TEXT:
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., & Kuhn, M. (2012). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 23-87.
EQ: Why is it important for students to engage in cooperative learning activities?
Reflection:
FOCUS: Marzano's - Cooperative Learning
This was a great read especially with so many links and resources. To answer the question Cooperative Learning "provides an environment where student can reflect upon newly acquired knowledge, process what they are learning by talking with and actively listening to their peers, and develop common understanding about topics". It can also "increase motivation for learning by establishing a strong kinship and sense of obligation to one another among students, which can lead to greater buy-in and increased achievement.
This had a great rubric for having students creating a video or some type of media over a specific assignment or specific topic and roles group members could play, check pg. 76-77.
This reading provided the following links for the following catagories:
Web Creation:
https://sites.google.com
http://schoolfusion.com
http://ww.ning.com
http://www.intuit.com/website-building-software
http://pbworks.com
Collaboration Software:
http://willyou.typewith.me
http://titanpad.com
http://www.apple.com/mac/facetime
http://mysyncpad.com
http://www.doodletoo.com
http://google.com/calendar
WebQuests
http://questgarden.com
http://webquest.sdsu.edu/taskonomy.html
http://www.zunal.com
Simulation Games:
http://www.civilization5.com
http://girlsinc.org/gc/page.php?id=6.2
http://thesims.ea.com
http://www.epals.com
http://theteacherscorner.net/penpals
Shared Bookmarking:
http://www.diigo.com
http://www.google.com/bookmarks
http://www.delicious.com
http://www.evernote.com
Course Management
http://moodle.org
http://www.blackboard.com
http://www.google.com/educators/p_app.html
http://www.jigsaw.org
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/profdev/rubrics.shtml
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Sunday, March 17, 2013
UDL and the Likes
Week 3 - Reading Reflections
Despite the emphasis on UDL and it’s brain networks, and three main principles, the huge concept to me is “multiple means”. Considering the three main areas of what it is involving a student to learn. It’s not just the “what” and then test over the “what” through memorization styled questions and assuming that if it was memorized correctly then they’re advanced learners. Now we need to deal with the “why’s” and the “how’s” of the learned content. I've seen this in some of the math tests at our school. They don’t give the students a math problem and expect some numeric answer or some answer tied to some numeric value. Now an answer is an mathematical formula as to “how” a student will solve the problem to eventually achieve the answer.
I remember when I was in high school, my sophomore literature teacher told us, “the majority of the material you learn it school, you will not use. However, you are in school to learn how to learn.” It eventually came to the point, that in order for something to stay in my head, or when I was learning something I was unfamiliar with I had to compare it or relate it to something I already knew or an area of expertise. Essentially I was taking a sense of ownership of the new knowledge so that it could stay in my head. I feel we need to do the same thing with our current students. Especially since new knowledge shows up in there face more often now than ever.
References:
Center for Applied Special Technology: UDL lesson Builder
Cast.org (2009). Cast UDL lesson builder. Center for Applied Special Technology. Retrieved from
http://lessonbuilder.cast.org
Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning, Chapter 6
Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for
learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Available
online at the Center for Applied Special Technology Web site. Chapter 6. Retrieved from
http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes/
UDL and Its Three Principles
New Idea on Old Actions
This feels like another one of those programs to where it’s “the same thing with a different title”. Although this is highly research based and driven, hearing David Rose from CAST giving the summary of UDL and its three principles really made me ill. I felt I was hearing from another individual that theorizes ideas based off of data while not being on the front lines.
Prioritizing the Principles
With that aside, I do agree with the three principles, but only because they coincide with other principles I’ve learned regarding differentiated instruction. What drives me nuts is that it’s taught as if it’s some type of structured program, but great teachers will reference it as, “I’m just doing my job.” The one thing I disagree with is the order they present the principles. Although it doesn't have to be in a certain order in the lesson plans, I feel what should be presented first is Principle III, then I & II. I feel the hardest part of the lesson plan is Engagement and guiding the student to the “why” of learning. Once that is established, then we can get into the multiple means of representation (what) and finally action and expression (how).
UDL Created Lesson: Weathering & Erosion
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Technology Intentions within Education
OBJECTIVE vs. SUBJECTive
In the book, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, there is an emphasis of not only setting objectives for our students but have students being a part of the objective creation process. “When teachers communicate objectives for student learning, students can see more easily the connections between what they are doing in class and what they are supposed to learn” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). This impacted me because, I often will place my objectives on the board; maybe have the students read it with me, but then throw it in then set it aside as we venture off into activities over the unit. I like how they express ideas of implementing technology to make these objective more engaging and more important than them having a set place on my board for when administrators walk in to visit the class.
I enjoyed the use of the KWL charts, and even better, the KWHL charts, and how the implemented Google Docs as well as the Kidspiration software to help the organizing of where the students are presently with their learning and where they’re going. At the same time I’m very fearful of doing this because I can see this taking a lot of time compared to what else can be taught in the classroom. I can see the being a huge battle between the curricular objectives versus the plain subject matter. However, the next section supports the objective view.
What came first? The technology or the education?
Towards the end of the article, The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement: What the most current research has to say, there were two main quotes that struck, especially has I had read the material in the paragraphs above. The first, “’One of the enduring difficulties about technology and education…is that a lot of people think about the technology first and the education later’” (Schacter, 1999). It upsets me that there are teachers who think they’re doing their students a favor by providing computer time for their students. And I believe they think that because the activities planned on the computers, laptops or any other device provide is content related material that learning is happening. I think students are a powerful tool and should be used as interactive tool, not a really expensive textbook. There are so many tools to allow the students to create and interact with on these devices.
The second quote, “There is, however, evidence in some of these studies that learning technology is … ineffective when the learning objectives are unclear and the focus of the technology use is diffuse” (Schacter, 1999). To again, place an emphasis on the objectives, have students see what they will be doing on electronic devices will tie into their learning goals. I believe a real challenge would be to have teachers use electronic tools, websites, or apps that are not driven by specific content area. Allow the students to make it a part of the content area by having them create or reflect on their learning or even add to their learning.
Conclusion
With set objects, created by both the student and the teacher, the entire class is then working in a synergized format to allow more learning than if it was just teacher led. Then, having technology enhance the learning by utilizing enhanced tools of technology to create, not only job skills, but reflection masterpieces of their learning.
Reference:
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Chapters 1, 15-38.
Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. Retrieved from http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf.
In the book, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, there is an emphasis of not only setting objectives for our students but have students being a part of the objective creation process. “When teachers communicate objectives for student learning, students can see more easily the connections between what they are doing in class and what they are supposed to learn” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). This impacted me because, I often will place my objectives on the board; maybe have the students read it with me, but then throw it in then set it aside as we venture off into activities over the unit. I like how they express ideas of implementing technology to make these objective more engaging and more important than them having a set place on my board for when administrators walk in to visit the class.
I enjoyed the use of the KWL charts, and even better, the KWHL charts, and how the implemented Google Docs as well as the Kidspiration software to help the organizing of where the students are presently with their learning and where they’re going. At the same time I’m very fearful of doing this because I can see this taking a lot of time compared to what else can be taught in the classroom. I can see the being a huge battle between the curricular objectives versus the plain subject matter. However, the next section supports the objective view.
What came first? The technology or the education?
Towards the end of the article, The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievement: What the most current research has to say, there were two main quotes that struck, especially has I had read the material in the paragraphs above. The first, “’One of the enduring difficulties about technology and education…is that a lot of people think about the technology first and the education later’” (Schacter, 1999). It upsets me that there are teachers who think they’re doing their students a favor by providing computer time for their students. And I believe they think that because the activities planned on the computers, laptops or any other device provide is content related material that learning is happening. I think students are a powerful tool and should be used as interactive tool, not a really expensive textbook. There are so many tools to allow the students to create and interact with on these devices.
The second quote, “There is, however, evidence in some of these studies that learning technology is … ineffective when the learning objectives are unclear and the focus of the technology use is diffuse” (Schacter, 1999). To again, place an emphasis on the objectives, have students see what they will be doing on electronic devices will tie into their learning goals. I believe a real challenge would be to have teachers use electronic tools, websites, or apps that are not driven by specific content area. Allow the students to make it a part of the content area by having them create or reflect on their learning or even add to their learning.
Conclusion
With set objects, created by both the student and the teacher, the entire class is then working in a synergized format to allow more learning than if it was just teacher led. Then, having technology enhance the learning by utilizing enhanced tools of technology to create, not only job skills, but reflection masterpieces of their learning.
Reference:
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Chapters 1, 15-38.
Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. Retrieved from http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf.
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Learning Theories: Constructivism, Connectivism, and Cyborg
(Week 1 - Reflections for EDLD-5364)
Cyborg
I’ll begin my reflection over the first three learning theories. I must admit the most extreme, and most unsettling learning theory is the Cyborg theory, especially as it borders science fiction and trending reality. Holding Christian beliefs close to my heart makes the cyborg theory most disturbing. To me, it crosses the lines of playing God and making what we’ve been given, better. I can see how this can be helpful to those who really need neurotic help. I’ve seen too many people suffer due to their neurological structures; whether it is developmental, emotional, or mental. What scares me the most is if this technology is used for the wrong purpose, there could be some serious repercussions we could not recover.
Also, what if the technology truly advances? When Professor Warwick mentioned how certain systems could be unimportant, specifically not needing universities or school by simply downloading information [taught in schools] into the brain. The “human upgrade” he speaks of could almost literally make us all robots. That’s the beauty of our current society. There are those superior to others in many different fields, whether it is athletics, academics, and many other vocational roles. The meaning of “superiority” would be lost because we all would be equals of superiority. This could really change the human evolution…and I don’t think there would be any good from it.
Reference:
Connectivism
To me, this is the most complex theory because it is sharing the idea that knowledge exists in the in the outside world and not within one’s mind. The only I could relate to this was by remember what a college professor said to his class. He said a true genius can apply new knowledge to the mechanics of something he already knows. Meaning, I may not know exactly the purpose of all the body systems, or how they work, but if I can compare and relate them to a car engine (something I know about) then I can understand it more. Self-reflection is important to this learning theory and that just because the knowledge is obtained differently, it doesn’t mean its wrong.
Reference:
Constructivism
When I was first watching the video over constructivism and read some of the brief articles about it, three letters came to my mind, K-W-L. I complete related it the ever popular KWL chart used in classrooms all over the country. It’s all about building on top of something one already knows; taking each piece of new information deeper. I can see how connectivism can be connected to constructivism. It’s now connecting the information one already knows and bring it to others. Utilizing the importance of external factors in order for connectivism to occur, it eventually has constructivism as a foundation.
Beyond the Learning Theories
I felt the majority of readings just set a blaze my already fired-up passion of implementing technology in the classroom and how it has to be emphasized in the classroom. I’m sure when students are at home, especially during summer break are wishing they had worksheets and textbooks in front of them to entertain their boredom. Yet this is what we still constantly feed and in the end of the process try and program them to take properly take a state mandated test.
My most favorite phrase of all the readings from this week was the “tipping point.” “At what point will new tools and new methods catch on enough in schools to reach the tipping point?” (Solomon & Schrum, 2007). I feel we’re in the middle of this tipping point. I’m scared that we are currently not doing enough to make it through this point. I feel we don’t just have a generation of teachers dealing with a different generation of students. To me it looks like we have multiple generations of teachers, administrators, and politicians deciding what’s best in our steam train process how to teach the generation of the bullet trains. We have the generations of the “but’s” teaching to the generation of “and’s”. (It almost look like a bad Coke Zero commercial). I’m fearful and excited all at the same time of the skills I have to teach a generation like this. I hope to be a part of this answer to the “tipping point.”
Reference:
Cyborg
I’ll begin my reflection over the first three learning theories. I must admit the most extreme, and most unsettling learning theory is the Cyborg theory, especially as it borders science fiction and trending reality. Holding Christian beliefs close to my heart makes the cyborg theory most disturbing. To me, it crosses the lines of playing God and making what we’ve been given, better. I can see how this can be helpful to those who really need neurotic help. I’ve seen too many people suffer due to their neurological structures; whether it is developmental, emotional, or mental. What scares me the most is if this technology is used for the wrong purpose, there could be some serious repercussions we could not recover.
Also, what if the technology truly advances? When Professor Warwick mentioned how certain systems could be unimportant, specifically not needing universities or school by simply downloading information [taught in schools] into the brain. The “human upgrade” he speaks of could almost literally make us all robots. That’s the beauty of our current society. There are those superior to others in many different fields, whether it is athletics, academics, and many other vocational roles. The meaning of “superiority” would be lost because we all would be equals of superiority. This could really change the human evolution…and I don’t think there would be any good from it.
Reference:
- Warwirk, K. (nd). Cyborg Life [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB_l7SY_ngI
Connectivism
To me, this is the most complex theory because it is sharing the idea that knowledge exists in the in the outside world and not within one’s mind. The only I could relate to this was by remember what a college professor said to his class. He said a true genius can apply new knowledge to the mechanics of something he already knows. Meaning, I may not know exactly the purpose of all the body systems, or how they work, but if I can compare and relate them to a car engine (something I know about) then I can understand it more. Self-reflection is important to this learning theory and that just because the knowledge is obtained differently, it doesn’t mean its wrong.
Reference:
- Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education, 7-44.
- Siemens, G. (nd). The Changing Nature of Knowledge [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMcTHndpzYg
Constructivism
When I was first watching the video over constructivism and read some of the brief articles about it, three letters came to my mind, K-W-L. I complete related it the ever popular KWL chart used in classrooms all over the country. It’s all about building on top of something one already knows; taking each piece of new information deeper. I can see how connectivism can be connected to constructivism. It’s now connecting the information one already knows and bring it to others. Utilizing the importance of external factors in order for connectivism to occur, it eventually has constructivism as a foundation.
Beyond the Learning Theories
I felt the majority of readings just set a blaze my already fired-up passion of implementing technology in the classroom and how it has to be emphasized in the classroom. I’m sure when students are at home, especially during summer break are wishing they had worksheets and textbooks in front of them to entertain their boredom. Yet this is what we still constantly feed and in the end of the process try and program them to take properly take a state mandated test.
My most favorite phrase of all the readings from this week was the “tipping point.” “At what point will new tools and new methods catch on enough in schools to reach the tipping point?” (Solomon & Schrum, 2007). I feel we’re in the middle of this tipping point. I’m scared that we are currently not doing enough to make it through this point. I feel we don’t just have a generation of teachers dealing with a different generation of students. To me it looks like we have multiple generations of teachers, administrators, and politicians deciding what’s best in our steam train process how to teach the generation of the bullet trains. We have the generations of the “but’s” teaching to the generation of “and’s”. (It almost look like a bad Coke Zero commercial). I’m fearful and excited all at the same time of the skills I have to teach a generation like this. I hope to be a part of this answer to the “tipping point.”
Reference:
- Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education, 7-44
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)