The title of the article immediately causes the reader to understand that interactivity in education comes in multiple forms and a balance is needed to create a successful learning experience. Anderson stresses how positive learning can be present as long as one of these three forms of interaction (student-student, student-teacher, student-content) is at a high level. I pulled out one of Anderson’s quotes how, “the value of another person’s perspective, usually gained through interaction, is a key learning component in constructivist learning theories”. I love this idea, and I realize now how important this is to me. I once took an English literature class on Jane Austen and Edith Wharton, where I was the only male among 30 plus females, and I was often amazed at how differently I interpreted the reading than my fellow classmates. Without the student-student interaction piece, I think I would have completely missed some of the most important features of the texts. Likewise, I think I was able to provide that different perspective for my other classmates as well.
My immediate reaction after starting to read the article was that I was neglecting the role of student-content interaction, which is just as viable and important as the other two forms. When I think about my own learning, I often focus upon the positive experiences I had with the teacher first, and then with the other students. The trouble or ease with interacting with the content was often overshadowed by the interactions I had with others. However, after reading the article, I know understand that the impact of the reading upon me acts as the interaction between myself and the content.
As a teacher, I do value the interaction with myself and the students the most. However, Anderson does make valid arguments as to why the student-student interactions are just as important. Anderson states that enhancing student-student interaction will increase student achievement and also their learning pleasure. I frequently will pair a stronger student with a weaker student so that the interaction between them will positively affect both. I’ve taught in many diverse teaching situations, and I’ve found that most students will stay on-topic during a good majority of their student-student discussions, which is great for extending their learning. (not to be confused with teacher-teacher discussions, which frequently get off topic J) This refers to the value of “side-talk” and how Anderson states it is conducive to learning. Anderson’s claims how increased technologies, like “smart” classrooms, are increasing the students’ interactions with content, therefore reducing the need for as much teacher-student or student-student interactions.
I also would not like to see the level of teacher-student interaction minimized, but Anderson’s argues that this is allowing more learning opportunities for students around the world by making classes more accessible and cost effective. The research in interactivity will allow course designers and universities to get the right balance of the different types of interaction so that high levels of learning can still take place. Although this may not be ideal for my personal learning style, it definitely is ideal for learners who can only afford or attend a class that is delivered in this manner.
I think your take on this article is not only informative, but a good model for approaching new challenges. It seems that you prefer student-teacher interactions, but are willing to increase the level of student-content in your classes in order to see if there is potential value. I think this open attitude towards research and education will be most beneficial for students in the future.
ReplyDeleteNathan, I think that your point is well-taken about how we often think of our dis/like of a teacher first when remembering a class. From my conversations with my daughter (she attends the HS that I teach at), I know that she certainly is affected by her classmates interaction as well. Since our school is very competitive, I think what her classmates are doing sometimes overshadows everything else as the kids try to be the "star" of the class. Outside of English class, she never mentions the content (delivered by a textbook in most cases) except as part of a complaint about its difficulty. Actually, as I type this, I wonder if I really understood what Anderson meant by interaction with the content...
ReplyDeleteYeah, I agree with what you said about the teacher/student interaction not being minimized. I can't agree with you more how vital it is. I feel with distance learning it is hard to balance the three interactions that Anderson talks about. Teacher/Student interaction I guess could be minimized if it was interfering with other aspects of the class. A relationship between the teacher and student though trumps the other modes of interaction in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteCatherine---I did have some of the same reaction to the student-content interaction. Anderson states that interaction is when both sides "mutually influence each other". Often a reading does influence me, but I don't see how I could influence the book :) Possibly, my newfound revelations would cause me to contribute to the scholarly debate on the topic, and indirectly or subsequently influence what the book has to say?? I thought it was somewhat of a stretch too, but I think including the student-content interaction is important b/c some courses only contain this type of learning.
ReplyDelete