learning

MS&E is more related to technological sphere while GSB is more about strategy in Management. The teaching method in both classes also differ. The former one is more teacher-centered, so you will need to write down the lectures. However, in the GSB you’ll be more involved in the discussion

Visual tool to help students organize complex information in a visual way. The Venn diagram comes from a branch of mathematics called a set theory. John Venn developed them in 1891 to show the relationship between sets. The information is normally presented in linear text and students make the diagram to organize the information. It makes it easier when there is a lot of information, because with linear text it is not as easy to see the relationship.

The Venn diagram is an important tool for dents because it is another way for them to problem solve in life. If you are presented with a lot of information that is confusing you can use the Venn diagram to organize the information and once you have the information it is easy for you to see it all laid out before you. This diagram is something that also helps students who are more of a visual learner. If you are able to put all of the information out in a diagram and then you are able to not only see all of the information, you are able to have it all organized in a diagram and right here for you to see.

This method is helpful for all students, even those who are not visual learners. With the Venn diagram you are also able to see how the information relates to each other, as well as where the information does not relate. Have always found the Venn diagram an easy method of learning for lots of information. An example would be if you had a list of students who were good in math, a list of students who are good in English and then a group of students who are good in science and along with that list you have a sit of students who are good in all three subjects.

It is mainly used In educational institutions, healthcare organizations, and military organizations. It is also used in employee training programs in corporate business souses. Covered in this Report This report covers the present scenario and the growth prospects of the Global Game-based Learning market for the period 2013-2018. To calculate the market size, the report considers revenue generated from sales of learning or educational games in digital and mobile media.

It also presents the vendor landscape and a corresponding detailed analysis of the top four vendors In the Global Game-based Learning market. In addition, the report discusses the major drivers that Influence the growth of the market. It also outlines the challenges faced by the vendors and the arrest at large, as well as the key trends emerging in the market. View our full TCO here Key Regions OPAC North America Latin America Western Europe Eastern Europe MEA Key Vendors BreakAway Ltd.

Learning’s Inc. Limos Labs Inc. Playpen. Com Other Prominent Vendors Corporate Internet Games Generating Health MAKE Technologies umbrages Management Possible/iii Workforce LLC Monte Crisis Ninth House Networks/Personnel Decisions International Corp.. Playpen. Com Rally SAVING Simulacra Transmitted Inc. Visual Purple LLC Will Interactive Inc. Key Market Driver Growth of Mobile-based Degases For a full, detailed list, view our report.

Implemented plans to Inhalant and accelerate the turnaround of the Mix business in Europe. Their plans focused on enhancing the brand by improving product appeal. In order to do this the company made key appointments to the Mix Europe Holdings management team. Along with appointing a new interim CEO, they appointed John Moore as consulting Vice President. Mr.. Moore came with an extensive background. Mr.. Moore was an Important factor with Firebombed & Bitch’s Hollister Co. Line and Modern

Amusement for Moslem Inc. LIZ Collarbone Inc. Believed that the turnaround process was at a critical juncture and the enhancements, structural changes and new leadership were necessary to reinvigorate the brand and improve performance (Bloomberg. Com). Liz Collarbone Inc. Hired Thomas Grate in 2009 as their permanent CEO for the Mix chain. Grate headed up a plan to improve the chain by changing the business modes so that one manager would oversee all aspects of a product segment, Including design, production, product management, and merchandise management. He called this “one-hand responsibility.

Then there was an urgent need to have a new corporate brand identity focused on the core markets in Germany and the Benelux countries. He implemented sales productivity improvement by accenting a “consumer need-based merchandise planning approach” and placing an emphasis on e-commerce (Reuters. Com). Grate continued to focus on the right products for the targeted group, not making the Mix line too much Like casual American sportswear or too city oriented. Grate resigned as CEO In 2012. Shortly after this LIZ Collarbone Inc. Sold Mix to The Gores Group which has also implemented many changing in leadership.

I think that you need to do whatever is necessary to keep the business thriving. In this case the leaders are very informed and knowledgeable in their industry. The execution has at least stopped the Mix line from its downward spiral. The losses today are less than those predicted by Wall Street. The management brought the Mix line out of the gutter and made it possible for LIZ Collarbone Inc. To sell a majority stake to relieve some of the worries of the struggling chain.

Self-reflection essay I remember first arriving in Haiti. The blast of heat stepping off the plane, cramming onto a mini school bus, and staring out the windows at the outskirts of Cap Haitian and the rural road to Milot. “I’m in Haiti… ” , I kept telling myself, trying to absorb all that I was seeing. The landscape, the way people live here, the norms of this culture were so different from anything I had seen before. We walked the streets of Milot that first day and I strongly recall the uncomfortable feeling of all eyes on us, the trash and the pigs in the rivers, and the children crying, “Blan!

Blan! ” as we walked past. It’s funny what happens after you’ve been in a place for a while. It ceases to be constantly foreign and overwhelming. I no longer see only abject poverty out the windows or while we walk through villages. I notice the details, walls painted bright blue, yellow, red, the heart design carved out of brick that make up the windows of every home, the bright red hibiscus flowers and cacti that form walls around each family plot of land. When I walk through Milot now I expect people to stare, why wouldn’t they?

I say “bonjou” to them and smile, and get a “bonjou” and a smile back. I look for the goat babies we pass on our runs, and am always comforted by the mountains surrounding this little town. Haiti is poor, yes, and I am reminded of that every day, but there is so much more to it than that. I wrote the above two paragraphs in my blog a little over a month into my trip to Haiti this summer. They sum up my feeling of becoming part of a place, as much as an American medical student can become part of a small Haitian town in 7 weeks. I had a truly amazing, fulfilling, and personally enriching experience.

My first learning objective was, “to ain confidence in applying the clinical skills I have learned thus far, through working with patients every day. ” I became very comfortable working through an interpreter, as this was the only way to communicate with every patient I interacted with. I had a lot of practice in conducting patient interviews, performing a targeted physical exam, and taking vitals. This opportunity was an amazing way to remember and fine tune all the skills I learned in medical interviewing, physical diagnosis, and CAP.

Interviewing patients who speak English will seem a lot easier in comparison. My second learning objective was, “to learn how to ask public health questions and carry out meaningful research to improve the health of a population. ” About half of our time in Haiti was dedicated to conducting a public health project. This was an incredible learning experience even before leaving the US. Three of us and our physician mentor applied for three IRB approvals as a group. That required a lot of research, teamwork, and delegation.

We were able to get approval before leaving for Haiti, which let us hit the ground running. We spent about 2 days a week in small illages around Milot, working with translators and going door to door to interview women, or meeting large groups of midwives in village clinics. This experience was a true test of my patience and ability to put my type A, “get things done now’ personality aside. Vans were always late to pick us up, the translators weren’t high quality, and there were myriad miscommunications between us and the volunteer coordinator.

Nevertheless, we managed to ge interviews conducted. I strongly believe that as a result of our research, positive developments will happen in Milot. This was a rewarding and challenging experience and even more educational than I thought it would be going into it. My third learning objective was, “to strengthen my teamwork skills by working closely and effectively with other medical professionals. ” I think my teamwork skills were honed best through working with two other students on our public health project.

We all learned how to compromise, how to put our opinions forward effectively, and how to cede to other’s opinions. We spent a lot of time and mental energy with each other without ever getting angry. There were times when we’d get frustrated with each other, but we were able to talk about it and move on. All seven of us students spent 2417 with each other for seven weeks and our collective ability to work together, to pick each other up when we were down, and to have fun together was like nothing IVe ever experienced.

My final learning objective was, “to improve my communication skills and cultural competence while working with patients and other health care professionals with varied backgrounds and beliefs. ” Of all my learning questions, this was perhaps the most important and the most difficult to successfully achieve. It will be a work in progress for my entire career, which is something I didn’t really nderstand until this trip. It’s not easy to put oneself, with one’s own background, beliefs, and culturally created personality into another’s shoes completely.

It’s also difficult to understand a culture so far removed from your own. Although I say it’s difficult, I spent every single day in Haiti trying to improve my ability to do so. From working with doctors who often worked at a pace that made it seem as though they didn’t care about their patients, to waiting for 3 hours for a late ride to a village, to the miscommunications that occurred frequently, every day was a conscious effort to nderstand the culture in which I found myself.

Finally, I always heard about how hard it is to deal with the dysfunctional systems in third world countries, and I thought I understood. It’s a whole different level of understanding when you see what that means on an individual human level in the eyes of the patients in front of you. And you are helpless to change the system. My time in Haiti I will remember, learn from, and be glad I did for the rest of my life. The things I learned, the relationships I made, and the experiences I had in those seven weeks would take a book to write down and do Justice to.

Research on linguistic communication larning schemes began in the sixtiess. It was infl uenced by the development of cognitive psychological science. Until the debut of cognitive psychological science, anterior research on 2nd linguistic communication acquisition and instruction focused chiefly on methods of learning, alternatively of on scholar features and the procedure of geting a 2nd linguistic communication ( Wenden, 1987 ) .With the coming of cognitive theories research in 2nd linguistic communication instruction has bit by bit shifted toward the scholar or scholar centered attacks in an effort to heighten scholar ‘s liberty and independency. In this manner, “ independent scholars assume duty for finding the intent, content, beat and method of their acquisition, supervising its advancement and measuring its results ” ( Holec, 1981, p.3 ) . This has resulted in a turning involvement in research in linguistic communication acquisition schemes ( LLS ) which are believed to “ lend to the development of the linguistic communication system which the scholar concepts and impact larning straight ” ( Rubin, 1987, p. 22 ) . Research in this field has gained prominence since the mid-1970s by the seminal surveies of Rubin ( 1975 ) and Stern ( 1975 ) . They attempted to research the schemes employed by good linguistic communication scholars and how the instructors can use these schemes to assist the less successful scholars to better their public presentation. Since so, copiousness of surveies have been conducted in the country of LLSs to research the important function linguistic communication larning schemes play a in L2/FL acquisition ( Abraham & A ; Vann, 1987, O’Malley & A ; Chamot, 1990 ; Oxford et al. , 1989,1993, 1995 ; among others )

Definition of larning schemes

Learning schemes have been defined in a assortment of ways. Wenden and Rubin ( 1987 ) specify them as “ any sets of operations, stairss, programs, modus operandis used by the scholar to ease the obtaining, storage, retrieval, and usage of information ” ( p.19 ) . In their influential survey, O’Malley and Chamot ( 1990 ) defined LLS as “ the particular ideas or behaviors that persons use to assist them grok, larn, or retain new information ” ( p. 1 ) . Oxford ( 1992,1993 ) illustrates LLS as “ specific actions, behaviors, stairss, or techniques that pupils ( frequently deliberately ) usage to better their advancement in developing L2 accomplishments. These schemes can ease the internalisation, storage, retrieval, or usage of the new linguistic communication. Schemes are tools for the autonomous engagement necessary for developing communicative ability ” ( p. 18 ) . Finally, Cohen ( 1998 ) defined larning schemes as “ the stairss or actions consciously selected by scholars to better the acquisition of a 2nd linguistic communication, the usage of it, or both ” ( p. 5 ) .

Features of LLS

Among the assorted features emerged in the LLS literature, Oxford identifies twelve of import characteristics of strategies.According to Oxford acquisition schemes

• contribute to the chief end, communicative competency
• allow scholars to go self directed
• spread out the function of instructors
• are job oriented
• are specific actions taken by the scholar
• involve many actions taken by the scholar, non merely cognitive
• support larning both straight and indirectly
• are non ever discernible
• are frequently witting
• are flexible
• are influenced by a assortment of factors ( p.9 )

Lessard-Clouston ( 1997 ) besides summarizes basic characteristics of LLS.First LLS are generated by the scholar and s/he bit by bit takes these stairss in the procedure of linguistic communication acquisition. Second, linguistic communication acquisition is enhanced by the usage of LLS which help develop linguistic communication competency, as reflected in the scholar ‘s accomplishments in hearing, speech production, reading, or composing the L2 or FL. Third, LLS may be seeable ( behaviors, stairss, techniques, etc. ) or unobserved ( ideas, mental procedures ) . Fourth, LLS involve information and memory ( vocabulary cognition, grammar regulations, etc. ) .

Taxonomy of LLSs

As noted above, early categorizations of LLSs merely provided a list of schemes based on the good scholars ‘ public presentation ( Rubin, 1975 ; Stern, 1973 ) . However, more recent taxonomies categorize schemes either harmonizing to their direct/indirect part to linguistic communication acquisition ( Rubin, 1987 ) , or the degree and type of information processed by linguistic communication scholars when they apply such schemes ( O’Malley et al. , 1985a ; O’Malley and Chamot, 1990 ) .

Based on anterior survey consequences, Oxford ( 1990 ) devised a linguistic communication larning scheme system ( See Table 1 ) , known as Strategy Inventory for Language Learning ( SILL ) , in which she classifies LLS into two major groups of direct ( including memory, cognitive, compensation ) and indirect ( metacognitive, affectional, societal ) schemes. Direct schemes are defined as those that are involved in witting mental procedures, whereas indirect schemes are non consciously applied but are indispensable to linguistic communication learning.Each class is so divided into six subcategories, which harmonizing to Oxford, are interrelated and back up each other.

Oxford ‘s categorization of learning schemes has been the most comprehensive one to day of the month ( Ellis, 1994 ) . and has been used in a considerable figure of surveies in assorted states.

Research on LLSs

The research on LLSs has preponderantly been descriptive since the scholars are required to describe on the schemes they use. In this manner, the research workers are able to look into the effects of scholar features such as gender, age, proficiency degree, learning manners, and affectional factors, like motive, on scheme usage, ( Chamot, 2004 ) .

Research indicates that linguistic communication scholars at all degrees use schemes ( Chamot & A ; Kupper, 1989 ) , but that some or most scholars are non to the full cognizant of the schemes they use or the schemes that might be most good to use ( Oxford, 1989 ) .

It appears that good linguistic communication scholars orchestrate and combine their usage of peculiar types of schemes in more efficient ways ( Chamot & A ; Kupper, 1989 ; O’Malley and Chamot, 1990 ; Oxford, 1993 ) . Rossi-Le ( 1995 ) found that more adept EFL pupils used self-management schemes such as planning, rating and formal pattern significantly more frequently than less adept pupils. Khaldieh ( 2000 ) studies that higher degrees of linguistic communication proficiency have besides been associated with less anxiousness and more assurance, which denotes the significance of affectional factors act uponing the scholar ‘s public presentation on a undertaking. Surveies have revealed that consciousness of undertaking demands and metacognitive cognition sing scheme choice are major differentiations between successful and unsuccessful scholars ( Abraham & A ; Vann, 1987 ; Khaldieh, 2000 ; O’Malley & A ; Chamot, 1990 ) . Harmonizing to some research findings, cognitive and metacognitive schemes extremely correlate with high linguistic communication proficiency degrees ( Peacock and Ho, 2003 ) . In some of these surveies, nevertheless, the positive relationship between the figure of schemes used and linguistic communication proficiency is partly supported ( e.g. , Abraham & A ; Vann, 1987 ; Khaldieh, 2000 ) .

Other research workers even found that, both successful and unsuccessful scholars actively use a great assortment of schemes, but in different ways. These unsuccessful scholars, nevertheless, normally fail to choose the most appropriate schemes ( Chamot et al. , 1988 ; Chamot & A ; El-Dinary, 1999 ; Vandergrift, 1997 ; Vann & A ; Abraham, 1990 ) . A figure of research surveies interestingly suggest that the appropriate pick of schemes will help scholars to derive more proficiency. This, in bend, likely leads the proficient scholars to the pick of more active schemes ( MacIntre, 1994 ; Green and Oxford, 1995 ) .

LLSs and types of scholars ‘ proficiency

A great figure of research surveies have highlighted the relationship between larning schemes and scholars ‘ proficiency in which the consequences show that more adept linguistic communication scholars use a greater assortment larning schemes ( Rahimi et at. , 2008 ; Griffiths, 2003 ; Lee, 2003 ; Anderson, 2005 ; Bruen, 2001 ; Green and Oxford, 1995 ; O’Malley and Chamot, 1990 ; Ehrman, and Oxford, 1989 ) . Research workers have utilized a battalion of ways to find pupils ‘ proficiency in the foreign linguistic communication including standardised trials such as TOEFL ( Arroyo, 2005 ) , pupils ‘ GPAs in English classs ( Shmais, 2003 ; Radwan, 2011 ) , linguistic communication accomplishment trials ( O’Mara & A ; Lett, 1990 ) , linguistic communication class classs and arrangement scrutinies ( Mullin, 1992 ) , instructors ‘ judgements about their pupils ( Magogwe & A ; Oliver, 2007 ) , continuance of survey ( Khalil, 2005 ; Rahimi et Al. 2008 ; Radwan, 2011 ) , and self-ratings ( Oxford & A ; Nyikos, 1989 ) .

Due to the demand for more probe on all facets of scholar ‘s proficiency, the current survey enterprises to concentrate on the studtents ‘ GPA tons, and continuance of English survey, as two steps of English proficiency, with the pupils ‘ study on their pick of LLSs. The findings would uncover the benefits and deficits of such steps and how good they could foretell the scholars ‘ usage of LLSs.

This survey examines the usage of learning schemes reported by Persian English scholars and its relationship to the pupils ‘ academic success determined by their GPA tons and the old ages of English survey they have completed.

Research inquiries

1. What are the most frequent acquisition schemes used by the EFL scholars?
2.  Be at that place any relationship between the usage of EFL linguistic communication larning schemes in general and the pupils ‘ academic success?
3. Is at that place any relationship between classs of schemes and pupils ‘ academic accomplishment?
4.  Is there a important difference between first twelvemonth and 2nd twelvemonth pupils with respect to their perceived scheme usage?

Method

Sample: The topics take parting in the survey comprise 107 male and female Iranian university pupils analyzing English in a two -year plan to acquire their Associate ‘s grade in Teaching English. They are either first -year or 2nd -year pupils whose age ranges between 19 to 31.

Instruments: In order to mensurate scheme usage, Oxford ‘s ( 1990 ) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning ( SILL ) designed for EFL/ESL scholars is used in this survey. The SILL uses a five-point Likert-type graduated table runing from 1 ( “ Never or about ne’er true of me ” ) to 5 ( “ Always or about ever true of me ” ) . It consists of 50 statements about the schemes used by linguistic communication scholars covering six wide classs of schemes, each represented by a figure of points.

1.  Memory schemes ( 9items )
2.  Cognitive schemes ( 14 points )
3.  Compensation schemes ( 6 points )
4.  Metacognitive schemes: ( 9 points )
5. Affective schemes ( 6 points )
6. Social schemes ( 6 points )

Dependability for the SILL ( Oxford, 1990 ) is high across many cultural groups with Cronbach ‘s alpha for internal consistence 0.93-0.98 ( Oxford & A ; Burry- Stock, 1995 ) .

In this survey, the SILL was presented in Iranian to the participants to

guarantee that possible failure to understand the instructions or inquiries

would non impact the responses. The research worker used Pishghadam ‘s ( 2008 )

Iranian version of SILL, which yielded a Cronbach alpha value of 0.96. Using the responses from the current participants, the dependability of SILL, as determined by Cronbach ‘s alpha, was 0.93.

The pupils ‘ academic success are judged based on their overall GPA mark on academic classs.

Data analysis process

The undermentioned process were carried out on the informations: 1 ) ciphering descriptive statistics ( mean, frequence & A ; standard divergence ) for all classs of SILL 2 ) carry oning correlativity analysis to find the significance of the relationship between scheme usage, and academic success of the pupils, 3 ) Calculating mated sample T- Trial to see whether there is any important difference the between first twelvemonth and 2nd twelvemonth pupils in footings of their sensed scheme usage.

To reply the first inquiry, descriptive statistics for the full SILL, the six subcategories of SILL, and the person SILL points were calculated. Harmonizing to Oxford ( 1990, p. 300 ) , average tonss that fall between 1.0 and 2.4 are defined as “ low ” scheme usage, 2.5 and 3.4 as “ medium ” scheme usage, and 3.5 and 5.0 as “ high ” scheme usage. The participants reported a medium frequence for the mean scheme usage on the full SILL ( M = 3.49, SD = 0.48 ) every bit good as the six classs of the SILL ( see Table1 ) . Among the six scheme classs, the participants reported utilizing metacognitive schemes most often and affectional and compensation schemes least often.

Analyzing the usage of the single scheme points for the full group, it was found that they often apply all the metacognitive schemes to form and measure their acquisition. The points like I think about my advancement in larning SL, I try to happen out how to be a better scholar of SL. , I pay attending when person is talking SL and I look for chances to read every bit much as possible in SL are the most often reported schemes severally. However, the least-used points were those that involved reading and composing in English such as, I write down my feelings in a linguistic communication larning dairy, and I read SL without looking up every new word.

Relationship between LLS and GPA

To examine for the additive relationship between pupils ‘ overall scheme usage and their GPA, a correlational analysis was performed. The obtained correlativity coefficient ( r = 025 ) demonstrated no important relationship between reported scheme usage and pupils ‘ GPA. Similar consequences were observed for the 3rd research inquiry. In other words, there was no important relationship between SILL class and pupils ‘ GPA ( See table 2 ) .

Difference between old ages of survey and reported scheme usage

The analysis of informations for the sophomore pupils showed a somewhat lower mean mark ( M= 3.42 ) than the first- twelvemonth ( M= 3.51 ) pupils in footings of their sensed scheme usage.

As respects the 4th research inquiry, an independent t-test was run to examine any important difference between the old ages of survey completed by the pupils and their reported usage of schemes. The T observed value of.70 ( df.= 104, P= 0.5 ) denotes that there is a no important difference between the two groups. Therefore, the void hypothesis that there is no important difference between the two variables is verified ( Table 3 ) .

Discussion

The findings of the present survey showed that Persian EFL scholars use larning schemes reasonably. They tend to utilize metacognitive schemes more often. This reflects the pupils ‘ efforts to go proficient in the mark linguistic communication. Among the top 10 schemes used by all participants, five belong to the metacognitive schemes. These schemes are necessary for successful linguistic communication acquisition, since they, as indicated by Oxford ( 1990 ) , aid scholars coordinate and heighten their ain acquisition procedure through monitoring and measuring linguistic communication usage, planning, concentrating, forming, and seeking chances to utilize the language.. A figure of other research surveies report the scholars ‘ penchant for metacognitive schemes ( Whorton. 2000 ; Goh & A ; Foong, 1997 ; Hong-Nam & A ; Leavell, 2006 ; Magogwe & A ; Oliver, 2007 ; Rahimi et Al. 2008 ; Pishghadam, 2008 among others ) . The Persian scholars ‘ frequent usage of metacognitive schemes may hold been influenced by the learning attack adopted in the Persian EFL schoolrooms ( Rahimi et al, 2008 ) .

The analysis of informations demonstrated that the more successful pupils in footings of their GPA were non better scheme users than less successful pupils. Shmais ( 2003 ) besides found no relationship between pupils ‘ GPA and their frequence of scheme usage. It seems that pupils ‘ GPA might be affected by some other factors and in some scenes lacks the explanatory power to foretell LLS usage. Similarly, some surveies ( Green, 1991 ; Phillips, 1991, as cited in Park, 1997 ) have reported a curvilinear relationship between the usage of schemes and the proficiency degrees of the participants ; the low degree proficiency scholars tend to utilize the schemes more often than those in a higher degree. The bulk of these surveies show that the pupils in the mid-proficiency group used the schemes more often than the highand low-proficiency groups.

The continuance of survey represented as freshman and sophomore pupils, in this survey, showed no important difference in LLS usage. Normally, it is assumed that an addition in the old ages of survey would ensue in higher proficiency degrees by scholars which would, in bend, lead to an addition in their scheme usage. However, in this context it was revealed that the continuance of survey does non need fully take to scholars ‘ more scheme usage. This determination is in line with some other research surveies ( Rahimi et al. 2008, Radwan, 2011 ) in which first-year pupils reported a higher degree of scheme usage. In other words, it does non follow a additive relationship between scheme usage and continuance of the survey.

Decision

This survey was an effort to look into the relationship between pupils ‘ perceptual experience of LLS usage and their overall proficiency, determined by the university GPA scores. The consequences showed that this relationship is non ever additive and straightforward. Strategy usage is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by other variables in assorted ways.

The context of the survey does hold a important consequence on the pupils ‘ usage of schemes, which may take to contradictory consequences. It has been revealed that Persian scholars employ metacognitive schemes more often than other schemes. The scholars may hold been influenced by the instruction attack practiced in the Persian EFL schoolrooms ( Rahimi et al, 2008 ) such as paying attending, consciously seeking for pattern chances, be aftering for linguistic communication undertakings, self-evaluating one ‘s advancement, and monitoring mistakes. Wharton ‘s ( 2000 ) observation in Singapore besides suggest that the scholars as alone persons and the context of larning play a function in the pick of scholars ‘ schemes.

The SILL might non ever be able to account for all the schemes employed by the scholar. On the other manus, there remains the possibility that scholars may describe on the schemes which they don’t really utilize. Research methodological analysis could be enriched by using multiple informatios aggregation process such as interviews and schoolroom observation combined with the usage of SILL questionnaire, to give farther and possibly more trusty findings ( Chun-Lai, 2009 ) .

The fact that more successful and less successful pupils, in some manner, follow similar scheme forms denotes that they have non received any formal direction in using LLS. Most of these schemes have likely been learned habitually and unconsciously. Therefore, developing pupils in utilizing learning schemes and promoting them to be cognizant of their ain alone ways of learning would do them independent and efficient scholars.

The failing of this survey is the limited figure of variables which have been studied in relation to larning schemes. More research is needed to see other of import societal and affectional variables which could play a function in the pick of LLSs.

We are at a game changing time in the history of education.  Never before have we been more “connected” to our students as we are today.  For educators, e-learning technology is paving the path for a new, modern, and fully engaging education. Video streaming, asynchronous and synchronous communication, interactive learning, and real-time collaboration are just a few of the amazing technological developments available today. As educators, we must assess how we use these new tools and assure that we are succeeding in the long term to increase learning.

Over the past few decades many approaches have been designed to inspire, motivate and stimulate long lasting student engagement while they learn. From promoting classroom participation and after school programs to encouraging study groups, peer homework activities and collaborative projects, teachers are constantly creating opportunities to foster better understanding of topics. The results of these efforts is not as impressive as we would have imagined. Sure, students participate in these efforts but students simply don’t engage long term.  (At least not the same way that they engage during playtime or similar leisurely activities.)

So the question is why? Why don’t students engage more with all these crafted strategies that we have concocted?  Below are several important elements that can transform learning and truly engage the student of today.

Data in, data out – collecting the correct information about student usage and performance

Observing how students learn and what seems to be most enjoyable and successful to them while they learn online, allows educators to track student performance, their order of actions in the system, and to identify their level of engagement with the technology.

Learning platforms are constantly improving the type of resources available to students (videos, animations, interactivity) as well as the way in which the resources are delivered (mobile, desktop, Smart TV’s, other portable devices). 

Since eLearning technologies are really good at delivering and organizing all sorts of information, educators can track usage information about their students to substantially increase student engagement  For starters we can see what type of resource a student enjoys, as it is important to realize that not all students are the same. Some lean more towards videos while others like to read to get to the key points. By tailoring the solutions and creating more personalized learning options, we are working with technology to improve performance, not working against it.

By customizing platforms and resources, this enables us to understand a student’s level of technology usage. The end result is that students will find more interest in their available resources if they are provided direct, personalized benefits.

Assemble students into intelligent cohorts based on the unique skills of each member in the group

Students are more likely to engage when they see that they achieve success and are able to offer tips and strategies to others. The popularity of online gaming highlights collaboration and the enjoyment students receive when working in teams as they play. 

In addition, combining diversity in learning styles and levels has become a proven successful learning strategy. By tracking student performance and interactions, we can group students in their class who offer unique value to the group. For example, a student that is strong in math but weak in history can offer their math skills to a weaker student in a peer to peer environment. The boost in confidence and camaraderie is invaluable.

Provide a framework where students can post questions and connect with their peers through a proven learning platform

Choosing the right learning platform to connect students and their learning levels is key. If educators are able to hone in on a student’s strengths, it helps to create long lasting engagement while they are learning.  Unlike a classroom where people are called randomly or students ask their nearest neighbor a question, an intelligent learning platform can help connect the students in a more sophisticated way.

Interactive question and answer sessions connect students and their educational needs with concise, focused strategies. The conversation becomes more engaging and the knowledge base can be expanded. Someone who may not feel comfortable answering out loud in a big auditorium, has the power of the keyboard to offer notes or comments on a topic and still be heard. The conversation and dialogue is much more connective. Ultimately, the technology platform creates an even playing field so everyone’s a valued contributor.

Create unique opportunities for students to work with other students from outside their class

As eLearning platforms expand so does their global scope. Learning projects that may have been limited in the past can now be collaborative nationwide and even worldwide. Students can now be paired based on their unique skills and assigned unique tasks.  Coordinated learning as a team to achieve agreed upon goals makes the topic more interesting.  Communication via Facebook, Skype, or other online forums, provide educators and students alike a platform to stimulate the learning process in a whole new way. As eLearning technology continues to evolve, it is imperative for educators to embrace students from all over the globe to coordinate skills and abilities for projects, competitions and research.

As we as a society utilize technology for all aspects of our daily life, it is imperative for educators to utilize e-learning technology to its fullest extent. As educators, we must assess how we use these new tools if we are to succeed in the long term to increase in student engagement and foster successful commitment to learning.