to learn, and by changing the learning environment.
Change your thinking about learning – By adopting a Learner’s Mindset you will see that learning is much more than the transfer of information, knowledge, skills, or process through instruction, self-exploration, or experience. This information transfer model just uses the lower order thinking which includes remembering, understanding, and applying while the Learner’s Mindset definition of learning is the making of meaningful connections which includes analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing the information you have taken to create something new or to solve a real-world problem.
Change your approach to learning – By embracing your Learner’s Mindset and asking the key questions of why, where, and how will this new information, skill, or process be used in the real world to solve a real problem.
Change your learning environment – By seeking out the actual real-world scenarios where the information, skills, and process will be used and applying the constraints of the real world to your learning you will leverage the authentic learning opportunities and create meaningful connections that will lead to growth and development.
How and why this works
Change your thinking about learning
The Learner’s Mindset approach to learning requires that you use all levels or orders of thinking. Even if you are only going to be asked to regurgitate information on a test or apply a process or skill knowing where and why this information, process, or skill will be important and in what real-world context this will be used will help you to encode the information for future retrieval.
Educational psychologists, learning theorists, instructional designers, educators, and many more learning professionals refer to Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning which looks at learning from three domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor.
Cognitive = Head/Knowing
Affective = Heart/Feeling
Psychomotor = Hands/Using the Sense
Bloom intended the taxonomy to be holistic and assumed that all three domains would be included when we develop learning environments. Unfortunately, this often isn’t the case in our educational systems and most other sectors of our society. Unfortunately, our systems of education have focused primarily on the Cognitive domain and all too often just on the lower levels of thinking that include remembering, understanding and applying.
Even though Bloom’s taxonomy was updated in the early 2000s the changes have only shifted in the higher order thinking putting creation at the top of the list. You will often see the levels labeled as remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating to denote the action by shifting from the noun to the verb form.
We prefer to go further and use the inverted Bloom’s taxonomy because it combines the higher-order thinking into a continuum and reveals that analyzing, evaluating, and creating must be conducted in conjunction which we often refer to as the synthesis level.
The synthesis perspective is extremely important because it not only requires that you take information apart and explore relationships (analyzing), critically examine the information and make judgments (evaluating), and then use the information to create something new (creating). All these higher-order levels still work with the information that would be acquired in the lower levels of thinking. In order to work at the synthesis level, you still need to find and remember information (remembering), understand or make sense of the information (understanding) and apply that information in a new but similar situation (applying). These lower levels of thinking are still very important because they are used to provide the information that will be analyzed, evaluated, and then synthesized when something new is created.
Depending on the context in which you’re in you will need to emphasize some of the levels more so than others. It is important to remember that knowing how you fully learn to make meaningful connections will help you even if you are just being asked to regurgitate information on an exam.
Change Your Approach to Learning
To change your approach to learning you need to ask why or where will this information be used. This is a much different question than asking “Why do we need to do this” next to “Will this be on the test”. These are among some of the most annoying questions instructors dread.
If your instructor has created a significant learning environment where they have given you choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA) then you will have the context and should be able to discern where this new information, skill, or process will be used. If your instructor is more focused on the information or acquisition model of instruction then they more than likely will not have created this type of learning environment and you may need to ask them the question about why, where, and even how this information, skill or process will be used in the real world. As we have pointed up earlier learning is really a process of making meaningful connections. If your instructor is focused on just the information, skill, or process then you will need to ask the key questions that will help you to make the connections you need to effectively learn. We often refer to this as a sift from collecting the dots to connecting the dots.
The conceptual framework referred to in this video is essential to the meaning-making process. This is especially important if you are brand new to the information or have very little experience or knowledge of an area. A good instructor will scaffold you into their level of understanding by helping you to see the conceptual framework in the way that they do. As you gain more knowledge and experience with the new ideas or concepts your conceptual framework will grow and you will make meaningful connections that will help you to retain the key information that you need to be successful.
If you have an instructor who is focused on covering the content in the text or in the assigned curriculum resources and isn’t willing or able to guide you to where and how this new information, skill, or process will be used in the real world then you will need to look for additional support from your classmates, from industry or from Google. We live in the most amazing time to be a learner. Virtually all the world’s information is accessible in the palms of our hands. Within a few minutes, you can do a Google search on almost any topic and get enough information to help you create the context and see the bigger picture.
Change in the Learning Environment
Learning doesn’t just happen in the classroom, library, or study space it actually happens all the time and everywhere if we are involved in using a real-world context. While we have been arguing this for several decades you may run into an instructor who does not hold this same position and view the classroom, lab, shop, or virtual meeting spaces as the location of learning. Obviously, you need to respect your instructor but we strongly encourage you to ask your instructor where this information, skill, or process can be used in the real world. We also encourage you to consider that a learning environment includes social and cultural factors.
If you are fortunate enough to have an instructor who creates a significant learning environment where they give the learner choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (the CSLE+COVA framework) or other aspects of constructivist learning theory then you will be immersed in a learning environment and also encouraged to expand your learning environment to include the real world scenario or project.
If you are not fortunate to have this type of instruction then you will have to consider the “where will this be used” question on your own. Relying on Google, friends, family, and classmates to help you to see where this new information, skill, or process will be used will be as important as it is in the Learning Approach section. Please keep in mind that if you are in high school or post-secondary education you should have some sense of what you may be planning to do after your studies so if you use this end as a focus for your learning journey and view your schooling is a means to an end. If you have a very specific focus like being a nurse, doctor, engineer, or trades-person then you have goals in mind and should be exploring your potential career environment to see how to apply everything you are learning.
We must warn you that this will be one of the harder parts of this process, especially if you have an instructor who is solely focused on delivering the content they are assigned to distribute. When COVID hit many instructors had to shift to remote learning where the primary form of interaction was Zoom or some other online collaboration tool, and this move was not made easily. Many instructors only know the information transfer or acquisition model of learning and they see content delivery as their primary responsibility. They give you the content in some form and you give it back to them in a form of a test, paper, or summative assignment; this is how the educational system works. Any shift away from the classroom is a difficult shift for these people because they are only focused on delivering content.
As a student you are not able to change these instructors so when you ask where and how this information, skill, or process will be used, please do so as politely and professionally as possible. You may find that many of your classmates will appreciate your questions and given a bit of time your questions should warm your instructor to the point where they start to look beyond just delivering you the content and focus on helping you to prepare for your future endeavors.
References
Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. Harper & Row.
Harapnuik, D. (2021, February). Learner’s mindset explained. [Website]. Retrieved from https://www.harapnuik.org/?p=8705
Harapnuik, D. (2021, June). Reignite your learner’s mindset. [Website]. Retrieved from https://www.harapnuik.org/?page_id=9069
Sreechinth, C. (2017). Extracted wisdom of Alan Watts: 450+ lessons from a Theologist. UB Tech. https://books.google.ca/books?id=xruxDwAAQBAJ
In the post To Own Your Learning You MUST Use Higher-Order or Deeper Thinking which I am referring to as Part 1 of this series, I argued that we need to move into an ongoing iterative process of higher-order thinking if we hope to own our learning and improve our situations. I also referred to earlier posts How to Change the World One Learner at a Time from January 2021 which is an update to a 2015 post and Changing the World, one learner at a Time where I started this whole line of thinking and writing. Since that time I have co-authored the COVA eBook and we are just about to publish a second edition of this book as well as are just about to publish the Learner’s Mindset book, so there has been a lot of time and research to help advance the development of these topics.
In the recent video Overcoming Challenges How a Learner’s Mindset Fuels Success I continue my exploration of how to move forward with the Learner’s Mindset and I point to the major challenges that we face when we adopt and live out a Learner’s Mindset.
The reason I continue to add a short written summary for many of my videos is that I want to offer my audience the benefit of an author’s summary perspective and an expansion of my personal story. The current video can be broken into two parts. The first part deals with the challenges of living a Learner’s Mindset and the second part is my admonition that I too experience these challenges and all too often long for a quick fix. Why not just deal with the facts and not labor the point by offering a personal story? I have learned that stories or narrative is what helps people engage and make their own meaningful connections. Don’t take my word for this; look at the evidence yourself. In the post Want To Change the World – Tell a Good Story and The Human Mind is a Story Processor, Not a Logic Processor I point to evidence that shows we are moved by stories because we each have a story of ourselves that we use to reconcile our place in the world so when we hear other’s stories it helps us to understand were this new story can fit. This notion is affirmed further by the research and sources post Feeling Machines that Think and my synthesis The Head Won’t Go Where the Heart Hasn’t Been.
Challenges to the Learner’s Mindset
Pursuit of the quick fix
School works – we learn in spite of the system of education
Pareto Principle or the 80/20 rule
While I do list 3 specific challenges, they are all closely related. I also argue that regardless of your cosmology (whether you believe we have evolved or are the result of intelligent design) the human being is the most amazing entity on the planet. As a result, we have a tendency to look for heuristics, more efficient ways of doing things, or finding shortcuts to problems. This perpetual pursuit of a better way, unfortunately, can lead to another human tendency; embracing the quick fix. While there are immediate time-saving advantages to the quick fix we know from research like Stanford Marshmellow Experiment which reveals that there are benefits to delaying gratification that have long-term consequences in improving our lives. I will also add that a quick fix like a visit to MacDonalds while on a trip can be a wonderful time saver and even a treat, but a steady diet of burgers and fries from MacDonalds will have dire long-term health consequences demonstrated by Morgan Spurlock in Supersize Me (2004). When we apply the quick fix to education, we must acknowledge that last-minute cramming or last-minute stream-of-consciousness writing will enable most learners to pass the test or write a passable essay. While this will work to get by one should consider if they would be willing to trust their safety crossing a bridge designed by an engineer who perpetually crammed for their exams and just did the bare minimum to get by.
When you combine our intrinsic capacity to do enough to get by with our current behaviorist model of education, which simply asks for the regurgitation of information on an exam or other summative assessment, many people will look back on their educational experience and confirm that this quick-fix can work. I also have to admit that I have used this quick-fix approach in my high school upgrading and also in much of my undergraduate studies. I recall a couple of Psychology courses that I not only passed but scored 110% (there were bonus points) in all the exams. Once I learned that the instructor was using the questions at the back of each chapter, I simply memorized the questions and variations of answers and aced all the exams. When I was sure that this model of instruction and testing was going to be consistent I also stopped going to the lectures. This enabled me to do better than the Pareto Principle or 80/20 rule because I put in about 10% effort and got 110% results. I also quickly realized I could easily put in 20% effort and get a “B” or an “A-” in most other courses. Getting that “A” or topping the class did take more effort and in my undergraduate studies, I did put in that extra effort in very selected courses and graduated with High Distinction which is equivalent to a 4.0 average. When I moved on to my graduate studies I realized that the information transfer model and the pursuit of an extrinsic motivator of grades was still being used in many required courses so I put in 10-20% effort to get that B or even an A and used my remaining time to focus on the courses that required more effort. I used the remaining time to improve my family’s living circumstances by working full-time to support my family and paid for my education without incurring any debt. In contrast, most of my classmates were more concerned with getting good grades and passing the test rather than using the learning environment as an opportunity to prepare for life.
One of the biggest problems with our system of education is that it only prepares students to pass the test but it doesn’t fully prepare students for life. Passing the test is easy and we all know people who have become very proficient at passing the test or demonstrating a skill or process. While these people are able to regurgitate information or recite a process, too many do not have the capacity to make a meaningful connection and use all that acquired information, recipes, and processes to change significant aspects of their lives or anyone else’s.
This leads me to the shift back to the video summary and to the story/narrative or the point in the video where I admit that I also have struggled with staying in the Learner’s Mindset just like anyone else. While I have successfully eliminated or prevented the need for knee surgery by moving completely to Xero barefoot shoes and working through a combination of Ben Patrick’s Knees Over Toes/ATG processes, Kelly Starrett’s Becoming a Supple Leopard 2nd Ed, Stuart McGill’s research, and many other approaches to rehab my knee I have also failed repeatedly along the way. Some of those failures were attributed to my nagging tendency to go for a quick fix and try to implement a partial solution rather than fully analyze and evaluate all the options as I tried to synthesize a more complete solution that was unique to my circumstance. Fortunately, these failures are simply part of the learning process. The quicker you fail or find out what doesn’t work the quicker you get to what will work. John Maxwell coined the term failing forward and offers Seven Principles for Failing Forward in his post Failing Forward.
Living the Learner’s Mindset, using my research skills and my uncompromising need to go to primary sources counters my laziness and has enabled me to sort through the plethora of copycat videos and sites to find the true authorities in a variety of integrated health disciplines including but not limited to exercise physiology, kinesiology, medicine, and nutrition. Because I live the Learner’s Mindset I am able to embrace my latest challenge of increasing my mobility as another opportunity for growth. Many of the lessons I learned in fixing my knee by fixing my feet can now be directly applied to fixing my mobility. Many of the resources and experts that I have already vetted can help me with this new endeavor.
My goal of being able to do a pistol squat is getting more attainable every day. Nearly a month has passed between when I finished the video in this post and when I have written this post and in that time the latest mobility solution that I have adopted is beginning to show improvement. I can stand and balance on one foot and put on my shoe and then switch to the other foot and put on my other shoe without falling over; most of the time. This is a major improvement. It doesn’t look very stable yet with my left side but as I strive to increase my stability with this movement it will continue to improve. Because I am continually evaluating my performance and also continually analyzing what I need to do to improve, I have noticed that my balance on my right side is much stronger and I have some persistent issues with my left side. The ongoing iterative process of continual improvement that is part of the Learner’s Mindset encourages me to see this latest challenge with balance as one more opportunity to grow and improve my mobility overall. I am also at the point in my personal diagnostic process where I will need another set of eyes and hands to help me determine the most appropriate actions to improve my strength and balance and overall mobility. One more trip to my integrated health specialist (fancy name for a Chiropractor) is in order to help me analyze/diagnose where I am at and what I need to do to make the next set of improvements.
This is going to take more time, but as I stated earlier the ongoing iterative process is necessary for the higher-order thinking process of evaluation, analysis, synthesis, and creation to be fully realized. This is just part of the Learner’s Mindset. This is not a treatment or a remedial activity; it is the way that we all need to live out our daily experiences. I am just going to add the qualified opinion of a trusted expert to help me with my analysis and help me to synthesize and create a new refinement to my current routine. Time and persistence is the key as is remembering that the effort is worth it.
Assessment OF/FOR/AS Learning. (2017, March). [National Forum]. The National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. https://www.teachingandlearning.ie/our-priorities/student-success/assessment-of-for-as-learning/
Chappuis, J., Stiggins, R. J., Chappuis, S., & Arter, J. (2012). Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right-using it well. Pearson Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Corwin Press.
Earl, L. M., & Manitoba School Programs Division. (2006). Rethinking classroom assessment with purpose in mind: Assessment for learning, assessment as learning, assessment of learning. Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth. https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/assess/wncp/index.html
Fenwick, T. J., & Parsons, J. (2009). The art of evaluation: A resource for educators and trainers. Thompson Educational Publishing.
McNamee, G. D., & Chen, J.-Q. (2005). Dissolving the Line between assessment and teaching. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 72–76.
NSW Education Standards Authority. (n.d.). Assessment For, As and of Learning. Retrieved December 7, 2020, from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-the-curriculum/assessment/approaches
Rowe, J. (2012). Assessment as Learning—ETEC 510. http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Assessment_as_Learning
Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 3–16). Springer.
Sparks, D. (1999). Assessment without victims: An interview with Rick Stiggins. Journal of Staff Development, 20, 54–56.
Types of classroom Assessment. (2003). Alberta Education. http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/mewa/html/assessment/types.html
Module 3
Bahula, T., & Kay, R. (2020). Exploring student perceptions of video feedback: A review of the literature. Proceedings of ICERI2020 Conference, 9, 10th.
Goldsmith, M. (2003). Try feedforward instead of feedback. Journal for Quality and Participation, 38–40.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(81), 81–112.
Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66.
Hirsch, J. (2017). The feedback fix: Dump the past, embrace the future, and lead the way to change. Rowman & Littlefield.
Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using Asynchronous Audio Feedback to Enhance Teaching Presence and Students’ Sense of Community. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(2), 3–25.
Lunt, T., & Curran, J. (2010). ‘Are you listening please?’ The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), 759–769.
Mahoney, P., Macfarlane, S., & Ajjawi, R. (2019). A qualitative synthesis of video feedback in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(2), 157–179.
McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio, and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 153–169.
Merry, S., & Orsmond, P. (2008). Students’ Attitudes to and Usage of Academic Feedback Provided Via Audio Files. Bioscience Education, 11. http://journals.heacademy.ac.uk/doi/full/10.3108/beej.11.3
Olesova, L. A., Richardson, J. C., Weasenforth, D., & Meloni, C. (2011). Using Asynchronous Instructional Audio Feedback in Online Environments: A Mixed Methods Study. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1). http://jolt.merlot.org/vol7no1/olesova_0311.htm
Oomen-Early, J., Bold, M., Wiginton, K. L., Gallien, T. L., & Anderson, N. (2008). Using Asynchronous Audio Communication (AAC) in the Online Classroom: A Comparative Study. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3). http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no3/oomen-early_0908.pdf
Parkes, M., & Fletcher, P. (2017). A longitudinal, quantitative study of student attitudes towards audio feedback for assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(7), 1046–1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1224810
Sharples, M., de Roock, R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Looi, C.-K., McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., & others. (2016). Innovating Pedagogy 2016: Open University Innovation Report 5. Milton Keynes: The Open University.
Shute, V. (2007). Focus on Formative Feedback. Educational Testing Service. http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-07-11.pdf
Stone, D., & Heen, S. (2015). Thanks for the feedback: The science and art of receiving feedback well (even when it is off base, unfair, poorly delivered, and frankly, you’re not in the mood) (Vol. 36). Penguin.
Yiğit, M. F., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2021). Effect of video feedback on students’ feedback use in the online learning environment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–11.
Module 4
Bandura, A. (n.d.). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W H Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5–12. Retrieved from https://www.ecolas.eu/eng/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Mezirow-Transformative-Learning.pdf
Mezirow, J. (2008). An overview on transformative learning. Lifelong Learning, 40–54.
I purposely used a provocative title to highlight an intrinsic problem with the use of technology in education. We all too often use technology as a treatment, quick fix, or even a silver bullet when we attempt to apply a narrow technological solution to the complex problems we have in education. History repeatedly shows us that technology alone, or the hope that the application of technology, will radically transform the way we do education. Consider the following shortlist of predictions about technology that failed to deliver:
Schools have had a longstanding immunity against the introduction of new technologies. In 1922 Thomas Edison predicted that movies would replace textbooks. In 1945 one forecaster imagined radios as common as blackboards in classrooms. In the 1960s, B.F. Skinner predicted that teaching machines and programmed instruction would double the amount of information students could learn in a given time. Filmstrips and other audiovisual aids were fads thirty years ago, and the television, now seen as a supplier of brain candy, once had a sterling reputation as an education machine (Seidensticker, 2006, p. 103).
In the post Why AI Should Scare Some Educators and Not Others, I update these predictions by pointing to the failure of MOOCs and also point to the more recent AI predictions that many are promoting.
In the post Computers in Schools – Not Working…Yet I point to an OECD research report that shows adding technology (ICT) or computers in schools has not improved test scores. Rather than just give you the link to the 200+ page report I pulled some of the key information and quotes and summarized the highlights.
I am not alone in pointing to a long history of educators attempting to use simple or narrow applications of technology in an attempt to solve problems that require a much more complex solution.
In the post We Need More Autodidacts I explore Justin Reich’s (2020) article Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education. Reich’s article and this later published book point to the primary challenges that so many teachers have faced in moving fully online due to the Covid lock-downs. The challenge is not the technology; it is the fact that most students are not prepared to learn more independently or without direct instruction, close supervision, and control cannot be maintained as effectively in online learning. Reich also points to the fact that students who are more autodidactic have not been adversely impacted by forced online learning because these students are learners first who can learn more independently anywhere and at any time.
In this post, I also have links to Larry Cuban’s review of Reich’s article and links to Cuban’s book Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom which offers an earlier version of Reich’s argument. Some of Cuban’s warnings on the empty promises of technology go back to the 70’s and 80’s so this is not a new idea. While Cuban is often referred to as a technology skeptic his examination of the data and conclusions are difficult to oppose.
Perhaps one of the most ardent skeptics of technology in education is Thomas L. Russell who’s book, “The No Significant Difference Phenomenon” (2001, IDECC, fifth edition), offers a fully indexed, comprehensive research bibliography of 355 research reports, summaries, and papers that document no significant differences (NSD) in student outcomes between alternate modes of education delivery. Russell’s book is difficult to get but you can review the No Significant Difference database at – https://detaresearch.org/research-support/no-significant-difference/
While Russell’s criticisms are well-founded, he doesn’t provide a perspective of how technology can be used to help to enhance learning. Cuban does acknowledge the limited benefits in the use of technology but reasserts that many of the better implementations of technology use are not sustainable or don’t do much more than support for the traditional implementation of direct instruction. Similarly, Reich suggests that we need to help students become more autodidactic but doesn’t offer how to do this.
In contrast, I have been arguing for several decades how we can use technology to enhance learning. In many of the above posts, I point to how we can help learners become self-directed and independent learners or autodidacts. I have spent the last three decades exploring and researching this question and you will find that my site is filled with posts on learning how to learn. My most recent emphasis on the Learner’s Mindset is just the latest synthesis of how we can help learners change their thinking about learning and change their approach to learning without ignoring that we need to change the learning environment.
Technology is a powerful tool that can enhance learning but it can only do so if we focus on first creating significant learning environment where we give learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA). If we focus on learning first technology then can be used in practical ways to enhance learning. If we focus on the technology first the learning has to be fit into the limitations or constraints of the technology which we have seen just doesn’t work as well as the hype that precedes it.
You will find that my site is filled with posts on learning how to learn. To save you some time on searching my site consider the following posts as a starting point:
