Advertisement

TechTrends

, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 40–46 | Cite as

The Habits of Mind Necessary to Generate New Ways of Teaching in a Career of Constant Change

  • Michael D. DeSchryverEmail author
  • Sean M. Leahy
  • Matthew J. Koehler
  • Leigh G. Wolf
Article

Abstract

In this paper we explore the philosophy, pedagogy and implementation of the third year course sequence in the M.A. in Educational Technology program at Michigan State University. We discuss how “little-r” revolutions in teaching and learning, i.e., technology facilitated revolutions specific to individual classrooms and contexts, are used to introduce our students to the thinking patterns of designers and innovators. This is accomplished by an overlapping emphasis on learning by design, trans-disciplinary creative cognitive tools, innovative technology, and reflective practice. In this environment, we also transition our students from acting as consumers of educational media to being producers of educational experiences. That is, not only do the students construct new educational media, they consider the aesthetic and affective implications of technology use for teaching and learning. Finally, given the rapid evolution of educational technologies, we support students as they establish a foundational vision for the interplay of education and technology that will serve them into the future, as they, and their learners, adapt tonew and emerging digital environments.

Keywords

Technology Creativity Teaching Learning Design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carliner, S. (2000.) Physical, cognitive, and affective: a three-part framework for information design, Technical communication, 47(4), 561–576.Google Scholar
  2. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  3. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  4. Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. In J. Bellanca and R. Brandt (Eds.), In 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn (pp. 51–75). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.Google Scholar
  5. Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). The 2009 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  6. Johnson, L., Adams, S., and Cummins, M. (2012). NMC Horizon Report: 2012 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  7. Kao, J. (1997). Jamming: The art and discipline of business creativity. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  8. Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2010). Reconsidering the T and C in TPACK: repurposing technologies for interdisciplinary knowledge. Paper presented at the The Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010, San Diego, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. New York: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
  10. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 10171054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mishra, P., Koehler, M.J. & Kereluik, K. (2009) The song remains the same: looking back to the future of educational technology, TechTrends, 53(5), 48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mishra, P., Koehler, M.J., & Henriksen, D. (2011). The seven trans-disciplinary habits of mind: Extending the tpack framework towards 21st century learning. Educational Technology, 11(2), 22–28.Google Scholar
  13. National Center on Education and the Economy. (2006). Tough choices or tough times: The report of the new commission on the skills of the American workforce.Google Scholar
  14. Oppenheimer, T. (2003). The flickering mind: The false promise of technology in the classroom and how learning can be saved. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  15. Prensky, M (2012). From Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom: Hopeful Essays for the 21st Century Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: CorwinGoogle Scholar
  16. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Root-Bernstein R.S. & Root-Bernstein M.M (1999). Sparks of Genius. Boston, MA. Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  18. Savery, J., & Duffy, T. (1995). Problem based learning: an instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B.G. Wilson (Ed.), Designing constructivist learning environments (pp. 135–148). Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2011). Structure and improvisation in creative teaching. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Stanford University Institute of Design (2012). Virtual Crash Course in Design Thinking. Retreived from: http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/
  22. Wolf, W. (1996, February). Steve Jobs: The next insanely great thing. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.02/jobs_pr.html
  23. Yushau, B., Mji, A., & Wessels, D.C.J. (2005). The role of technology in fostering creativity in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Pythagoras, 62, 12–22.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael D. DeSchryver
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sean M. Leahy
    • 2
  • Matthew J. Koehler
    • 1
  • Leigh G. Wolf
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Teacher Education and Professional DevelopmentCentral Michigan UniversityMt. PleasantUSA
  2. 2.Webster University—LeidenLeidenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations