Computers as Mindtools

I agree with Jonassen and colleagues (1998) that utilizing computers as mindtools would engage learners in critical thinking. However I disagree with their statement that mindtools would require students to think about what they know in different, meaningful ways. Students may think differently if they are utilizing the computers as designers as opposed to learners, but I have my doubts that mindtools would engage students differently compared to other active/engaged learning methods such as cooperative learning. Some of their examples of mindtools such as databases and concept mapping software are not exclusive to computers because students could very well construct the same knowledge with the use of the basic paper and pencil.

Mindtools may be effective but I feel their effectiveness is dependent on the learner’s motivation to use these tools. I have trouble imagining school children being excited about entering data in a content database and using it to analyze and organize the data. There is however one form of entertainment that has captured the attention of young and old alike: the computer and video games. In a study by Dickey (2005), she compared the engagement strategies in popular computer and video games and the characteristics of engaged learning. With that, she examined how these game designs may be used to inform instructional design. Perhaps one day technology would allow students to design their own video games that are both engaging and educational.

References

Dickey, M.D. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can form instructional design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53, 67-83.

Jonassen, D.H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43, 24-32.