As Schwartz’s article stated, the STAR Legacy Modules is designed to “teach a deep understanding of disciplines, while fostering the skills of problem solving, collaboration, and communication, focusing on problem-based learning, followed by open-ended project based learning.” This module focuses on creating another inquiry-based learning environment for students. The learning objectives are closely connected to the subject matter and in order to get to the solution, it requires the navigation through several steps. I am not sure why, but initially this module seemed more complex to me than the others.
This module would allow for both in-class and asynchronous activities. It would work well as outlined in a web-based module as well. Initially, when reviewing the resources for this week, some of the challenges that came to mind was the ability for some students to activate their prior knowledge, be able to competently generate ideas, and the ability to collect data for research that would be geared towards a purpose. I think that it is important for the Facilitator to be “strong” as well. As noted in the article (Schwartz), the Facilitator can pose questions that can direct the learners towards what variables should be represented in the module and keep them focused on the goal of the challenge. Other challenges may be the ongoing responsibility of raising test scores. Does this align with the role and accountability efforts of the educators? As we all know, these challenges are not new to us, as we have posed these questions throughout our blogs throughout the semester.
I think that students would benefit from this module in an on-line environment. Additionally, as the examples of the modules provided to us this week, the modules are capable of supporting the issues of differentiation, accommodations, and collaboration. I think that it is important for the challenge posed to be interesting and students should be able to make connections between the material and the challenge. Adequate time should be given to complete the module. The reflection component is equally as important. As a common theme with the prior theories, teachers would need additional planning time to carefully plan accordingly. Cases can be embedded with multi-media tools. Various podcasting tools, Voice Thread, Clipshack, Castpost, JayCut, and collaborative tools can be used, such as Wikis. There are endless possibilities when enhancing the module with multi-media. The audio and video can help to reinforce and enhance the content.
Hi, Donia,
ReplyDeleteI think I have a clue as to why this approach seems more complex than the others.
It's a compedium of just about all of the approaches we have studied so far. It contains the elements of collaboration, is anchored in meaningful tasks, there is reflection before and after each lesson, instruction is customized to fit to the students' domain knowledge, etc., etc....
The approach is divided into three modules consisting of pretest, inquiry cycle, and reflection/assessment...the inquiry cycle is subdivided into six segments, each of which is further subdivided into relevant activities supporting those subdivisions...
(sigh) makes me nostalgic for chalk-and-talk!
I do agree, SL is highly adaptable for internet use, and the facilitator needs to be well-trained as how to employ this approach. It is easy to see how students could become lost in the labyrinth, but with proper guidance though the learning cycle, I think students could benefit overwhelmingly to this approach.
Thanks for your post!
-Al
I think it is interesting how we each interpret the different models individually. I think we will all walk away from this class with a toolbox filled with possibilities for creating highly interactive lessons.
ReplyDeleteI personally feel 'raising test scores' is NOT a motivator for any educator. If we create well-designed lessons, formatively assess and support re-teaching through differentiation, mastery will increase -- affecting those test scores others are so focused on.
Donia -
ReplyDeleteYou mention that you think the instructor/facilitator has to be '“strong” as well'. This is an interesting point. What I like about this is that it does force someone to be more of a facilitator than a "teacher" but it does require the ability to ask the right type of questions and direct students in a ways that aids in their progress but still leaves the control and responsibility to the student. It probably requires strength on both the part of the instructor and the student!
My first response was also that this model seemed more complex than the others. I like the simplicity of the 5 stages, but there is definitely a lot than can be packed into each section... paths within a path.
ReplyDelete(Julie Jones)