Forum Getting Started: Re: Re: LAMS and Google

By: James Dalziel

[ Reply | Forward ]

I think it is worth stressing to students that not knowing the answer, or having a wrong answer, is fine for a starting Q&A - the point of the task is usually to get a variety of views, and then build from that, not to get the "right" answer from the beginning. If students are new to LAMS, I'd probably also point out that their answer will be anonymous (if you've left the Q&A as anonymous during authoring) - so they're not concerned about having their name with their answer.

In terms of using Google, I don't see a problem with this unless it runs counter to what you are trying to achieve - using Google shows a different innovative approach to learning that may be worth encouraging if searching fits some of your other learning objectives.

Posted by James Dalziel

By: Karen Baskett

[ Reply | Forward ]

Hi Peter,

I agree with James here - it's probably worth pointing out verbally that you don't expect the right answer. It may take them a while to actually believe you but worth persevering with. Another strategy might be to highlight an answer from a student who hasn't Googled - ie has written their own ideas and say something like "this is an interesting/great response because..."

I think this is a common problem in online learning - that what we as teachers/facilitators are expecting as outcomes isn't always clear to the students. Working with teachers in trials I sometimes hear that answers in LAMS weren't as "deep" as they had hoped for. One strategy I have suggested is that before going to the lab or starting the LAMS session, teachers quickly go through the session using a data projector/ smart board and explain what they want from students in each activity. This may not be a relevant strategy for you but my point is that because LAMS is so good at letting students study independently, sometimes we forget to explain objectives and reasons for doing activities thoroughly.

Hope this helps

Karen

Posted by Karen Baskett

By: Peter Miller

[ Reply | Forward ]

Karen -- I think you're absolutely right, i.e. you do have to be explicit with students about what you're trying to achieve at each stage.

James -- I do use Google for real elsewhere. I especially like the "define" function, as in "define:bioinformatics", as an opportunity to get students to reflect on their own thoughts and, indeed, those of the authors of the multiple definitions thrown up by Google.

Posted by Peter Miller

By: James Dalziel

[ Reply | Forward ]

I didn't know about the Google "define: ..." feature - that's quite handy. It could definitely be useful in sequences (eg, I could do a variation of my What is Psychology sequence where the student themselves have to go find definitions of Psychology, instead of the sequence providing them, and then students could share one they've found back with the class and explain why they chose it - probably using Share Resources with learner sharing enabled).

I couldn't help trying "define:LAMS" - the result is a bit depressing...

"Definitions of LAMS on the Web:

* Light Aircraft Maintenance Schedule (UK).
www.gremline.com/index_files/page0016.htm

* Long-range Attack Missiles. Capitals and base planets build these weapons. They are as powerful as GDMs, but are able to hit targets up to five sectors away.
www.neurohack.com/anacreon/manual/Glossary.html"

Posted by James Dalziel

By: Peter Miller

[ Reply | Forward ]

Useful set of Google tips at http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2005-09-29-n85.html though I suspect "define:" is the most pertinent and easiest to remember function.

Posted by Peter Miller

By: Peter Miller

[ Reply | Forward ]

Acronym Finder at http://slang.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?string=exact&acronym=LAMS has a few more. Can't help thinking that the military has made a land-grab for most acronyms.

Posted by Peter Miller