Over the years, every time there was an advancement in technology it changed the way I learned and gathered information. I have to say the biggest shift was when I started college, and I started viewing the Web as a viable resource. Things like search engines and video lectures/tutorials really helped me learn new concepts. For me, it is the fastest and easiest way to gather information and study subjects that I don't have a good base of knowledge for. For classes like "Multimedia II", video tutorials helped me with the more advanced capabilities of ActionScript 3.
After thinking about it for some time, I can only think of a few ways to improve on what's already here. After studying Web trends in this class, things seem to be becoming more interactive. Between things like Skype chats and interactive tutorials, I think this would be a massive improvement on what we have. Under most circumstances, students can learn much more in an interactive setting than in typical "Cram & Test" environment. With the technology advancing at an exponential rate, this type of learning is becoming easier to utilize in a Web environment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I agree. Having an interactive experience with the learning process is much more rewarding than just reading a book and taking a test. I hate science and once I am done with the class I generally forget what we were taught (at least for some of the more advanced concepts).
In one of my sciences classes, in high school, the teacher made the class room much more interactive. We would split up into teams the day before the test and compete against each other in a game about the information we learned. This is a much better method, in my opinion, than just power points, reading assignments and tests.
For the majority of students I've talked to, interactive learning is usually the way to go. Especially in Digital Media Design, it is much easier to understand the material if you are applying the skills while learning. In almost every class, we work through a tutorial while the concept is being taught.
Take Web II for example, we followed Bill through Dreamweaver as he was teaching us about the interface. It seems to be a quicker way to relate to the material.
I agree that it is much easier to learn applications like Dreamweaver when you can watch a demonstration and follow along. I find that I become familiar with the how to navigate the interface and use the tools much more quickly when I have a visual reference. Instructional manuals work fine, but they are limited in being able to show a clear depiction of each step.
Though an in-person explanation allows you to ask questions, it is also helpful to watch a screencast tutorial. I like being to able to pause and rewind as I follow along with each step. I think screencasts would be a valuable instructional tool if classes like Web II are ever offered online.
Screencasts can be very helpful, but for me they work better if you know the basics already. Trying to learn Dreamwaver through tutorials would not have been as easy as learning from another person face-to-face. The questioning process is probably the most important part for me, because it helps to place it into a context that is easier to understand.
Once I have learned the basics about something, tutorials usually help much more. Since you have the base knowledge to go from, it is much easier to get the material.
Some software is easier to learn than others. When I first learned Adobe software it was before I came to DMD. I learned it all through reading a basic tutorial with some screenshots. After that I just did some tutorials and eventually I understood how everything worked. Adobe software is not too complicated.
However, during 3D class I had very limited experience with Cinema 4D. Having an instructor there helped me out a lot. I feel screencasts are can be just as good as face-to-face instructors. Even when it comes to teaching the basics. If the person teaching in the screencast is good; they generally know what kind of questions I would want to ask and answer them while explaining. I remember Kathleen had some screencasts when I first came to DMD and they were just like the lectures; easy to understand.
Kathleen does a very interesting interpretation of a screencast...she treats it as if she is talking to you, even with the "Hi, this is Kathleen Kinney" intro. Her approach is, well, here it goes... mistakes and all. Me? Well, I'm a video guy, so I produce all my content (as you can tell.) Mistakes hit the editing room floor. (Don't ask me how many times I recorded the intros to each week's lecture... or re-did the voice-over. Egads! Kathleen thinks I'm crazy.)
But there are interactive experiences beyond what you've seen so far. Imagine, Matt, if you could learn science through a video game. I mean really learn it! The trick, of course, is to not only pass on knowledge but to get the student to "reflect" on it. Learning actually takes reflection, which is why learning F2F, as John says, is such a better experience for some classes.
In this class, the reflection is internal, hence all the papers. (Sorry about that.) But the questions you might have are easy to find answers to. Not so much in working with a new programming language or complicated software where even going back through the tutorial doesn't make sense. Some Lynda.com tutes are, sadly, a lot like that.
I think that as web designers we should not be only looking to improve technologies already available on the web, but what technology needs to be implemented. As online web students we should be able to develop the new era of online learning so that everyone has the opportunity to learn like we have in this class.
Post a Comment