EDU 807 - Week 3 Video - Education, Creativity, Design, and Technology - Spring 2018 Group 2
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
In this presentation, you will hear Dr. Mishra describe his own approach to teaching that blends a variety of different disciplinary perspectives. As you view the video, I have marked a few segments worthy of conversation, and especially in light of our other focus reading this week on TPACK. You are welcome to comment on these segments, or to note others of interest.
Please offer three initial comments, as well as three replies to your classmates' comments.
Big questions to consider:
- Given that this presentation was offered nearly a decade after Mishra and Koehler originally formed the TPACK concept, what shifts do you see/hear in Dr. Mishra's thinking? That is, how is teaching with technology envisioned in TPACK, and how does he envision it here?
- What are the practical challenges that educators -- in K-12, higher ed, and training contexts -- encounter on a daily basis and how might Dr. Mishra's approach to design-based learning be of use to them?
- Finally, as you prepare to "reread" the TPACK concept (in a shorter form), make connections to the "21st century literacies" that he describes here, as well as the current version of the Horizon Report. What specific technologies might help a teacher/instructor bring Dr. Mishra's vision to life in the classroom/online?
At this moment in the video, Dr. Mishra begins to describe how he and his team reviewed various frameworks for 21st Century Literacies.
How are these ideas about “21st Century Literacies” similar to/different from what you know and have already learned about TPACK?
Are 21st Century Literacies = TPACK?
Are 21st Century Literacies ≠ TPACK?
Why? Why not?
From my understanding, 21st century literacy != TPACK.
With 21st century literacy, I think of the example of hypertext. In EDU800 we read an article by Coiro & Dobler that explored reading comprehension of hypertext, which is what I consider to be a good example of 21st century literacy. It requires a different (often greater) cognitive load to process than regular text.
Unless I’m wrong, however, the concept of literacy itself doesn’t come pre-packaged with a well-defined framework like TPACK that can be used as a research construct. I would envision 21st century literacy as an element than can be examined through the lens of TPACK.
That’s an interesting connection to the piece by Coiro and Dobler… thinking about how we can make the comparison to literacy practices – how they have changed, how they have remained the same – is important.
As for literacy frameworks, well, there are many. The one that I found most compelling over the years – both because it is sufficiently broad and somewhat vague – is the New London Group’s Pedagogy of Multiliteracies:
I think that one Interesting way to think about connecting 21st century literacies and TPACK would be to examine the ways in which teacher knowledge and skills would need to shift across various aspects of the TPACK framework when thinking about teaching literacy in digitally mediated spaces.
I think TPACK is a way to get to 21st century literacies. If the teacher is able to combine the best practices in technology, pedagogy, and content then they are not only able to create units, lessons, and activities that instill 21st century literacies into students, but they are demonstrating their own ability to do it.
I agree with you that it is important for teachers to be able to model and demonstrate their own ability.
That’s a good way to think of it. If you are truly doing all elements of TPACK, then you would have to be 21st century literate in at least one aspect, right?
After reviewing the TPACK mind-map definition, I believe that 21st Century Literacy framework creates a strange (& different) and larger overlap replacement for TPACK’s Technology Knowledge discipline section. So this would place 21st Century Literacy as being TPACK’s largest subset of the other two disciplines.
I’m definitely curious to hear more of your thinking about this, George.
I can certainly see how we might map 21st-century literacies onto technology knowledge.
In what ways do you think that educators – both in the K-12 system as well as more broadly in higher ed and the corporate world – might need to reconsider what it means to be “technologically knowledgeable,” and how this broader approach toward digital literacies might be useful?
Interesting connection… Curious to hear more…
Well I think the whole term of being technology knowledgeable is a moving target. Just as I tell anyone interested in technology for a career….you better like learning on your own and by the seat of your pants because if you don’t you will be out of a job because what you know now will soon be updated. So the definition of being technology knowledgeable needs to be a floating level comparison to probably geographically located age group of people. The bench mark needs to move with new technology and as certain number of people become comfortable with it.
Dr. Mishra also states in the video that nothing has changed…the 21st Century Learning framework still has the core pieces of TPACK. What has changed is the tools available. I view 21st Century Literacy as a sub-section of TPACK.
Curious to hear more of your thinking here, Pam. I can certainly agree that 21st-century literacies are an essential part of any type of technology-enriched teaching, and I wonder if you might add a little more detail here.
In what way do you think 21st century literacies are a subsection of TPACK? Are they required of the teacher in order to be fully “operational” in a TPACK sense?
At this moment in the video, Dr. Mishra begins to describe his vision for creativity.
How are these ideas about “creativity” similar to/different from what you know and have already learned about TPACK?
Is creativity = TPACK?
Is creativity ≠ TPACK?
Why? Why not?
This is similar to when he discussed being a video game designer. As he said, you can’t be only a programmer—you have to also be an artist.
In his diagram of 21st century learning, the first thing he pointed out is content knowledge. Later, however, he agrees with the notion that standardized testing is the cause of the decline in creativity, but I would question whether the content knowledge is there to allow for the divergent and convergent thinking that he mentions.
I’m glad that you picked up on this idea about content knowledge and the importance of, at some minimum level, having a certain set of facts, skills, and abilities.
Often times, I’m afraid that educators get quite caught up in the idea that all knowledge can be gained through constructivist, collaborative, experiential and other types of learning. Though I definitely lean heavy on that side myself (probably 90%) I also see a. place for learning and understanding specific content (probably about 10%).
Where do you fall on the continuum between content and creativity?
I honestly think that the fact that students carry a device that can get facts for them makes knowing facts irrelivent. They do need content understandings, but the ability to create from those understandings is even more important. An example of this would be project or problem based learning. If you tell a kid that food deserts are a problem and ask how can this problem be fixed then the student doesn’t need the teacher to tell them and they don’t need to memorize facts about food deserts. They need research skills to find out what a food desert is and the cause and effects of it. From there they need to think critically about the causes and creatively think of ways these things can be solved.
In addition to creativity, I think collaboration is key in this process as students who are solving the food desert problem can collaborate with other teams and provide critical feedback that allows the students to consider problems that may arise from their intended solution.
Short answer: content can be found and learned, creativity and collaboration are what get the real results.
Ashley, I agree. It is how we use the tools and not what we have memorized that makes the difference. We have many devices to help with holding and locating content info. This allows us to be more creative & efficient at utilizing the information.
I agree with Ashley and also agree with Maria Popova’s statement that creativity can’t be forced but it is possible when the content we learn is combined with other resources.
Yes, this exactly. I usually see it in the form of “We have to teach them how to be critical thinkers!” But I don’t think you can be a critical thinker without a bedrock of content knowledge, otherwise you don’t know what you’re criticizing.
Personally, with the continuum you mention, I definitely fall short in the creative category. Every time I try to be creative, my brain ends up looking for a formula, and then I realize I’m not really being creative anymore.
I can certainly understand your frustration here, Robert. I wonder if you might provide a specific example when you have tried to be creative with your teaching and yet encountered this kind of shortfall?
Does it happen with particular topics? Particular classes? Curious to hear more…
With that example, I was thinking of visual projects I’m sometimes tasked with, usually during professional development workshops. For instance, I had one creative task to build a graduation cap out of various colored paper. When I tried to think of a creative, multi-colored design, my brain just wanted to do single-colored and symmetrical!
I see the definitions/disciplines of TPACK assuming the inclusion of creativity. What I mean for that is each of the 3 sections of TPACK (Technology, Pedagogical and Content) all assume their information. But in reality the technology section is part because creative minds were used to create the “Technologies” to use, the ability came from previous “Content knowledge” that was taught and learned by children starting at an early age (pedagogy). So, TPACK’s definition assumes the use of creativity or chooses to not define their section origins in such a granular manor.
The vision for creativity as being NEW (Novel, Effective, and Whole) is similar to my understanding of TPACK. In TPACK, TK is new, unique, novel ways of applying technology to teaching and learning. PK is effective teaching and classroom strategies and CK is strong content and learning applications as a whole.
You are probably seeing a pattern here…
At this moment in the video, Dr. Mishra begins to describe his vision of trans-disciplinary thinking.
How are these ideas about “trans-disciplinary” similar to/different from what you know and have already learned about TPACK?
Is trans-disciplinary = TPACK?
Is trans-disciplinary ≠ TPACK?
Why? Why not?
I like the idea that Dr. Mishra introduces about combinatorial creativity, aka (in)Disciplined learning. It actually explains a lot about where creativity comes from. For instance, for Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy to exist, there had to be an author who knew enough about science and enough about the arts to cross-pollinate the two in a creative way.
I still would not equate trans-disciplinary learning with TPACK, but would say it’s one aspect of learning that could be part of the TPACK framework.
Nice example! …I think the answer was 42??
;-)
Trans-disciplinary thinking is just a fancy way of connecting ideas and thoughts. We used to call it “Out of the box” thinking. And sorry to state the obvious but the more you know about a subject and the more subjects you know the more opportunities you have at having unique ideas. And, of course, practicing that type of thinking also helps.
My thoughts exactly George…out of the box thinking.
Trans-disciplinary thinking is weaved within TPACK in my view. For example, in TK, an educator may decide to integrate an app they use for their fitness goals as a tech tool to explain a health sciences concept. On the other hand, the idea of trans-disciplinary thinking is true for how it applies to students. Students’ interests outside of their academic pursuits shape how they learn, how they problem solve and how they express their creativity.
General Document Comments 0
icons on the left to see existing comments.
0 archived comments