Rosetta Stone boasts lessons for a multitude of languages, which seems to follow the learning objects process of customizing learning theory to a variety of content. The program followed learning objects' procedural learning by first presenting information (hands-off), then allowing the student to respond with some guidance (do the next step), and finally giving the student an opportunity to arrive at the answer with little or no guidance (you-do-it) (Merrill, 1999, p.409). Furthermore, exercises give students instant feedback and wrong answers are "retained" and asked again until the student gives the correct one (Merrill, 1999, p.417).
A multimedia-rich program such as Rosetta Stone probably required years of research and a very knowledgeable, experienced team of experts to develop and implement. I think it would be difficult for most instructors to be involved in such a large-scale undertaking without the right amount of financial backing and manpower. However, open and enthusiastic collaboration is an initial step to understand the types of projects that can be explored.
Before Koppi's article, I did not fully understand the weight of the issue in regards to teachers' hesitation in sharing their teaching material. I am more inclined to think of "social responsibility" as a motivator, but it seems that a majority prefer a "reward" in the form of recognition or salary raises (Koppi, 2004, p.455). Considering the sacrifice of time and resources, rewards are realistic demands, but it is unfortunate if it becomes a dilemma that distracts teachers from pedagogical goals like offering students a quality learning experience. Administrators and the school system have a responsibility to discuss with teachers about the necessary investments and proper compensations.
References:
Koppi, T., Bogle, L., Hodgson, N., & Lavitt, N. (2004). Institutional use of learning objects: Lessons learned and future directions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13 (4), 449-463.
Merrill, M. D. (1999). Instructional transaction theory (ITT): Instructional design based on knowledge objects. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (2nd ed., pp. 397-424). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
I raised the issue of teacher's willingness to share in my post too. I'm amazed at how competitive the teaching community can be - especially when it comes to sharing lesson ideas and resources. I think this could be changed with the proper discussions within PLTs. At our school we "curriculum map" - and that philosophy has forced many of us to become sharers. Again, I'm not sure why the profession is so competitive - but I agree with you that Learning Object raises the issue.
ReplyDeleteI also wanted to give you props on thinking of Rosetta Stone - I hadn't thought of that one. Good work.
Ginny,
ReplyDeleteI love Rosetta Stone. I never thought that teachers would not want to share their Learning Objects, but that could be a problem.
You raise some interesting points in your final paragraph about the sharing of resources. The school system where I work has proposed implementing Pay for Performance beginning in 2014. One of the concerns that continues to arise in conversations is the question of whether this plan will serve to perpetuate the problem of teacher isolation and unwillingness to share their good ideas.
ReplyDeleteFor me, one of the challenges to sharing, is TIME! Thankfully, my administration makes a point of allowing people to share ideas during staff meetings, provides 1/2 day planning for teams to share ideas, and encourages vertical planning across grade levels which has also contributed to a more collaborative environment.
(Julie Jones)