I started my teacher studies at AMOK by attending the international week during 25.-27.3.2014. All in all, the three days were really interesting and I learned a lot. We had lots of interesting discussions. Thank you for the experience for everyone :)
The first day’s subject was
innovative learning environments and internationality. The first speaker was Liisa
Holmberg from Sámi education institute in Inari. The institute attracts people
from all over Finland to come learn traditional hand crafts, but it was particularly
interesting to hear how the reindeer herders are taught. When the education was
started some 40 years ago, the main emphasize was the education given in the
school premises. At some point the teachers realized that the reindeer herders require
especially practice, not so much class room education. So nowadays, the
students are most of the time with their reindeer, using modern technology to
stay in touch with their teachers and to do their theoretical exercises. One
could imagine that reindeer herding as well as learning it are very
traditional, so it was surprising to hear that modern technology is very much
used. But it would be nice to see how well it works in practice, though. I
would suspect there are bunch of problems on the way.
The maps Liisa used were
interesting. They were not from the traditional point of view of the world, but
showed only the northern parts of the world. The North Pole was in the center,
surrounded by the northern parts of the world, in which reindeer herding is
practiced. Since I had not seen the world earlier from that perspective, it was
quite hard to distinguish any countries or any areas.
Liisa also talked briefly about the
education of practical nurses. The challenge in the education is how to teach
the Sámi culture, language etc. inside the quite strict frames of education.
The teachers from the Sámi education institute have written some booklets for
this reason. For example the eight seasons of the Sámi culture are described
and all the different things during each season, such as festivals, nature,
handicrafts and so on. It was enlightening to hear and understand how many
different things a person, who wants to work with people from different
cultures, needs to know and understand. Especially when dealing with elderly
people in places such as rest homes, I am sure one benefits from knowing
cultural issues.
Kari-Pekka Heikkinen from Oulu
GameLab told about the way people learn in GameLab. It was very interesting to
hear since the learning is project based. The main point is not even learning
itself but rather employment, the future of the students. People do demos or
even a full product in a small group, which contains all the talents required
for a SW-project, including marketing etc. so the learning is multidisciplinary.
There are no teachers as such, but rather everyone as an expert in some area
learns from others. I did not know that the way the projects are organized is
unique in the whole world. For example in Japan and in USA projects based
learning is used, but the projects have only SW professionals and for example
marketing people are missing. So the learning is not actually so
multidisciplinary and the end result most probably is not a whole product since
some aspects, like how to make money with the product, are missing. This is why
GameLab has attracted interest in other parts of the world and it is starting
co-operation with Japanese schools.
It was also nice to hear there will
be other labs coming also. So far, GameLab has been very successful and many
start-up companies with good products have been established. I’m sure this is
even crucial to Oulu since there have been many layoffs in IT-world. I was
surprised that people from the south of Finland have wanted to come to live to
Oulu because of GameLab! Way to go, GameLab!
Blair Stevenson told us about MOOCs,
which was a new thing to me. These Massive Open Online Courses can be divided
into two different types of groups: cMOOCs, which are based on networking and
knowledge creation & generation, and xMOOCs, which are extensions to
old-fashioned courses, i.e. the same course is provided also online. After
hearing some theory and background, we made team work trying to create a MOOC. It
turned out coming up with a proper subject that would fit to a MOOC was quite
hard. We had too wide thoughts and could not concentrate on a specific item. We
also came up with too practical subjects, where one would have required lots of
practice, which is not easily organized in MOOCs with lots and lots of
students. So at the end, we could not come up with any good course in the time
that was given. But we came up with a bunch of problems in planning and
organizing a MOOC.
In my work, I actually have attended
many MOOCs, since it seems organizing learning in workplace via MOOC is popular
at least in IT-world. I am sure it is cheaper than organizing face to face
courses, especially when the courses are targeted to massive amount of people.
But learning via computer only is not so efficient, though, and I do not think I
get so much out from them. Also the questionnaires used in the MOOCs I have
participated have usually been, how to say it, ridiculous. It seems that in a
MOOC, it is easy to come up with precise questions, where one has to remember
some detailed information. To me, learning precise details is not the main
point – you will not most certainly remember those after a while anyhow – but wider
understanding of the subject. But trying to figure out whether a person has
understood the subject in a wider sense is not so easy in MOOC environment. So
it seems MOOCs, according to my experience, do not really support deeper
learning.
During the second day, we were
divided into groups and each group visited a place. I visited with my group the
school of business and information management. For future business people,
international competence, practice and contacts are crucial, so the students
are encouraged to for example do their practice abroad. Also for the teachers
of the school, internationality is very important, since teachers are the
center part in networking. It is essential that teachers have good skills for getting
and staying connected. Because of the importance, the school already has wide
networks throughout the world, for example with different schools. It was quite
interesting to hear that half of the students in the school are actually themselves
international!
Nijolė ČiuČiulkiene talked about
mentoring. A mentor can be an educator, a model, an acculturator, a sponsor or
a provider of psychological support. Reverse mentoring, where both sides learn or
even the situation can be upside down, i.e. the mentor does the learning, was
new thing for me. Nijole told that it comes from business world, but I had not
encountered it earlier. Most of the lecture was quite theoretical and I could
not grasp it – it would have required more time to read and think.
During the third day, the subject
was multiculturalism, which is actually a familiar subject for me since I have studied
multiculturalism (approbatur studies at the open university). But it turned out
Yrjö Mikkonen brought lots of new ideas and interesting aspects to the subject.
He had researched multiculturalism from the viewpoint of concepts and terms. Yrjö
told many good examples of how terms and concepts differ even though they are
used as mixed in real life. For example New York as a city is multicultural,
but an airport cannot be multicultural, i.e. there have to be a set of rules,
certain measures and so on. So an airport can be international, but not
multicultural. Similarly a school as a system can be international, but not
multicultural, since a school for example has to have similar rules for
everyone. The school system is international, but the school spirit has to be
multicultural! If a learning environment is multicultural, it wants to learn
from different people, not stick to the provided rules.
Internationality can be seen as “we”
and “them” thinking, where thoughts are exchanged. For example an international
market serves different food from different parts of the world. Multiculturalism
means that there is only “us” – there are no “those” or “them”. For example a
multicultural market has people from all over the world mixing their food
traditions together to create some new dishes. International is conservative,
has strict rules and does not allow much individuality. One finds unity from
sameness, in something people share. The past of internationalism is cruel with
conquests and so on. Multiculturalism is the co-operation of different cultures
and different people. Trust is crucial. Innovations and new things rise from
multiculturalism, but uncertainty is also part of it. Multiculturalism can be passive,
active or aggressive (such as segregation).
Yrjö introduced system thinking,
which was new for me. Things are looked at as components and connections. Simple
systems are usually man made, such as technological and administrator systems.
But natural systems are usually complex, such as cultures, forms of society and
ecological systems. If there are problems in the system, simple systems require
someone correcting them, but natural systems usually correct themselves by
themselves.
What comes to “teacherhood”
(opettajuus), Yrjö emphasized the relationship of the teacher and the student. Justice,
discussion, understanding approval and encouragement are important. What comes
to immigrants, one has to be careful not to punish them in front everyone,
because in many countries, keeping one’s face is important.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti