Posts Tagged Technological Tool

Meta-Reflection

December 19, 2009 at 1:23 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , , , ,

                It has been an interesting experience taking a technology class with people who are already teachers and attempting to use technologies in their classrooms. This is my first quarter in the MAT program; I have nearly two years before I will be in a classroom of my own.  So while some of my colleagues are actually applying our learning to their classrooms, I am formulating my pedagogical beliefs about technology and its place in the classroom. For example, Harris, Mishra, and Koehler (2009, p. 396-97) emphasize not only the use of technology, but “the connections among technologies, curriculum content, and specific pedagogical approaches” which “produce effective discipline-based teaching with educational technologies.” While I am not completely sure if I will ever use tools as specific as Scratch or SuperGoo (Peppler & Kafai, 2007), I think it is more important that I develop a philosophy about incorporating technologies into education without becoming too focused on the technology and lose sight of the rest of the content the state requires that students learn.  The technology will change and become outdated; from this course I now understand that it is about finding technologies that are worth using and that will work well with the rest of the course content. So while I cannot say that I am leaving this class with a list of tools that I will definitely use, I do know that I will use technologies that are supplemental to the material we are working on in class.

                In years past, the use of technology in the classroom by making the classroom online through online courses has carried a negative stigma with it. Bacer (2009, p.1) describes that students previously enrolled in online courses faced learning obstacles because “the lack of audio and visual clues can create a sense of silence” because students are “not seeing or hearing the other learners.” I shared this perspective and did not believe that it is possible to learn as much in an online course as in an actual classroom. However, through the use of tools such as VoiceThread, WordPress, and EtherPad, there is a connection between the other students and myself; they are now more than just a name on the computer screen to me, proving to me that an online class can be worthwhile. Teachers now have the ability to overcome the obstacle of engaging the students in an online classroom through tools that allow students to interact with one another and work together, even if it is not face to face.  Even in regular classrooms, technologies have been difficult to incorporate because of the cost to purchase the latest and greatest programs; but most of the technologies we looked at this quarter were free, allowing teachers to have plenty of options without having to pay.  The advancement of technologies that allow people to be more interactive through the use of audio, video, real-time technologies, and others, make using technologies for class work an enjoyable activity that still allows learning to take place.

                Using technology in the classroom is not always an easy feat. Sandholtz and Reilly (2004, p. 487) explain that it is difficult for teachers to stay up to date on what technology is available to teachers and that it is better not to expect them to have high technical skills, but for them “to focus on developing curriculum, evaluating learning materials, and thinking about how to provide better learning opportunities for their students”; when this is done, “teachers are likely to use technology more effectively and creatively in their teaching.” Students are expected to be taught how to use technology so they are ready for the digital world that we live in. However, this is not a specific content area in itself; teachers have to tie it in with the rest of students’ educations. As someone who is not yet a teacher, I cannot say that I understand the difficulties that these and some of my peers have described, but I feel more informed about some of the struggles I may face and some of the expectations that will be on my shoulders when I walk into my classroom. Not only have I been informed about potential challenges, rather, I feel as though I have also been equipped with the tools and with the philosophy to allow me to succeed in becoming a teacher who utilizes technology in the classroom.

References:

Bacer, Kathleen (2009, May). Utilizing auditory and visual tools to engage the 21st Century eLearner.

Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed, Journal of research on technology in education, 41(4), p. 393-416.

Peppler, K. A. & Kafai, Y. S., (2007). From SuperGoo to Scratch: Exploring Creative Digital Media Production in Informal Learning, Learning, Media and Technology Special Issue: Media Education Goes Digital [Electronic Version].

Ribble, M. S., Bailey, G.D., & Ross, T. W. (2004). Digital citizenship: addressing appropriate technology behavior, Learning & leading with technology 32(1), p. 6-12.

Sandholtz, J. H. & Reilly, B. (2004). Teachers, not technicians: rethinking technical expectations for teachers, Teachers college record, 106(3), p. 487-512.

Leave a Comment

Technology Project

December 18, 2009 at 8:56 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , , ,

As one of the final projects for EDTC 6536 we were to create a five minute instructional video that taught about an online tool that teachers and students can use in a classroom. To create the screencast we used a program called Jing, a free downloadable program available online. For the project, I taught about EtherPad, a tool we used earlier in the quarter for one of our own projects. I chose EtherPad because I was really impressed with the program and would like to use in a classroom when I am a teacher.

Five minute EtherPad screencast

Handout to go with the screencast

Jing

Leave a Comment

Module 6: Scratch and Kindergarten Learning

November 18, 2009 at 4:05 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , , ,

                “Instead of making kindergarten like the rest of school, we need to make the rest of school (indeed, the rest of life) more like kindergarten” (Resnick, p. 1). What a great piece of advice for me to receive before I get started with my teaching career! Resnick’s reasoning in All I Really Need to Know (About Creative Thinking) I Learned (By Studying How Children Learn) in Kindergarten, is that students learn to think creatively because of how kindergarten learning is cultivated. “In traditional kindergartens, children are constantly designing, creating, experimenting, and exploring”; (Resnick, p. 1) these activities not only allow for kindergarten students to enjoy what they do in kindergarten, but also to learn through experience. Experience is a way that embeds knowledge into a student because he/she will have something to recall back on when discussing an idea or concept. This is not just for kindergarteners, but for people of all ages, which is why Resnick believes the kindergarten method of learning is worth implementing in schools for all ages. It is a process that spirals through the acts of imagining, creating, playing, sharing, reflecting, and imagining (Resnick, p. 1). While this spiral may look differently in a kindergarten classroom than it would in a tenth grade history class, students will be engaged in what they are doing and actively participating in their own education. If I can incorporate this type of teaching philosophy into my work from the beginning of my life as a teacher, students will be able to truly experience social science in my classroom, not just read about and report on it.

                The second article for this week, From SuperGoo to Scratch: Exploring Creative Digital Media Production in Informal Learning, by Peppler and Kafai (2007) presented another great technological tool for teachers to implement into their classroom. This article discusses the use of Scratch, a program can be used by students to create their own project and experiment with the use of media and technology. Peppler and Kafai (2007) use case studies in their article to share the ways student s can use Scratch for completely different types of projects, from music videos, to video games, to car designing. Students are able to stretch their minds and experiment with different products and designs, similar to Resnick’s argument about learning through the kindergarten method. While the students in Peppler and Kafai’s (2007) case studies created projects that would not be pertinent in a secondary social studies classroom, using a program like Scratch to make a music video about the events that happened in 1968, or to design a Revolutionary War-themed video game, may not be irrelevant.

                Whether it is a kindergarten class or a twelfth grade social studies class, pushing the students to think creatively and to stretch their learning is beneficial. The teachers are able to participate alongside students as they learn instead of attempt to drill pieces of information into students’ minds. Using technological tools like Scratch also help the students to be prepared to use technology for more than entertainment.

 

Peppler, K. A. & Kafai, Y. S., (2007). From SuperGoo to Scratch: Exploring Creative Digital Media Production in Informal Learning, Learning, Media and Technology Special Issue: Media Education Goes Digital [Electronic Version].

Resnick, Mitchel. All I Really Need to Know (About Creative Thinking) I Learned (By Studying How Children Learn) in Kindergarten, 1-6.

 

Comments (1)

Module 5: Pedagogies and Technology Beliefs

November 11, 2009 at 4:21 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , ,

                The article that we read for this week about pedagogical beliefs and the implementation of technology was very different from anything we had looked at thus far in class. I found the article to be very interesting in how a teacher’s personal beliefs can be an influence in how technology is utilized in that teacher’s classroom. For example, Ertmer (2005, p. 30) states “whereas some teachers may think of technology as just another tool they can use to facilitate student learning, others may think of it as one more thing to do (i.e., an innovation).” These differences in perspectives will change the way that teachers use technology in the classroom. While I am not extremely savvy in the technology field, I hope that when I implement technology tools in the classroom it is for the benefit of the students and benefitting their learning experience. While technology can cause dilemmas and hold-ups, I hope that I do not see using something new as a chore but as an opportunity. In a class like secondary history, where students are quick to assume the course is boring, I would like to use innovative tools that liven up the content and engage the students. Maybe I can even convince them that history is not boring!

                As far as how I fit-in in relation to this article, I think I am at an in-between point. I am not a teacher who already has a set belief about the use of technology in a classroom, nor am I a person who has seen technology utilized in a classroom as a student. I would like to go into the teaching field with fresh energy for doing things in a new way; however, I have not seen this be done before. So while it is not because I am too fixed in my own routine that I do not utilize technology, I definitely feel as though I need better preparation in order to be excited about implementing it in a classroom. However, this is part of the problem for current teachers that Ertmer (2005, p. 30) discusses, “because few current teachers have experienced, or even observed, the use of technology in their own K-12 schooling, they are unlikely to have many preconceived ideas about how technology should be used to achieve student learning.” Teachers know the technology is out there, but without seeing it utilized in the classroom context, there is confusion in how to fluidly incorporate it. I believe that technology can be a great tool in the classroom; I just need to know how to implement it better.

                I think that in all of this we need to remember the purpose for incorporating technology into any classroom. “Ultimately, the goal is to facilitate uses of technology that lead to increased student learning” (Ertmer, 2005, pgs. 27-28). I think that this end-goal is often forgotten and that teachers and schools begin to compete with one another in becoming the most hi-tech. The only reason for using a new tool in the classroom is if it will be beneficial for the students. I want this to be the reason that I do anything in my classroom. I want the students to be engaged and appreciate what they are spending their time on, both because they are learning and because they enjoy the way they are doing it.

Ertmer, Peggy A. (2005). Teacher Pedagogical Beliefs: The Final Frontier in Our Quest for Technology Integration?. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(4), 25-39.

Comments (1)

Module 3: Reflecting on Bridging the Divide

October 28, 2009 at 4:17 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , ,

Mike Bogle’s (2008) article, “Bridging the Divide: Facilitating the Exploration of Emerging Technologies that Support Innovative Learning and Teaching” made many interesting points on the need for teachers to be advocates for further use of technology in their schools as well as the need for teachers to have consultant to help them stay current on the best and newest technologies for the classroom. As ones leading the classroom as well as the liaison between the students and the administration, teachers have a responsibility to make sure the administration knows what students need. While classes have the ability to continue without the use of the latest technologies, Melissa (2009) pointed out in this week’s VoiceThread that teachers have a responsibility to prepare students for the technological world that we live in today. Many schools do not have the type of consultant that Bogle describes, which means teachers have some extra work to do within their schools. This is an intimidating task, but Bogle (2008, p.8) explains that teachers (even one working alone) need to be the ones who begin to use the technology in the classroom and document their usage in order to prove to the administration that what they are doing is important. This task will take a lot of time for a teacher; he/she will need to begin exploring which technological resources will work well in his/her classroom and learn how to use the resources on his/her own. However, this is the type of responsibility that teachers sign up for when they take on the job.

Once the school understands the need to encourage the use of technological resources, it is possible for the school to hire someone on as a consultant. Bogle (2008, p. 4) describes that “the role of the consultant is to engage in all the peer networking and evaluative activities that others cannot perform themselves, and then having done that to share their findings with the wider community.” This position is a great idea. The consultant is someone who is more tech savvy than the average teacher and can work through the different programs to decide what is worthwhile for teachers to introduce to their classrooms. I have a hard time believing that a consultant is a feasible position in every school because of funding purposes. With budget cuts that seem to continuously be occurring in school districts, I am not sure that most schools will be able to afford a consultant.

As someone who is preparing to enter into the teaching profession, the idea that I may have to be the initiator is intimidating. To be a first-year teacher trying to plan lessons and manage my own classroom for the first time and do extra research to utilize the different technologies seems like a lot. In addition, I wonder how receptive a school administration will be to a first-year teacher making suggestions for large changes in a school. This is not to say that I am not willing to take on the challenge if I am put in that position, these are just some concerns that I think need to be addressed while discussing Bogle’s article.

 

Bogle, M.  Bridging the Divide:  Facilitating the exploration of emerging technologies that support innovative learning and teaching.  March, 2008.

Comments (2)

Module 2: Reflection

October 21, 2009 at 4:32 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , ,

The article “Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and Learning 2.0” by John Seely Brown and Richard P Adler (2008) was very informative on the different online resources that can be used for education, or even just personal growth. In a world where the average person will have multiple careers, it is valuable to know that there are free resources available to educate and ease that transition (Brown & Adler, 2008, p.2). This movement, the Open Educational Resources (OER) opens up possibilities for people to gain knowledge from places like MIT, Harvard, and other institutions that few people will actually attend on their own (Brown & Adler, 2008, p.2). This movement has opened up possibilities for the k-12 world as well. Students can become a part of virtual classrooms such as Terra Incognita (part of the University of Sourthern Queensland) and Digital Study Hall (Brown & Adler, 2008, p.6 & 8). These new resources change learning to a demand-pull approach that allows students to learn at the same time that they are practicing the skills they are learning about (Brown & Adler, 2008, p.15). Not only that, but because these are free tools on the Internet, students can continue to access them on their own time whenever they want to learn something new, creating invaluable lifelong learning skills (Brown & Adler, 2008, p.15-16).

These online resources seem to be such a great tool for students of all ages to utilize. It is almost disappointing knowing that many people do not know these great opportunities are just a click away. I see these tools being great resources when I am a secondary teacher because they open up new types of learning experiences for students. With so many different forms of free online learning, it will be easier for my students to pursue areas of interest to them within a social studies context. They will be able to interact with other people who are interested in the same topic and be able to have small group discussions that they would not previously been able to have during an independent research project. These OERs are a great resource for schools because they do not require more money and because they are offer such a variety of learning for students.

Terra Incognita: http://www.usq.edu.au/

MIT Courses: http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/index.htm

Brown, J.S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and Learning 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, 43(1), 1-19.

Comments (1)

Reflecting on VoiceThreads and Other Technology

October 14, 2009 at 5:36 am · Filed under T4: Technology ·Tagged , , ,

After taking a previous online course that was dependent on emailing weekly assignments and posting responses on discussion boards I believed that online classes were not for me or anyone else who was serious about learning anything in depth about a subject. Dr. Bacer’s article, Utilizing Auditory and Visual Tools to Engage the 21st Century eLearner and the limited experience I have had using VoiceThreads has helped me to see that online courses can be more than my previous experience.

Dr. Bacer’s article was very interesting in supporting the use of technological tools for online classes. According to Bacer (2009), three online tools that were studied in online classes were claimed to increase that online learning environment by 100%. These findings are very interesting to me. Either online classes in the past were extremely poor or these tools are really great things to have around. During a class VoiceThread, Rachel White shared something interesting that she learned at a school conference: girls need to feel a connection or see an excitement about the course content to have the optimal class experience (VoiceThread Module 1). I think that this points out a lack of quality in online classes that do not utilize VoiceThreads, Skype, podcasts, or other extra technologies. Prior to these tools, Bacer (2009) reports that there was a lack of humanization in the online classroom. By adding visual (ex: Skype) and audio (ex: podcasts) tools, there is an added depth to the classroom that goes beyond the former type-only setting.

Prior to this class, I never knew that VoiceThreads existed. Now, though it takes a bit longer than reading a post, I can listen to my colleagues share their thoughts about what we are reading and learning. I appreciate being able to hear their voices, it makes these strangers, whom I have never met, more real. I can gain a sense of their personality, and I think people are apt to share more when they are talking than when they are typing their thoughts or responses. Though I am not sure that VoiceThreads will be the best tool to use when I become a secondary teacher (they seem best fit for online classes), gaining experience and familiarity with them are helping me to become more comfortable with newer technologies that I have not used before. While VoiceThreads may not be the ideal online tool for me to incorporate into my classroom, Bacer’s (2009) thoughts on using Skype and instant messaging really appeal to me and can be beneficial during after school hours to be able to assist students if they are struggling or have questions.

Bacer, Kathleen (2009, May). Utilizing auditory and visual tools to engage the 21st Century eLearner.

Comments (1)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.