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 4th 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 2nd 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.