WORLD RELIGIONS ACTIVITY1
World Religions Activity in a Thai Buddhism Class
Bradley Opatz
EDU520.90 Digitally-Mediated Technology & Learning
Dr. Kurti
World Religions Activity in a Thai Buddhism Class
Introduction
This paper describes the learning theory with the use of technology in an activity that teaches the major features of the world’s religionto a Thai Buddhism class. The writer is a part-time Buddhism teacher in the English Program at RatchaborikanukrohSchool in Ratchaburi, Thailand, teaching lower secondary students (grades 7, 8 and 9). Major standards required to be taught throughout the year include the history and spread of Buddhism, major teachings and themes of Buddhism, proverbs, stories of the Buddha’s past lives and basic teachings and religious figures in other world religions. Because of the general lack of religious and cultural diversity within the educational context, an activity focusing on the world religions standard was chosen. Outcomes of the learning activity include increased general knowledge of the major features of the world’s religions, cultural/religious awareness as well the ability to compare and contrast other religions with Buddhism. The constructivist learning theory, including social development theory, is used to create a framework for the learning activity, which is enhanced by the use of educational technology.
Theoretical Framework
The world religions activity that follows is based on the constructivist theory of learning championed by Jerome Bruner. Under Bruner’s framework, learning is seen as an “active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current/past knowledge” wherethe “learner selects and transforms information, constructs hypotheses, and makes decisions, relying on a cognitive structure to do so” (Culatta, 2013). The constructivist theory is student-centered because it relies on learners’ prior knowledge; the teacher works as a facilitator to guide the leaner to construct a new concept by integrating new content into existing worldviews.
Bruner also stresses the importance of society and culture in learning, learning is not an individual activity. Culture is seen as vital to learning because the mind is shaped by culture and all existing worldviews are constructed from culture (Bruner, 1996). By drawing on learners’ worldviews, influenced largely by culture, the educator can assist in posing appropriate questions and learning activities that tap into pre-existing knowledge.
Bruner’s emphasis on society and culture was largely influenced by Lev Vygotsky’s social development theory (Smith, 2002). Social development theoryclaims that social interaction takes place before any kind of development occurs and that social behavior and socialization give rise to consciousness and cognition. Vygotsky asserts that social learning occurs first in the interpsychological realm, socially, and then individually, on the intrapsychological level. He also introduced concepts of the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) and the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The latter is the space within learning takes place: between the learner’s abilities and the educator’s goals or outcomes; this is where learning happens. The MKO is defined as anyone who has a higher cognitive ability than the learner; this can be the educator that facilitates the process or even a more knowledgeable peer that aids another learner. The focus is on social interaction and the relationships between the educator, the learner and peers working collaboratively (Learning-Theories.com, 2013).
The constructivist theory as explained by Bruner works well in a Buddhism class because it complements the way the historical Buddha taught (BDEA/BuddhaNet, 2008). The Buddha taught gradually, talking from universal life experiences and guiding the disciple through questioning until reaching the intended realization. Examples from prior knowledge and experiences are cast in a new light through pointed questions; thereby the learner constructs new meaning through synthesis. Vygotsky’s social development theory also fits this educational context because of the social culture of Thailand. In the Thai education system, students in the same grade are grouped together in different class sections; the class sections have the same school schedule and stay together until graduation. This combats shyness in the classroom and equates to students becoming comfortable with each other, promoting ease of idea exchange and construction. Also, Asian culture in general has a large emphasis on society, which works well in fostering group work through activities.
Technology
Technology integrated into the world religions activity includes smart phones, tablets, other computing devices that can connect to the internet, a class website and glogster.com. Smart phones and tablets can be used by learners in the classroom to quickly search for and retrieve information as needed as a class or in a group. Any computing device that has the ability to connect to the internet can be used to access the class website outside of class time, individually. The class website, monitored by the facilitator, will include supplemental multimedia and materials as well as host a discussion forum wherein learners will participate. Glogster.com will be used as a platform to show synthesis and evaluation of knowledge and understanding gained by studying major world religions through video, audio, visual representations and text. This educational technology will aid in teaching and learning by stimulating learning on the individual, group and class levels. Because of the easy access of materials provided via the internet, content is not only restricted to the classroom but can be retrieved at any time and allows for asynchronous discussion.
Learning Activity Proposal
The world religions learning activity aims to guide students toward learning the general features of the world’s religions, including Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Chinese folk religions during two, fifty-minute class periods. The first class will start with a five-minute Anapanasati or loving kindness meditation, depending on the learners’ individual preferences. The facilitator will then introduce the topic of world religions by eliciting the basic features and facts, already familiar to learners, of the aforementioned religions from the class as a whole.Next, the facilitator will give a personal account of experiences with other religions, religious followers and sacred sites. The class will then be split up into groups with each group assigned a specific world religion and tasked with making a list of facts about that religion; learners will use smart phones and tablets to search content from the internet. Groups will then present their lists to the entire class, followed by a 5-minute reflection/loving kindness meditation. The student-made lists will be made available on the internet via the facilitator, along with supplemental reading materials and a discussion forum where learners willbe asked to compare and contrast Buddhism with two of the major world religions. Students will then collaboratively participate, in small groups, to create their own religions. Increased knowledge of major world religions will aid in constructing major features of their own religions, along with a short history and ways practitioners of their religions worship; students will be tasked with constructing a poster board with the abovementioned elements.
The second class period will again begin witha five-minute Anapanasati or loving kindness meditation. The facilitator will then introduce the topic of cultural awareness by telling a few short and humorous, personal stories which highlight the need for being culturally aware when interacting with people of other cultures and religions. Choosing one of the facilitator’s stories, each student will reflect on actions that would have reduced cultural/religious misunderstandings; students will share their opinions to the class. Students will then present their unique religions to the class while each group in the audience comes up with one question to ask the presenting group. After the religions are presented, the facilitator will then pose a few questions for reflection (What are some similarities and differences between your made-up religions? How might some of these religions misunderstand each other if practitioners met for the first time? Give examples of cultural/religious misunderstandings you have had or seen with major world religions.). Students will then participate in a class discussion until the end of class. Online materials will be made available on the topic of cultural/religious awareness including websites dedicated to promoting religious understanding. There will be a discussion question posed to the entire class for the week (Do we need to learn about other religions to learn about other cultures? Why or why not?Please give examples.). Students will then be asked to make a glogster.com page (glog) about what they thought were the most important things they learned about over the last two class periods. All activities and discussions in the physical classroom and online will be conducted in English.
The learners in this activity are mathayom-suksa 1 (7th grade) students in the English Program at RatchaborikanukrohSchool. This activity is important for learners because it increases inter-religious/cultural understanding and helps the learner become more familiar with, and see the similarities and differences between, the world’s religions. Learning outcomes for this activity are as follows:
By the end of the world religions activity students will be able to:
- Describe the major features and leaders of major world religions
- Articulate increased cultural/religious awareness
- Compare and contrast religious practices of major world religions.
Schwier defines formal, non-formal and informal learning in terms of differences in the degree that learners engage in activities. Formal learning has pre-determined activities that must be carried out; non-formal learning has fewer controls, while informal learning gives ultimate control to the learner (Schwier, 2010). Formal learning does not only take place in a classroom setting, but can be recreated in an online format to fit the degree to which the learner is given control over the course. Eshach has similar definitions, with decreased structure from formal to non-formal to informal learning (Eshach, 2007).
Combining formal and informal learning would occur through the use of blended learning. Inside the classroom would be a more formal learning process with the introduction of major world religions and eliciting prior knowledge from students, while the online portion would be more non-formal with more control of the specific content in the hands of the learner. Informal learning would also have a place in discussion boards and in the accumulation of knowledge to engage in the non-formal learning activities. Bonk shows that the use of Facebook, other social media and blogs to form communities is the way millions of people around the world connect and learn from each other in an online context (Bonk, 2007). This kind of learning is synonymous with informal learning in that the learner has complete control over the delivery of the content. While informal learning is gaining wider regard, the learning activity combines elements of both formal learning, to introduce new content, and informal learning, to extend interest related to the content.
Learning will occur in a hybrid situation, combining both face-to-face and online learning, also termed ‘blended learning’. The goal of blended learning is to combine the best aspects of face-to-face instruction and online learning: engaging activities with “multimedia-rich” online activities that can be accessed at any time (The Pennsylvania State University, 2009). Group and class activities will happen in the classroom while individual learning takes place through supplemental, online materials; group collaboration through a discussion forum will also take place online. By implementing a blended learning context, learners work in a variety of situations: as a class, in a group and individually. The learning context also has the ability to easily morph from teacher-centered to student-centered.
Assessment and Evaluation
Mueller (2012) defines authentic assessment (AA) as a type of assessment “in which students are asked to perform real-world tasks that demonstrate meaningful application of essential knowledge and skills” (What is Authentic Assessment?, para. 1). This is in contrast to traditional assessment (TA), which takes the form of true/false, multiple choice, fill-in-the-blank and other standardized test formats that do not assess meaningful application (Mueller, 2012). Instead of taking a test that assesses knowledge recall, AA is a more holistic way of testing knowledge through application and skills, demonstrating knowledge of a concept. This is also a more active approach than passive TA, where students an guess the answer and the educator can only infer that the concepts/ideas tested can be applied by students in the read world. Mueller (2012) sees AA and performance based assessment as synonymous. Palm (2008) states that performance based assessment tasks “need not for example be real world applications or require much communication and high levels of cognitive complexity just because students’ activities are hands-on or because they have to construct an answer themselves” (p. 9). For Palm (2008), performance assessment defines the response format of a test and not the real-world applicability.
Regardless of the name used, AA and performance based assessments both use direct assessment. Wiggins (1990), sums up this concept by stating that “Assessment is authentic when we directly examine student performance on worthy intellectual tasks” as opposed to “proxy” tasks that superficially assess knowledge (para. 1). For the major world religions activity, AA/performance based assessment can be seen through the construction of students’ group-made religions and class discussion to directly assess that the activity’s outcomes were achieved.
References
BDEA/BuddhaNet. (2008). Buddhist Studies for Schools: Guidelines for Teachers.
Retrieved from
Bonk, C. J. (2009). The world is open: How web technology is revolutionizing
education.San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bruner, J. (1996).The Culture of Education.Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press.
Calutta, R. (2013). Constructivist Theory (Jerome Bruner).Instructional Design.
Retrieved from
Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal,
and informal education. [Article]. Journal of Science Education & Technology,
16(2), 171-190.
Learning-Theories.com. (2013).Social Development Theory (Vygotsky). Retrieved from
Mueller, J. (2012). Authentic Assessment Toolbox. Retrieved
from
Palm, T. (2008). Performance Assessment and Authentic Assessment: A Conceptual
Analysis of theLiterature.Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 13(4).
Retrieved from
Schwier, R. A. (2010). Focusing educational technology research on informal learning
environments. [Article]. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 90-92.
Smith, M.K. (2002). Jerome S. Bruner and the process of education. The Encyclopedia of
Informal Education.
The PennsylvaniaStateUniversity. (2009). What is Blended Learning? — Web Learning
@ PennState. Retrieved from
Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment.Practical Assessment, Research
& Evaluation, 2(2). Retrieved from