Search Results For ownership | 127 Results

Search Results For "ownership"

CSLE+COVA

Dwayne Harapnuik — July 19, 2017

If someone needs directions, don’t give them a globe. It’ll merely waste their time. But if someone needs to understand the way things are, don’t give them a map. They don’t need directions; they need to see the big picture (Seth Godin, 2017 para. 1).

In order to fully understand what the CSLE+COVA framework is and how it can enhance and transform learning, you need to see the broader perspective of creating a significant learning environment (CSLE) in which we give the learner choice ownership and voice through authentic learning opportunities (COVA).

The CSLE+COVA framework isn’t just a theoretical construct it provides the learning foundation for the Masters of Education in Digital Learning and Leading program and Masters of Education in Applied Digital Learning at Lamar University, is being used in the Lamar Honors College and several other programs at Lamar, is being used in the K-12 classrooms all across North America and is also being used to transform corporate learning environments.

We recommend that you use the following linked pages (traditional blue link text) in sequence but as you will see from the principles of COVA we leave that choice up to you:

CSLE+COVA – The synergy of creating significant learning environments by providing learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.

To benefit from the CSLE+COVA framework you must begin with a Change in Focus
You will find that these two videos (Part A – 7 min & Part B – 4 min) will help you to recognize how a simple change in focus can help you and your organization stay focused on helping your learners to realize their full potential and grow into future leaders who will help improve our world.

Creating Significant Learning Environment

CSLE
This short video (6 min) explains how important it is to look at the bigger picture when you are creating significant learning environments.

COVA
The short page and video (2 min) provides the overview and context for COVA and will help to reinforce how important it is to have choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.

CSLE+COVA Framework
The short page and video (2 min) provide the overview and context for CSLE+COVA.

Why CSLE+COVA
Since people don’t buy into what you do but buy why you do the CSLE+COVA Why, How and What page and the short 4 Keys to CSLE+COVA (5 min) provide the foundational starting point about how to use technology to enhance learning.

How The CSLE+COVA framework is used as the foundation for the Masters of Digital Learning and Leading (DLL) and Applied Digital Learning (ADL) at Lamar University:

DLL Program Map & ADL Program Map
The DLL Program Map and ADP Program Maps pages and related videos (8 min) will give you a detailed explanation, and a visual representation of how the DLL and ADL programs works and how each of the courses works together to help you build, implement and measure an innovation plan that will help you succeed as a digital leader.

What to expect from the DLL & What to expect from the ADL
Constructivist hold that people learn by making meaningful connections between what they already know and what is new. Therefore, it is our hope that the What to Expect video (6 min) which compares and contrasts the CSLE+COVA to the traditional information transfer model will help you to understand how to deal with the differences you will experience in the DLL program

What you get from the DLL & What you get from the ADL
Since the DLL and ADL programs use authentic learning opportunities that are core to the constructivist CSLE+COVA approach this page points to all the authentic, plans, strategies, and related resources that you will create in the program.

Research that supports the CSLE+COVA Framework
We encourage everyone to always look at the research and supporting ideas and theories behind what you read. The CSLE+COVA and the DLL and ADL programs are based on well-established constructivist theories and research so we encourage you to explore these foundational ideas further.

References
Godin, S. (2017, January 8). Maps and globes [Blog]. Retrieved from http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2017/01/maps-and-globes.html

To better understand how the CSLE+COVA approach compares to traditional approaches, how it is used in the Masters of Digital Learning and Leading at Lamar University and to view the research supporting the approach consider the following:

Change in Focus
Why CSLE+COVA
CSLE
COVA
CSLE+COVA vs Traditional
Digital Learning & Leading
Applied Digital Learning
Research

Foster Inquisitiveness Rather than Rebuild It

Dwayne Harapnuik — July 18, 2017 — Leave a comment

In the Curiosity is the Cat post, Will Richardson makes the argument that curiosity is the only “C” that truly matters. Richardson alludes to the variety of authors who have pointed to 4, 7, or more Cs of 21st Century learning and suggests that without curiosity you wouldn’t have critical thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration. He also points to the reality that our children are filled with curiosity prior to going to school and by the time they are in their teens they have little curiosity for anything to do with the curriculum. There appears to be a correlation between the ages that children lose their curiosity and a number of questions that they ask.

Santana & Rothstein of the Right Question Institute have compiled a graphic from NCES data that shows children’s peak questioning happens at age 4 and then significantly declines as they progress through school.

Warren Berger confirms this correlation in his book A More Beautiful Question and points to our education systems that reward rote answers over challenging inquiry as one of the primary causes of this decline. Our educational system focuses on giving the right answers as opposed to starting with the right questions. And yet the most innovative organizations in the world like Google, Netflix and IDEO and most innovative artists, teachers, and entrepreneurs look to change the world by starting with a “beautiful question.” Innovation requires starting with questions and our current educational system is not preparing learners who are equipped to ask questions and innovate.

When we focus on the right answers instead of starting with questions we not only extinguish our learner’s ability to question, inquire and innovate we create an environment of rewards and punishment that fosters fear in the learner when they aren’t able to regurgitate the right answer. In my research into how to get adults more comfortable with using technology, I learned that in order to stimulate the natural curiosity that is extinguished by our educational system I had to first help the adult learner get over their fear of doing something wrong or the fear of not knowing the right answer. Once steps were taken to help adult learners deal with this fear then we could start working on rebuilding that inquisitiveness that would help them to explore and see “what would this button do” as they learned how to use technology. While my approach to adult learning called Inquisuitivism proved to be effective, I couldn’t help wonder why we had to reactively help people rebuild a natural disposition or mindset that we all have as children.

Instead of attempting to reignite our learner’s inquisitiveness wouldn’t it be much more effective to nurture that natural ability they have in abundance before they start school? When we ask this question we need to be prepared to do something about what our inquiry reveals. There is no doubt that if we continue to do what we have always done in school our passive educational environment of main lecture points, content delivery, step by step rubrics, individual competition and standardized testing will continue to efficiently extinguish our children’s natural inquisitiveness.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Like Santana & Rothstein, Richardson, Burger, I also believe that we can help develop connected curious learners who will become the innovators of the future. While reigniting the questioning spark is extremely important this is only one part of a bigger process. If we focus on just this part of the problem we can easily fall into a quick fix mentality which is another perennial problem that we face in education. There are no quick fixes; we have to purposefully design our learning environments. We have to stop doing what we have always done and start creating significant learning environments by giving our learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA).

References
Berger, W. (2014). A more beautiful question: The power of inquiry to spark breakthrough ideas. New York, NY: Bloomsbury USA.
Richardson, W. (2017, February 11). Curiosity is the cat. Retrieved from https://willrichardson.com/curiosity-is-the-cat/
Santana, L., & Rothstein, D. (n.d.). Percentage of children asking questions. Retrieved from http://rightquestion.org/percentage-children-asking-questions/

In 21st century learning, Design, EDLD 5313, Learning CLSE, COVA, EDLD 5313, inquiry, inquisitive, inquisuitivism, questions

Are You Bolting a Jet Engine onto Your Horse Cart?

Dwayne Harapnuik — June 23, 2017 — Leave a comment

Source: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/4b/80/9e/4b809e7bf3d048ba8f61eef6889fcaaf.jpg

This image would be much more humorous if it wasn’t for the fact that this is an unfortunate and accurate representation of what is happening in our educational systems. Because we have been focusing on the technology and not the learning and have been attempting to gauge the effectiveness of applying today’s technology based on yesterday’s standards we are going nowhere in a hurry. Papert (1993) likened this to:

Attaching a jet engine to an old-fashioned wagon to see whether it will help the horses. Most probably it would frighten the animals and shake the wagon to pieces, “proving” that the jet technology is actually harmful to transportation. (p. 29)

Most people would chuckle at Papert’s example and ask how can anyone or any group be so naive or foolish? Yet, by trying to improve our passive traditional teacher-centered pedagogy with the application or addition of technology, we have essentially strapped a technological jet engine to our classrooms. Perhaps we should be pleased that we are at least not harming the animals (the teachers and students) and haven’t shaken our classrooms (the wagons) into pieces as the ‘no significant difference’ test results would show.

Unfortunately, we have the tendency to make similar mistakes when it comes to curriculum planning and instructional design. We all too often look to the content to be covered, update our terminology to reflect the current trends (individualized instruction, flipped classroom, blended learning, genius hour, 20% time, etc.), and then simply add in some new trendy activities to our well-established routines. We also bolt on some technology for added benefit. In minutes you have a new lesson plan, unit plan, or course plan. If you are fortunate enough to have a text book which chapter headings can be used to structure the content delivery steps—all the better.

However, if you really want to create significant learning environments by giving your learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities then you have to build your courses and programs differently. You can’t just bolt on new activities to your existing curriculum. You have to look at doing things differently by using the backward design mythologies that require you to start with a big hairy audacious goal (BHAG) which you construct by imagining what your learner will look like, become, or be able to accomplish by the end of the course or units of instruction. I have outlined this process in greater details in the post, 4 Keys to aligning outcomes activities, and assessment.

Be forewarned… this is not going to be an easy process. Leon Festinger (1957) has argued that we seek or strive for psychological consistency and are motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance that comes from dealing with contradictory information or ideas. It is not uncommon to feel psychologically uncomfortable when we are asked to do things differently than what we are accustomed. We look for ways to conform and align what we are doing with what we believe and if we can’t find this alignment we become uncomfortable. When this happens people will either change their beliefs to align with their actions or change their actions to align with their beliefs.

Fortunately, you get to choose how you are going to deal with this situation. If you are put in a position where you are asked to experiment or apply a different approach to creating your course or other units of instruction you have two choices. You can temporarily suspend your traditional content coverage beliefs about course design and adopt the new course design methodologies at the beginning of the process and then the actions of creating your BHAG and aligning outcomes, activities and assessments will fall into place and your discomfort may be limited or reduced. In contrast, if you maintain your traditional beliefs and choose to focus on content coverage you will find that you will not only be uncomfortable with the new course design process you will also not be able to create a BHAG nor align the outcomes, activities, and assessments that are so important to creating significant learning environments.

If you really want to get the most out of any learning opportunity you have to fight through the cognitive dissonance and experiment with the new ideas and processes to see if they really can make a difference. If you aren’t willing to do this with your course or unit design then you really do run the risk of bolting new more powerful ideas onto an antiquated foundation. Don’t your learner’s deserve more?

References

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York, NY: Basic books.

In Design, Learning 5313, backward design, COVA, CSLE, curriculum, EdTech, Learning, technology

DLL Course Goals

Dwayne Harapnuik — June 20, 2017

DLL courses and their Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAG):

EDLD 5302
Learners will take ownership and agency over the learning process and incorporate learner choice and voice in designing authentic projects that use technology innovations as a catalyst for change in their organizational setting.

EDLD 5303
The learner will prepare and submit an ePortfolio that demonstrates their mastery of the learning outcomes for previously completed professional development work (Apple Distinguished Education, Microsoft Certified Educator, Google Certified Educator, EDLD 5302, etc.).

EDLD 5304
Learners will be equipped with tools to be a self-differentiated leader who can address the inevitable resistance to change that will occur when launching innovative digital learning initiatives.

EDLD 5305
Learners will identify technology innovations and embrace them as opportunities rather than challenges and proactively use those changes as catalysts to enhance their institution or district’s learning environments.

EDLD 5313
Learners will identify and incorporate constructivist theories to create and implement significant digital learning environments.

EDLD 5314
Students will analyze and assess global educational technology innovation projects to determine what worked and what could be done better and apply those lessons learned to local innovation projects.

EDLD 5315
Learners will be able to assess the instructional impact the implementation of their innovation plans have on creating effective digital learning environments.

EDLD 5316
Learners who work in the area of educational policy and practice will be able to navigate the emerging educational and legal challenges of a knowledge society where most K-12 students are deeply immersed in online communication, having grown up as “digital natives.”

EDLD 5317
Learners will examine a variety of digital environments and other digital resources to effectively communicate with others the practical implementation and the pedagogical value for educational use.

EDLD 5318
Students will apply constructivist learning theories and instructional design principles in the development and delivery of an online course utilizing significant learning environments through selected course management tools.

EDLD 5388
Learners will effectively apply an innovative teaching practice by collaborating with colleagues to evaluate their impact on learners and design and model authentic professional learning (PL) activities that are active, have a significant duration, and are specific to their discipline.

EDLD 5320
Learners will synthesize their knowledge, skills, beliefs, and values gained through their digital learning and leadership experiences and present a comprehensive plan on how they developed into digital learners and leaders that can identify and promote innovation, create significant digital learning environments, and lead organizational change.

Why Authentic Learning Converts Into Lifelong Learning

Dwayne Harapnuik — June 5, 2017 — Leave a comment

This past Saturday morning when I walked into our living room I couldn’t help noticing the large sheet of black ABS plastic that Caleb, my 19-year-old son, had acquired for his latest project.

Ever since Caleb was a toddler he has enjoyed creating things that would change and enhance his world. For the most part, he was just like every other young kid who loved playing with Lego and other toys but Caleb and his older brother Levi would migrate away from typical play and look for ways to improve their toys and their environment. Both my boys would use Lego and Kinex and other constructables (what I like to call toys that you can build things with) to make things that they could use for other purposes. Their desires quickly moved beyond using Lego and Kinex to using authentic resources to change their environment. For example, when my older son Levi was three he wanted to be able to pull his wagon with his bike and rather than just use a rope he wanted my help to rig up a hitch system which we created and he used and then passed onto his younger brother. Caleb was equally industrious and I have so many fond memories of heading down to the hardware store to gather the items my boys needed for their latest projects.

So when I saw the big piece of plastic I reminisced about Caleb’s passion for making things. I also thought about how my wife and I carefully nurtured and helped him and his brother develop their interests and created the environment in which they could fully develop their creative abilities and learn how to learn. If there was just one thing that I can point to that really made the difference it would have to be the use of authentic projects. While we didn’t deny our boys models, Lego, Knex and other constructables we also encouraged them to explore working on authentic projects. My boys were always working on something that was real and that would make an authentic difference in their world.

The bike hitch, bike ramps, countless other smaller projects, and the major fort project were just the starting point for exposing my boys to authentic learning. When I purchased and renovated a rental property the boys who were just 8 and 10 worked alongside me at every stage from cleaning up the junk in the yard to demolishing the basement rooms, to building new rooms and doing all the work that was necessary to bring the house into a state where it could be rented and then sold. Later that spring when the boys were still just 8 and 10 they planned out all the details of our month-long summer bike trip which included everything from getting the maps from the AMA, planning the route, to identifying what we could do along the trip to, where we would stay, and what we could do when we got to the interior of British Columbia. They put together a detailed binder that had all the information we would need. That first major biking holiday is still one of the most talked about trips that my boys will reminisce about. As professional DownHill Mountain bike racers and extreme athletes Levi and Caleb travel continuously so this early experience has served them well. The have spent the majority of their short lives working on authentic projects that not only enhance their lives but lives around them.

Authentic projects work because they not only give the learner choice and ownership over the world that they live in but they also give the learner the ability to find and use their voice and show the world what they have created. Caleb’s projects are getting very sophisticated and while the air splitter he created for his high-end sports car is not a project you would ask a novice to undertake Caleb is able to create a professional quality enhancement and add significant value to his car because he has lived a life filled with authentic projects.

The cognitive and analytic processes of prediction, modeling, experimentation, diagnosis, and problem-solving that Caleb experiences through his countless authentic projects has also contributed to his desire to take on in bigger and bigger challenges. I enjoy helping Caleb with his projects because his passion for learning and creation are contagious.

In our typical education rhetoric we talk about engagement, individualized instruction, and life-long learning but the reality of standardized testing or, if our learners are lucky, the occasional analysis of case-based studies offers our learners very little motivation for learning in the present, so how can we expect them to be excited about learning in the future. We can change this. But that means we have to give back control of the learning to the learner. We need to allow our learners to choose and work on authentic projects that will inspire their intrinsic passions for learning and help them grow their learner’s mindset. When we do this for our learners the possibilities of what they will be able to do are virtually limitless.