From Kolb, to Computers in Writing, to Differentiated Classrooms

1
From Kolb, to Computers in Writing, to
Differentiated Classrooms

• Christie Gordon and Judith Kilborn
• Computers Writing 2005

2
A Case Study of the Intersections of Technology,
Learning Styles, Pedagogy

• Description of a primarily online graduate course
  on Computers, English, Pedagogy
• Research questions
• Methodology
• Primary sources of study
• Analysis of asynchronous and synchronous
  communication
• Description of Kolbs Learning Styles Inventory
  (LSI)
• Findings

3
Graduate Course Computers, English, Pedagogy

• 18 graduate students at a Midwestern,
  comprehensive university
• The majority of the students were currently
  teaching composition or literature
• five of the 18 students were teaching first-year
  college composition and two additional students
  were preparing to teach that class
• one was teaching composition and literature in a
  community college, three in a high school, and
  one in a middle school
• three were teaching ESL and two were preparing to
  teach ESL
• one was preparing to teach Information Media.

4
Focus of the Class

• Theoretical issues concerning computers in
  literature and composition classrooms
• considered what is meant by electronic literacies
  particularly how the nature of reading and
  writing is changing and how that is affecting the
  way people write and how they teach writing
• unpacked some of the key issues underlying
  computers and pedagogy issues concerning
  community, power, culture, and so on

5
Focus of the Class contd

• Pedagogical uses of specific technology in
  composition and literature classrooms
• explored how people are using the web in
  "web-enhanced courses
• examined use of asynchronous discussion (blogs,
  email, listserv) and synchronous discussion
  (chat, MOO) in composition and literature
  classrooms

6
Key Premises of Course

• That technology should not be used for its own
  sake but should be selected
• to support specific instructional goals
• to speak to particular pedagogical problems or
  needs
• to address specific learners in individual
  learning contexts
• That students should use the class to sort out
  what technology applications they preferred for
  what pedagogical purposes and why

7
Key Premises of Course contd

• That they, like their own students, have
  individual learning preferences that affect the
  way they use technology and how they feel about
  it
• That they should consider all learning styles
  when they plan technology applications
• so that they teach around the clock
• so that they don't focus on the needs of those
  with their learning styles while ignoring the
  needs of other types of learners in their classes

8
Primarily Online Class

• During the 15-week semester, students met face to
  face twice
• The first class met in a computer classroom for
  the class introduction
• covered the key premises of the course
• administered and discussed Kolbs Learning Styles
  Inventory (LSI)
• encouraged students to think about learning
  styles as they explored various technologies they
  might use in their teaching
• familiarized students with the synchronous
  discussion space (a MOO) that they would use for
  the majority of class meetings

9
Primarily Online Class contd

• A second face-to-face class occurred midway
  through the semester.
• introduced Dreamweaver
• workshopped translating print teaching materials
  to the Web
• For the other 13 weeks of the course, students
  met in a MOO
• to discuss readings
• to focus on various ways in which technology use
  in classrooms can emerge from consideration of
  pedagogical needs

10
Students Work

• Each student lead two class discussions of
  readings online in the MOO and developed some
  basic web materials for their teaching.
• Each student completed a semester-long personal
  blog
• reflecting on and responding to readings
• connecting readings, class discussion, and
  technology applications to their own classrooms
  and to their own lives
• keeping notes of outside research and reading
  about technology applications
• At the end of the semester, this blog served as
  the basis for a MOO presentation concerning the
  student's plans for using technology in a
  specific course.

11
Students Work contd

• Students participated in asynchronous discussion
  that supplemented the classroom.
• This asynchronous discussion used various forums
  as the semester progressed
• For the first five weeks, students posted to a
  class listserv (Cybers).
• For the next month, students posted to a
  community blog in response to the teacher's
  prompts.
• For the final six weeks of the term, students
  posted to a team blog
• They could respond to the prompts of the teacher
  or their colleagues.
• They could initiate their own threads.

12
Summary of Class

• Students in this graduate course were immersed in
  technology.
• Students read about and experimented with various
  technology throughout the term
• synchronous discussion (chat, MOO)
• asynchronous discussion (blogs, email, and
  listservs)
• Web activities for their students as well as Web
  materials for their teaching

13
Summary of Class contd

• Students reflected on what particular technology
  applications might support their teaching goals.
• Students considered how specific technologies
  might be preferred by particular types of
  learners.
• Students decided upon the technology applications
  that matched their course goals, students, and
  instructional contexts.

14
Research Questions

1. How do learning styles impact the use of and
   attitude toward technology?
2. Which technologies were selected and modeled in
   class? And which technologies did the graduate
   students select and implement to fit the goals of
   their own classes?
3. Is a particular technological application
   selected because of a fit with learning style,
   or is it resisted because it did not fit with the
   dominant learning style?
4. What insights were gained in students
   self-reflections on the intersections of learning
   style, technology, and pedagogy? How did these
   insights link to our perceptions?

15
Primary Sources for Study Students Public
Discourse

• The synchronous communication was comprised of
  logs of 13 MOO classes (2 1/2 hours each).
• The asynchronous communication was comprised of
• 5 weeks of email sent to Cybers (the class
  listserv)
• 13 weeks of postings on students' personal blogs
• 10 weeks of postings on a class blog

16
Review of Public Discourse

• We focused on the public discourse of four
  students from the class.
• These students represent Kolb's four Learning
  Styles.
• These students teach in different areas
• middle school
• high school
• first-year college composition
• English as a Second Language (ESL)

17
Analysis of Asynchronous Communication MOO

• We analyzed the MOO logs to determine if learning
  style preferences could be identified in the
  students modes of online presentations.
• the MOO discussions of readings led by these four
  students
• these students' final MOO presentations about
  their plans for using technology in a class that
  they are currently teaching or plan to teach.

18
Analysis of Synchronous Communication Personal
Blogs

• We reviewed the four students' personal blogs,
  recorded the number and types of postings, and
  calculated percentages that we could use for
  cross-comparisons.
• We wished to know the percentages of
• on-task/off-task postings
• posts that initiate and respond to threads
• posts including more than one type of response.

19
Analysis of Synchronous Communication Personal
Blogs contd

• We were interested in discovering the types of
  postings typical of each student, such as
• summaries or response to research, reading, or
  class discussion
• analysis of technology applications and
  connections to their own lives, their own
  classes, or their own use
• This data was intended to reveal patterns in the
  blogs that might be associated with learning
  styles preferences.

20
Analysis of Synchronous Communication Class
Blogs

• We reviewed the last month of postings for the
  class as a whole.
• We recorded the number and types of postings.
• We calculated percentages that we could use for
  cross-comparisons.
• We focused on the postings of the four students,
  assessing the types of postings and the posting
  patterns typical of each student.

21
Intersections

• Technology
• Learning Styles Pedagogy

22
Kolbs Learning Styles Types
Concrete Experience (CE)
Accommodators Divergers Sensors/
Sensors/ Feelers Feelers
doers watchers
Convergers
Assimilators Thinkers
Thinkers doers
watchers
Reflective Observation (RO)
Active Experimen- tation (AE)
Abstract Conceptualization (AC)
23
Diverger the Innovative Learner

• Is imaginative
• Gathers information, then needs reflecting time
• Creates own structure
• Seeks personal meaning and values social
  interactions
• Prefers atmosphere of high involvement
• Asks why?
• Creates goals
• Forges connections (class and lives)
• Integrates experience with self
• Connects new knowledge with prior knowledge
• Prefers to learn through discussion and
  interaction methods

24
Assimilator the Analytic Learner

• Is theoretical
• Needs rational, sequential organization
• Prefers systematic structure and subdued
  emotional climate
• Values information, facts, and intellect
• Prefers parts to wholes
• Learns concepts
• Asks what?
• Poses questions
• Likes direct teaching and prefers to learn
  through informational methods

25
Converger the Common Sense Learner

• Is practical
• Needs direct, hands-on learning
• Values sensory stimuli, the concrete, and
  workability
• Seeks solutions to problems
• Likes peer dialogue
• Asks how? or how does it work?
• Prefers to learn through coaching

26
Accommodator the Dynamic Learner

• Is intuitive
• Prefers lack of structure
• Creates own structure
• Values intuition and experience
• Seeks hidden possibilities
• Asks if? or What can this become?
• Looks at collaborative possibilities
• Goes beyond class
• Takes risks
• Prefers to learn through self-discovery

27
How Webs Are Viewed by Various Learning Styles
Accommodators see web as information site for handouts place for technology applications like movies/recordings space for developing critical thinking link to other teacher sites place for new ideas especially curriculum ideas a place for feedback on teaching Divergers see web as assignment place (calendars, links, resources) place for activities (web evaluation, etc.) place to establish a feel for class, teacher site parents, students and other teachers can check
Convergers see web as technology to teach and make available to students resource for class materials that they needed to make available for students Assimilators see web as canvas to convey meaning creative space for zines and publishing resource for class materials file cabinet place for links to experts and expert sources
28
Intersections

• Each of the four Learning Styles identified by
  Kolb and modified by McCarthy Diverger,
  Assimilator, Converger, and Accommodator has
  different characteristics and preferences that
  were addressed in English 652 (Computers,
  English, and Pedagogy). 
• Our classrooms are populated by students with
  diverse learning styles who need to be taught
  using pedagogy and technology that reach all.
• By using technological applications that support
  instructional goals and that attend to all four
  Learning Styles, teachers enable students to both
  hover in their comfort zones, but also stretch
  their own learning and teaching.

29
Findings General

• When we examined the public discourse of the
  students in the course, patterns emerged.
• Despite a limited sample size and an analysis
  focused on only four graduate students who taught
  in four different situations and had four
  different Learning Styles, we saw connections
  among students learning styles, pedagogy, and
  technology applications.

30
Research Question 1. How do learning styles
impact the use of and attitude toward technology?

• Assimilators feel a loss of control in the MOO.
• They are also bothered by what they see as
  messy blogs and listservs because it is hard
  for them to see any structure in these technology
  applications.
• Assimilators prefer moderated discussions and a
  threaded outline.
• When teaching their own classes, Assimilators
  prefer to provide prompts for their students.
• While MOO resistance came mostly from students
  whose dominant learning style favors reflection
  and structure, these students were stretched by
  the MOO experience.
• Reflective learners (Assimilators and Divergers)
  report a tendency to blurk on blogs and to lurk
  in MOOs.

31
Research Question 2.Which technologies were
selected and modeled in class? And which
technologies did graduate students select and
implement to fit the goals of their classes?

• Blogs, both community and individual, were
  implemented in English 652.
• This form of technology often seemed to result in
  stretches as noted in self-reflections.
• In keeping with the course objectives, blogging
  offered another kind of public accountability. .
  . It helps increase students awareness of genre,
  audience and purpose (Reading, Blogging and
  Rithmetic Flahagan).
• Following the use of blogs in 652, the four
  students we examined approached and implemented
  blogs in a variety of ways.

32
Comparison of On-Task Blog Postings of Four
Students (32 required)
Diana Diverger Alexis Assimilator Catherine Converger Anna Accommodator
On-task postings done 110 52 52 149
Percentage of required postings done 343.75 162.5 162.5 465.63
33
Comparison of On- and Off-Task Blog Postings of
Four Students
Diana Diverger Alexis Assimilator Catherine Converger Anna Accommodator
On-task postings done 110 52 52 149
Percentage of on-task postings done 93.22 92.31 91.22 94.3
Off-task postings done 8 4 2 9
Percentage of off-task postings done 6.78 7.69 8.77 5.69
34
Dianas On-Task Personal Blog Postings
35
Diana (Diverger) Types of Blog Postings
I do it the same/I agree and why 38.18
Analysis of particular technology application 27.27
Connections of technology to own life/use 34.54
Connecting current practice to new technology 18.18
Personalizing/Community building 53.63
Self-assessment 14.54
On-task blog postings of more than one type 67.27
36
Diana (Diverger)

• Diana reflects first on why technology fits,
  personally, then asks what she can do with it,
  and later applies the blog to parent/teacher
  communication opportunities in her middle school.
  
• She also sees blogs as a place for teacher tasks,
  as a site for students to ask homework questions,
  and as a method for her class responses to
  literature, videos, speakers.
• Diana, as a Diverger, illustrates how personal
  meaning and social interactions are so important
  to her teaching pedagogy. As shown by the charts,
  Dianas largest type of posting was categorized
  as personalizing/community building, illustrating
  her need for social interaction.

37
Alexis On-Task Personal Blog Postings
38
Alexis (Assimilator) Types of Blog Postings
I do it the same/I agree and why 19.23
Connections of technology to own life/use 55.77
Frustration 26.92
Personalizing/Community building 38.46
Self-assessment 25
On-task blog postings of more than one type 73.07
39
Alexis (Assimilator)

• Initially, Alexis tries to be cheerful about blog
  entries, but is frustrated.
• However, when she becomes more comfortable with
  blogs and wants to set up blog opportunities for
  her high school students, she is again frustrated
  when the high school administration thwarts her
  plans by saying there are security issues for her
  students.
• Alexis does set up a 7-9th grade assignment on
  web evaluations that students post on a blog.
• In keeping with her learning preference, Alexis
  took the theory explained in The Classroom Blog
  and constructed book club discussion groups using
  two of her high school classes.
• Alexis shows an Assimilators preference for
  sequential organization, and she does that by
  establishing blogs that work in her classroom.

40
Catherines On-Task Personal Blog Postings
41
Catherine (Converger) Types of Blog Postings
I do it the same/I agree and why 53.85
Analysis of particular technology application 19.23
Connections of technology to own life/use 34.61
Personalizing/Community building 48.08
Self-assessment 28.85
On-task blog postings of more than one type 53.85
42
Catherine (Converger)

• Catherine makes her required blogs entries but
  says she wont continue blog use. Is she
  uncomfortable with it?
• She does give her first-year composition students
  the option for public presentations on a blog.
• Catherines resistance to the blog is
  demonstrated by the fact that she never adds to
  or initiates community threads.
• Because workability is important to Convergers,
  she might not have seen workable sides of
  blogging.
• Was she struggling to find what worked? Unsure of
  her own capabilities with technology?

43
Annas On-Task Personal Blog Postings
44
Anna (Accommodator) Types of Blog Postings
Response to Research 7.4
I do it differently/I disagree and why 9.4
I do it the same/I agree and why 42.96
Analysis of particular technology application 28.18
Connections of technology to own life/use 38.25
Personalizing/Community building 34.22
Self-assessment 11.4
On-task blog postings of more than one type 56.38
45
Anna (Accommodator)

• Anna, the dynamic learner who needs unstructured
  experimental organization, took the 652 blogging
  experiences and made them her own.
• In the community blog, she initiated many threads
  and responded to many othersa true community
  builder.
• She went on to implement a blog in her current
  Intensive English class as a way to encourage
  greater audience awareness in the public
  discourse written by her second language
  students.
• Anna likes the blog and even sets up a Chinese
  blog as a way to stay in touch with her friends.

46
Technology Preferences According to Style
Accommodators enjoy all technology (like change) especially enjoy MOO and blogs say the least about listserv Divergers prefer community blogs and listserv to personal blogs have mixed feelings about MOO
Convergers enjoy MOO and blogs have mixed feelings about listserv Assimilators prefer blog to listserv but have mixed feelings about both dislike MOO
47
Divergers Technology Preferences
MOO Mixed like interaction, sense of community, personal reinforcement from others (such as nods or direct response), and the ability to lurk and read dislike the fast flow of ideas and the fact that by the time they compose what they wanted to say, it has often already been said Listserv Like like the personal involvement like the opportunity to read, write, and respond at their own pace like conver-sations that unfold over time Blogs Like prefer personal blog as place to journal when ideas occur or to capture information for later reflection prefer community blog as space for clarifying ideas on subject and for interacting with others prefer community blog over personal blog find reading blogs fun can get to know others can search for interesting titles or quotes owning personal blog brings sense of freedom
48
Assimilators Technology Preferences
MOO Dislike dislike loss of control find discussion hard to follow and messy threading isnt visually apparent dislike social interaction dislike the fast pace, lack of focus, and opinionated nature of MOO Listserv Mixed dislike lack of structure and tangential thoughts find speed too fast and postings hard to manage like defined audience and boundaries of listserv like hearing what experts think and teacher has to say Blog Mixed prefer the more structured feel of blogs to the more random feel of listserv find the more obvious threading easier to follow especially like the community blog when threads managed by teacher dislike the loosey goosey feel of the threading would prefer threaded discussion forums where threads are hierarchically displayed like the ability to blurk
49
Convergers Technology Preferences
MOO Like like the ability to make connections among ideas in MOO can control own learning in MOO its hands-on Listserv Mixed like explanations dislike the fact that ideas arent linked dislike repetition of ideas Blogs Like can gain insights in blog can be creative with color/photos in blog
50
Accommodators Technology Preferences
Accommodators like all technology can adapt to various situations and enjoy change. Accommodators like all technology can adapt to various situations and enjoy change. Accommodators like all technology can adapt to various situations and enjoy change.
MOO Like like diverse perspectives enjoy collaboration opportunities benefit from unstructured and creative environment enjoy the focus on topic, not person Listserv Like like interaction Blogs Like like to explore the hidden possibilities love interaction enjoy reading and various perspectives like to develop knowledge or expertise appreciate choice of topics like running around (blog) rather than running into (listserv) something like open, public audience
51
Research Question 3.Is a particular
technological application selected because of a
fit with learning style, or is it resisted
because it did not fit with the dominant learning
style?

• Some examples of fit can be seen through the
  four students as they led MOO discussions on
  articles read by the entire class.

52
Diana (Diverger)

• Diana, in her March 28 discussion, provides a
  slide on an article and asks, In what ways do
  you see technology working with your course
  goals? In what ways does technology not fit? When
  not many peers respond, Diana rephrases the
  questions by asking, Im curious to see where
  you all think technology fits best. And where
  does it does it not fit?
• Diana often uses this rephrasing discussion
  pattern to engage her peers a fit with her
  preference for an atmosphere of high involvement.

53
Alexis (Assimilator)

• Alexis, in her March 11 discussion, used many
  slides. These slides might have been her way of
  organizing and accumulating facts to be analyzed.
  
• In her presentation, she asked What? questions.
  For example, she often asked, What did you think
  about. . .? What do you think about the
  cross-curricular effects? or she would say, I
  questioned. . . .
• Alexiss other responses to the group discussion
  seem motivated at involving them in their own
  applications of the creative uses of technology
  and ways to reconsider writing strategies.

54
Catherine (Converger)

• Catherine, in her February 21 discussion, used a
  few quotes on slides and responded by saying,
• Thats an interesting question.
• Yes, that can be a problem.
• I talk about it in my class.
• Yes, thats true.
• While she probably saw these comments as
  affirmations to classmates who participated in
  the discussion, the comments come across as
  perfunctory.
• She never asks follow-up questions and does not
  encourage the extension of the discussion.
• She never asks How questions in her discussion.
  This could be seen as a form of resistance to
  MOOing or to the online discussions.

55
Anna (Accommodator)

• Anna, in her April 4 discussion, tends to ask
  many open-ended questions. She also asks her
  peers,
• What do you need to do for your own class?
• What are students attitudes towards. . .?
• Do you agree/disagree with the author?
• Give examples to support your reasons.
• These questions seem to represent a fit with
  her learning preference for applying information
  in new ways, going beyond the class, and
  considering the larger audience, in this case,
  students of her classmates.
• Anna writes an end-of-the-course evaluation in
  which she talks about the advantages of online
  discussion over traditional class discussion.

56
Research Question 4.What insights were gained in
students self-reflections on the intersections
of learning style, technology, and pedagogy? How
did these insights link to our perceptions?

• Students in English 652 wrote self reflections on
  all of their technology applications.
• These reflections provide some insights into the
  intersections of learning style, technology, and
  pedagogy.

57
Summary

• A variety of asynchronous and synchronous
  discussions were modeled and implemented in the
  graduate course.
• Patterns emerged in the public discourse
  generated by the graduate students.
• Students have individual learning preferences
  that affect their use of technology and their
  attitudes about technology.
• When teaching online, it is important to
  implement technology that supports instructional
  goals, speaks to pedagogical needs, and stretches
  all learning styles.
• Our case study was small a larger study is
  needed.