4 Educational Lenses
- Remember the 4 lenses are a theory of strategic management. Strategy As Idea. This approach to strategy emphasis innovation and the need for diversity of ideas in the organisations. Strategy can emerge from the way people within the organisation handle and respond to the changing forces present both in the organisation and in the environment.
- The four lenses were introduced in the course Introduction to learning and teaching in higher education. Strategies for gathering feedback data The table summarises Brookfield’s four lenses and adds an additional lens of learning analytics as proposed by Vigentini, Mirriahi and Kligyte (2016). Sources of evidence for reflection.
Many photographers are attracted to the interchangeable lens feature of the DSLR. However, they don’t want to deal with the camera’s weight and bulk. Certain lens manufacturers seemed to consider this preference and came up with the micro four thirds lenses now seen in many Olympus and Panasonic cameras.
You have explored the relationship among technology, society, and the individual through the four general education lenses. You have looked at the nature of technology and how it is socially constructed and has an influence on social and cultural practices.
What are Micro Four Thirds Lenses?
Micro four thirds is a sensor/lens specification that provides a more compact option to photographers who want high-quality images. It’s significantly thinner and smaller than the bigger sensor types but still keeps many of the DSLR camera’s highly sought-after features like the ability to switch lenses.
Although often interchanged, micro four thirds cameras are not the same as mirrorless cameras. For one, not all cameras have this feature. As of this writing, only Olympus and Panasonic have compact cameras with this element.
The micro four thirds lenses from each brand are interchangeable, so you can use one with the other.
4 Lenses Assessment
What are the Best Micro Four Thirds Lenses?
Best All-Around Micro Four Thirds Lens
Easy-to-use and relatively affordable for its features, the Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f/1.7 ASPH is the perfect micro four thirds lens for beginners. It’s a fast lens, so you can take sharper images under any lighting condition. This lens also allows you to use a narrow depth of field, so you can blur the foreground or background in your frame as you’re setting the focal point of your image.
Because of its internal focus design, the lens focuses silently, quickly, and accurately. You don’t have to fiddle with the controls to see which setting allows you to focus better.
The Panasonic Lumix G 25mm lens is also useful for people on the go, as it weighs only 125 grams and doesn’t add much weight to the bag.
Best Micro Four Thirds Lens for Long-Distance Shooting
If you’re into outdoor or sports photography and want something with an extra reach, the Olympus M.Zuiko 40-150mm is a great option. It takes decent-quality photos at a zoom equivalent of 80-30mm despite being small and light.
At its current price of $99.00 and its extended zoom range, this Olympus micro four thirds lens is a great budget-friendly supplement to the 12-42mm kit lens of most Olympus and Panasonic mirrorless cameras.
Best Micro Four Thirds Lens for Portrait Photography
For portrait and street photographers, a dedicated portrait micro four thirds lens like the Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 45mm f/1.8 is ideal. It has a 90mm-equivalent field of view, which is the standard focal length for head-and-shoulder portraits.
A 90mm-equivalent lens or a 45mm lens on a micro four thirds camera allows you to compose your pictures so that your subject’s head and shoulders fill the frame while blurring the background. This way, you’ll be able to focus on the subject’s eyes or whichever part of the face you’ll want to set as a focal point.
Like the other lenses on this list, it’s a fast prime lens that allows capturing sharp images on the go.
Best Micro Four Thirds Lens for Kit Upgrade
If you like roughing it out in the wild and need a micro four thirds lens that can also tough it out with you, then this lens from Panasonic is for you. An upgrade from your default kit lens, the Panasonic Lumix G 12-35mm f/2.8 allows you to produce more detailed and better-quality images, even in low light. It’s also weather-sealed, so it won’t easily give in to damage.
This lens model also has a built-in image stabilization for sharp and noise-free images.
So if you need a bit of an upgrade from your kit lens, the Panasonic Lumix G 12-35mm f/2.8 ASPH won’t disappoint.
For general, portrait, and wildlife photographers and those who are transitioning from hobbyist to pro, there’s a micro four thirds lens that fits every need. All that’s needed to do is to figure out the photographer’s skill level and the photography type to focus on.
Developed by Dr. John Bransford and his colleagues, the How People Learn (HPL) theory is the theoretical framework upon which our STAR Legacy Modules are built. HPL represents a problem or challenge-based approach to achieving a fuller understanding of instructional or classroom issues and challenges. For an in-depth examination of HPL and how IRIS Modules make use of it, please view the IRIS Module How People Learn: Presenting the Learning Theory and Inquiry Cycle on Which the IRIS Modules Are Built.
HPL offers classroom approaches that are different from the methods of instruction and assessment traditionally used in classrooms. Using the theory as their guide, John Bransford and his colleagues developed the HPL framework as a way to organize thinking about the design of effective learning environments.
Four Lenses
The HPL framework highlights four overlapping lenses that can be used to analyze and enhance any learning situation (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999). Harris, Bransford, and Brophy (2002) describe these four lenses:
Learner centeredness – Instruction is tailored, based on a consideration of learners’ prior knowledge as well as their previous experiences, misconceptions, and preconceptions.
Knowledge centeredness – Rigorous content is provided and students are helped to understand the material rather than simply to memorize it. This has implications for how instruction needs to be sequenced in order to support the comprehension and use of said knowledge in new situations.
Assessment centeredness – Frequent opportunities for monitoring students’ progress toward the learning goals are provided and the results fed back to instructors and learners.
Community centered – There is recognition that students are members of multiple communities (e.g., classroom, professional organizations) and that these communities offer opportunities for students and instructors to share and to learn from each other.
The STAR Legacy Cycle
4 Educational Lenses
Many instructors find it difficult to balance all four of the HPL lenses. For example, an instructor might successfully create a knowledge-centered learning environment but find creating a learner-centered one more challenging. At times, a sense of community might not be sufficiently promoted. Many environments also lack opportunities for frequent assessment and revision. In response to this difficulty, the STAR (Software Technology for Action and Reflection) Legacy model was designed to help introduce and balance the features of learner, knowledge, assessment, and community centeredness for instructional settings. This model uses an inquiry cycle that anchors learning, is easy to understand, and is pedagogically sound. The cycle is composed of five parts that have been repeatedly recognized in educational research as important, yet often implicit, components of learning (Schwartz et al., 1999). IRIS STAR Legacy Modules incorporate these five components, balancing the four HPL lenses.
Challenge – Modules are organized around case-based scenarios. Research shows that effective instruction often begins with an engaging scenario or challenge to introduce the lesson and invite student inquiry (Barron et al., 1998; CTGV, 1997; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; NRC, 2000; Kolodner, 1997; Reiser et al., 2001; Williams, 1992).
Initial Thoughts – Students then generate their own ideas in order to explore what they currently know about the challenge. Discovering the extent of students’ prior knowledge and experiences regarding the problem or case-based scenarios––and building upon that knowledge––is a means through which to enhance learning. This can be particularly true for students from culturally diverse backgrounds, who often struggle to learn content in ways that are antithetical to their learning styles (Cobb, 2001).
Perspectives and Resources – Next, students access resources relevant to the challenge. These resources are presented as nuggets of information and may include text, interviews with experts, movies, and interactive activities. These resources often create “ah ha!” experiences when the students learn about points that they did not initially consider.
Wrap Up – The cycle continues with a summary and an opportunity for the student to review his or her Final Thoughts (which are the same questions asked in the Initial Thoughts section of the module). Learning is considered to have occurred when there is disparity between initial and final thoughts, with greater disparity indicating greater learning (e.g., Bransford, 1979; Schwartz & Bransford, 1998).
Assessment – Students eventually receive assessment opportunities to apply what they know, with the opportunity to return to the Perspectives and Resources section if needed.
Research Findings
Research concerning the effectiveness of HPL and STAR Legacy has demonstrated positive outcomes in college classrooms. Roselli and Brophy (2003) found that in an undergraduate biomechanics course students rated modules quite positively in terms of effectively communicating key concepts and stimulating interest. In addition, systematic and structured observations of a sample of class sessions were compared for sections that relied on traditional taxonomy-based instruction versus the HPL strategy; the latter included more learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered, and community-centered behaviors by both the instructor and students. Using a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high), 69.7% of the students in the “HPL courses” rated communications effectiveness as a 4 or 5, compared to only 33.6% of students in the traditional courses. Fifty-seven percent of the students in the HPL course gave ratings of 4 or 5 for stimulating interest versus 26% of students in the traditional course. Both the course (53.1% vs. 23.7%) and the instructor (69.7% vs. 37.6%) were judged more favorably (i.e., received higher percentages of 4 and 5 ratings) by students in their final course evaluations.
References
Barron, B. J., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., Bransford, J. D., & CTGV. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem solving and project based learning. Journal of Learning Sciences (3&4), 271–312.
Bransford, J. D. (1979). Human cognition: Learning, understanding, and remembering. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Cobb, P. (2001). Supporting the improvement of learning and teaching in social and institutional context. In S.M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV). (1997). The Jasper Project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Duffy, T. J., & Cunningham, D. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 170–198). New York: Macmillan.
Harris, T. R., Bransford, J. D., & Brophy, S. P. (2002). Roles for learning sciences and learning technologies in biomedical engineering education: A review of recent advances. Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 4, 29–48.
Kolodner, J. L. (1997). Educational implications of analogy: A view from case-based reasoning. American Psychologist, 52(1), 57–66.
Martin, T., Pierson, J., Rivale, S., Vye, N., Bransford, J., & Diller, K. R. (2007). The role of generating ideas in challenge-based instruction. In W. Aung, J. Moscinski, M. Da Graca Rasteiro, I. Rouse, B. Wagner, & P. Willmot (Eds.), World innovations in engineering education and research. Arlington, VA: iNEER.
Martin, T., Rivale, S. D., & Diller, K. R. (2007). Comparison of student learning in challenge-based and traditional instruction in biomedical engineering. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 35(8), 1312–1323.
National Research Council (NRC). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded Edition). Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, & R. R. Cocking (Eds.), with additional material from the Committee on Learning, Research and Educational Practice. Commission on Behavior and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. [Online]. Available from http://www.nap.edu/html/howpeople1/.
O’Mahony, T. K., Vye, N. J., Bransford, J. D., Stevens, R., Stephens, R. D., Richey, M. C., Lin, K. Y., & Soleiman, M. K. (2012). A comparison of lecture-based and challenge-based learning in a workplace setting: Course designs, patterns of interactivity, and learning outcomes. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 182–206
Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263–305). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Roselli, R. J., & Brophy, S. P. (2003). Redesigning a biomechanics course using challenge-based instruction. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology, 22, 66–70.
Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition & Instruction, 16, 475–522.
Schwartz, D. L., Brophy, S., Lin, X., & Bransford, J. D. (1999a). Flexibly adaptive instructional design: A case study from an educational psychology course. Educational Technology Research and Development.
4 Educational Lenses Available
Schwartz, D. L., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. D. (1999b). Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional designs. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: New paradigms of instructional theory, Vol. II (pp. 183–213). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Williams, S. M. (1992). Putting case-based instruction into context: Examples from legal and medical education. The Journal of the learning Sciences, 2(4), 367–427.