The Other AR: The Good, the Bad, and the To Plan For of Students

4 March, 10 March Reflections:

4 March - I need to incorporate ways to interface and train with the other students that I haven’t worked a lot with in the past… to get them working with my students more.

They need to work on some processes together and iron out some coordination and collaboration of each co-worker.

I need to craft some craft some ‘problems’ that they need to work on… challenging ones that they will really have to work through.  These problems need to challenge them as well as stress system limitations (technology wise).

10 March – Frenetic thoughts/Observations/Reflections

Problem Based Learning/Project Based Learning/Inquiry Based Learning – Training and Instruction:

·         Has to incorporate ‘team’ collaborative learning

This has to be supplemented by individual decisions that agree with cohesive goals!

ME: Design “unstructured problem(s)” for collaborative TEAM work to solve

-          I may utilize Inquiry-based principles that require student research

-          Seek our pertinent facts – do research – use others & resources – trial & error iterations (experimentation?) – prove/disprove – “do these”...

Has this solved “the problem”? + other methods if needed

Iterative learning (?) – to create the best, most-comprehensive product

Reflections & acknowledgements of student characteristics –

-          They learn things FAST & I mean they don’t have much inhibition to thought of how to work things out – they also don’t have much patience for shortcomings in the system (software use) – This is good and bad.

-          Good – Their expectations are high and their thinking is relatively clear and wide open… they’re not scared of “hurting the system”. They are very willing to experiment.  This shows deep care for the fundamentals they are being taught and willingness to work around software confines to achieve what they want to.

-          Bad – they are reluctant/skeptical/untrusting of system limitations or issues that they are taught (this can be a positive – as noted above- as they are or may be capable of deeper cognition). Questioning & skepticism is often what brings about positive use, manipulation, and maturation of the system, architecture.  Creative use of software coupled with system knowledge should ultimately help them achieve their goals.

Most importantly of the bad – often when the ‘trained way’ is deviated from – it yields a broken (software) system that they lack the knowledge or time required for recovery…

IF THIS IS NOT UNDERSTOOD OR HEEDED to = distress and detriment overall.

Takeaway: How do we maximize both the good and bad characteristics to prepare for the best training?