A presentation combining research on adult basic education learners in an online learning program, with universal design for learning concepts. Pictures used come from the research project, personal photos, and Pixabay.
Sunday, 20 March 2016
Friday, 29 January 2016
Standardization. Make everything the same and it's easier to manage. It's a conundrum that has faced front-line instructors since the inception of standardized curriculum and tests. Online development, especially at an institutional level, is undergoing the same issues. Balancing administrative and instructional needs can be an awkward balance.
At the adult level, assumptions are made that standardization and even research around online design applies to all levels of learners. Yet, a basic education student doesn't manage information in the same way a student in a post-secondary college program does. It's not about being an adult, common sense, or a weird assumption that smart phones and computer literacy are the same thing. It's about the level that a person is at with their prior knowledge, skills and abilities. Self-efficacy and confidence plays a part, as well as prior learning experiences, learning deficits and digital and critical literacy.
When it comes to ideas like Universal Design, you wouldn't say I'm not making that doorway bigger to ensure wheelchair access because it doesn't fit with the design elements of our hallway. Or, I am not painting that door so that my residents with dementia won't get confused. In my opinion, someone who has never met with a person who is in a wheelchair should probably not be designing their accessible kitchen.
Universal design for learning takes the idea of design into the virtual world in wonderful ways. It is even incorporated into checklists when it comes to online design. Yet, when it becomes a matter of aesthetics and checklists, unfortunately the level and reality of a learner isn't always taken into consideration.
Design elements and decisions such as monochromatic, small print, and nothing flashy in order to make courses institutionally the same are the norm. But it should be recognized that these decisions are often being made by individuals with a much different worldview and understanding than our adult basic education students. As a result, the creative is abolished. And it is the creative that is most needed to bring in those learners who exist on the margins, in order to better facilitate their online experience. Ensuring the decisions being made relates to the learner at their particular level becomes a matter not of personal preference or inappropriate research applications, but of what really works for our learners.
At the adult level, assumptions are made that standardization and even research around online design applies to all levels of learners. Yet, a basic education student doesn't manage information in the same way a student in a post-secondary college program does. It's not about being an adult, common sense, or a weird assumption that smart phones and computer literacy are the same thing. It's about the level that a person is at with their prior knowledge, skills and abilities. Self-efficacy and confidence plays a part, as well as prior learning experiences, learning deficits and digital and critical literacy.
When it comes to ideas like Universal Design, you wouldn't say I'm not making that doorway bigger to ensure wheelchair access because it doesn't fit with the design elements of our hallway. Or, I am not painting that door so that my residents with dementia won't get confused. In my opinion, someone who has never met with a person who is in a wheelchair should probably not be designing their accessible kitchen.
Universal design for learning takes the idea of design into the virtual world in wonderful ways. It is even incorporated into checklists when it comes to online design. Yet, when it becomes a matter of aesthetics and checklists, unfortunately the level and reality of a learner isn't always taken into consideration.
Design elements and decisions such as monochromatic, small print, and nothing flashy in order to make courses institutionally the same are the norm. But it should be recognized that these decisions are often being made by individuals with a much different worldview and understanding than our adult basic education students. As a result, the creative is abolished. And it is the creative that is most needed to bring in those learners who exist on the margins, in order to better facilitate their online experience. Ensuring the decisions being made relates to the learner at their particular level becomes a matter not of personal preference or inappropriate research applications, but of what really works for our learners.
Tuesday, 19 January 2016
Anatomy of ABE Students
Why do we need to be conscious of the research and the tools connecting to our students' reality?
For anyone who has worked with pre-high school level students it is obvious. The reasons for separate, intentional and flexible programming reflects that the reasons behind adult basic education students not achieving success in prior schooling are many and varied.
"The lesson eventually learned is that ABE/GED students with high expectations and equally high vulnerability to physical, psychological, and family stress are less likely to believe that persistence pays. For many ABE students, getting through two classes may take more persistence and energy than it took their teachers to get through two years of college… imagine enrolling in a graduate program where you have no idea how many years it will take to get your master's, and seated beside you is a student who has been in the program for twelve years (Dr. Nancy Boraks)."
(Excerpted from "What I Wish They Had Told Me" by Dr. Nancy Boraks).
-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)