In our Group Critique, we were asked to analyze the 6th Grade Math portion of the AdaptedMind Website. Our critique rated the website very positively as to the questions asked and the direction of our learning at the time. Now, we that we have an opportunity to evaluate the site with a few more weeks of knowledge under our belt, has given us a great opportunity. As with any creation, things can always be improved, modified, or tried until 100% mastery or perfection occurs.
Addition or Deletion of Components
According to our class reading and overall discussion, dimensions of divergence are all the ways a procedure can vary. In our critique, we stated in the beginning that the AdaptedMind website was procedural in learning by allowing students to take action on a sequence of events. While we found the website had tremendous value in the reinforcement of learning, we did not find that the website was a valuable teaching tool (even though the applied videos could provide this function). The website has a few components that are missing and would need to be added to go beyond simple reinforcement of learning. The two biggest components that stick out in our mind are:
1. The learning objectives are not stated clearly &
2. Immediate feedback is not always available.
In our research, we came across Robert Gagne who best describes the reason why the lack of these two components create a dilemma for our website. As he expounds upon the domains of learning, he begins to contract a 10 year old learning math and a 24 year old learning statistics. In both age examples, effective learning is demonstrated but each one has a different path. The 10 year old has a very structured learning process. Everything is laid out for the 10 year with reinforcement rewards built in. As for the 24 year old, Gagne shares, “The difference in the two instances is often summarized by saying that the 24-year-old has become to a large extent a self-learner, whereas the 10-year-old has not yet achieved this state, and has a ways to go before he does” (Gagne, 1972). He explains that the 24 year old has additional knowledge and experience which allows him to be an individual who will seek stimulation and learning for the sake of the experience. This is in contrast to the 10 year old who may not even understand or comprehend the value of what is being taught.
In the AdaptedMind website, example problems are produced and yet very little instruction, if any, is given. When an answer is presented, the student has the option to go do a video lesson, but everything is self-discovery driven. I would propose that it would take a highly motivated 6th grader, even with the virtual badge reward, a while to go through this website. However, if coupled with a live facilitator and issued as homework, the website takes on a new dimension.
Generic Skill
This is an interesting question and brings to light the major issue our group had with this website. As stated in the question so eloquently, our website presents 6th grade math concepts and problems in an “un-organized laundry list.” If you go to the AdaptedMind Website to the particular area we are reviewing, you will find overarching categories (such as Geometry, Factoring and Multiples, etc…) followed by a series of problems. As you scroll over the problem hyperlinks, you are given an example with the formula that acts as the solution. If you click on the hyperlink, it takes you to a series of problems that have multiple choice answers. Your progress is measured, video-lessons are offered, and badges are issued for rewards the further you progress. The generic skill in this situation is the ability to follow the procedure once you are on the right path. However, the minimal guidance and the inconsistent method in which feedback is given leads to frustration and thus without anything else the website becomes another deadlink.
References:
Gagne, R. M. (1972). Domains of learning. (Vol. 3, pp. 87-105). Ontario:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
I am a little confused about the first part of the assignment. We understood and approached it differently, but I like the way you reviewed our group critique of AdaptedMind in relation to the additions and deletions of the components.
ReplyDeleteI agree this is in my mind a little difficult. We critiqued what we were given but really didn't have parameters around which to build our critique. Thus, we found the tool to accomplish what was being asked. However, upon further learning and more evaluation I really find this website to be ineffective and I tried to highlight the two components that would need to be expanded upon. For the instructor, learning objectives were missing and for the learner feedback was available but directed more for self-learners. Gagne's research is a little dated but pertinent to this regard. I have some thoughts around the other questions that I will add later on. Tough assignment having to do two modules like this.
ReplyDeleteKatie, I agree with you that this was difficult to critique with out really knowing what to look for. I do think the website could be used as a practice site for reinforcement of math skills being taught. Since to learn math is to practice what has been taught.
ReplyDeleteI agree. At first glance, the website looks great. Video tutorials, colorful, and feedback. However when you dig lower it's missing some key things. It's a shame because they were headed in he right direction just needs more work.
ReplyDelete