Mind Tools- response

Mindtools

I personally really enjoyed the article Computers as Mindtools for Engaging Learners in Critical Thinking by Johassesn, Carr, & Yueh. I found the article very interesting because it makes a clear definition between instructional technologies being used as media for delivering instruction wherein the technologies attempt to instruct learners to technologies being used as mindtools. The authors define a mindtool as computer applications, which allow learners to interact, organize, and construct personal knowledge so that the learner acts as the designer. The computer functions as the mindtool and allows for the learner to engage in critical thinking about knowledge. Besides setting the distinction between instruction tools and mindtools the authors give some great and innovative computer application, which have been designed as or can be repurposed to fulfill the definition of being a mindtool.

I feel the main difference is the idea of supporting vs. engaging. The use of mindtools seems to fall best in line with Clarks view on media and constructivist thought (Clark, 1994). The instructional method behind/integrated in the way students use the technology creates a learning environment where students construct their own personal knowledge.
The authors elude that the use of mindtools supports one of my personal favorite pedagogy practices, which is having students teach material to foster deeper understanding and retention. In this case mindtools allow the learner to work with material and in essence teacher the computer. This concept falls in line with Papert’s idea that students learn more when they have deep interaction with materials realizing learning is not always easy or quick (Paper, 1993).

In my experiences with teaching in today’s modern classroom one of my biggest stumbling blocks is the fact that many students don’t want to think for themselves. Students are so used to teacher directed learning that they want someone to tell them the answer or how to think instead of thinking on their own. Students have a hard time with high order thinking skills specifically the application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The students are pretty good at the knowledge and comprehension because of the constructs of their learning environments. Further practice is needed in higher levels thinking skills and I believe methods behind mindtools can fulfill an educational need by giving students opportunities to practice and develop these skills. The biggest obstacle I feel is in the aspect of time. Using technologies to support learning takes only a fraction of time compared to using the methods related to mindtools.

References:

Bloom, B.S., (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Clark, R. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research
& Development, 42(2), 21-29.

Jonassen, D.H., Carr, C., & Yueh. (1998, March). Computers as mindtools for engaging
learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24-32.


Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking schools in the age of the computer.
New York: Basic Books