Thursday, 21 April 2011

Week 1 and it’s a smorgasbord out there!

Levi's teacher 2010
Stuart MacKenzie

Today was incredible. Talk about a plethora of information. So much that needs to be understood and that which isn't understood needs to be researched. Could be overwhelming but Uni has taught me that I can learn anything, do anything & teach anything that I need to, as I am a lifelong learner. Today I even managed to keep up & to set everything up.

I've learnt about terms like Cloud Computing. It makes perfect sense to keep everything remotely in the "cloud" so to speak. I am excited to be learning about all the new technologies we discussed and using these technologies to aid classroom learning is exciting. My sons’ teacher is really technologically savvy and this is partly why his students are so engaged in learning. I see ICT's as being a vehicle to enhance learning and I am eager to learn about some more of the tools that can be used to engage my students and augment their learning in ways that they can relate to as the Digital Natives that they are (Prensky, 2001).

Reading Reflections

Readings this week provided numerous examples over the P-9 range of practical ideas for using ICT’s in the classroom (The State of Queensland, 2003). I also read the Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework (2011). This framework shows teachers what they need to do in order to gain a Certificate, Licence or Licenced Advanced in the field of digital pedagogies.

PS From Week 6: What is the driving question for my blog? Maybe it’s: Where does technology fit into learning in the classroom and how did I come to this understanding?

References:

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20- %20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part1.pdf

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/

The State of Queensland. (2003). ICT’s for Learning years 4-9 practical ideas for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/2/28_Week_1.html

The State of Queensland. (2003). ICT’s for Learning years P-3 practical ideas for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/2/28_Week_1.html

Week 2 Do Smart Classrooms Equal Smart Teachers and Smart Students?

Lecture and Tutorial Reflection

Today we looked in some detail at the Smart Classrooms ICT Certificate. Completing this certificate will show that we have “demonstrated foundation level capabilities with ICT in a learning context” (The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training, 2011).

Meeting these requirements is intended to help us be better teachers not just to add the “Oo” factor to lessons. We should always consider how the ICT we have chosen will aid learning not just how it will engage the students.

Reading Reflections

So exactly “what is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge?” TPACK (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) is a concept that challenged me and left me confused. Making sense of what was written didn’t come together in my head. I will need to consider this article later. Maybe I should skim it instead of trying to draw meaning from every word I read.

I like Prensky’s (2001) Technology analogy of foreign speaking and native speaking peoples. As my “accent” (Prensky, 2001. P.2) gets a little less noticeable I become more aware of how difficult it is for students to relate and learn because of the heavy accents of their teachers who may resist adapting to use technologies. These teachers hold to old fashioned “legacy” content (Prensky, 2001. P.4) when they need to embrace “Future” technological content in order to more effectively teach “legacy” content and even to transform learning entirely (Prensky, 2001. P.4). Prensky’s favourite way to teach “legacy” content involves educational computer games.
Beverley Head (2008) reminds me that using ICT’s doesn’t necessarily mean students are learning. Students need to be using ICT to create, analyse and transform information. Wise teachers will use these fun technologies and teach students explicitly how to transform content and not just cut and paste it. After all, ICT needs to be used to “benefit…learning and not just as an end itself” (The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training, 2011).

References:

Head, B. (2008). Generation cut and paste. Retrieved from,             http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/3/7_Week_2.html

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contempary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70. Retrieved from http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/3/7_Week_2.html

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Retrieved from             http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20- %20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part1.pdf

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from     http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/

Week 3 I’m amazed and confused/ less confused?

Formal Learning Reflections

This week we met and spoke with the 2M Gems. Mrs M is obviously a digital immigrant (Prensky, 2001) although her accent is minimal. Mrs M uses the forum of blogging to create an authentic reason for students to write and read to “benefit learning” (The State of Queensland, 2011). Students who are recalcitrant to put pen to paper will often engage with blogging.

Today Jason further expounded sections of the ICT Certificate. I love this statement: “I understand that ICT can be used to benefit teaching and learning and is most effective when used in the context of learning and not as an end itself” (The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training, 2011). For example, I use Spelling City with my sons to support their weekly spelling list (Vocabulary and SpellingCity.com, 2011). This ICT is beneficial to learning, because their spelling results are substantially higher when using Spelling City. The games are an enjoyable element of Spelling City and educational games are good learning resources (Prensky, 2001).

Reading Reflections

What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge?

Ok, so second read around and a bit of www. searching (Koehler & Mishra, 2010) and I finally get it: TPACK is a concept that challenges educators to consider three vital components currently considered to be best practice for effective learning to occur. When our content knowledge, teaching pedagogy and the technologies that we use converge to create effective learning; we have found that “sweet spot” (J. Zagami, personal communication, April 2011) where it all comes together. Now our LA1 is starting to make more sense. This seems to be the framework to hang this assessment on and vital that I understand this concept.

This You Tube gave me a framework to hang my developing understandings on:

Myths and Realities About Technology in K-12 Schools.

Now here’s an interesting question: Will we receive adequate “return on investment” for monies spent on Technology? Will education be better? Will students be better prepared for life? This investment will fail to improved education unless teachers are trained, software and technical support is available and technology is fully integrated into the education system, not just an add-on (Kleiman, 2000). Five years later Kleiman (2004) revisits his original question. He notes that some exciting innovations have taken place. However, there are still schools where technology is rarely used because standardized testing retards implementation of technologies as teachers face in a backwards direction towards more traditional education. How do I not allow myself to be drawn along with this trend?

Speaking of direction: What direction for LA 1?

Discussions & investigations continue. Do we go with an established educational technology such as Google Earth, or do we learn something totally new to all three of us? I vote for learning something new! Ideas are evolving as to what pedagogy and what content would suit the technology we are thinking about addressing. So much to learn and engage with!

References:

Kleiman, G.M. (2000). Myths and realities about technology in K-12 schools. The online journal of the leadership and new technologies community, 14(2), 1-8. Retrieved from http://www.edtechleaders.org/documents/myths.pdf

Kleiman, G.M. (2004). Myths and realities about technology in k-12 schools: Five years later. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(2), 248-253. Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/articles/v4i2seminal2.pdf

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2010). TPCK - Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.tpck.org/tpck/index.php?title=Main_Page

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contempary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70. Retrieved from http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/3/7_Week_2.html

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/prensky%20- %20digital%20natives,%20digital%20immigrants%20-%20part1.pdf

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/

Vocabulary and SpellingCity.com (2011). Retrieved from http://www.spellingcity.com/

Week 4 TPACK in Practice…

Our ongoing learning experience began with defining “Digital Literacy.” This term encompasses more than it excludes unlike traditional literacy’s. Digital pedagogy was also discussed as being synergistic in nature as it is more than digital, more than pedagogy and more than knowledge. This understanding is clearly represented in the TPACK model (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). We were challenged to use ICT as a part of student learning and not just at the lowest level of engaging students but to actually transform learning using ICT’s.

Reading Reflections

These readings helped me to understand the style of teaching I most naturally embrace, gives me alternatives and pinpoints the pedagogy we will be using for our PD (Instructional Design Knowledge Base, 2002-2006). The Horizon report was quite inspiring in its description of future technologies! (Johnson, Smith, Levine, and Haywood, 2010).

Professional Development

Jake & I attended an interesting PD this week. The keynote speaker was Glenn Finger. From a really weak start I find that I am now enjoying the TPACK model. I was even able to answer a question about it. OK, so I waited until no teacher was going to answer and then I got brave, put up my hand and even got the answer right. The workshops made me aware of just how much can be done with technology and how important it is to become a community of learners and to share with each other our technological “discoveries” on personal learning network forums as there is no way that we can do this effectively as a stand-alone individual.

LA 1

We are almost on th content for our PD. Our educational technology is Sketch Up. The Content Knowledge area is Math with 3D objects from Year 3 and 5 Essential Learnings (Queensland Studies Authority, 2007) being our focus. I personally see vigorous applications available using Sketch up in the Technology as a human endeavour strand as students design products to meet perceived needs (Queensland Studies Authority, 2007). This could involve the designing of 3D packaging for a food product including advertising. Students can also meet aspects of the Creating with ICT’s and Operating ICT’s strand (QSA, 2007). But for this PD we will simply stick to Math KLA. We were all interested in Constructivism (Instructional Design Knowledge Base, 2002-2006) as a way to teach and to learn, and as our chosen educational technology is Sketch Up we believe that Discovery Learning (Instructional Design Knowledge Base, 2002-2006), which comes under the Constructivism umbrella, is the appropriate choice for our pedagogy. In its simplest form Discovery Learning is when the teacher provides the tools and the information to solve a specific problem or to learn a concept and the learner then "makes sense" of them (Instructional Design Knowledge Base, 2002-2006). This idea of leading students towards being self-directed learners is not new (Grow, 1991) and Discovery Learning supports this idea. We would provide students with a specific problem to solve and introduce them to Sketch Up as being a way to solve that problem. Technology students could even model the school on Sketch Up. Then they could geo-locate their models onto Google Earth. When studying SOSE students’ could recreate the pyramids or other historical sites. So many transformational educational applications and so little time. Follow this link for further ideas:

Educational applications

References:

Grow, G.G. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3). Retrieved from http://alec2.tamu.edu/grad_courses/611/Modules/ Module2/Lesson2/Grow01.PDF

Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2010). 2010 Horizon Report: K-12 Edition. Austin Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contempary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70. Retrieved from http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/3/7_Week_2.html

Instructional Design Knowledge Base. (2002-2006). Retrieved from http://classweb.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/Resources/IDKB/models_theories.htm #discovery learning

The State of Queensland - Queensland Studies Authority. (2007). ICTs Cross– curriculum priority By the end of Year 7.

The State of Queensland - Queensland Studies Authority. (2007). Mathematics Essential Learnings by the end of Year 3.

The State of Queensland - Queensland Studies Authority. (2007). Mathematics Essential Learnings by the end of Year 5.

The State of Queensland - Queensland Studies Authority. (2007). Technology Essential Learnings by the end of Year 5.

Week 5 and our Professional Development heats up!

Lecture and Tutorial Reflection

This lecture showcased a concept called rich tasks that I can use as an effective teaching and learning framework to encourage higher order thinking, deep knowledge and understanding. These rich tasks are cross-curricular in nature and recognise that effective brain function occurs when we make connections between learning. As we consider the TPACK model (Koehler, & Mishra, 2009) we understand that rich tasks can be further enhanced when integrating ICT’s. Technology is powerful and can result in autonomous and independent learners because they have unprecedented access to knowledge and to the resources to create their own understandings and then to transform that acquired knowledge (Head, 2008). The You tube clip on Digital Story Telling viewed today has helped to guide my initial ideas for a script for our PD video.

Today we were also introduced to a number of different programs. I went home and put together a cartoon in Extranormal that could be used in our PD Video. It is pretty neat what I managed to do with my own discovery learning adventure.

GoAnimate.com: TPACK by jolene.battye

Like it? Create your own at GoAnimate.com. It's free and fun!

Jake, Nicole and myself have spent the 2 hours after tutorial for the past few weeks discussing how we want to approach this PD. We are now finally in total consensus on what we want to focus on and my initial planning following the digital story telling video seems to be providing a focus. We each have an area to work on so next we will come together with our completed assignments so far…

…Obviously we cannot just pick a technology and decide what KLA & pedagogy fits. We have to actually create an idea that shows how these three aspects of the TPACK model come together in such a way that they enhance and transform the learning experience. We felt that Sketch Up would benefit learning but we wanted to find evidence of our claims that we make to support our ideas as being effective for learning (Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework, 2011). For example: We claim that 1.Students may disengage from math and that technology is one way to stop or reverse this process and 2. That children can benefit from being taught to be spatially aware and that 3D computer aided drafting programs (Sketch Up) will aid in this process. These two claims were made based on prior experience and instinct, but in order to validate these claims we needed to find evidence based practices that supported our reasoning’s otherwise this PD plan would be in need of serious overhauling and our reflection of the TPACK model would become quite shallow.

Engaging with Harris & Hofer (2009) has made me aware that our process of creating our PD has been an educationally unsound development. If we were not creating a PD for teachers and were planning to educate students then we would follow this progression:

“Our work suggests that planning a particular learning event can be described as the end result of five basic instructional decisions:

• Choosing learning goals

• Making practical pedagogical decisions about the nature of the learning experience

• Selecting and sequencing appropriate activity types to combine to form the learning experience

• Selecting formative and summative assessment strategies that will reveal what and how well students are learning

• Selecting tools and resources that will best help students to benefit from the learning experience being planned (Harris & Hofer, 2009).”

I have come to understand that:

“By selecting the technologies that best serve the learning goals and activities last, both students’ learning and maximally appropriate educational technology uses are assured…By focussing first and primarily upon the content and nature students’ curriculum-based learning activities, teachers’ TPACK is developed authentically, rather than technocentrically (as cited in Harris, & Hofer, 2009).”

Papert (as cited in Harris, & Hofer, 2009) tells us that being technocentric is when one is “focussed upon the technologies being used, more than the students who are trying to use them to learn.” How helpful is it to have a sequence laid out in chronological order for me to follow as I prepare to teach? This sequence helps me to avoid becoming technocentric.

This is Jake, Nicole and my googledoc that we worked on for the narration of our PD Video.

References:

Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. Retrieved from, http://activitytypes.wmwikis.net/file/view/HarrisHofer- TPACKActivityTypes.pdf

Head, B. (2008). Generation cut and paste. Retrieved from,             http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/3/7_Week_2.html

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contempary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70. Retrieved    from http://www.zagami.info/4001EPS/Readings/Entries/2011/3/7_Week_2.html

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from     http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/

Week 6 and what is my driving question?

Much was said today about finding a driving question so that we can give students a reason to desire to learn about what we need to teach them. We take our driving question which is KLA and pedagogy based, decide on the activity types that we will use and then add ICT connectivity to hook and inspire our digital learners. Our PD driving question challenges teachers to consider their own understandings of the TPACK model by asking: “Are you struggling to effectively implement TPACK into your classroom teaching? Have you even heard of the TPACK model?” The presentation then continues to show one simple way to use the TPACK model to enhance and transform student learning. ICT’s used to answer our driving question include: Microsoft word, Microsoft Power Point, Windows Movie Maker, Google Docs, Email, Instant messaging, texting, Digital camera & video, the internet, Screen-cast-o-matic and then Camtasia, Voki and Extranormal as well as Goanimate.

…After viewing each other’s PD contributions it is time for improvements. We have each used almost 4 minutes each and this does not include adding transitions’ to WMM or the animations that Jake and I have created in 3 different programs. The animation voices are so far from engaging that deadly boring would be a better description & we can ill afford the length of time they take to speak as we can do it quicker and more enthusiastically. After all the rubric does say to be engaging! Hence we decided to include our animations in our blogs instead.

In answer to my other questions from last week I have discovered that: 1. While “students may disengage from math because of the difficulty with the subject…or simply from boredom.” (Stone, Alfeld & Pearson, 2008, p.769) that using a games based approach such as advocated by Prensky (2001) can reinvent math and make it engaging as evidenced by the vast array of PC and online math skills based games. Just look at Mathletics – an online and evidenced based effective game that develops math skills (Doig, 2008). From Nickson (2000) we learn that,

“Children’s earliest mathematical experience is spatial in nature as they learn to understand size and to recognise 2D and 3D objects. Spatial ability is a major factor in children’s learning of geometric skills and concepts and can be nurtured though appropriate classroom activities (Nickson, 2000).”

Obviously spatial ability is important but can Technology enhance spatial awareness development? Well apparently “there are real educational advantages to playing games like Theme Park, Sim City… or Tetris- type games that encourages the development of spatial awareness” (Sanger, Wilson, Davies & Whital, 1997). If Sim City & Tetris can do all this than why not a program like Sketch Up that can also be used to meet many aspects of the Essential Learnings (QSA, 2007).

For example, when Technology requires students “to generate design ideas that match requirements and communicate the details of their designs using 2D or 3D visual representations?” (QSA, 2007). Our instincts about these claims are indeed validated and evidence based. This means that we have the best chance of getting that “sweet spot” in the TPACK model that indicates synergistic learning can occur. So it’s full steam ahead with our PD!

References:

Doig, B. (2008) Mathletics: Does it enhance achievement in mathematics? Retrieved from http://www.independentschools.vic.edu.au/schools/research/mathletics _report_2008.pdf

Nickson, M. (2000). Teaching and learning mathematics 2^nd edition: A guide to recent research and its applications. London: Continuum Books. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.au/books?id=sEFxmS3pifMC&pg=PA48&dq=teaching+children+spatial+awareness&hl=en&ei=mUulTYfoIo7evQPY0pj9CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=teaching%20children%20spatial%20awareness&f=false

Sanger, J., Wilson, J., Davies, B., & Whital, R. (1997). Young children, videos and computer games: Issues for teachers and parents. London: The Falmer Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Fa49AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA171&dq=teaching +children+spatial+awareness+using+computers&hl=en&ei=cVKlTf- rC4qivQOh3vT_ CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CGgQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

The State of Queensland - Queensland Studies Authority. (2007). Technology Essential Learnings by the end of Year 5.

Stone, J.R., Alfeld, C., & Pearson, D. (2008). Rigor and relevance: Enhancing high school students’ math skills. American Educational Research Journal, 45(3), 767-795.

Week 7 Professional Development and personal learning networks

So close to a completed PD now. Recording Nicoles powerpoint with Camtasia proved interesting. Nicole’s netbook did not cope. Mine didn’t pick up the audio and then we tried to match my visual with an audio done on Jakes laptop and found out later that editing this wouldn’t work. Lesson learnt: We need to be able to complete whatever project we assign our class so that we know it can be done with the tools that students have. Also, when teaching, we need to always have a backup plan and we need to be more than just teachers using technology we need to use it to its best effect to enhance student learning (SCPDF, 2011).

This week I joined a group called ProTeacher Community (1998-2010). I now have access to a range of tried and tested teacher ideas. I am now “part of the Pro Teacher community.” This is just one example of personal learning networks that help us achieve much more than we could on our own. When will I know if my teaching ideas are worth sharing? Well one idea I did not think to share was Spelling City. Luckily Jasmine did and so I made a suggestion to set it up for our classes on PX3 and not just for home use!

One of the major developers in my understanding of applying the TPACK model and the Professional Knowledge statement has come as I have researched while developing ideas for a unit of work on Mini Beasts for my PX3 when I came across a site which shows how I could implement ICT’s for this Mini Beasts unit of work:

http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdf/student-expectations-p-3.pdf

First, I now know what I want the class to learn. Next I will design activities for learning and then I find ICT’s to support this experience that will also aid in meeting formative and summative assessment requirements (Harris, & Hofer, 2009).

References:

ProTeacher Community (1998-2010) retrieved from http://www.proteacher.net/

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/

Week 8 and so where to from here?

Helping Jason get onto Prezi for one of the presentations made me aware that just because I can’t get technology to work doesn’t make me a technological retard because anyone can have difficulties with it. A lot of the focus for this week’s lecture was about how education will change and how we currently see those changes as relating to connectivity. Connectivity is provided through the internet and this will change the face of education as the traditional classroom is institutionalised but the classroom of the future will have no walls. Speaking of connectivity, this is the 3rd week that we have had no internet at home. I would never have believed that this would be such a disabling experience.! I feel cut off from the world and will go to great lengths to get Wi Fi access. It is an actual temporary disability. I imagine that this is how this digital generation feel going to school every day in a traditional learning environment. Well not in my classroom!

This learning adventure has been like putting together the pieces of a puzzle. Everything that I have included in this blog has acted like a piece in the puzzle that is the answer to my personal driving question. Every reading, lecture, personal and formal professional development I’ve attended, every personal learning network I’ve engaged with, our group work as we put together our PD video as well as the initial planning for teaching on Prac has all added together like pieces in a puzzle to contribute to my understanding of the Professional Knowledge statement, “I understand that ICT can be used to benefit teaching and learning and is most effective when used in the context of learning and not as an end itself” (The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training, 2011) and helped clarify my comprehension of the TPACK model (Harris, & Hofer, 2009).

So, where to from here you may ask? Well the next step lies in how I will implement the use of technology in my classroom on Prac. My planning to integrate ICT’s in my classroom has radically changed from the ideas that I initially held at the beginning of this course and although I thought that I understood the concept behind the Professional Knowledge statement I must admit to having being a little technocentric (Papert, as cited in Harris, & Hofer, 2009) in my enthusiasm to use technology in the classroom. Thank you Koehler & Mishra (2009) for explaining TPACK to me even though I was a slow learner and thank you to Harris & Hofer (2009) for showing me how to implement TPACK and answered my personal driving question from Week 1: Where does technology fit into learning in the classroom? Thank you Jason for making me work for the answer instead of just handing it to me. I believe that the outcomes of my personal growth will be reflected in my planning for teaching and learning during PX3 and will be evidenced in the webpage that I put together in order to meet the ICT Certificate requirements.

Check out our Professional Development Video. Completing this learning assessment helped my understanding of the TPACK Model.

References:

The State of Queensland - Department of Education and Training. (2011). Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdframework/