E-learning modules for Integrated Virtual Learning


    Discussion Forum 5

    avatar
    yvette

    Posts : 28
    Join date : 2008-08-12

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  yvette on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 2:00 am

    Thanks. Indeed, quality content is of utmost importance in teaching and learning. it is dependent upon the cultivation of wisdom and meaning in education. I am trying to say that today, various types of instructional designs are utilized to cope up with the changing times and different cultures (article on multicultural pedagogies). In our exec class for example, the traditional way of teaching is being supplemented with other techniques, such as computer based.

    silva731 wrote:Yeah technology is good but i just think that the paper is telling us that eventhough there is technology we should not be mere technical managers of a programmed process. Educators are educators we used technology as an instrument but we should not depend solely on it. Pinar tells us that quality content given by educators is still of utmost importance.

    yvette wrote:The article speaks of a curriculum theory. Lawrence Stenhouse (1975) defined curriculum tentatively: 'A curriculum is an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of an educational proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable of effective translation into practice'. He suggests that a curriculum is rather like a recipe in cookery.
    It can be criticized on nutritional or gastronomic grounds - does it nourish the students and does it taste good? - and it can be criticized on the grounds of practicality - we can't get hold of six dozen larks' tongues and the grocer can't find any ground unicorn horn! A curriculum, like the recipe for a dish, is first imagined as a possibility, then the subject of experiment. The recipe offered publicly is in a sense a report on the experiment. Similarly, a curriculum should be grounded in practice. It is an attempt to describe the work observed in classrooms that it is adequately communicated to teachers and others. Finally, within limits, a recipe can varied according to taste. So can a curriculum. (Stenhouse 1975: 4-5)

    Thus, in my own opinion, incorporating technology in the context of curriculum is one of the ingredients in a recipe or styles of acquiring knowledge in education. Such, I disagree on commenting it as a ‘nightmare’. At present, the use of computers and other technology is essential, since it makes both teaching and learning more efficient and effective.


    Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) 'Curriculum theory and practice' the encyclopedia of informal education, www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm.
    avatar
    evancarlo

    Posts : 53
    Join date : 2008-08-12

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  evancarlo on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 2:01 am

    Additional Citations:

    Teaching today is increasingly complex work where teachers find themselves caught in a triangle of interests and imperatives. This triangle requires teachers to be: (a) catalysts of the promises of opportunity and prosperity of the knowledge society; (b) counterpoints to the threats posed by the knowledge society to community, security, and the public good; and (c) casualties of the standardization imposed by the imperatives of the knowledge society (Hargreaves, 2003). How must teachers proceed with their work as educators within the professional
    paradox and conditions of fragmentation created by the knowledge society?

    The paradox of teaching in a knowledge society
    “We are living in a defining moment of educational history when the world in which teachers do their work is changing profoundly….” So writes Andy Hargreaves (2003) in Teaching in a knowledge society, his most cogent critique, to date, of the current wave of overregulation and standardization in education, which neoliberal discourses defend as increasing equity and fairness while holding all students to the same high standards. As Hargreaves notes, we (postindustrial societies in the West) are living in knowledge economies that are driven by ingenuity, creativity, inventiveness, and the capacity to cope with rapid change. Schools in knowledge societies have to cultivate these qualities in young people for their nations to survive and stay competitive. But Hargreaves
    also observes that while knowledge economies stimulate growth and prosperity they primarily serve the private good, and, in their relentless competitiveness and pursuit of profit and self interest, they fragment the social order and widen the wealth gap. Particularly disconcerting for public education, knowledge economies impose “soulless standardization” that leaves some students behind by eroding curricula
    and pedagogies that build on the experience, language and cultural identity of these students, decreasing teachers’ autonomy of judgment, undermining moral vision and social commitment in schools, and derailing the very creativity, ingenuity, and flexibility that schools are supposed to cultivate. The paradox of teaching in a knowledge society is
    that while schools and teachers are expected to create the human skills and capacities that enable knowledge economies to survive and succeed, they are also expected to teach the compassion, sense of community, and emotional sympathy that mitigate and counteract the immense problems that knowledge economies create (Hargreaves, 2003). The predominantly market oriented forms of life and practice at the heart of knowledge economies have, therefore, fragmented the work of teachers as never
    before.

    The method of currere
    “Currere is a reflexive cycle in which thought bends back upon itself and thus recovers its volition”. (Madeleine R. Grumet, 1976b, pp.130‐131)

    “Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards”. (Soren Kiekegaard, cited in Habermas, 2003, p. 4)

    Formulated in the 1970s by William Pinar and other curriculum scholars as the Latin infinitive of “curriculum”—meaning ‘to run the course’—the concept of currere refers to an existential experience of institutional structures (Pinar, 1974b). The method of currere is devised to disclose and examine such experience “so that we may see more of it and see more clearly. With such seeing can come deepened understanding of the running and with this can come deepened agency” (Pinar & Grumet, 1976, p. vii).

    Reference:

    Journal of the canadian association for curriculum studies
    Volume 4 number 2 winter 2006
    avatar
    Divinia Joy Tuzon

    Posts : 65
    Join date : 2008-08-12

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  Divinia Joy Tuzon on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 2:08 am

    Indeed, technology plays a pivotal role in education today. There is nothing wrong with incorporating technology in the context of our curriculum; it is actually maximizing the pedagogical approach educators use in imparting knowledge to their students. Technology is changing the way faculty teaches and students learn. As technological advances are introduced into the academy, students are more and more attracted by the promise and potential of technology for enhancing access and learning. Faculty, staff and administrators need to understand what technology can and what it cannot do. The National Education Association (n. d.) believes that technology is seen by some as the panacea for budgets cuts: some see visions of hundreds of students sitting in front of monitors, with talking heads providing cheap, mass education. Others see technology as a critical complement to the educational experience, opening more opportunities for the learner than can be encompassed by one campus. While both visions are possible, the first however is not particularly desirable. This is what the article teaches us. I agree that educators should only use technology as an instrument to complement their own teaching but they should not depend on it alone.

    REFERENCE:

    National Education Association. (n. d.). “Technology.” Article retrieved August 20, 2008 from http://www2.nea.org/he/techno.html


    silva731 wrote:Yeah technology is good but i just think that the paper is telling us that eventhough there is technology we should not be mere technical managers of a programmed process. Educators are educators we used technology as an instrument but we should not depend solely on it. Pinar tells us that quality content given by educators is still of utmost importance.

    yvette wrote:The article speaks of a curriculum theory. Lawrence Stenhouse (1975) defined curriculum tentatively: 'A curriculum is an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of an educational proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable of effective translation into practice'. He suggests that a curriculum is rather like a recipe in cookery.
    It can be criticized on nutritional or gastronomic grounds - does it nourish the students and does it taste good? - and it can be criticized on the grounds of practicality - we can't get hold of six dozen larks' tongues and the grocer can't find any ground unicorn horn! A curriculum, like the recipe for a dish, is first imagined as a possibility, then the subject of experiment. The recipe offered publicly is in a sense a report on the experiment. Similarly, a curriculum should be grounded in practice. It is an attempt to describe the work observed in classrooms that it is adequately communicated to teachers and others. Finally, within limits, a recipe can varied according to taste. So can a curriculum. (Stenhouse 1975: 4-5)

    Thus, in my own opinion, incorporating technology in the context of curriculum is one of the ingredients in a recipe or styles of acquiring knowledge in education. Such, I disagree on commenting it as a ‘nightmare’. At present, the use of computers and other technology is essential, since it makes both teaching and learning more efficient and effective.


    Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) 'Curriculum theory and practice' the encyclopedia of informal education, www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm.
    avatar
    luder

    Posts : 42
    Join date : 2008-08-12

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  luder on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 2:30 am



    As i read the article, i recall a time in Philippine history where the people were "helped with no advice given." rizal wrote two novels that started a spark in the hearts of our countrymen. and started a revolution that would eventually free us from spanish tyranny. it seems to me that the article presents an analogous situation. educators are being denied the freedom to really teach. all that is left for them to work on is a set of policies that they have to comply with. pinar tries to arouse the vigilance in educators to step up and express their frustrations in being held back from their true purpose.

    we can't say for sure that politicians only look at the business side of education (although it maybe very obvious at times). of course, i assume, they have the best interest for the country in mind. the problem maybe is that they look into this so broadly(the country) that they fail to see the specific needs each sector really needs. in effect were all just a part of a big machine. an assembly line to be more precise. we enter the educational system and end up all the same. i believe the politicians are using the backward design themselves. the goal is to pass the exam, to get enough points to go to the next level of the educational system. then they build educational policies around that.

    I believe that our nurse leaders will not allow our profession to be exploited. although they have no power to go against the flow. being in a high position means having more responsibilities that would include being expected to follow legislation. the point is although it seems that the politicians have control over what happens to the educational system, it would be up to our nurse leaders to make sure that we get the best of what the policies dictates. a five yr nursing course is not a bad idea, if it will produce more competitive nurses, not easily said when it comes to caring attitudes. but at least, we're confident they won't jeopardize patient safety.

    avatar
    Kriselda Anne Moreno

    Posts : 26
    Join date : 2008-08-12
    Age : 32

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  Kriselda Anne Moreno on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 4:02 am

    Good morning everyone!

    The article “Help without giving advice” talks about curriculum theory, focusing on Canadian and American being the closest among nations. As Pinar stated, there is an increasing faith in public education in Canada, enjoying a measure of trust and public confidence, while in America, market capitalism are now reforming the landscapes of education. Schools in America are now speaking and running in terms of “business language”, not necessarily focusing on the quality education every school has to provide.

    Market capitalism, I believe, is currently happening right now in our country. The boom in nursing profession attests to that. As what Sir Gary has mentioned, there is a massive increase in nursing schools today and a huge number of nursing enrollees spiked up ever since the issue on “in demand” nurses was released. Every year, a growing number of nurses graduated and take the board exam, after that, thousands of new registered nurses were made but sadly, thousands were also jobless. I was thinking, is being jobless after passing the licensure exam the reward of four whole years I have spent I school? Nursing schools, especially those non-nursing schools but later on decided to cater nursing course, are now profit-oriented and business minded, I must say. They will do anything to attract new enrollees, new “customers”, for their business to boom, not entirely keeping their promise to provide quality education or to assure that their students will be able to go to the States after graduation. As CHED makes revisions in the current nursing curriculum, adding international subjects for the Filipinos to easily cope up with the culture in abroad, it came into my thinking that Filipino nurses are really not made for Philippines; we will soon be exports in other countries. And now I agree that not even passing all the examinations would make you competent enough. Why do we have to suffer this market capitalism? What happened to “quality education” the schools promise?
    avatar
    Kriselda Anne Moreno

    Posts : 26
    Join date : 2008-08-12
    Age : 32

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  Kriselda Anne Moreno on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 4:07 am

    I agree with you Sir Luther. I do also believe that even though you have the highest position in nursing, you couldnt do anything over the politicians. But I must ask, will a five year course in nursing education assure more competitive nurses? What if market capitalism still runs in the nursing schools today? Does adding one year to our curriculum makes us more competitive than those who studied nursing for only four years?

    luder wrote:

    I believe that our nurse leaders will not allow our profession to be exploited. although they have no power to go against the flow. being in a high position means having more responsibilities that would include being expected to follow legislation. the point is although it seems that the politicians have control over what happens to the educational system, it would be up to our nurse leaders to make sure that we get the best of what the policies dictates. a five yr nursing course is not a bad idea, if it will produce more competitive nurses, not easily said when it comes to caring attitudes. but at least, we're confident they won't jeopardize patient safety.

    avatar
    patmarban

    Posts : 38
    Join date : 2008-08-11
    Age : 36
    Location : Quezon City

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  patmarban on Wed 20 Aug 2008, 8:37 am

    I believe it is a matter of quality, not quantity of units. The Philippines is known to run around the bush and have knee-jerk reactions to situations. Adding another year would not solve the root of the problem, which is the lack of quality teaching in some schools. Do you agree?



    Kriselda Anne Moreno wrote:I agree with you Sir Luther. I do also believe that even though you have the highest position in nursing, you couldnt do anything over the politicians. But I must ask, will a five year course in nursing education assure more competitive nurses? What if market capitalism still runs in the nursing schools today? Does adding one year to our curriculum makes us more competitive than those who studied nursing for only four years?

    luder wrote:

    I believe that our nurse leaders will not allow our profession to be exploited. although they have no power to go against the flow. being in a high position means having more responsibilities that would include being expected to follow legislation. the point is although it seems that the politicians have control over what happens to the educational system, it would be up to our nurse leaders to make sure that we get the best of what the policies dictates. a five yr nursing course is not a bad idea, if it will produce more competitive nurses, not easily said when it comes to caring attitudes. but at least, we're confident they won't jeopardize patient safety.


    Sponsored content

    Discussion Forum 5 - Page 2 Empty Re: Discussion Forum 5

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed 20 Nov 2019, 3:47 am