Mr Rogers versus Sesame Street

My issue with so many of these models is that I cannot start to visualize them from reading the articles or listening to the lecture. I start to have a cursory understanding though when I look at the examples. Usually when I see the examples the light bulbs go off and it starts to come together. But with Anchored Instruction, even when I saw the examples, I still could not get my head around it. It reminded me slightly of what it was like to watch Mister Rogers compared to what it was like to watch Sesame Street. The examples shown demonstrating this model, seem much more like Mr. Roger's in comparison to other models we have been seeing. Like other models we have discussed this seems to be much more geared towards elementary education. I could sees the value in using this model with students who can overstimulated if there too many audio or visual cues to process. Again, there was always something very calming about watching Mr. Rogers and that element popped out at me when I looked at these examples. Simple and easy to process. One tool though that I could see using with Anchored Instruction is Prezi. Prezi allows you to create a presentation where the viewer can move around at will. It would make it more Sesame Street than Mr. Rogers in that it would allow for more non-linear approach. Still, I am not sure when and if I would use this model with the students or participants I work with.

Goal-Based Scenarios

When I first read the pdf of Kevin's camtasia presentation (the audio on my computer has been acting wonky - and yes that might be because it knows that I am longing to chuck it out and just simplify my life by getting the 2nd generation Ipad, which by the way has not just one but two Moodle Apps) I sort of thought it hearkened back to my middle school days when we got to do a lot of role playing in a somewhat misguided, swinging sixties/seventies (please remember this was towards the end of the Vietnam War) attempt at education.  Not a lot of core learning was accomplished but we had a great time!  


When I started reading the articles, I realized that it holds closer to what I did in my early days of corporate training.  Back then I did a lot of exercises that really stressed the experiential  aspect of learning.  We would present a scenario to participants, in which there was a problem to solve.   They in turn had to work together to solve the problem in a given time period and with a given set of resources.  This would usually be done within a  larger framework of a program in which larger concepts like change, leadership, communication, teams, etc were being addressed.  These types of activities were designed for participants to apply the concepts of the classroom in a "real" situation to garner further learning and start to apply that learning forward to work.  To me this type of learning is similar to the apprentice-based learning we discussed last week, where we put students in situations where they really have to incorporate what they have learned in a real situation - not just a case-study application which stays at a more theoretical level.    


This is one area that I struggle to incorporate effectively when I have taught online. The trainings that I have been involved in have not been the most successful and really do not get at the same type of learning by doing.  One project involved the use of Second Life.  Participants created their own avatars and participated in role playing.  The problem was that in this setting the ability of creating a realistic setting was limited at best.  There  was little to no buy-in from participants and what happened was that the scenario fell flat.  But I have also worked with a lot of military groups over the years and the military has had great success with creating realistic virtual training scenarios that really do help provide a realistic platform to test competencies.

Situated Learning

This model brought to mind a faculty meeting that I attended last month when a welding instructor talked about how he taught logarithms to his students everyday but he never called them logarithms and because the students are actually using the math, they are not scared of it and they are able to apply it and use it.

This model also has the most personal appeal simply because I have always learned best by doing, not necessarily by abstract application of material.  While this model works extremely well in concrete apprenticeships it also works well in more abstract arenas like experiential education.  At the same time I can see the connection with project-based learning when even in a controlled setting, the student gets to apply the concepts - similar to our projects that we work on in this course.

In my mind, apprenticeships, internships, mentor-ships, etc are all an essential piece of the educational process.  In this day when jobs are not easily come by, they offer the student an opportunity to build a skill set that is more applicable to what they will face, and the ability to demonstrate those skills.

So...how will I incorporate this? Hmmmm, to be honest, I am not sure but I can say that this feels instinctively like the next step in my journey.

Problem-Based Learning

…Or as some might call it the Pepto Bismol of Learning.  The reason I say this is simply one must be not just a teacher or instructor but also a conductor, facilitator, coach, project management expert, etc, etc.  This is not a model that one goes into lightly given the complexity and the time it takes to do this well.  This complexity seems to be a factor that could send even the bravest running for the hills.  Jess said in her blog last week that she has moved away from incorporating aspects of cooperative learning as her life has become busier and busier with its many demands.  I think this is true for many of us.  While we want to provide a quality learning experience for our students it must be balanced with the other demands that are part of our lives.  To me Problem-Based Learning thus might be best for a team teaching scenario where the joy and responsibilities can be shared.

One way I can see using PBL is as a model for action learning with corporate clients.  Right now CCL does a lot of action learning with long term clients who are sending intact groups through a long-term process where they come to CCL a few times over the space of about 1 year.  Part of their learning is to create action-learning teams where they work on issues that are being faced by their organiztion.  They have to work colloboratively but each person on a particular team has their own piece of the pie, so to speak, that they must research, investigate and report back to the team.   As with PBL, there are a lot of project management skills that goes along with this model, both by the instructor and the participants.  Right now the model that CCL uses to manage this process is slighlty cumbersome and extremely expensive.  It involves more face to face times at intervals that are spread out over months.  It does not necessarily help keep participants engaged in the process.  I have been working on a design that would use the online classroom as the tool to help keep teams on task, engaged and able to communicate more effectively (especially since more often than not these are globally dispersed teams).   Often organiztions have internal structures like Sharepoint that can be used to help facilitate this process but tools such as Webex, Yammer, Adobe Connect, Wiggio, can all be used to give teams a central organization spot and allows an instructor to help facilitate the process on an ongoing process.  But again, in doing this, one must be committed to the process and willing to see it through to the end for participants to really gain from this expereince.  So get out the Pepto Bismol, here I come!