Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Module 6 - Learning in a Digital World
Technology has a huge impact on the way that I learn. I can listen to a lecture or watch someone review a power point presentation and walk away with not bit of new knowledge. On the other hand, I can view a podcast at my leisure, rewinding and replaying key parts, or participate in an interactive learning activity, and immediately become engaged in the learning process. This is when I gain new knowledge and skills. I am the type of person who needs reflection time and likes independent learning, so face to face appears to be so much more structured and rigid, while the online environment allows me to personalize my own learning.
I believe that knowing the standards that I am teaching is the most critical and non-negotiable element in teaching and learning. Next, communication with administrators, colleagues, and most importantly, the students is key to successful teaching and learning. I have learned much about the different learning theories and feel that a blend of all of these theories at the appropriate time and in the right way is the best way to prepare learners for a future in such a constantly changing environment. My preferred theory is connectivism, however in my profession as a middle grades teacher, the maturity of those students and the lack of experience with theory on my part requires for sure that I incorporate behaviorism and constructivism into their education. There are many elements involved in online and face to face education that are important factors and another important feature is flexibility. The world is changing, technology is changing, and I must change and allow my students to transform with the rest of the world.
I commented on the following blogs:
Sunday, August 4, 2013
Module 5 - New Technologies
New
technologies are arriving with amazing speed at our instructional doorstep and
the enthusiasm with which they are met varies among educators. Some are used, some are passed over, and some
do not get a glance, however the method by which these technologies are
introduced might make a huge impact on their adoption. I am sure that I may have seen different outcomes
during one such introduction of my own had I employed Keller’s ARCS model.
Several
months ago, I was introduced at the district level, to some new technological
advances and capacities for an existing assessment software program currently
used by our schools. The majority of our
teachers used the program to create score-able answer sheets for multiple choice
and short answer assessments. New
additions to the program capabilities included test banks for nearly all
subjects with various DOK levels and types of questions, online testing and
scoring with immediate feedback potential, question validity and standard
analysis, test comparisons among individual students, classes, or whole grade
levels and a few other tricks to improve the process of formative and summative
assessments. I was completely on board
with these new processes and was anxious to share with my colleagues.
What
did I do? I got myself put on the
professional learning calendar and redelivered the information to teachers who
were required to attend my session during their planning. I assumed that all of the hours spent placing
screen shots on the step-by-step handouts might make me change agent of the
year and expected everyone to return to their rooms and immediately begin sessions
with the new assessment resources, creating tests, analyzing data, setting up
student groups by standard, and initiating a new plan of instruction based on
all of this new data from the technology.
Nothing happened. Nothing
changed. There were a few teachers who
used the new test bank to create assessments, and others who looked at the test
analysis. However, no one was motivated
to take the time to learn how to use and implement the new additions to the
program so many of the new software additions went unused. The teachers were
busy, did not appreciate having to give up their planning time to attend a training
that they felt might not apply to them, and some just did not feel comfortable
using the computer program and felt lost the entire time. Using Keller’s ARCS model might have given me
the opportunity to motivate and encourage my colleagues to successful use of
the program throughout the school.
First,
I never tried to gain their attention to the program other than by sending an
announcement that professional learning would be about “blah blah blah” and
attaching a schedule for training. I may
have changed the direction of their mindset simply by sending out a flyer, a quick
video clip, podcast, or animated Voki, highlighting the new attributes of the
existing program and how much time could be saved by using these additions in
the classroom, thereby making it relevant to each of them. By including a quick “cheat sheet” of basic
directions for use of the new functions, teachers would have been able to peek
at the program or practice in private, giving those who needed it some amount
of confidence. Instead of just training,
I should have had a fake class set up and allowed the teachers to implement the
steps as they decided how to adjust the program to suit the new fake
classroom. By facilitating my colleagues
in using the program, and allowing them to feel some personal success, I am
positive that the results may have been much different.
Reference
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of Learning for
Instruction. Boston: Pearson Education.
I read and commented on several blogs, including:
http://castanosblogs.blogspot.com/
http://loridodd.blogspot.com/
I read and commented on several blogs, including:
http://castanosblogs.blogspot.com/
http://loridodd.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)