0 Comments
Constructivist E-Learning Activities for Enlisted Compassionate Actions As a U.S. Army human resources instructor, I am responsible for providing training to other human resources personnel on processing numerous personnel actions. While there are countless important personnel actions, enlisted compassionate actions are perhaps one of the most important for human resources personnel to be extremely knowledgeable of and be highly skilled in processing them correctly and quickly. Enlisted compassionate actions include requests such as reassignment, deferment, and deletion for several reasons such as financial, legal, family, and medical problems. In chapter five of section three in Army Regulation 614-200, human resource personnel are provided with an overview of compassionate actions, criteria for soldiers requesting compassionate actions, supporting documentation needed to request compassionate actions, and different criteria based on the type of compassionate actions requested. The types of compassionate actions include when problems are temporary, problems are not expected to be resolved within a year, under emergency conditions, a spouse has died or soldiers and military families have special needs, and victims of sexual assault. Human resources personnel are responsible for providing support through administrative action to ensure the readiness, health, and welfare of all soldiers. Therefore, the need for human resources personnel to be highly knowledgeable and skilled in enlisted compassionate actions is crucial for mission accomplishment. The key objectives are to provide a lesson plan and e-learning activity based on the learner-centered model from a constructivist perspective in effort of human resources personnel gaining a better understanding of the seriousness and criteria of compassionate actions. It will also allow human resources personnel to better process administrative paperwork with urgency and attention to detail while also demonstrating communication and higher-order thinking skills for those requesting compassionate actions.
Constructivist E-Learning Activities Outline I. Part 1 Learning Activity – A Research Paper (Discovery and Active Learning: Two Weeks) a. Human Resources Personnel will be grouped into teams of two and write a 3,000-word research paper, using Google Docs, based on section three in chapter five of the Army Regulation 614-200 which covers all relative information on compassionate actions. i. Paper demonstrates knowledge of the types of compassionate actions. ii. Paper demonstrates knowledge of the criteria for compassionate actions. iii. Paper demonstrates knowledge of the process of compassionate actions. II. Part 2 Learning Activity – Role Play (Real-Life Problems Relevancy: Two Weeks) a. Each group of two will receive two different real-world situations for a soldier requesting a compassionate action in which they will take turns being the soldier and administrator through role-play and share a PowerPoint Presentation of it online to the discussion forum for others to share their thoughts and ask questions. i. Presentation demonstrates the ability to accurately interpret, identify, assess, categorize, and justify the assigned compassionate actions. ii. Presentation demonstrates the ability to communicate in a manner appropriate for soldiers requesting compassionate actions. III. Part 3 Learning Activity – A Reflection Paper (Learning Assessment: 1 Week) a. All human resources personnel will write a 500-word essay on their own contributions to the team projects, their team member’s contributions to the team project, and their newly constructed knowledge from the projects. Utilization of Technology Since the design of the e-learning activities is based on constructivist elements, human resources personnel will be grouped into teams of two to collaboratively conduct research, write a research paper, create a presentation to share, and write a reflection paper using various technology including computers, internet, Google Docs, Microsoft Word, and PowerPoint. More specifically, these types of technologies will help human resources personnel have more control over their learning and learn constructively through exploration, social negotiation, applying higher-order thinking skills to provided relevant real-world situations, and self-reflection; these are many of the fundamental design and collaborative design elements in constructivism (Koohang, Riley, & Smith, 2009, p.94). Application of Constructivist Theory In effort of applying the learner-centered model for designing a constructivist e-learning activity, human resources personnel will be grouped into teams of two to participate in a few assignments. First, they will be assigned to collaboratively conduct research in Army Regulation 614-200 and write a research paper on the types of, criteria for, and process of compassionate actions using Google Docs. Second, they will be assigned to collaboratively role-play in provided real-world scenarios in which one team member takes the role of the soldier requesting the compassionate action and the other team member takes the role of the administrator processing the compassionate action using PowerPoint Presentation. Third, they will be assigned to individually write a short reflection paper of their contributions, their team members’ contributions, and their newfound knowledge constructed from research paper and PowerPoint presentation projects. According to Woolfolk (as cited in Koohang, Riley, & Smith, 2009, p.92), constructivist “learning is active mental work, not passive reception of teaching.” These particular projects enable human resources personnel to embrace constructivism by being held responsible for their own learning and working collaboratively with others through various activities to construct and apply new knowledge to compassionate actions that are needed in the human resources realm. John W. Ferguson (2005) conducted case studies of teachers in his college applying constructivist elements to their instructional design and one of the teachers relinquished responsibility of learning to her students who would organize their own community meetings and found that they were more motivated and involved and also built important real-world skills to include confidence, teamwork, organization, and communication skills. The constructivist learner-centered model embedded in the e-learning design of these projects is aimed to promote and produce similar learning and outcomes from human resources personnel similar to Ferguson’s case study of students learning constructively. The Enlisted Compassionate Actions Projects Rubric Score: Component: 4 (100%) Does all of the following:
(90%) Does most of the following:
(80%) Does some of the following:
(70%) Does a few of the following:
Above is a constructivist rubric to assess the outcomes of the activity/lesson that is influenced by both Peter and Noreen Facione who developed the “four-level Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric” (Pierce, 2006). References Ferguson, J. W. (2005). Two cases of college instructors' application of constructivist principles. College Quarterly, 8(3), Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ846788 Koohang, A., Riley, L., and Smith, T. (2009). E-Learning and constructivism: From theory to application. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects (5). Retrieved from http://www.stevekerby.com/omde_610/Readings/e-learning_and_constructivism_Koohang_Riley_Smith.pdf Pierce, W. (2006). Designing rubrics for assessing higher order thinking. AFACCT. Retrieved from http://academic.pgcc.edu/~wpeirce/MCCCTR/Designingrubricsassessingthinking.html Lesson and Learning Activity for Army IPERMS As a U.S. Army Human Resources Specialist who received a special award for contributing greatly to mission accomplishment by having 100% of Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (IPERMS) documents uploaded correctly, it is my responsibility to instruct other Human Resources personnel on how to do the same and inform them of why it is so important to do so. IPERMS is a secure, web-based system that is used to upload all soldiers’ important documents to include, but not limited to, promotions, awards, orders, reprimands, life insurance, and emergency notification information. The need for IPERMS is crucial since it serves as a database for all new or updated information and is available for soldiers and Army administrators as needed. The key objectives are to provide a lesson plan and learning activity from a cognitivist perspective that also incorporates multimedia learning principles through the use of technology in effort of gaining the interest and interactivity of HR personnel for optimally understanding the importance of and how to use the IPERMS system.
Cognitive Lesson and Learning Activities Outline I. Part 1 Lesson – Introduce the term and purpose of IPERMS (Input). a. Define IPERMS. b. Explain the importance of IPERMS. II. Part 2 Lesson – Demonstrate how to upload important documents on IPERMS (Process). a. Provide step-by-step instructions with written information and visual screenshots. b. Have HR personnel use the handout to follow along with the PowerPoint Presentation. III. Part 1 Learning Activity – Allow HR personnel to practice uploading IPERMS documents (Output). a. Use multimedia principles and technology (computer, internet, smartboard, and projector) for HR personnel to interactively learn by following along with me. IV. Part 2 Learning Activity – Provide Testing for HR personnel to demonstrate understanding of IPERMS (Output). a. HR personnel will demonstrate their own understanding of the term, purpose, and process of IPERMS through a written test including term and definition matching, individual interpretation of the importance of IPERMS, and organizing the order of uploading IPERMS documents step-by-step. Utilization of Technology According to Bognar (2016, p. 231), “Storing information in long-term memory does not depend merely on abilities and learning styles of a learner, but above all on the presentation of educational contents which attract attention and stimulate activity in independent creation of mental connections.” Throughout the lesson and learning activity, I will be using technology including a computer, internet, smartboard, and projector to incorporate multimedia in effort of capturing the interest and encouraging active learning of HR in a number of ways. I will also apply Mayer’s principles on multimedia learning including “multimedia principle, cognitive science principles, principles for reducing extraneous processing, principles for managing essential processing, (and) principles for fostering generative processing” (Bognar, 2016, p. 232). First, I will use my computer and the printer to create a handout that will have both text and visual screenshots as step-by-step instruction which is based on the multimedia principles that people learn better with both visuals and text rather than just text alone (Bognar, 2016, p. 232). Second, in effort of reducing extraneous processing, HR personnel will use their handout to follow along as I use my computer, projector, and smartboard to conduct a presentation using PowerPoint for the lesson which is based on both the redundancy and temporal contiguity principles regarding presentation with simultaneously using pictures and narration (Bognar, 2016, p. 232). Third, in effort of managing essential processing, I will use multimedia in the form of video and interactive content by having all HR personnel use their computer and internet to follow along with me as I use my computer, smartboard, and projector to walk them through step-by-step on uploading iPERMS documents which is based on the segmented and modality principles regarding lessons presented in segments and visualizations with speech (Bognar, 2016, p. 232). Fifth, in effort of fostering generative processing, I will present the lesson and learning activity in a way that encourages “conversational style rather than a formal style” and speak in a friendly voice to promote better and active learning which is based on the personalization and voice principles (Bognar, 2016, p. 232). Application of Cognitivist Theory I will design the delivery of my lesson and learning activities based on the cognitive theory in a few ways. According to Bognar (2016, p. 230), “cognitivist theory employs an information-processing, input-process-output model” which is demonstrated in my outline to serve as guide in shaping the delivery of the lesson and learning activities. First, introducing the term, definition, and purpose of IPERMS will allow HR personnel to input the material. Second, providing a handout with written and visual information for HR personnel to follow along with my PowerPoint presentation will allow them to process the material. Third, guiding HR personnel to practice uploading IPERMS documents while following along with me and providing a written test for them to demonstrate their knowledge of the term, purpose, and process of IPERMS will allow them to output the material. Fourth, the layout of the lesson and learning activity is based on a cognitivist perspective that “the teacher should control the process of learning” and “respect the importance of learners’ activities and interests (Bognar, 2016, p. 232). In short, these three processes combined will encourage the rehearsal of information in different ways to encourage HR personnel to store IPERMS knowledge for long-term use according to the cognitivist theory. Rubric Content: Outcome assessed through lesson and learning activities of understanding and using IPERMS. Score: Component: Comments: 4 (100%) Does four of the following:
(90%) Does three of the following:
(80%) Does two of the following:
(70%) Does one of the following:
Above is my own version of a cognitivist rubric to assess the outcomes of the activity/lesson that is influenced by both Peter and Noreen Facione who developed the “four-level Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric” and “Stephen Paulone of University of Maryland University College” who used a rubric in the form of a table (Pierce, 2006). References Bognar, B. (2016) Theoretical backgrounds of e-learning. Croatian Journal of Education, 18(1), 225-256. Retrieved from https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/288139-022082-01-2182-GO1-9040/Bognar_Theoretical_Backgrounds_e-Learning.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=HvgpeC47p1EVwtML9eGO7z1Rk Pierce, W., (2006). Designing rubrics for assessing higher order thinking. AFACCT. Retrieved from http://academic.pgcc.edu/~wpeirce/MCCCTR/Designingrubricsassessingthinking.html How Epistemology Informs Learning Theory People are, by nature, lifelong learners. As we grow and learn we gain different epistemologies shaped by the experiences and knowledge associated with being exposed to a variety of situations in which our minds react in different ways. In fact, we often do this as a society without even knowing it. There are a multitude of factors which can include personal and professional experiences, social interactions, and economics which all form the foundation of who a person is and the exact method in which they learn. This foundation for epistemology transcends time and borders. Simply put, people may react to the same situation differently due to how their epistemology informed their personal learning theories. This type of philosophy is now being applied to education and it is important to understand how epistemology informs learning theory to better understand why students learn in different ways.
Defining Epistemology and Learning Theory Since epistemology informs learning theory, it is important to understand the background of the two related terms. The term epistemology was first introduced in the mid-nineteenth century by a Scottish philosopher and idealist named James Frederick Ferrier who argued that one must first understand what can be known before finding what exists in defense of skepticism (Keefe, 2007). According to Hofer and Pintrich (as cited in Bates, 2015), “Epistemology is a branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and justification of knowledge.” In other words, epistemology involves one’s beliefs about the origin, constitution, and validation of what is true. Epistemological beliefs inform learning theories which are ways one constructs, processes, and conserves information. Different Epistemologies and Learning Theories Amongst the many different learning theories, the four most common include objectivism, behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism which are informed by certain epistemologies. First, someone with an objectivist epistemology would be drawn towards the learning theory of objectivism. More specifically, objectivists believe knowledge is constant and will continually evolve and value objectively learning through “facts, formulas, terminology, principles, theories and the like” in effort to find truth that is correct and justifiable (Bates, 2015). Second, someone with a behaviorist epistemology would be drawn towards the learning theory of behaviorism. More specifically, behaviorists also take an objective approach without passing judgement as they believe human behavior is predictable and controllable based on invariant principles and measurable outcomes (Bates, 2015). Third, someone with a cognitivist epistemology would be drawn towards the learning theory of cognitivism. More specifically, Cognitivists believe knowledge cannot be restricted to observable external measurements, such as behavior, and are more concerned with interpretive internal measurements, such as mental processes (Bates, 2015). Fourth, someone with a constructivist epistemology would be drawn towards the learning theory of behaviorism. More specifically, constructivists believe knowledge is subjective based on perceptions and that new knowledge is not acquired by simply memorization, but constructed through reflection of existing knowledge, experiences, and social collaboration (Bates, 2015). While these four learning theories are somewhat similar in ways and also unique in their own right, it is important to recognize that they are informed by different epistemologies that can be conceptualized as individually equal and even cohesive at times rather than one being better than another. Investigating Students’ Epistemologies According to Hofer (as cited in Labbas, 2013, p. 2), epistemology was initially utilized in philosophy, but was later introduced in education by Clinical Psychologist Jean Piaget who believed the “nature of knowledge is best understood when the psychological and sociological factors are understood.” Soon after, William Perry constructed a developmental model known today as The Perry Scheme to investigate students’ intellectual beliefs and cognitive processes (Labbas, 2013, p. 3). Perry’s scheme was initially developed into nine positions, and then collapsed into three categories known as “The Modifying of Dualism,” “The Realizing of Relativism,” and “The Responsibilities of Commitment” (Labbas, 2013, p. 3). The first category consisted of students who believed there were right and wrong answers, multiple answers, and that knowledge also consisted of diversity and uncertainty at times (Labbas, 2013, p. 3). The second category consisted of students who believed knowledge was constructed contextually based on circumstances and relatively based on subjective opinions (Labbas, 2013, p. 3). The third category consisted of students who began to recognize the role of responsibility and the value of commitment and made choices accordingly that later affirmed their identities (Labbas, 2013, p. 3). Once epistemology was introduced in education, developmental models, such as The Perry Scheme, came about and have provided further insight into the different ways in which students learn and why. Conclusions Based on the above findings, it becomes clear that there are a number of ways in which epistemology informs learning theory. It’s critical to understand that although there are many ways in which epistemologies are formed, the rules surrounding that development are non-existent. For that reason, no single epistemology and specific learning theory can be said to be the best method since the experiences surrounding their development are different. Even in cases where experiences may be quite similar overall, the personal deduction and interpretation of those events are often quite different. As a result, we’re left with a society that is molded by things in vastly different ways. In terms of academics, the same principles of epistemology in society at-large apply to students. Students associate events and scholastic information in many different ways and apply that information to future studies in ways that best serve them. At the end of the day, the only thing that is certain is that a person’s individual epistemology has a very real and tangible effect on their individual learning theory. References Bates, A. (2015). Teaching in a digital age. Guidelines for Designing Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage Keefe, J. (2007). James Ferrier and the theory of ignorance. Monist, 90(2), 297-309. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/stable/27904033 Labbas, R. (2013). Epistemology in education: epistemological development trajectory. Journal of International Education and Leadership, 3(2), Retrieved from: http://www.jielusa.org/ |
AuthorWincy Fisher's artifacts and assignments in the Distance Education and E-Learning Master's Program. Archives
April 2018
Categories |