EDUC 6713 Final Reflection

My initial goal of my GAME plan was to create, modify or adapt one math lesson a week so that the lesson better “engage(d) students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources” (ISTE Standard 1).  My initial reflections indicated that that goal was a bit too lofty and one lesson a week was too much to manage.  One way I adapted my GAME plan was to take time to sort through resources—specifically websites—that I have collected over the years and organized them so I would be able to better utilize them.  This process helped me realize I already have many good tools that will allow me to adapt the teaching of my lessons to better engage students.  I now have my bookmarked websites organized in folders titled the same as each of my math units.  If there is a website I use in multiple units it is included in multiple folders.  Although this was not part of my original plan it has made achieving my goal much easier because now I have many resources right at my fingertips.  A recent observation by a colleague made me realize that although I have made many changes to my instruction I need to make sure I am fully teaching our district adopted curriculum.  Although I am teaching the content of our curriculum I am finding better ways/methods to teach it.  I am struggling to find the correct balance. 

I need to make sure I continue to find more opportunities for student discourse in math.  The lessons are engaging students more in real world contexts but too often it is me presenting the lesson and students are passive—which I guess means they aren’t truly engaged.  I am in the process of rereading a book my school did a school wide book study on several years ago.   The book Classroom Discussions, helps me not only incorporate technology make sure my students are truly engaged. 

I have already started using a modified version of the GAME plan.  With my 4^th grade students it is very structured and has less flexibility for student choice.  However, I am using the language of setting goals, taking action, monitoring and evaluating and extending (Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P., 2009).  Each week students are choosing a math goal based on our state standards and what our current focus is.  Students make a plan to meet the goal and are provided time during our daily math intervention time.  Each week students reflect on whether or not they met their goal(s) and begin making plans for the next week. 

As a result of my learning from this course I will be incorporating more options for online-social collaboration.  My students loved working together on the wiki where they expressed their knowledge of perimeter and area—the 2^nd lesson of my content area plan.  I learned that students collaborating online provided them with the opportunity to teach each other and move their level of understanding to a more concrete level.  I am thinking of creating a homework wiki that students can go do each night to collaborate and provide each other help on their homework.  One obstacle I would have is making sure that students aren’t simple giving each other the answer on the wiki.  Monitoring the wiki would help overcome this challenge.

My learning curve in this course has been substantial.  At times I was ecstatic with the new tools I was learning and other times I was overwhelmed with how I would incorporate them in my class.  This course allowed me to start small and see positive results, which will help me to continue to implement new and exciting technologies. 

References

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

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.a

O’Connor, C., Canavan-Anderson, N., Chapin, S. (2003). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn.  Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions Publications. 

Monitoring Your Game Plan Progress

Since creating my GAME plan several weeks ago I am beginning to create a resource bank of authentic lessons connected to my math curriculum.   As I stated in last week’s blog I have realized that my initial goal was a bit to lofty and it is going to take more time to provide authentic resources for each of our curriculums lessons.  I am continuing to look for online resources that connect to my curriculum.  To aid in this process I have contacted our district’s curriculum director and he has put me in touch with other districts that are using the same math curriculum we are using.  One of the districts I have connected with, is further along in technology integration than our district and has already started this process of connecting the math curriculum to technology resources.  I am in the process of seeing how I can use the resources they have gathered to enhance my teaching. 

Although I am not implementing all of the ideas I am getting at this point I can see how the more I incorporate authentic learning activities the higher level learning that will occur.  Based on the lessons/activities I have implemented I am seeing how my students are beginning to make connections from what they are learning in math to how it connects to the real world.  I am struggling to find the balance between continuing to fully implement our curriculum as required by the district while still providing these experiences with my students. 

My students are definitely more engaged in the learning when they are involved in simulations as opposed to pencil/paper work.  Just recently I was teaching my students how to find perimeter and area of a basic rectangle and more complex shapes.  We spent some time doing worksheet type activities and I realized students were quickly becoming bored with this and had memorized the process but weren’t understanding what exactly determining the perimeter and area was telling them.  After meeting with my grade level partner we found several websites that helped students connect the process with why they would need to know perimeter and area.  A few of the websites we used were: http://tinyurl.com/e4jrh;  http://www.funbrain.com/poly/index.html;  http://www.mathplayground.com/area_perimeter.html

Reviewing My Game Plan

So,  perhaps I was feeling a bit ambitious when I initially wrote my GAME plan…or perhaps I am now feeling a bit overwhelmed with report cards, conferences, the holidays and well, the list goes on.  In my GAME plan I had a goal of rewriting or adapting one math lesson a week to “engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems” and to “incorporate digital tools and resources”.   I am definitely feeling like that was a bit of a lofty goal to meet on my own. 

Part of my original plan was to meet weekly with my grade level partner to adapt/modify one of the lessons.  I now realize this isn’t going to be able to happen each week.  I have revised my goal so that it is more realistic for my teaching partner and myself.  We will work to revise several lessons of each unit in math we teach.  Instead of reinventing the wheel I have been doing some searching on the web for other teachers that have already started this process.  I have found several resources where teachers have adapted our curriculum’s lessons to be used with a SMARTboard.  One such resource I will be using is http://tinyurl.com/SMARTmathexpressions Another source I have come across is the National Library of Virtual Manipulatives.  This website is making it so that I can easily “incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and creativity”.  To stay abreast of new ideas of how to incorporate technology into the classroom I have subscribed to the “Math Solutions” online newsletter featured by Marilyn Burns. 

At this point I haven’t progressed too far in reaching my goal.  I plan to recommit myself after I have finished report cards and the next five days of parent teacher conferences.  What’s important is that I recommit to my goal and recognize there will be times when I will not be able to make as much progress as I had originally planned.  

Developing My Personal GAME Plan

The two indicators of the ISTE NETS for Teachers that I would like to strengthen are Standard 1, Indicator B and Standard 2, Indicator A.  The first indicator that I would like to increase my confidence and proficiency in is my ability to “engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources”.  The second indicator I have chosen to create a GAME plan for is m ability to “design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and creativity”.   These are two areas have spent countless hours talking to colleagues about.  The problem is we have made little progress in the area of change.   

Goal: To increase my proficiency and confidence in these two areas I want to make sure at least one math lesson a week meets these two indicators.  If this year I adapt and change one lesson a week to meet these two indicators I will work next year to adapt the remainder of the lessons with the help and support of my colleagues. 

Action: In order to meet this goal I will work with my teacher partner during our weekly planning time.  We will use our math curriculum textbook and pick a lesson that could be adapted in order to give students a real world or authentic problem.  Much of our math curriculum’s lesson will easily fit this requirement.  Next, I will work to incorporate a digital tool to provide an alternate way to teach the concept.  Perhaps, students will view online advertisements to learn about percentages; view online weather resources to learn about the different types of graphs or how to determine mean, median and mode.  What ever digital tool I choose to use it will have a real world/authentic application. 

Monitor: As I begin to take action I will need to make sure this goal is manageable.  While adapting each lesson and providing students with a real world/authentic purpose I must still continue to teach/use the required district curriculum.   Once I spend more time on adapting lessons I might see how I can integrate other content areas.  For example, in math we are currently learning about the different types of graphs and mean, median, mode and range.  In science, we are learning about salmon.  Using online resources I can incorporate the two contents to ensure that both curricula goals are still being met. 

Evaluate and Extend: One way I will evaluate whether or not my goal is met is by observing student behavior and performance.  My hope is that the changes I make based to the lessons will increase student interest and participation.  I will be able to compare how students are motivated when I do a lesson that isn’t authentic and doesn’t allow creativity with a lesson that does.  In addition, I can seek comments from students.  Based on what I find, I will either work to modify and adapt more lessons or rethink my GAME plan. 

References:

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

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.a

EDUC 6713--Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas

Welcome to my blog for EDUC 6713-Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas

EDUC 6711 Final Reflection

           Most teachers would agree that technology has a place in the classroom.  But when they are given the technology they rarely use it.  When I talk to these teachers it is because they do not know how to use it and are fearful of breaking it.  This course has allowed me to see first hand technologies place in the classroom and how it connects to learning theories.  I have learned to use technology as more than an instructional tool but as a learning tool. 

My personal theory of learning has not changed as a result of this course but I now see the important role technology plays in helping my students learn.  I still consider myself a social constructivist who blends in the ideas of behaviorism and cognitivism.  This summer my classroom will become a model technology classroom, as I will be receiving a Smart Board, document camera, projector, laptop and a set of SMART Response devices.  This course has allowed me to think ahead about how I will use these new tools as learning tools not simply instructional tools.  Just as I will spend time learning how to use these tools this summer, I will spend time teaching my students how to use these tools.  Just as I have been intentional about how I teach without technology I will need to be intentional about how I teach with technology.

Immediate adjustments I will make to my instructional practice are the inclusion of some of the instructional strategies we have learned about in this course.  Although I would love to begin to incorporate and master all nine instructional strategies immediately, I know this is not realistic or best practice (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010a).   I will use technology to help students create nonlinguistic representations and cooperate with peers outside of our school community.  I will begin to utilize E-Pals and pair students up with a peer from another school in the United States—or perhaps another county.  Other technology tools I will incorporate are Voice Threads, Inspiration, Glogster and virtual field trips.  The incorporation of these tools will help me to meet the diverse needs of my learners because as I am reaching out to many different intelligences (Duffy & McDonald, 2008).   Dr. Orey shared that the human brain makes connections through experience—and the more varied the experiences are the more likely humans are to make the connections and to be able to recall the information (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010d).   My repertoire of instructional skills has not necessarily been expanded but refreshed as a result of this course.  I vaguely remembered learning in college about the nine instructional strategies discussed in this course.  But because I was only reading about them in a textbook I quickly forgot about them and was not always implementing them in my class.  Now, as a result of this course, I am reminded that “education is complex” and I must know my learners and use a variety of instructional skills, tools and strategies (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010b).  

One long-term goal change I would like to make to my instructional practice is to commit to using technology as a learning tool not only an instructional tool.  Learners need to be active in the learning process—not sitting on the sidelines waiting to be filled with information.  Dr. Orey tells us that when students are engaged in learning and the creation of an artifact they work to resolve their disequilibrium (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010c). 

Another long-term goal change I would like to make to my instructional practice is to look at lessons I teach year after year and see how I can make modifications to incorporate technology as a learning tool.  Many of my lessons can be enhanced by incorporating technology as a learning tool.  I will work to see how I can utilize Wikis, blogs, virtual field trips, web quests and other tools we have learned about to make the most out of my lessons. 

References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010a). Program eleven. Instructional strategies, Part one [Webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010b). Program nine. Connectivism as a learning theory [Webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010c). Program seven. Constructionist and constructivist learning theories [Webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010d). Program two. Brain research and learning [Webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education

Instructional Strategy of Cooperative Learning and the Social Learning Theory

I think back to just fifteen years ago when I was in high school.  My teachers taught using an overhead projector, white board and in some cases a chalkboard.  My friends and I communicated via hand written notes, phone calls and stopping by each other’s houses.  Fast forward to present time.  Now we teach using a document camera, projector, SmartBoard, and the Internet.  Friends communicate with each other via text messaging, Facebook, Skype and cell phones.  Because of the rapid change in technology, people are able to interact with each other in ways that only a few years ago weren’t even possible. As teachers it is our job to incorporate the technology into our class to allow “students to interact with each other in groups in ways that enhance their learning” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). 

I believe that social learning is the foundation of a lesson that uses cooperative learning groups.  Cooperative learning activities require students to use their communication skills to explain their thinking.  They must also be active listeners—truly understanding what the other members of his/her group are communicating.  In addition, integrating technology into cooperative learning can provide students with opportunities to interact with people outside of their school community. 

In “Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works” the idea of keypals is shared.  Keypals are the modern version of penpals.  A couple of times a month I receive a letter in my school mailbox from a student who is part of the “Great Mail Race”. The letter is often a form letter and all my students would do is fill in a fill in the blank survey.  I will admit that I almost always toss these letters in recycling because I see little educational value to my students. Using keypals modernizes this idea and allows students to collaborate with students across the United States and the world.  This type of social communication would provide students with an opportunity to work on their writing skills while also teaching them about the lives of other students and cultures (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  I am thinking next year I might use http://www.epals.com/ to have my students connect with someone from each of the 50 states. 

In addition to the use of keypals students can collaborate with one another through the use of WebQuests, websites and online simulations (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  All of these resources allow student communication, collaboration and promote critical thinking.  As teachers we must begin to change the way we teach by incorporating technology into our social learning activities.  A simple web search of “elementary webquests” or “online simulations” and you’ll find a tool you can use in your classroom.  Check out one site I found when I Googled “elementary webquests” to help get you started http://www.owen.k12.ky.us/trt/elementarywebquests.htm  

References:

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