I think the project is interesting, though the paper isn't very accessible. First, if you're defining something, just define it, and do the literature survey later - readers will stagger over the incomprehensible definition of 'invisible learning' offered by the author. Second, avoid obvious falsehoods. The authors write, "Education at all levels has largely taken on faith that if teachers teach, students will learn." Nobody believes this; otherwise, we would never test learners, we would just take their learning on faith. The authors are mostly looking at the kind of learning that happens in non-learning projects - "critically engaging primary sources, social dialogue, and multimedia authorship." The work here is "not merely trying new teaching strategies but looking closely at the artifacts of student work that emerged from them." The authors identify "three types of learning: adaptive, embodied, and socially situated." With sharper writing may come more precise - and useful - insights from this work.
Today: 0 Total: 149 [Direct link] [Share]
