Fall 2000

Fall 2000

Learning Sciences and Technology Qualifier
November 2, 2000

Answer five of the following seven questions.
Remember to cite the readings in your answers.

1. Transfer means being able to use something learned in one circumstance in another related one that wasn't explicitly targeted in instruction - for example, application of Newton's First Law (a concept) or ability to control variables in a random experimental setup (a skill or practice).

a. Explain your understanding of what it takes to achieve transfer.

b. Choose your favorite knowledge building environment, and identify

- its affordances for promoting transfer
- the ways it ensures that those affordances can be recognized and productively used
- the transfer one could expect from learners learning in this environment
- its weaknesses and directions you would like to see it extend into

 

2. Imagine that you're going to provide a programming environment to be used by high school students preparing for their Computer Science AP exam (which is currently in C++). Consider programming environments for students that you've seen or read about: MOOSE Crossing, Boxer, Logo (including variations like StarLogo), and Emile. Which of the features of these environments would you include in your CS AP environment, and why these? Pick at least three features from any combination of these environments.

 

3. It is common wisdom in the learning sciences that in order for deep learning to happen, some sort of reflection needs to be happening as well. Some educational approaches focus heavily on how to make that reflection happen (e.g., cognitive apprenticeship); others focus on setting up the affordances for reflection but don't focus on the reflection itself (e.g., constructionism). Two excellent examples of this second approach are Eisenberg's Hypergami and Ellis' Palaver Tree On-Line (or choose some other one - there are plenty). Choose one of these to focus on, and using it as an exemplar:

Answer all parts.

  1. Explain what its creators want users to learn through using the system.
  2. Identify the kinds of reflection necessary for such learning.
  3. Identify the the affordances in the system (or the environment in which it's used) that were designed to point users towards such reflection.
  4. Explain how you might refine the software or the environment in which it is used to ensure that users are noticing and making productive use of those affordances. If some affordances are missing, you can also comment on how you might add those.

 

4. Projects like "One Sky, Many Voices" make use of adult mentors. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this technique. Make sure to mention issues of motivation for learning, role models, and the perceived and actual value of possession of "expert" knowledge. How is the role of a mentor different from the role of a teacher? Is this more like cognitive apprenticeship or traditional apprenticeship?

 

5. You've studied several attempts to teach through design, including Harel's ISDP, Kolodner's LBD, and Schoen's "Educating the Reflective Practitioner."

Answer both parts.

  1. What's the common theme in these projects? What is generally agreed upon in the way that design can support learning?
  2. Now consider at least two projects where students may be designing, but the researchers aren't describing it as such, e.g., Model-It, BOXER, MOOSE Crossing, StarLogo, and CoWeb. Do you think that design-for-learning is playing a role in the learning of students in these projects? Why or why not?

 

6. Roy Pea writes that Seymour Papert "claims that educational activism and experimental research are 'radically incompatible.' This is a remarkable dichotomy, a narrow construal of what constitutes experimental research, that belies the practices of educational innovation and social science." ("The Aims of Software Criticism: Reply to Professor Papert," Educational Researcher, June-July 1987, p. 6).

Answer both parts.

  1. What are the strengths of Pea's position? What are the weaknesses?
  2. Suppose that Pea and Papert were both trying to evaluate Mike Eisenberg's Hypergami. What might each of their evaluation plans look like? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach?

 

7. Kolodner and Guzdial argue that we must understand both the "effects with" and "effects of" CSCL.

Answer both parts.

  1. Discuss this in relation to a CSCL environment on the qualifier list.
  2. Discuss this in relation to your own research.