Final Blog Post
It seems hard to believe seven weeks have come and gone. We are all hard at work finishing up our final assignments. For this final Blog post, we were asked to reflect on our original GAME plan. The two standards I chose to focus on addressed developing “relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools” and collaborating “with colleagues and students of other cultures using digital-age communication and collaboration tools” (http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx). I am pleased with the progress I have made. I have recently finished creating a Problem Based Unit which centers on a budget deficit.
Prior to this course I would not have taken on such a large endeavor. Admittedly I was surprised by all of the benefits associated with Problem – Project Based Learning. Dr. Ertmer (2010) lists the following as positive outcomes of Problem – Project Based Learning: students learn how to work in groups, students often use “tools of the trade”, a “broad ranges of skills are addressed”, the activities are “cross curricular” and students are “self directed” (Laureate). Within the unit I utilized many new technology tools that I would not have incorporated before this course even though I knew of their existence. My unit has the students accessing a Blog to communicate their thoughts and ideas. In addition, groups of students are working together posting their data and findings on a Wiki. Finally, I have students reflecting and telling their “story” using Power Point. I was hesitant to utilize these tools in the past because I was unsure if students would really learn the content. I didn’t just want to use technology for technology’s sake. Just because a website or a software program has cool graphics doesn’t mean the students will automatically learn from it. Dr. Abrams (2010) warns, “don’t mistake activity for achievement” (Laureate). As a result of this course, I have gained experience on how to utilize technology in such a manner as to engage learners, support content, and develop meaningful learning tasks.
Although I have made significant progress toward meeting my first goal, I feel my second goal is still a work in progress. I have joined an online community that will enable myself and my students to connect with other classes. However, it is Summer Vacation and I have limited access to students. I will continue to work on this goal throughout the school year as I have received approval from administration to participate in this community. I look forward to this challenge.
Even though it is Summer Vacation, I am already beginning to consider the changes I will make to my instructional methods in the upcoming year. The unit I developed in this course will be used in the upcoming school year. At the beginning of the school year I plan to set up a Blog for students to post responses. Soon there after, the students will use a Wiki to complete a short group project, perhaps a novel study presentation. Allowing students time to practice with these tools, serves as a “scaffold” and should prepare them later in the school year to work more independently with these technology tools. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) in regard to student interactions with technology recommend structuring the, “learning activities so that they are able to complete their tasks as autonomously as possible, given their current ability levels” (p. 96). This provides a “win win” situation for everyone. Students feel more confident and can be more productive. As a teacher, I am reassured that the technology is not getting in the way of student learning. Possibly the biggest change to my instructional methods is to move away from “teaching specific skills” and move toward “teaching students how to learn” (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009, p. 23). Technology is an important support to this endeavor.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,Cengage Learning.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). “ Spotlight on Technology: Digital Storytelling, Part 2” Baltimore, MD: Author
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). “ Spotlight on Technology: Problem-Based Learning, Part 1” Baltimore, MD: Author.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Monitoring Your GAME Plan Progress
It’s official, I have jumped into the deep end of the pool. I have created an account with ePals Global Community. This is a risky endeavor as I have yet to hear back from my curriculum director. Summer is a difficult time to reach staff so I have sent a follow up e mail to my principal and my curriculum director regarding online collaboration. Admittedly I am concerned, our student technology use guidelines are currently being revised and I have confirmation YouTube is blocked for students. I am worried what other venues may now be limited. Hopefully by the next post I will have more information regarding student technology access.
Even though I do not have “official” permission I signed my class up for two online projects. The two projects are “What’s it Like Where You Live” and “Jump into ePals Introductory Project”. The first project was chosen because it addresses a key element of my GAME plan, which involves working online with students from another part of our country. The second project “Jump into ePals Introductory Project” was chosen as a result of this week’s reading resources which point out the importance of coordinating lessons with assessments.
Assessing student technological skills before beginning an online project ensures that content learning will not be hindered. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) lend support by stating, “It is important to know your student’s technology proficiencies so that you can plan and implement appropriate learning activities and assessments” (p. 160). The “Jump into ePals Introductory Project” is a way for me to evaluate student competence with a variety of technology such as website navigation, copy and pasting of images, and use of a word processing program.
Content standards will still be addressed. Students must be able to communicate in an appropriate manner using correct grammar and sentence structure. However, the main focus of this unit is the acquisition of skills associated with these tools. There is a need for teachers to asses technological literacy which is defined by the International Technology Education Association as, “the ability to use, manage, assess, and understand technology” (as cited in Engstrom, 2005, p. 30). I have chosen rubrics as my main assessment tool as they are easily adapted to different subject areas and learning endeavors. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer, (2009) state, “Rubrics are malleable and can be created for any content area and assessment mode, such as the scoring of projects, essays portfolios or live or videotaped student performances” (p. 155). Once my students have moved through this introductory unit I will begin the “What’s it Like Where You Live” project.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Engstrom, D. E. (2005). Assessing for technological literacy. Technology Teacher, 64(4), 30–32.
ePals global community. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://www.epals.com/
It’s official, I have jumped into the deep end of the pool. I have created an account with ePals Global Community. This is a risky endeavor as I have yet to hear back from my curriculum director. Summer is a difficult time to reach staff so I have sent a follow up e mail to my principal and my curriculum director regarding online collaboration. Admittedly I am concerned, our student technology use guidelines are currently being revised and I have confirmation YouTube is blocked for students. I am worried what other venues may now be limited. Hopefully by the next post I will have more information regarding student technology access.
Even though I do not have “official” permission I signed my class up for two online projects. The two projects are “What’s it Like Where You Live” and “Jump into ePals Introductory Project”. The first project was chosen because it addresses a key element of my GAME plan, which involves working online with students from another part of our country. The second project “Jump into ePals Introductory Project” was chosen as a result of this week’s reading resources which point out the importance of coordinating lessons with assessments.
Assessing student technological skills before beginning an online project ensures that content learning will not be hindered. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) lend support by stating, “It is important to know your student’s technology proficiencies so that you can plan and implement appropriate learning activities and assessments” (p. 160). The “Jump into ePals Introductory Project” is a way for me to evaluate student competence with a variety of technology such as website navigation, copy and pasting of images, and use of a word processing program.
Content standards will still be addressed. Students must be able to communicate in an appropriate manner using correct grammar and sentence structure. However, the main focus of this unit is the acquisition of skills associated with these tools. There is a need for teachers to asses technological literacy which is defined by the International Technology Education Association as, “the ability to use, manage, assess, and understand technology” (as cited in Engstrom, 2005, p. 30). I have chosen rubrics as my main assessment tool as they are easily adapted to different subject areas and learning endeavors. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer, (2009) state, “Rubrics are malleable and can be created for any content area and assessment mode, such as the scoring of projects, essays portfolios or live or videotaped student performances” (p. 155). Once my students have moved through this introductory unit I will begin the “What’s it Like Where You Live” project.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Engstrom, D. E. (2005). Assessing for technological literacy. Technology Teacher, 64(4), 30–32.
ePals global community. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://www.epals.com/
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Carrying Out Your GAME Plan EDUC 6713D
Have you ever felt like you have “bitten off more than you can chew”? That is my feeling as I review my GAME plan. It all looks so lovely, such a well thought out and presented plan. Now that I am reviewing it, I realize I might have jumped into the deep end of the pool and the water is freezing. Perhaps it is time to realistically look at what I am comfortable doing while still meeting the goal of my plan.
First and foremost I want my students to work collaboratively with other students from a different region of the United States. This remains my intent. In order to accomplish this I listed three action steps. The first step was to review school policy. I have e mailed our school’s contact person regarding the participation in an ePal project and all that this may entail. For example, the creation of student e mail accounts, student participation in Wiki sites, and sharing of video resources via the web. The second step involved pursuing collaborative learning communities. I chose to investigate Vicki Davis’s suggestion of ePals (Laureate, 2010).
The ePals Global Community website matches willing participants with classrooms as well as ongoing projects. Upon review of the site, I found two projects that addressed my original goal and that seemed manageable. The titles were What’s it Like Where You Live and The Way We Are PowerPoint Project. Both projects were listed as e mail exchanges, however e mail communication is only a part of the projects. The first project is based out of Tennessee and has students describing aspects of their region through digital projects. The second project has elements of the first where students are describing their region, however it has the added component of also discussing the culture of the student’s community (http://www.epals.com/index.php). I am both relieved and pleased to have found two projects that address my goal and are manageable. Once I hear back from our school’s contact person, I plan to complete my next action step which is to make contact with the teacher involved.
Admittedly both of these projects rely heavily upon technology. Resources to be used include but are not limited to Microsoft Power Point, designated websites, use of e mail, digital recording equipment, and even scanners. In considering Universal Design for these projects, it is important to include multiple methods for the student to achieve the desired learning goal. The focus can not be on the technology it must be on the content. Cennamo, Ross, and Ermer (2009) add support by citing, “UDL emphasizes that achieving outcomes should not be contingent upon the media used to achieve them” (p. 121). Technology should act as a support to the skill or content to be learned.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
ePals global community. Retrieved July 11, 2012, from http://www.epals.com/index.php
Laureate Education, Inc. [Executive Producer]. (N.D.). Enriching content area learning experiences with technology part II. Integrating technology across the content areas. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Have you ever felt like you have “bitten off more than you can chew”? That is my feeling as I review my GAME plan. It all looks so lovely, such a well thought out and presented plan. Now that I am reviewing it, I realize I might have jumped into the deep end of the pool and the water is freezing. Perhaps it is time to realistically look at what I am comfortable doing while still meeting the goal of my plan.
First and foremost I want my students to work collaboratively with other students from a different region of the United States. This remains my intent. In order to accomplish this I listed three action steps. The first step was to review school policy. I have e mailed our school’s contact person regarding the participation in an ePal project and all that this may entail. For example, the creation of student e mail accounts, student participation in Wiki sites, and sharing of video resources via the web. The second step involved pursuing collaborative learning communities. I chose to investigate Vicki Davis’s suggestion of ePals (Laureate, 2010).
The ePals Global Community website matches willing participants with classrooms as well as ongoing projects. Upon review of the site, I found two projects that addressed my original goal and that seemed manageable. The titles were What’s it Like Where You Live and The Way We Are PowerPoint Project. Both projects were listed as e mail exchanges, however e mail communication is only a part of the projects. The first project is based out of Tennessee and has students describing aspects of their region through digital projects. The second project has elements of the first where students are describing their region, however it has the added component of also discussing the culture of the student’s community (http://www.epals.com/index.php). I am both relieved and pleased to have found two projects that address my goal and are manageable. Once I hear back from our school’s contact person, I plan to complete my next action step which is to make contact with the teacher involved.
Admittedly both of these projects rely heavily upon technology. Resources to be used include but are not limited to Microsoft Power Point, designated websites, use of e mail, digital recording equipment, and even scanners. In considering Universal Design for these projects, it is important to include multiple methods for the student to achieve the desired learning goal. The focus can not be on the technology it must be on the content. Cennamo, Ross, and Ermer (2009) add support by citing, “UDL emphasizes that achieving outcomes should not be contingent upon the media used to achieve them” (p. 121). Technology should act as a support to the skill or content to be learned.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
ePals global community. Retrieved July 11, 2012, from http://www.epals.com/index.php
Laureate Education, Inc. [Executive Producer]. (N.D.). Enriching content area learning experiences with technology part II. Integrating technology across the content areas. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Developing Your Personal GAME Plan EDUC 6713D
Setting out on a road trip with no particular destination can be exciting at first. However, if you don’t know where you are going, how do you know when you have arrived? Better yet did you even enjoy the trip? Having a destination in mind and a planned route ensures a safe and productive journey. In my opinion, this can be true for a road trip as well as in the classroom.
For this week’s class assignment we are to develop a GAME plan to increase our proficiency for two NETS-T (National Education Standards for Teachers). Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) define GAME as a series of steps, “1. Set Goals 2. Take Action to meet those goals 3. Monitor progress toward achieving goals and 4. Evaluate whether the goals were achieved and Extend your learning to new situations” (p.3). The two standards I chose address designing authentic learning experiences and exhibiting ethical behavior.
The first standard is 2.a which states, “Teachers design, develop, and evaluate authentic learning experiences and assessments incorporating contemporary tools and resources to maximize content learning in context and to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes identified in the NETS•S.” and section a states, “design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and creativity”. The second standard is 4.d which states, “Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical behavior in their professional practices” and section d states, “develop and model cultural understanding and global awareness by engaging with colleagues and students of other cultures using digital-age communication and collaboration tools” (http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx).
These two areas were chosen based on my desire to develop a creative, collaborative, learning environment for my students through the incorporation of authentic instructional activities. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) cite, “creativity is often developed through an authentic instructional approach” (p. 27). They go on to define the principles of authentic instruction as, “1) learner autonomy and 2) active learning, and tend to be anchored by 3) holistic, 4) complex, and 5) challenging activites” (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009, p. 28).
The following are the steps of my personal GAME plan.
Goal:
I would like to design an authentic learning activity that incorporates appropriate technology that will enable my students to work collaboratively on a project with students from another part of our country.
Action:
1. I will review my school’s policy on the use of BLOGS, Wikis, Podcasts, and SKYPE for classroom instruction.
2. I will seek out learning communities interested in participating in a group project via the use of the internet
3. Once contact has been made, I will collaborate with the other teacher to determine a subject area focus and establish a unit complete with individual lessons, time frames, and desired learning outcomes for the students
Monitor:
In order to monitor student understanding I plan to use formative assessments. Examples include response journals, individual conferences with the students, and review of artifacts created.
Evaluate and Extend:
Once the activity is complete student understanding will be evaluated by a summative assessment of the unit material. I will reflect on what went well during the activity and what elements could be improved upon. As an extension, I will present my findings to my grade level partners in the hope of expanding this project.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx
Setting out on a road trip with no particular destination can be exciting at first. However, if you don’t know where you are going, how do you know when you have arrived? Better yet did you even enjoy the trip? Having a destination in mind and a planned route ensures a safe and productive journey. In my opinion, this can be true for a road trip as well as in the classroom.
For this week’s class assignment we are to develop a GAME plan to increase our proficiency for two NETS-T (National Education Standards for Teachers). Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) define GAME as a series of steps, “1. Set Goals 2. Take Action to meet those goals 3. Monitor progress toward achieving goals and 4. Evaluate whether the goals were achieved and Extend your learning to new situations” (p.3). The two standards I chose address designing authentic learning experiences and exhibiting ethical behavior.
The first standard is 2.a which states, “Teachers design, develop, and evaluate authentic learning experiences and assessments incorporating contemporary tools and resources to maximize content learning in context and to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes identified in the NETS•S.” and section a states, “design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and creativity”. The second standard is 4.d which states, “Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical behavior in their professional practices” and section d states, “develop and model cultural understanding and global awareness by engaging with colleagues and students of other cultures using digital-age communication and collaboration tools” (http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx).
These two areas were chosen based on my desire to develop a creative, collaborative, learning environment for my students through the incorporation of authentic instructional activities. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) cite, “creativity is often developed through an authentic instructional approach” (p. 27). They go on to define the principles of authentic instruction as, “1) learner autonomy and 2) active learning, and tend to be anchored by 3) holistic, 4) complex, and 5) challenging activites” (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009, p. 28).
The following are the steps of my personal GAME plan.
Goal:
I would like to design an authentic learning activity that incorporates appropriate technology that will enable my students to work collaboratively on a project with students from another part of our country.
Action:
1. I will review my school’s policy on the use of BLOGS, Wikis, Podcasts, and SKYPE for classroom instruction.
2. I will seek out learning communities interested in participating in a group project via the use of the internet
3. Once contact has been made, I will collaborate with the other teacher to determine a subject area focus and establish a unit complete with individual lessons, time frames, and desired learning outcomes for the students
Monitor:
In order to monitor student understanding I plan to use formative assessments. Examples include response journals, individual conferences with the students, and review of artifacts created.
Evaluate and Extend:
Once the activity is complete student understanding will be evaluated by a summative assessment of the unit material. I will reflect on what went well during the activity and what elements could be improved upon. As an extension, I will present my findings to my grade level partners in the hope of expanding this project.
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Final Reflection EDUC 6711
In this final blog entry for EDUC 6711 we were asked to reflect on our Personal Theory of Learning formed in week one of this course. As I read through my initial application paper I am still of the mind that leaning is unique to the individual which is at the heart of constructivism (Lever-Duffy & Mcdonald, 2008). Additionally, I still maintain that behaviorism does not provide the best model for the teaching of higher order thinking skills. This is not to say that additional insights were not gained.
I would say my strongest “aha” moment came from Marzanos Non-Linguistic Representation instructional strategy. The definition seems plain enough “enhance students’ ability to represent and elaborate on knowledge using mental images” (Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K.,2007 pg. 9). After viewing the media segment Instructional Strategies and seeing Dr. Pickering use this approach to summarize information, I knew I wanted to try it. I pulled a group of my lower students and we read an informational Science text which identified the different classifications of living things. The five kingdoms were listed. I used a white board to draw pictures and added one or two words. My students were able to explain the section without turning back to it. In the past I have read informational text with this group and then initiated small group discussion which provided for limited success. I plan to implement this approach in other areas as well. This scenario seems to support Paivio’s dual coding hypothesis which maintains that individuals will process and recover information easier if the information is presented through images (Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool, 2010).
This course offered many examples of technology tools which could be easily used to enhance learning. The two tools I plan to make use of immediately are my promethean board and VoiceThread. I am fortunate enough to have an interactive white board in my classroom. I am dismayed to admit the board was used primarily as an instructional tool and not a learning tool. I used it to present information quickly and allowed for minimal student interaction. As a result of this course, I have begun to call more students to the board and have turned the pen tool over to them, thereby changing the board from an instructional tool to a learning tool as defined in our media resource Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool. The second technology VoiceThread has allowed my students to take charge of their presentations. Even my struggling students are able to upload photos and post comments. The two technologies will allow my students more opportunities to interact with the material I am presenting thereby firming connections for stronger understanding.
The two long term goals I would like make are developing a classroom resource wiki and creating a webquest for the Three Fires tribes of Michigan. Currently my grade level partners and myself are in the beginning stages of creating this wiki. I have established an account on wikispaces and we have added a few content area website links. Our vision is to include the worksheets associated with each lesson and video presentations of our lessons for students who are absent. The second long term goal was selected out of a need for resources for a particular content standard. I teach in a predominately Native American school in Michigan. In our grade level standards we are required to teach about other cultures. It is my opinion the students would feel more connected to the content if they were learning about tribes in our region. I have visited Webquest.org to obtain guidelines on the initial set up. I am in the process of researching appropriate sites.
Although at times the workload seemed heavy this has been a very rewarding experience for me.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Instructional Strategies Part I.
Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical foundations. In Teaching and learning with technology (3rd ed. pp. 2–35 ). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
I would say my strongest “aha” moment came from Marzanos Non-Linguistic Representation instructional strategy. The definition seems plain enough “enhance students’ ability to represent and elaborate on knowledge using mental images” (Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K.,2007 pg. 9). After viewing the media segment Instructional Strategies and seeing Dr. Pickering use this approach to summarize information, I knew I wanted to try it. I pulled a group of my lower students and we read an informational Science text which identified the different classifications of living things. The five kingdoms were listed. I used a white board to draw pictures and added one or two words. My students were able to explain the section without turning back to it. In the past I have read informational text with this group and then initiated small group discussion which provided for limited success. I plan to implement this approach in other areas as well. This scenario seems to support Paivio’s dual coding hypothesis which maintains that individuals will process and recover information easier if the information is presented through images (Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool, 2010).
This course offered many examples of technology tools which could be easily used to enhance learning. The two tools I plan to make use of immediately are my promethean board and VoiceThread. I am fortunate enough to have an interactive white board in my classroom. I am dismayed to admit the board was used primarily as an instructional tool and not a learning tool. I used it to present information quickly and allowed for minimal student interaction. As a result of this course, I have begun to call more students to the board and have turned the pen tool over to them, thereby changing the board from an instructional tool to a learning tool as defined in our media resource Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool. The second technology VoiceThread has allowed my students to take charge of their presentations. Even my struggling students are able to upload photos and post comments. The two technologies will allow my students more opportunities to interact with the material I am presenting thereby firming connections for stronger understanding.
The two long term goals I would like make are developing a classroom resource wiki and creating a webquest for the Three Fires tribes of Michigan. Currently my grade level partners and myself are in the beginning stages of creating this wiki. I have established an account on wikispaces and we have added a few content area website links. Our vision is to include the worksheets associated with each lesson and video presentations of our lessons for students who are absent. The second long term goal was selected out of a need for resources for a particular content standard. I teach in a predominately Native American school in Michigan. In our grade level standards we are required to teach about other cultures. It is my opinion the students would feel more connected to the content if they were learning about tribes in our region. I have visited Webquest.org to obtain guidelines on the initial set up. I am in the process of researching appropriate sites.
Although at times the workload seemed heavy this has been a very rewarding experience for me.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Technology: Instructional Tool vs. Learning Tool.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Instructional Strategies Part I.
Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical foundations. In Teaching and learning with technology (3rd ed. pp. 2–35 ). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
In this week’s resources the focus was on Social Learning theories. Constructivisim, Constructionism, and Connectivism were examined. Dr. Orey discussed the subtle differences between Constructivisim and Constructionism. The basic premise of these two theories is that “knowledge is derived from interactions”. Connctivism as discussed by George Siemens maintains that a “learner is in a networked world”. Learning is forming networks (connections) and navigating these networks. All three theories site the importance of learners interacting with each other to form stronger understanding of a concept.
One such teaching strategy that lends itself well to social interaction is Cooperative Learning. Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski caution, “Cooperative learning is not so much learning to cooperate as it is cooperating to learn”(pg. 143). This is an important point. Simply placing students in groups and hoping for learning to occur is not cooperative learning. In order for cooperative learning situations to be successful a great deal of planning must be done. Everything from group make up, how the work will be assessed, and specific roles of each group member must be developed.
Technology allows for a richer cooperative learning experience. Students are no longer limited to their classroom. Through the use of the internet they are now able to communicate effectively with classrooms around the world. Vociethread is one such technology tool which is easy to use and provides a forum for pictures, video, and voice recordings. Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski state, “When students work in cooperative groups, they make sense of, or construct meaning for, new knowledge by interacting with others” (pg. 139). The quality of these interactions can be magnified by utilizing web resources.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010a). Program Eight. Social Constructivism. [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA:ASCD
One such teaching strategy that lends itself well to social interaction is Cooperative Learning. Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski caution, “Cooperative learning is not so much learning to cooperate as it is cooperating to learn”(pg. 143). This is an important point. Simply placing students in groups and hoping for learning to occur is not cooperative learning. In order for cooperative learning situations to be successful a great deal of planning must be done. Everything from group make up, how the work will be assessed, and specific roles of each group member must be developed.
Technology allows for a richer cooperative learning experience. Students are no longer limited to their classroom. Through the use of the internet they are now able to communicate effectively with classrooms around the world. Vociethread is one such technology tool which is easy to use and provides a forum for pictures, video, and voice recordings. Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski state, “When students work in cooperative groups, they make sense of, or construct meaning for, new knowledge by interacting with others” (pg. 139). The quality of these interactions can be magnified by utilizing web resources.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010a). Program Eight. Social Constructivism. [Webcast]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA:ASCD
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)