Have just finished reading over the Davis article, the article for the week. My first impressions are about it's readability. Not sure if that's something that we are to talk about on our blogs, but I'm going to anyway. Having spent a semester deep in philosophical inquiry and reading (it was a fun but hard Fall 2009!) - a practical piece of writing like this was quite enjoyable. Straight and to the point.
Overall I like this learning theory, the PSI. I really appreciate the sentiment expressed by the authors nearing the end of the second section - "Learning is basically an asynchronous, creative adventure." Hell yeah! Thank goodness someone else has said this! But I can't help but notice something interesting and I'm wondering if my classmates noted this as well.
There is a note in the description of the model - and I think Kevin mentioned this in the lecture - that the professor oversees the course but the weekly (or whatever time frame there is) meetings are arranged by teaching assistants or graduate students. Grading (I think) is to be done by these folks as well. As I'm looking back over my notes, it strikes me as interesting that two professors invented a model of instruction where they were the creators and somewhat the deliver-ers (depending on the methods of course), yet there exists the possibility that teaching assistants/grad students would be doing a majority of the footwork. Just an observation. :)
I see in this model much of the online instruction that I have participated in in my life. I took an English course that took this model and employed it via email. A course I took last semester used a blog. Other technologies could easily be used in this model... wikis, an easy web-editor like Google Sites, Moodle/Vista/some other CMS, and maybe even a Google Wave? Maybe a bit too early to tell on the Google Wave!
I can see using this model in future instruction - depending on the students, environment, and subject matter. I can also see how this model could be the foundation for many other models due to its simplistic nature (not that this is a bad thing).
Another observation - you can read the date on the article. Meaning - I just checked quickly and wasn't able to locate the publication date on the article but you can "read" based on its sources and the authors' choice of vocabulary that this is a bit dated. I wonder where this engineering coursework/development is now...
Do others share my experiences with PSI?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Even though professors set up the system, but graduate assistants do the footwork, aren't the graduate assistants still learning too? The professors pass along the tools, which they refine and expand upon for future graduate assistants. I'd like to find an update to this development too.
ReplyDeleteI too noticed the date was missing - and yet I felt comfortable in my assumption about the timeframe this was researched and written (i.e. B4 Web 2.0).
ReplyDeleteI think they got the ball rolling for when technology caught up to their needs - what is the adage? "Necessity is the mother of all invention..."
If I'm not mistaken, the Keller Plan was originally associated with large lecture classes where it would be beyond the scope of one professor to grade all of the work without assistants. But you're right, a professor would definitely design a model like this out of personal necessity. Isn't there a quote out there about necessity breeds innovation, or something like that?
ReplyDeleteThere is that quote - and I agree.
ReplyDeleteIt's just interesting that the solution fit so nicely with (what I know to be) many professors' desire... to interact a bit less with students?