Subject: Curriculum, Instruction and the Internet
From: Manny Halpern (manny.halpern@nyu.edu)
Date: Mon 17 Jan 2000 - 19:59:18 MET
From: "Manny Halpern" <manny.halpern@nyu.edu> Subject: Curriculum, Instruction and the Internet Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:59:18 -0500
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I was reading Andrew Seaton's discourse on the topic, I wondered
about the relevance of 'constructivist pedagogy' and 'life-long
learning' to adult education & training. How do you see the difference
between education and training?
In the conceptual framework Andrew advances, as well as Mohammad/s
presentation of the topic, I do not see a distinction between the two.
Yet, the distinction can be useful for understanding the role of the
internet and designing the content of the material it delivers. Assuming
that educational programs address the acquisition of knowledge while
training focuses on skill acquisition, the role of the internet (and the
classroom) can be better defined.
Much of the formal adult education is geared toward training. In this
context, the rationale for using the Internet is pragmatic in nature.
Rather than a door to the real world, the internet and the class room,
serve primarily to deliver knowledge. Interactivity can be introduced
into the delivery mode to enhance self learning. However, the class room
may not be the best place for acquiring skills. Aside from the practical
constraints in terms of equipment, time and space, there are pedagogical
limitations. Some skills require knowledge of performance and results.
Individual feedback is often limited in a classroom environment. The
internet can enhance the learning by introducing knowledge of results.
The main challenge in the use of the internet for adult training is in
teaching skills, particularly 'soft' skills, testing the acquisition of
the skills, and providing feedback about performance.
As a side note: The content of the knowledge is important in adult
education (think of marketing life long learning!). I see valid reasons
for making the curriculum and the instruction dependent on the subject
matter: we may very well design an engineering course differently from a
literature course, even if the underlying learning mechanisms are the
same.
I would like to see some discussion on how the constructivist approach
can help designing the curriculum for delivering and testing knowledge
and skills in adult education and training. For example, do the
attributes of learning change in the course of life, and if so - do we
need all 7 attributes of life-long learning that Andrew listed to design
more effective ways to educate and train adults? Can we apply the
principles suggested by The Cognition and Technology Group to on-the-job
training rather than formal classroom training? Is the internet
efficient enough at this stage (think bandwidth) for experiential
learning?
While technology should not limit the learning experience, it would
certainly determine in the short run whether it enhances the acquisition
of specific knowledge and skills in adult education.
============================================
Manny Halpern, PhD, CPE
Occupational & Industrial Orthopaedic Center (OIOC)
NYU Medical Center Hospital for Joint Diseases
63 Downing Street, New York, NY 10014, USA
tel +1 (212) 255-6690
fax +1 (212) 255-6754
e-mail manny.halpern@nyu.edu
============================================
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Mon 17 Jan 2000 - 21:24:19 MET