We began with a discussion/recap of last week’s online forum topic regarding the Net Generation. Dr. Foreman sparked the discussion by asking for characteristics of the Net Generation. Characteristics such as immediacy, informality, multitasking, connectedness, social responsibility, and large networks of knowledge and information sharing were mentioned, along with some anecdotes from class members regarding instances in which we’ve observed these characteristics of the Net Generation in person.
We talked about the internet, and how it’s an amazing tool for distraction, and that we too, although not of the Net Generation, will end up multitasking and taking advantage of the immediacy of information when we are on the web.
We compared and contrasted different modes of digital communication (email, IM, online forums, blogs) and the degree to which each can or can’t get past superficial discussion.
We discussed whether the online forum worked as a class format for us—it seemed generally agreed that it did, and that we appreciated the freedom to take the thread in different directions rather than answer only specific questions. We also talked about the permanency of making a comment in writing rather than just in passing by means of speech, and how that’s difficult for some of us, and how we don’t think it’s necessarily difficult for most Net-Gen-ers, who seem more accustomed to sharing their every thought via blogs or MySpace.
We then moved to discussing this week’s reading. Dr. Foreman reviewed Cognitive Information Processing.
Then, she split the class into two, and sent half the class out. We played a game where she allowed us to observe the contents (roughly 20 items) of a box for about 30 seconds, and then gave us another 30 seconds to write down everything we could remember. The first group did so with only those instructions. The second group was informed that the items belonged to 4 categories, and she described the categories. The twenty items were:
Fork
Plate
Sugar
Equal
Mustard
Dollar
Battery
Screwdriver
Candle
Hair clip
Paper clip thingy
Post-its
Scotch tape
Comb
Lipstick
Lotion
Tylenol
Eraser
Pen
Little mustard packet
Pyramid thingy
Success in memorization did not vary much between the two groups. The second group was more likely to default to categorization as their memory-assistive method, but not all of them used it. The first group was more likely to use other methods, but all methods seemed useful. The methods mentioned included:
Categorization
Narratives
Method of Loci
Association with colors, shapes, and sound
Primacy/Recency
After the break, we continued discussing last week’s reading. Dr. Foreman passed out John’s outline and we used it to review the concepts. John’s was particularly interesting because he related it to his own experience and used examples from his life.
Then, Dr. Foreman split us into groups and we each took a section—sensory memory, working memory, long-term memory, or methods of incorporating these theories into instructional design, and came up with examples:
The first group, describing sensory memory, used driving and all the sensory input you receive while engaged in that activity… how much of it is dismissed, but how things such as sirens, similar cars, etc, can draw your attention.
They talked about how such things as recognizing stop signs have reached automaticity (able to do them without actively thinking about them.)
The second group described methods of moving information from short-term memory to long-term memory.
The third group used the analogy of the “jesus lizard” (bipedal and runs on water, defying easy characterization) to go through various theories of long-term memory.
The class then discussed the different theories, and we especially discussed PDP (parallel distributed processing) which seemed less straightforward than the other theories. We agreed it seemed more physical, more anatomical, whereas the other theories were more philosophical.
The fourth group discussed ways to use these theories in designing instruction, such as helping the students with selective attention, encoding, relating to one’s own experience, paraphrasing in one’s own words, drill and practice, etc.
Dr. Foreman ended the class and introduced the next assignment using Gagne’s Instructional Model and creating a taxonomy, due in three Tuesdays, and she also went over the items we are to bring to the Digital Storytelling Workshop on the 21st.
Signing off,
Michelle Gilkey
