Madres Comunitarias – Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar

3. Reflective Observation (RO) 4. Abstract Conceptualisation (AC)

1.

Active Experimentation (AE)

All participants at different stages of the research preferred the active experimentation (AE) mode of learning. What became evident is that ―experience alone is not sufficient for learning; something must be done with it‖ (Baker et al, 2002, p. 10). In this study, the transformation of knowledge and the acquisition of skills were the focal points of learning for the immigrating

participants. They processed information by experimenting, doing, changing, and influencing people, as well as relying on other people and themselves.

Six participants (Figure 9) stood out in their interaction and learning process, as they were more interested in the active experimentation throughout the course. These participants preferred to rely on each other for their learning, and on activities that incorporated ‗hands-on‘ experimentation.

Patricia liked to work with people, in groups (Patrick, Penelope and Danielle), discussing browsers and the different difficulties they all encountered, such as the hardware and downloading. And generally Patricia‘s attitude was involve me and I will learn. She liked to collaborate, especially in order to achieve a set goal and complete a task. This became evident when, as literacy co-ordinator at her school, she organised spreadsheets to record all the literacy material for all grade levels. In her journal, she wrote:

many hands made light work; What a team...Look at database (the material needed for the literacy program) on cupboard door and finally when the work was done: We‘ve

Active Experimentation 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Pa tri c ia Pe g Pa tri c k Po lly Ph ilo m e n a Pe n e lo p e C o n Pe a rl Ph o e b e D a n ie lle D a v id D e lia D o ro th y D u n c a n D o ri s As h le y

done it again. All staff have their own hard copy and a list is hanging in the storeroom for each grade level.

Patrick was another participant willing to experiment, learn, and collaborate with others. He was:

only new to the technology but the students he taught had computers at home, although at that stage, he didn‘t have one and as far as he was concerned the good part about all this, was for them to have an opportunity to teach him something.

Patrick liked tohave time to have a go at it, have time to talk about it with a colleague, interact with the person organising or facilitating, or with one another. And Penelope preferred to

cooperate and discuss the features of PowerPoint that they (Patrick, Patricia, Danielle and herself) were not familiar with, because she wanted toexchange information about the browsers and problems about connections … meaning the Internet.

Technology opened up new ways of thinking and approaching learning. These digital immigrant teachers found a new form of collaborative environment to solve immediate concerns. They began to form communities and build knowledge to survive in their new environment (Laferrière 1997). Penelope‘s experience was similar to the experience of many immigrant as new arrivals who often share and assist each other on their arrival in a foreign country. As Ling (2004, p. 14) states: ―survival [for the immigrant] in an alien environment … relies heavily on strategies of mutual aid‖.

Philomena was similarly taken with the idea of active experimentation. As far as she was concerned teachers learn best by doing, yes and experimenting: I‘m happy to give it a try or …

to find help if I need to… The same theme recurred throughout the course and in her second interview; she said that what she liked about the course was:

just the hands on experience of doing it and then I need to go home and actually have a practice at home. She experimented with PowerPoint: clicking, doing and experimenting.

Philomena‘s confidence in her knowledge increased, and her skills developed. She began to email attachments to herself, and she opened up her newly acquired knowledge and skills to others, especially her students: great excitement today with my PowerPoint group – hit the computers! Philomena continued to write in her journal about her new found enjoyment; about how she actively influenced others by applying her new learning in a practical manner. Of then sharing of this knowledge in her school workplace and in university classroom she wrote - they all learned how to print the computer screen! This single activity brought about great excitement for her and she recorded this fact in her journal.

Polly was a participant who felt quite comfortable and well-suited to the unstructured environment found in the facilitative ambience of this university classroom. Her approach was to:

just do it that way, check out the real thing and try it yourself and if it doesn‘t work out the first time, it will the second time. It‘s just time to just sit down and fiddle around and

play with it and enjoy it.

Polly also became involved in group work and shared her knowledge with others. This sharing, and having the opportunity for interaction and dependence on each other, created a sense of community within the university classroom. It allowed the participants to jointly deliberate and collectively pursue their learning. They would tell each other how to crop and about the different icons.

Another participant, Phoebe, also actively experimented and got things done by asking other people. She displayed an open-minded approach to her learning which she expressed by asking, and by becoming personally involved in this new, present situation. Her journal relates how:

I knew I was starting a new school year at the end of January and I knew I had to have some basic knowledge because the children would be using computers in the classroom and so I bought a computer over the Christmas break.

Peg, who unfortunately did not submit her journal which could have thrown further light on her learning, preferred to experiment, do, reflect, and learn the technical skills as she progressed. Her initial trials and experimentation predictably produced errors. These she contemplated before asking for assistance. She sought the advice of other people – such as the teacher educator – when she was having difficulties in her school classroom with PowerPoint. She liked to solve problems and find practical solutions to the technical tasks.

Con was eager to know how a computer program worked. He was pragmatic and actively experimented. He thoroughly enjoyed solving problems, learning the skills, and then passing the information on to his students:

I went back and tried it at home… Well, home and school, just to try and develop the skills a little better. So I knew a bit more of what I was doing, so then I could pass onto the children or just for my own benefit, so that I was, I guess, a bit more aware of where and what was happening.

Con reinforced his own learning and looked for practical and concise ways of attempting a task. As Con and the other participants became more confident with the technology, their observed language changed and began to sound more cryptic:

in here, you need to place this section, once you‘ve done that, then return to this part and here you need to copy this line and then go to… Go back and make it attractive…Con gives Doris directions.

This became the common language among the group and created a bonding. Although the language of these new arrivals appeared cryptic, they understood each other and accurately conveyed their messages. (See Glossary for a list of digital terms and their meanings.)

Con organised his knowledge in a hypothetical-deductive manner, focussing on specific problems. He preferred to deal with technical tasks and problems rather than social and interpersonal issues. He displayed a marked tendency to focus on specific tasks and aspects, and to actively experiment with technical tasks. He brought into class new programs for his colleagues to view – Kahootz (a Window‘s PC-based multi-media narrative creation software for children) and the latest version of Kidpix (a similar media manipulation program for Macintosh computers). He explained the technical aspects of the programs and talked about the specific tasks of the two programs. Pedagogical issues were not mentioned; only practical concerns were discussed.

During the field observation, Con constantly solved problems and experimented:

I picked this up by doing this…and then you do this… by pressing this icon and all I get is this running square, I‘m after a box…No, that‘s just to select, the actual box is further down, here let me show you, he proceeds to show Doris who leans over to see it on his computer.

The same mode pattern of learning occurred for most other participants, the exception being Dorothy who scored a low preference in active experimentation (AE). She was often late for class due to her school workplace commitments. However she was adamant that she did want to learn about computers and that this was the purpose of doing the course. Initially she said that she was terrified of computers. Nonetheless by mid-year, her confidence had increased and in her second interview, she stated that she had really learned a lot, and one of the things… is that

you can play around and not destroy the computer. This enhanced capability allowed her to experiment, and by the end of the year, although she still came in late she could now muck around with PowerPoint and other programs.

Ashley scored the lowest active experimentation (AE) score in the group of participants. He was not confident about his ability to learn ICT. However, a change occurred in his life during the course when he obtained a permanent teaching position. This led to a new attitude and his approach to learning became more positive. He started to experiment and do things; he obtained

a laptop and, like many of the other participants, bought himself a USB memory stick. He even explained and showed another participant the process of setting up the memory stick if the technology did not take it. He did so utilising the common language the group was discovering and developing: take yourself to Windows… etc.

During the latter part of the year, when Ashley gained his permanent teaching position – a prep class for the remainder of the year – he cheerfully, and quite seriously felt confident enough to decide that for these five and six-year-old digital natives that their computer experience is limited. His experiences within the university classroom increased his confidence and he started to evoke a positive attitude. Ashley became more interested in, and excited by, experimenting with the technology rather than just theorising about possibilities in regard to its mechanics, but he, too, was not obviously concerned with the pedagogical theory in relation to learning. He became active in the online discussion and the following appeared on the bulletin board: Hey, I think I've actually done it right... we'll see. An interesting site to have a play with- www.pets.info.vic.gov.au, I hope this message gets through.

A notable feature of the university classroom environment of this study was the degree to which interaction allowed team building and collaboration. Kolb refers to this interaction as ―team learning, [which is] the process by which teams gain clarity about purpose, develop good working relationships, and effectively accomplish their goals. It involves valuing individual differences, learning how to focus on a common purpose, and sharing responsibility for getting work done‖ (Kolb et al. 2004, p. 1). Doris observed and worked with Duncan, Dorothy, and Con. And in her case, Doris felt that she:

always just found a little group work was better, because you sort of… bounce [ideas]

off each other… Cooperative learning, it‘s very good, because I do think you open up a bit more, and brainstorm…

For many of the participants, experimenting with and within the new environment of ICT assisted them in identifying their own needs with regard to ICT learning. Many of the

participants echoed Peg, who said in her second interview that, as far as she was concerned, teachers learn best: just by doing. Yeah, just by doing. These experienced teachers were like many new arrivals who explore and experiment with different aspects of their new environment. For example, new immigrants may buy new types of food and try to cook it, but they cook the food using styles they know from their former home: mixing ―leftover macaroni with vegetables and fragrant garam masala‖ (Giri 2002, p. 1), as it were. These digital immigrant teachers experimented in an analogous manner; they used Microsoft PowerPoint to organise presentations. These presentations were in the traditional linear text format, and did not utilise the program‘s inbuilt dynamic organisation which would allow them to organise information and connections through hypertextual links to other documents and tasks. However they were indeed experimenting and doing, and developed a pragmatic approach to their immediate classroom needs. This experimentation gave meaning to the different concrete experiences that they were encountering in the information age.