Mark's Alessi/Trollip Ch 9 thoughts

I like that this chapter opens with the fact that these tools are more "uncategorized" but still constructivist. That allowed me to read more "freely" without concern of mentally placing each tool into a specific category. My main thoughts as I read this chapter were: "Wow, this sounds like fun," "I really want to try that," "I'd really like to produce something like that for rainforest ecology in Madagascar," and "How can I used this in class..."

It was also good to see another perspective on "microworlds" (other than the paper we read). This sure does seem like a great tool for online classes (and other settings), but I'm still trying to see the difference between this and virtual reality. Learning tools are also discussed, and I like that they are touted as both assisting with learning AND a type of assessment tool (thought they don't give the details about how to assess or if you're comparing to an expert's tool output). I also appreciated that "dreamweaver" was included in multimedia construction tools. That is, we don't have to build the framework for new tools or even hire people to make us tools; many are already around, and we just have to find creative ways to use them! Have students build (constructivist) webpages or presentations or concept maps using PowerPoint, Adobe Photoshop, etc. Then, the class would consist of teaching the technology (as a tool) in order to get "output" from the student; then it comes down to the assessment of that output (compare to expert model or peer models?).

The second half of the chapter focuses on Open Learning Environments (OLEs)--programs that permit learning in a natural and flexible way. They can accomplish a variety of goals and are used in conjunction with other learning materials (p327). These are supposed to be most useful for the "guiding and practicing" phases of instruction (though can be used for presenting and assessing as well). As the went into examples of OLEs, I couldn't help but think "isn't this just a Wiki" when reading the CSILE section. Anybody else think that? The only difference seemed to be that entries/posts in CSILE had to be labeled as "opinion, fact, question" or other labels.

Overall, this chapter seemed less about theory, and more about some practical tools to try out (that are flexible and don't fit in other categories).