metacognitionRecent blog entries tagged with metacognition.
ELI Annual Video: Teaching MetacognitionCreated by Gerry Bayne (EDUCAUSE) on January 30, 2008
Video and slides of this presentation can be found here. The speech is by Marsha C. Lovett, Associate Research Professor & Associate Director for Carnegie Mellon University, and is entitled, "Teaching Metacognition". It was delivered at the ELI 2008 Annual Meeting. As educators, we teach students “content” but also want to help them develop as learners. Metacognition—the process of thinking about one’s own thinking processes and strategies—is essential to both goals, and yet instructors often feel they lack time or expertise to teach metacognitive skills. In this session, Lovett discusses recent research on teaching metacognition, including a Carnegie Mellon program where metacognitive instruction is integrated into first-year science courses. ELI Podcast: Teaching MetacognitionCreated by Gerry Bayne (EDUCAUSE) on January 30, 2008
In this 61 minute podcast, we feature a speech by Marsha C. Lovett, Associate Research Professor & Associate Director for Carnegie Mellon University, and is entitled, "Teaching Metacognition". It was delivered at the ELI 2008 Annual Meeting. As educators, we teach students “content” but also want to help them develop as learners. Metacognition—the process of thinking about one’s own thinking processes and strategies—is essential to both goals, and yet instructors often feel they lack time or expertise to teach metacognitive skills. In this session, Lovett discusses recent research on teaching metacognition, including a Carnegie Mellon program where metacognitive instruction is integrated into first-year science courses. Against the "Relevance" of Educational TechnologyCreated by Catherine Howell (University of Cambridge) on September 21, 2005
One of the arguments for integrating technology into the curriculum is that it is “relevant”. I’d never deny that technology awareness (and skills) are useful. But can we please ditch this discourse of “relevance”? I’ve mentioned before that I don’t favour, and have never favoured, the idea that an educational curriculum, of any flavour, ought to be based on “relevance”. For two reasons: democratic and historical. First, who gets to define what is relevant? The notion of “relevance” puts too much power into the hands of too few. It’s dangerous. Second, definitions of “relevance” are irrevocably tied to the social and technological present in which we find ourselves. And our social “present tense” rapidly becomes the past. Surely the purpose of education is to help prepare individuals for their future, not our present. I am NOT arguing that ICT is “impossible” in the educational context because of the phenomenon of obsolescence. What I principally object to is the way that the language of “relevance” consistently reduces the philosophy of education to an instrumental point of view. Notions of educational “relevance” are invariably tied to a definition of education as an instrumental process, in which an individual is inculcated with specific competencies and/or skills. Skills are utterly situational. They are tied to specific technologies and work practices. |
Contact | Help | About EDUCAUSE | FAQ | Feedback | Colophon | Terms of Use
