One interesting session at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the National Writing Project was Reading the Research: Living and Learning with New Media, which discussed the MacArthur report summarizing its findings from the Digital Youth Project.

Report Findings:

• Youth use online media to extend friendships and interests.
• Youth engage in peer-based, self-directed learning online.

Implications from the Report:

• Adults should facilitate young people's engagement with digital media.
• Given the diversity of digital media, it is problematic to develop a standardized set of benchmarks against which to measure young people's technical and new media literacy.
• In interest-driven participation, adults have an important role to play.
• To stay relevant in the 21st century, education institutions need to keep pace with the rapid changes introduced by digital media.

Looking at these findings and implications, I wondered, "Is there anything new here?" and initially concluded, "Not really." But continuing to read it, I thought that with respect to learning, it's difficult to posit something new. (As noted below, I continue to work with the same theories of learning I've used for the past 15 years.) Even so, it's an important report in that it shows that present theories of learning apply online as well as offline, thus supporting the validity of generalizing these theories across various contexts.

For its theoretical framework, the report drew upon the work of Henry Jenkins, Jean Lave, and Etienne Wenger, and emphasized the "social and cultural participation" nature of learning. In particular, learning occurs through interest- and "friendship-driven genres of participation."

Despite this emphasis, in many ways the report supported a psychological approach to learning with new media. In looking at interest-driven genres of participation, the report stated,

It is not about the given social relations that structure youth's school lives but about both focusing and expanding on an individual's social circle based on interests. (p. 10)

Despite the report's emphasizing "an individual's social circle", what is seen is an individual's interests driving his/her actions and the expanding of the social circle a by-product not a focus. In fact, the report itself also states,

Messing around with digital media is driven by personal interest, but it is supported by a broader social and technical ecology ...

Naturally, social support is key to pursuing one's own interests. Even Deci and Ryan's self-determination theory, a psychological theory of motivation (see Self-determination and motivation), notes its importance. However, this theory posits that the key factor in motivation is autonomy, which the report also noted as essential in learning "fluent and expert use of new media" (p. 36).

Another key factor in interest-driven genres of participation was "feedback," a term emphasized in Csikzentmihalyi's theory of flow (see Engagement and Flow), another theory of individual motivation.

Feedback is also a key factor in John Anderson's ACT-R theory of cognition, which posits the key factor in learning as "time on task," and the report also noted the need for "ample time" to learning to use new media.

So, in many ways, this report underscored how learning to use new media can be understood through cognitive theories of learning.

In its conclusion, the report asks some good questions:

Rather than thinking of public education as a burden that schools must shoulder on their own, what would it mean to think of public education as a responsibility of a more distributed network of people and institutions? And rather than assuming that education is primarily about preparing for jobs and careers, what would it mean to think of education as a process of guiding kids’ participation in public life more generally, a public life that includes social, recreational, and civic engagement? And finally, what would it mean to enlist help in this endeavor from an engaged and diverse set of publics that are broader than what we traditionally think of as educational and civic institutions? (p. 39)

In quite a few posts, I've commented on poverty being the number one factor in academic underachievement. But High school teacher Patrick Welsh in his article Making the Grade Isn't About Race. It's About Parents takes a closer look at it and comes up the importance of parents in academic achievement:

"Why don't you guys study like the kids from Africa?"

In a moment of exasperation last spring, I asked that question to a virtually all-black class of 12th-graders who had done horribly on a test I had just given. A kid who seldom came to class -- and was constantly distracting other students when he did -- shot back: "It's because they have fathers who kick their butts and make them study."

Another student angrily challenged me: "You ask the class, just ask how many of us have our fathers living with us." When I did, not one hand went up.

Welsh is arguing against the simplistic racial explanations for academic achievement and for the importance of parenting in academic achievement.

Four years ago, William Raspberry, Pulitzer Prize recipient and retired Washington Post columnist, also commented on the importance of fathers in his article "A Better Cure than Abortion", connecting it to this story:

Some years ago, South Africa's game managers had to figure out what to do about the elephant herd at Kruger National Park. The herd was growing well beyond the ability of the park to sustain it.

The two-phase solution: transport some of the herd to the Pilanesberg game park and kill off some of those that were too big to transport. And so they did.

A dozen years later, several of the transported young males (now teenagers) started attacking Pilanesberg's herd of white rhinos, an endangered species. They used their trunks to throw sticks at the rhinos, chased them over long hours and great distances, and stomped to death a tenth of the herd -- all for no discernible reason.

Park managers decided they had no choice but to kill some of the worst juvenile offenders. They had killed five of them when someone came up with another bright idea: Bring in some of the mature males from Kruger -- there was by then the technology to transport the larger animals -- and hope that the bigger, stronger males could bring the adolescents under control.

To the delight of the park officials, it worked. The big bulls, quickly establishing the natural hierarchy, became the dominant sexual partners of the females, and the reduction in sexual activity among the juveniles lowered their soaring testosterone levels and reduced their violent behavior.

The new discipline, it turned out, was not just a matter of size intimidation. The young bulls actually started following the Big Daddies around, enjoying the association with the adults, yielding to their authority and learning from them proper elephant conduct. The assaults on the white rhinos ended abruptly.

Raspberry is arguing against long legal sentences for non-violent offences that results in "fatherless communities."

Naturally, there are other contributing and overlapping factors, such as poverty, that exacerbates the problems many students have in succeeding academically. There are also curriculum effects and teacher quality effects, at least in mathematics. Even so, the family factor is arguably a, if not the, major one. And this is true in other arenas, too. For instance, the National Institutes of Health reported that "Family Characteristics Have More Influence On Child Development Than Does Experience In Child Care". This governmental review of the literature shows the importance of family influences in problem behaviors of children. And some research shows the effects of divorce on children.

We need to reconsider, as Raspberry argues, legal policy effects on communities and families. We need to rethink the effects of our social policy effects on communities and families. Children are our future, and we need to invest in them. We need to rethink our priorities.

The U.S. Senate has declared October 20, 2009, to be the National Day of Writing. At one minute past midnight, the National Gallery of Writing will open, and NCTE is sponsoring a day-long webcast (9 am - 8 pm EST).

Institutions can create their own gallery of wriitng. Kean University Writing Project has established its own gallery (welcoming writing of all types from everyone) and has scheduled a variety of events at Liberty Hall Museum.

If you're interested in writing, any type of writing, this is a good time to participate and share your writing with others.

The Stanford Center for Teaching and Learning has an excellent email newsletter for professional development with respect to, as the name indicates, teaching and learning. These articles can also be discussed at Tomorrow's Professor Blog. Here's an example of their newsletters (the most recent emailing) titled The Ten Worst Teaching Mistakes, which are:

1. When you ask a question in class, immediately call for volunteers.
2. Call on students cold.
3. Turn classes into PowerPoint shows.
4. Fail to provide variety in instruction.
5. Have students work in groups with no individual accountability.
6. Fail to establish relevance.
7. Give tests that are too long.
8. Get stuck in a rut.
9. Teach without clear learning objectives
10. Disrespect students.

The newsletter is somewhat brief with each item receiving a 1-3 paragraph explanation of the item. For instance, on disrespecting students, it states,

How much students learn in a course depends to a great extent on the instructor's attitude. Two different instructors could teach the same material to the same group of students using the same methods, give identical exams, and get dramatically different results. Under one teacher, the students might get good grades and give high ratings to the course and instructor; under the other teacher, the grades could be low, the ratings could be abysmal, and if the course is a gateway to the curriculum, many of the students might not be there next semester. The difference between the students' performance in the two classes could easily stem from the instructors' attitudes. If Instructor A conveys respect for the students and a sense that he/she cares about their learning and Instructor B appears indifferent and/or disrespectful, the differences in exam grades and ratings should come as no surprise.

Even if you genuinely respect and care about your students, you can unintentionally give them the opposite sense. Here are several ways to do it: (1) Make sarcastic remarks in class about their skills, intelligence, and work ethics; (2) disparage their questions or their responses to your questions; (3) give the impression that you are in front of them because it's your job, not because you like the subject and enjoy teaching it; (4) frequently come to class unprepared, run overtime, and cancel classes; (5) don't show up for office hours, or show up but act annoyed when students come in with questions. If you've slipped into any of those practices, try to drop them. If you give students a sense that you don't respect them, the class will probably be a bad experience for everyone no matter what else you do, while if you clearly convey respect and caring, it will cover a multitude of pedagogical sins you might commit.

The article also gives references for further reading, most of which can be found online:

1. R.M. Felder and R. Brent, "Learning by Doing," Chem. Engr. Education, 37(4), 282-283 (2003), http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Active.pdf.
2. M. Prince, "Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research," J. Engr. Education, 93(3), 223-231 (2004), http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/Prince_AL.pdf.
3. R.M. Felder and R. Brent, "Death by PowerPoint," Chem. Engr. Education, 39(1), 28-29 (2005), http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/PowerPoint.pdf.
4. R.M. Felder and R. Brent, "Cooperative Learning," in P.A. Mabrouk, ed., Active Learning: Models from the Analytical Sciences, ACS Symposium Series 970, Chapter 4. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 2007, http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/CLChapter.pdf.
5. CATME (Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness), http://www.catme.org.
6. M.J. Prince and R.M. Felder, "Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases," J. Engr. Education, 95(2), 123-138 (2006), http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/InductiveTeaching.pdf.
7. R.M. Felder, "Sermons for Grumpy Campers," Chem. Engr. Education, 41(3), 183-184 (2007), http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Sermons.pdf.
8. P.A. Cohen, "College Grades and Adult Achievement: A Research Synthesis," Res. in Higher Ed., 20(3), 281-293 (1984); G.E. Samson, M.E. Graue, T. Weinstein, & H.J. Walberg, "Academic and Occupational Performance: A Quantitative Synthesis," Am. Educ. Res. Journal, 221(2), 311-321 (1984).
9. E. Seymour & N.M. Hewitt, Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997.
10. R.M. Felder, "Designing Tests to Maximize Learning," J. Prof. Issues in Engr. Education and Practice, 128(1), 1-3 (2002). http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/TestingTips.htm.
11. R.M. Felder & R. Brent, "Objectively Speaking," Chem. Engr. Education, 31(3), 178-179 (1997), http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Objectives.html.

All in all, this newsletter is a great resource for teachers.

David Jones, a PhD student at The Australian National University, writes about the progress on his dissertation, which looks at how educational institutions constrain the implementation of e-learning initiatives. In his most recent post People, Cognition, Rationality, and E-Learning, he reviews some of the literature on the irrationality of human decision making and states:

At the level of the individual, there is significant research to indicate that people do not make rational decisions. It has been shown that when making decisions people rely on strategies such as rules of thumb and heuristics to simplify decisions, several of which suffer from systematic biases that influence judgement (Tversky and Kahneman 1974).

We usually assume that people are rational, but when you think about it, it's pretty obvious we aren't. Otherwise, we would come to similar conclusions most of the time, and, quite obviously, we don't. In fact, the old saying "Don't discuss politics or religion" underscores how Emotions Overrule Reason and moves us to ignore facts that contradict our position. And that also applies to experts, who predict no better than non-experts.

So, if we and our students are primarily not rational, how do we move ourselves and them to rationality? Should we? Does learning need to be a rational endeavor?