Reaching and Engaging all Learners Through Technology Reflection

Over the past eight weeks I have learned the importance of getting to know my students variances, which include: readiness levels, interests, and learning profiles (Laureate Education, 2009). By understanding my students and their specific learning needs I will be more prepared to differentiate my instruction. I have learned that, “When combined with the practices and principles of Universal Design for Learning, differentiated instruction can provide teachers with both theory and practice to appropriately challenge the broad scope of students in classrooms today” (CAST, 2009). I now know how technology can help differentiate instruction and am able to access my group’s wiki (Differentiation Station social network created throughout this course) to find resources that will help me as I begin using what I have learned throughout this course in my own classroom.

Although I plan on changing my teaching to reflect what I have learned about UDL and DI, I will do as Dr. Carol Ann Tomlinson suggests and ‘start small’ (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 2). “Trying too many things before you have a chance to think them through leads to frustration and failure” (Tomlinson, 1999, p. 3). Therefore, one adjustment that I plan to take immediately this upcoming school year is to take the time and get to know my students. Not only will I do a better job at getting to know them, but I will also allow them time to understand the principles and procedures of the classroom so that when it comes time to participate in differentiated instructional activities, my students needs will be met and the group as a whole will be easier to manage.

I look forward to the upcoming school year and I feel more prepared to defend my teaching practices based on the information and resources I have learned throughout this course on “Reaching and Engaging all Learners Through Technology”. I believe that by changing my teaching methods and showing the success of students, I will be able to convince both the administration and my colleagues of differentiated instruction through the use of technology in the classroom.

References

Center for Applied Special Technology. (2009). UDL guidelines, version 1.0. Retrieved July 12,2010 from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore: Author.

Tomlinson, C. (1999). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

New and Emerging Technology Final Blog Post

Throughout the course New and Emerging Technology, I have learned a lot about what it means for a technology to be considered ‘emerging’ and the importance of keeping up to date with new tools being released. According to Serim & Schrock, “The most obvious challenge in keeping current with the new shape-shifting technologies coming into view is understanding how they can be used to improve learning” (2007, p.13). Throughout week’s six and seven I created an application entitled, “Changing the Game at Your School”. For this activity I was asked to create a learning activity that involved a new and emerging technology and then use the activity to influence the adoption of a new technological tool at my school. The final part of the application was to explain how I would write a grant for funding in order to purchase the new technology.

This assignment was extremely helpful in that it gave me the opportunity to apply my learning to a real-life, authentic situation. Knowing that “technology can make a significant positive impact on the quality of teaching and learning, the level of student motivation and engagement, and the intensity of career preparation” (Gillard & Bailey, 2007, p. 87), I was able to think of how I will adjust my own teaching to include technology. Now that school starts in a month, I have time to write a grant and apply for technology funding. This class has helped me to see the importance of incorporating new technology into my teaching so that students develop twenty-first century skills. I am excited to use my resources in finding new and exciting ways of motivating and engaging my students with technology in the upcoming school year.

References

Gillard, S., & Bailey, D. (2007). Technology in the classroom: Overcoming obstacles, reaping rewards. The International Journal of Learning, 14(1), 87-93.

Serim, F., & Shrock, K. (2007). Nailing digitial jelly to a virtual tree. Learning and Leading with Technology, 35(4), 12-16.

Online Learning in K-12 Schools

Final Blog Post

Throughout the past eight weeks I have learned how to integrate technology into meaningful classroom experiences in order to meet both Content and National Educational Technology Standards. In order to accomplish this daunting task I was taught the GAME plan steps. “The GAME plan requires you to think about and take steps to direct your learning process, specifically while learning about technology and how to integrate it into the curriculum” (Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer, 2009, p. 3). The plan consists of four steps; set goals, take action to meet those goals, monitor progress toward achieving goals, and evaluate whether the goals were achieved and extend your learning to new situations (Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer, 2009, p. 3).

My two GAME plan goals were to: create more meaningful learning experiences that involve the use of digital tools and promote creative thinking in the classroom. In order to try and accomplish these goals I brainstormed various actions that I would take and then monitored my progress as I took action. Although my actions of trying to locate grants that would fund new technologies did not turn out the way I wanted to, I did learn strategies and resources that would be beneficial for promoting more creative thinking in the classroom with the technology that I already have.

These strategies and resources came directly from the creation of the Content Area Unit Plan constructed throughout this course. This plan consisted of three different lessons: problem-based learning, online collaboration, and digital storytelling. Each week we were taught various resources for implementing this type of learning in the classroom. I learned multiple strategies that would engage students, create self-directed learning, and promote creative thinking. This new type of learning has changed the way that I plan to teach in the upcoming school year.

Next year I plan to adjust my instructional practice so that it not only includes more meaningful use of technology, but it also promotes more self-directed and creative learning. Students will be motivated and engaged to solve real-world problems while meeting both content and technology standards. The more open-ended I made the problems the more students will have to create and understand. I am excited about my new knowledge and cannot wait to try it out with my students next year.

References

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Using the GAME Plan Process with Students

Over the past few weeks I have gone through the entire GAME plan process by: creating two goals, planning and implementing specific actions, monitoring my progress, and evaluating my actions. Although this process was rather lengthy and I did not meet both of my goals, I still learned how to be self-directed when it came to my learning of the NETS-T. The NETS-T and NETS-S are nearly the same. The only difference between the two is that the teacher version is instructing students how to meet their standards (NETS-S). As the GAME plan process helped me as a teacher, it can also be helpful when teaching students to develop proficiency in the NETS-S as they learn to become more self-directed learners.

Cennemo, Ross, and Ertmer explain that, “While the ultimate goal is that students will, over time, assume full responsibility for their learning, teachers need to provide guidance and support while students are in the process of becoming self-directed” (2009, p. 30). Rather than having students create two goals, I would ask them to choose the one that they need the most practice with. The six different standards that the students could choose from are: creativity and innovation; communication and collaboration; research and information fluency; critical thinking, problem solving, and decision making; digital citizenship; and technology operations and concepts. After they have chosen a goal they will have to create a plan of action by incorporating the standard into the problem-based project which they are given. Throughout the project students will monitor their progress at specific check points and at the end of the activity students will evaluate themselves when it comes to meeting their overall goal.

Although the students will have the option to be creative in solving the overall problem, they will be required to work towards a NETS-S goal and learn the math content at the same time. Throughout this authentic type of active learning and GAME plan process, students will be completing a task that helps lead them towards becoming self-directed learners.

References

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Revising My GAME Plan: Week #6

Throughout the past few weeks I have learned that although teaching twenty-first century skills involves the use of technology, there is not enough funding to supply teachers with the necessary tools to teach these critical skills. I have searched high and low for grant opportunities and other resources that might help me reach my goals and have had no luck what-so-ever. It has been a disappointing search and I have come to the conclusion that without funding and support for necessary resources, I will not be able to teach the skills that I find important. The e-beam that I thought I could use in the classroom is not available and the other two student computers will be taken out of my room so that another computer lab can be created. Yes, I can still help students become more creative thinkers, but I cannot involve technology and collaboration outside of the classroom when I do not have parental approval and the resources I have are so ancient that they do not sell the parts anymore. Times have changed; however, change costs money, and our district along with many others do not have the capability to supply money for these resources.

Therefore, at this point I am not ready to set new goals. I would still like to figure out how I can ‘make do with what I have’ and find ways of integrating technology seamlessly into my math curriculum. Today’s leaner uses technology continuously throughout their lives and it is not something that should be taken away or limited in the classroom. It is important for my students to use these tools and as Vicki Davis suggests in the video, I am not only a teacher, but also a connector (Laureate Education, 2009). I should be connecting my students to as many resources as possible so that when they leave my classroom they have the tools they need to succeed in life. Throughout the summer I will continue to search for grants and other opportunities that help me to reach my goals; however, I will also try to create lessons that promote creativity and collaboration without the use of technology.

References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Integrating technology across the content areas. Baltimore: Author.

GAME Plan Progress: Week #5

After a week of trying to reach people who can help me with the grant writing process, I have decided that my action plan must change. Begin that it is so close to the end of the school year, many people are unavailable and do not have time to sit down and discuss grant opportunities. Even though I have not found a grant that matches the technology I would like in my classroom I have found an e-beam that I might be able to borrow. From what I understand an e-beam is very similar to a Smart Board; however, it is something that must be installed on a white board and is less portable. I feel that having this interactive white board will allow for more meaningful learning experiences that promote creative thinking.

Besides obtaining new technology, I have learned other ways of promoting creative thinking through more meaningful learning experiences. One way is through the creation and use of Problem-Based Learning. According to Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer, “Students need to have opportunities to experience well-structured, challenging, and worthwhile activities that address important mathematical topics” (2009, p. 247). I can create these types of experiences with the technology that I already have in the classroom. A Problem-Based Learning experience such as researching the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico involves creative thinking while students solve issues related to the current event. Not only are students motivated and engaged, but they are also meeting mathematical content standards established by Washington State.

It is my hope that through the creation of this week’s Problem-Based Learning Lesson I will be more knowledgeable when it comes to strategies in creating this type of learning experience for students. I think that the more practice I have with creating Problem-Based Learning experiences the easier creating them will become and the more knowledge my students will obtain. Using PBL in the classroom allows students the creativity and engagement that I am striving towards in my teaching and will meet my GAME plan goals.

Does anyone else have suggestions for PBL topics/questions that are appropriate for a seventh grade math class?

References

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Monitoring My GAME Plan Process

It is getting extremely close to the end of the school year. With only fifteen more days of school, I am finding it more and more difficult to focus on everything that needs to get done before June 18th. Because there is so much on my mind towards the end of the school year, I have found it challenging to take the necessary steps towards my two goals of: creating more meaningful learning experiences that involve the use of digital tools and promoting creative thinking in the classroom. Although I have talked with our district math coach and my administrator about professional development opportunities, the lack of funding for education has put a halt on my progress. Not only is there insufficient funds for training, but there are a limited amount of technology grants available as well. I have been trying to research grant opportunities that provide technology tools in the classroom and have so far been unsuccessful.

Throughout all of my research I have learned that grant writing is more difficult than I had originally thought (especially in more challenging economics times) and that I may need to take an actual class before attempting to apply. Most of the technology grants are very precise and require teachers to provide specific lesson plans; therefore, I first needed to decide what tool I wanted in the classroom and why I wanted it. I have decided that since I already have a student response system, I would really like an Interactive White Board. According to multiple sites, this tool would cost roughly $2,000. This is $2,000 that our district does not have and is something that I am not prepared to pay for; therefore, I will be looking more in depth for grants that provide this type of tool. As for writing the grant, I will need to find someone in our district that can help with this process. One person I have in mind is our physical education teacher who has already written and earned a grant of her own.

At this point I do not think that I need to modify my plan; however, I may need to stretch the deadline. Although I may not be successful with earning a grant this year, I have all summer to write and apply. I need to relax and take things one step at a time, otherwise I am afraid that I will get burnt out and will have less success with teaching my students the new skills that they desperately need for a better future.

Some questions that I still have are:
1. What other resources are available for funding technology in the classroom?
2. If technology is as important as educational leaders say that it is, why can’t we get more assistance in this area?
3. What are some effective strategies for writing grants?

Carring Out My Game Plan

The two goals that I have created for my action plan are to: create more meaningful learning experiences that involve the use of digital tools and promote creative thinking in the classroom. Now that I have created these two goals, I need to develop a plan of action that will help me to carry out the plan.

In order to create more meaningful learning experiences that involve the use of digital tools I need to use my self-directed learning skills and seek out professional development opportunities that involve the use of technology in teaching mathematics. One person that might be able to help me with this is our district math coach who not only helps develop trainings, but knows of other trainings offered throughout the state. Once I have experienced the trainings and understand what tools have been developed, I then need to look into Grant’s and other funding possibilities for purchasing new classroom technology that supports the math content. Connecting newly acquired technology to the seventh grade math curriculum will help me to develop the meaningful learning experiences that motivate students, while meeting the needs of diverse learners at the same time.

Once the learning experiences have been created it is important to then focus on my second goal of promoting creative thinking in the classroom. When it comes to classroom management techniques I think that the best advice comes from other teachers who have created effective learning environments; therefore, I will seek out those who may have recommendations on how to accomplish this goal. According to Cennamo, Ross and Ertmer, “Sharing what you have discovered with your colleagues is a critical step in improving your instructional effectiveness” (2009, p. 115). Although my colleagues may have great ideas, it will be important for me to seek additional information about my incoming students for next year. This way I will have a clear understanding of specific learning needs and can brainstorm ways of accommodating them before running into issues with the various learning experiences.

Although these goals may take time, I have already started to look forward to next year by focusing on creating learning experiences that involve creative mathematical thinking. This summer I will attend two or three different professional development opportunities directly related to my goals and have talked with other educators who have had success promoting creative thinking in the classroom. I plan to post these goals close to my desk so that I can stay focused on them throughout the school year.

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Using the GAME Plan to Accomplish NETS-T Goals

Today’s students have the world at their fingertips as the search the Internet, download music to their iPod, socialize on Facebook, and Skype with their friends. When student’s have a question, they can easily find out the answer. According to Mark Prensky, “Long before they ever get to school, kids have seen a tremendous amount of the world” (2008, p. 42). So in a world of immediate information, it is the educators job to “build on, and strengthen students’ reservoirs of knowledge” (Prensky, 2008, p. 42). In order to accomplish this task, the International Society for Technology in Education has created five different standards known as the NETS-T, which are the ‘National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers’. The five standards include: Facilitating and Inspiring Student Learning and Creativity; Design and Develop Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments; Model Digital-Age Work and Learning; Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility; and Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership (ISTE, 2008).

Out of all five standards, the one that I feel the most comfortable with is the fifth standard, which is to ‘Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership’ (ISTE, 2008). As a third year teacher I have been involved in: ongoing district professional development with technology, a Master’s program promoting the use of technology in the classroom, and a professional learning community that works towards “implementing new technology to improve student learning” (ISTE, 2008). I feel that as a teacher I “continuously improve my practice, model lifelong learning, and exhibit leadership in the school and professional community by promoting and demonstrating the effective use of digital tools and resources” (ISTE, 2008).

The two standards that I could improve on are: “Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity” and “Design and Develop Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments” (ISTE, 2008). More specifically, my goals are to create more meaningful learning experiences that involve the use of digital tools and to promote more creative thinking in the classroom. In order to meet my goals, I need to take action by reviewing the math content and state standards to find places where technology can easily be implemented. At this point in the GAME plan it is critical that I “make sure all activities clearly relate to specific learning outcomes and are not perceived as unnecessary ‘busy work’” (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009, p. 97). Throughout the process of delivering the specific digital activities I will be sure to monitor my progress and make changes where necessary while focusing on encouraging student creativity. Teaching the same class three times in a row allows me to ‘tweak’ the plan and measure student progress in order to compare different deliveries of the same lesson. At the end of the activities it will be very important to evaluate the effectiveness of each lesson and decide whether or not they would be worth doing again.

At the end of the GAME plan it is necessary for me to continue my development of the NETS-T by creating new goals that will challenge me further in my self-directed learning. Just as students have taught themselves to use technology at home, I too can take charge by learning new and creative ways to implement these five goals into my teaching of seventh grade mathematics.

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

ISTE. (2008). National education standards for teachers retrieved from http:www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008 on May 12, 2010.

Prensky, M. (2008, March). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40-45.

Supporting Information Literacy and Online Inquiry in the Classroom Reflection

This past week I had a student who intentionally plagiarized on her project by copying word for word from a specific source. When she was confronted about plagiarizing she asked if she could have a chance to redo the assignment. I allowed her to redo the project; however, I noticed that when she turned the assignment in for the second time she had once again plagiarized from the same source. The only difference the second time was that she had changed a word or two from each sentence, thus she felt she had ‘made it her own’. It was at this moment that I realized she did not understand what plagiarizing entailed and therefore had most likely never learned the ‘New Literacy Skills’ taught throughout the course I am finishing in my Master’s studies at Walden University.

The New Literacy skills taught throughout this course include: Questioning, Understanding Resources, Evaluating, Synthesizing, and Transforming (QUEST). In order to teach these skills, educators must embed them into the content for a more natural classroom experience. The most striking revelation that I have had throughout this course is, “that children learn best when they practice skills and strategies within the context of authentic learning activities rather than artificial ones” (Eagleton & Dobler, 2007, p. 51). Although I have heard this in the past, I never quite understood how to make it work within a middle school mathematics classroom.

This course on Inquiry-Based learning has taught me how to create authentic, more meaningful learning experiences for my students and has provided me with helpful resources that include ways to teach the New Literacy Skills. Rather than having students solve problems with pre-established mathematical algorithms, I will teach my students how to problem solve through questioning, evaluating, synthesizing, and transforming information. It is my goal as a teacher to provide students with real-life experiences and as Dr. Warlick said, “graduate less with a transcript and more with a resume” (Laureate Education, 2009).

In order to prepare myself for this type of teaching there are still some things to learn. One professional development goal I have for the summer is to attend a workshop or class on how to create effective rubrics that assess student knowledge when it comes to authentic Inquiry-Based projects. I will need to call our district office and get in touch with the professional development planner for our area to find out whether or not there are any classes like this offered throughout the summer. If there are not any classes offered within my district, I will need to look on the Washington State Educational Website (OSPI) for more information regarding professional development opportunities.

As I look towards the next school year, I plan to start early by assigning Inquiry-Based projects that teach the New Literacy Skills. It is my hope that by doing so, I will not have students unknowingly plagiarize on large projects towards the end of the school year and into the future.

References:

Eagleton, M.B., & Dobler, E. (2007). Reading the Web: Strategies for Internet inquiry. New York: The Guilford Press.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Supporting information literacy and online inquiry in the classroom. Baltimore: Author.

Think Out Loud Evaluation

The title of this post will link you to my screencast produced by Screentoaster.com. Throughout the screening you will watch and listen as I go through the process of validating a website.

Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology Reflection

Roughly seven weeks ago I wrote a paper reflecting on my very own personal learning theory. Since then, I have been studying how to ‘bridge learning theory, instruction, and technology’ through my studies at Walden University. Although I have learned many new strategies for classroom instruction, I still believe that, “We teach so that our students will learn the concepts or skills we have identified as critical” (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008, p. 10).” I believe that the research and studies presented to me throughout this course have helped deepen my understanding of the way in which students learn and how to apply it in my classroom.

After reflecting on all that we have studied, I immediately need to adopt at least one of the nine strategies explained throughout Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn and Malensoki’s book entitled, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. The strategy that I plan to concentrate on is ‘immediate feedback’. The reason why I have chosen to focus on this strategy is because students need to “know how well they are performing relative to a particular learning goal so that they can improve their practice” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski, 2007, p. 41).

The two technology tools that will help me implement immediate feedback are, VoiceThread and Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets. I will have the students use VoiceThread to post their work and explain their understanding. After all students have posted their initial work, other students will be required to respond by leaving comments and questions, which is a form of immediate feedback. If students are not creating their own project, they are usually doing mathematical calculations. Rather than having students waste time calculating data so that it can be graphed, I can create a template in Microsoft Excel that students will use to calculate their data for them so that more time can be spent on the creation of their graph.

Although I plan to immediately implement the use of these tools, I also have a long-term goal of using my website as a ‘hub’ for all the technology used in the classroom. My plan is to slowly introduce new technology to students, have them practice in class, and then assign them activities that can be completed both in and out of the classroom. As the students have more experience using the technology they will have more meaningful learning experiences that teach them the critical information required for today’s world.

References

Lever-Duffy, J. and McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations. In Teaching and Learning with Technology (3rd ed. pp. 2-35). Boston: Pearson.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Integer Experts

Social Learning Theories

Throughout my studies at Walden University we have discussed behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism. This week we have been reading and discussing social learning theories, which seems to encompass all of the other three learning theories. Social learning theories focus on “interactions as students engage in constructing artifacts and conversing with others” (Laureate Education, 2009). This focus relates to constructivist theories in that students are creating and building. It also ties in the idea that “learning is the act of forming networks” (Laureate Education, 2009), which comes from the cognitive view of learning. In order for students to build networks, they need structured activities that will help guide them down the path of understanding. “Instructional models based on the social constructivist perspective stress the need for collaboration among learners and with practitioners in the society” (Orey, 2001).

“The instructional strategy of cooperative learning focuses on having students interact with each other in groups in ways that enhance their learning” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski, 2007, p. 139). “The main purpose of cooperative learning is to actively involve students in the learning process; a level of student empowerment which is not possible in a lecture format” (Orey, 2001). In order to effectively implement cooperative learning, educators must first: “specify objectives; determine group size; assign students to groups; arrange the classroom; plan for instructional materials; assign group roles and task; explain criteria for success; specify appropriate behaviors; monitor behavior; intervene when necessary; assist; and offer praise” (Orey, 2001). After cooperative learning has taken place, it is critical that educators summarize and allow time for reflection so that networks can connect.

Although there are many forms of cooperative learning, all can be used more effectively through the use of technological tools such as; Google Docs, Blogs, and Wikis. For example, in a structured problem solving situation, students could be assigned a smaller task that must be combined with others to create a larger ‘whole’. As group members work to research smaller tasks, they could use Google Docs or a shared Wiki to post important information that will help the larger ‘whole’. While using a shared document for resources, students in the group could also collaborate in an online setting from home using a blog. As the group cooperates to complete the problem or artifact, they engage with one other. This type of interaction is the foundation of social learning theory and should be used in educational settings when appropriate.

References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from htt://projects.coe.uga.edu/epitt/index.php?title=Main_Page on Dec.1, 2009.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Constructivism and Constructionism

During my studies through Walden University this week we have been reading and discussing both constructivism and constructionism. As Dr. Michael Orey explains, “constructivism is a learning theory of knowledge stating that each individual actively constructs his/her own meaning”; whereas “constructionism is a theory of learning that states people learn best when they build an external artifact or something they can share with others” (Laureate Education, 2009). Both learning theories focus on the student and allowing opportunities to share knowledge through the construction of knowledge.

According to Dr. Orey, constructionism has four main building blocks or ‘mechanisms for learning’; assimilation, accommodation, equilibration, and schema. Every human being is constantly striving towards equilibrium, which is the “process of achieving a balance between differences in external reality and one’s current beliefs and understandings (schemas)” (Laureate Education, 2009). As people learn new information and try to reach equilibrium, they either use assimilation or accommodation. “Assimilation occurs when external reality is made to fit within one’s current beliefs and understandings (schema)” (Laureate Education, 2009). When one can not fit new information into a pre-established schema, they then use accommodation, which “occurs when one’s current beliefs and understanding (schema) are altered to fit the external reality” (Laureate Education, 2009).

Although there are many examples of how to create constructionist learning activities, the one instructional strategy that I plan to use in my classroom immediately is “Generating and Testing Hypotheses” explained in, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. According to the authors, “When students generate and test hypothesis, they are engaging in complex mental processes, applying content knowledge like facts and vocabulary, and enhancing their overall understanding of the content” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p. 202). Students should be using technology as they generate and test hypotheses in order to “maximize instructional time and meet learning objectives” (Pitler, et. al., 2007, p. 207). Technology makes it easier for students to focus on the solving the problem rather than setting it up.

Rather than giving students the question to answer, students generate questions based on content knowledge and use their skills to research and analyze information that will help them. All of these activities require the teacher to become the facilitator as the students work through the problem solving process, which is a part of the constructionist theory of learning.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Orey, M.(Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Cognitive Learning Theory

The focus of my studies this week was congitivism and the ways in which it can be implemented in classroom instruction. Dr. Orey explains that cognitivism is a learning theory that is also known as the information processing model (Laureate Education, 2009). The cognitivism theory focuses on three stages; sensory input of the information, short-term memory, and rehearsal (long-term memory). Through the use of cognitive tools and consistent elaboration, students store the information in their long-term memory for later recall.

Because students need constant practice and numerous experiences with new information it is critical that educators use instructional strategies that involve cognitive learning. Some examples of cognitive instructional tools introduced in Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works are: Cues, Questions and Advanced Organizers and Summarizing and Note Taking.

Cues, Questions, and Advanced Organizers “focus on enhancing students’ ability to retrieve, use and organize information about a topic” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p. 73). One way to help students develop experiences that create cues, is to use the cognitive tool, Virtual Field Trips. A Virtual Field Trip allows students to visit someplace they might not otherwise be able to and creates an experience for students tie later information to (Laureate Education, 2009). Once students have an episode to tie new knowledge to, brainstorming and organizing software such as Kidspriration act as cognitive tools to help students develop new information.

After students have a basic understanding of what they are going to learn and have created a concrete network, the next step is to begin introducing new information.
Summarizing and Note Taking “focus on enhancing students’ ability to synthesize information and distill it into a concise new form” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007, p. 119). A technological cognitive tool that helps students to summarize information is Concept Maps. A concept map relates to Paivio’s dual-coding hypothesis, which explains that knowledge is best remembered and recalled as images (Laureate Education, 2009). Concept maps allow students to visually graph their knowledge into a framework of understanding.

Both Cues, Questions, and Advanced Organizers and Summarizing and Note Taking give students the opportunity to rehearse knowledge and transfer knowledge to their long-term memory, which is the third state of information processing or the cognitive learning theory.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Behaviorism

According to Standridge, “Behaviorism is primarily concerned with observable and measureable aspects of human behavior” (Orey, 2001). Behaviorists such as Watson and Skinner believed that “human behavior resulted from specific stimuli that elicited certain responses” (Orey, 2001). This theory shows up in classrooms consistently, especially when it comes to classroom management. When educators see a positive behavior from a student, the behavior is rewarded; whereas when a student shows negative behaviors, they are punished with a consequence. Just as behaviorism shows up in management strategies, it can also show in classroom instructional strategies as well.

One example of an instructional strategy that rewards positive behavior is, reinforcing effort. Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski explain, “The instructional strategy of reinforcing effort enhances students’ understanding of the relationship between effort and achievement by addressing their attitudes and beliefs about learning” (2008, p. 154). By having students track their own successes, students learn how effort is rewarded with better scores and grades. As an educator I feel that it is incredibly important for students to not only understand effort, but to also track their own progress and self-monitor their participation in homework and practice.

It is important to have students track their effort in homework and practice because, it “give[s] students a chance to review and apply what they have learned” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhm, & Malenoski, 2008, p. 187). Giving students practice to help deepen their understanding, is equally as important as providing immediate and helpful feedback. Students need to understand right from wrong so that they can learn the specific behavior and skills required to succeed. If students do not receive feedback, they will never know whether or not they are doing things correctly.

Both of these instructional strategies can be improved with the help of technology. In order to track student effort, educators can use rubrics, Microsoft Excel spreadsheets or Survey Monkey. The effort can be tracked based on the student’s homework and practice. In order for feedback to be immediate, teachers can use online educational games and other websites as homework and practice. Students can learn what they are doing right and wrong immediately so that they do not go through the entire practice learning something wrong. The student's behavior can be observable and measureable, just as the behaviorist model suggests.

References

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from htt://projects.coe.uga.edu/epitt/index.php?title=Main_Page on Nov. 11, 2009.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Reflecting on the Use of Technology

Although one may have used technology throughout their entire life, implementing its use in the classroom may be a challenge. The technological tools for classrooms have been available for the past few years; however, ways in which to use them in the educational system has only just been made clear throughout the past two months as I have participated in the “Understanding the Impact of Technology on Education, Work, and Society”. Rather than using technology as a way to “do things differently” (Laureate, 2007) in the classroom, I plan to start using it to “do different things” (Laureate, 2007) and help students develop the twenty-first century skills they need as digital natives.

In order to teach the necessary skills to students, the “teachers need to think of themselves more as coaches who model the skills that the students need to be successful and motivate them to strive for excellence” (Richardson, 2009, p. 137). The learners can find information in seconds with the use of the Internet search engines; therefore, teachers need to allow students to discover the answers through inquiry based projects and activities. Rather than being teacher directed, classrooms must become more student-centered with a focus on collaboration not just inside, but also outside the classroom walls as well.

In order to create this type of classroom I have come up with two specific goals in order to center my focus over the next two years. My first goal is to continue expanding my knowledge of technology by participating in my third year of a technology grant within my school district and taking more courses to complete my masters in “Implementing Technology into the Classroom”. By participating in both of these opportunities, I will be more equipped when it comes to my second goal which is to expand my classroom outside of the four walls I have been given. Dr. Chris Dede said that “the real power of technology is outside of the classroom” (Laureate, 2007) and my students will learn to reach out so that their learning has more meaning.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2008).Understanding the impact of technology on education, work, and society. Baltimore: Author.

Richardson, W. (2009). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Today's Student

Throughout this weeks studies at Walden University we have been discussing the "Digital Native" (Prensky, M., 2001). A "Digital Native" is a person who grew up surrounded by technology and continues to use various technological devices. Many of the students that we teach in schools today are considered "Digital Natives". It is important that as educators we seek to understand "Digital Natives" because according to Marc Prensky, "Today's students think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors" (Prensky, M., 2001). As teachers we can no longer teach the way that we were taught in the past.

In my podcast entitled, "Today's Student" you will hear me analyze the three interviews I conducted on 16-17 year old students from Puyallup, Washington. Each student was asked questions about their use of technology both in and out of school. At the end of my analysis you will hear me explain what sort of implications this will have on my teaching when the school year begins in September. Hearing today's students describe the lack of technology in their classroom experiences makes me realize the importance of understanding and meeting the learning needs of my diverse students.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).