Immediate Impact of Technology

Children learn differently using various modalities and multiple intelligences. Educators need to find avenues for students to utilize and maximize learning opportunities. According to Dr. Ross, it is an educator’s responsibility to provide students with access to the curriculum (Laureate Education, 2009). This course has taught me ways to create flexibility with instruction using technology to meet the individual needs of all learners. I will immediately adjust my instructional practices regarding the use of technology integration to customize instruction.

The first thing I will do to adjust my instructional practices is to use technology to determine my students’ learning profiles and interests. When students are interested and motivated to learn, they will move through the learning process on their own instead of the teacher having to drag them through it (Laureate Education, 2009). I will learn about my students’ learning profiles and interests by having them complete my survey “Getting to Know You” located at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/8T37G5L. This survey will help me design effective instruction and assessment for my students. It is my responsibility to make sure that I understand my students’ interests and learning styles so that I can provide effective learning experiences.

The second thing I will do to immediately adjust my instructional practices is to use technology to differentiate assessments. I will use technology to assess students’ academic strengths and weaknesses. The evolution of technology has created opportunities for differentiation in classrooms that were not possible before. Technology has created ways for teachers to “bridge the gap” (Laureate Education, 2009) between students’ learning styles and assessments. Teachers are now able to assess children in ways that were not available previously. “By using assessment strategies that draw students into the assessment process, it is more likely that they learn more” (Science Education Resource Center, 2010). I will continue to use my district’s online benchmarking program “Orchard” as a formative assessment to create individualized and effective instruction. In addition, I will integrate using digital answering devices (clickers) to assess student understanding during a lesson. Students that typically are shy may be more willing to answer if they do not have to speak. Another way I will differentiate assessments is to allow students to create digital portfolios instead of taking written paper and pencil tests. Digital portfolios can support my efforts to provide students with an alternative assessment that engages learners and supports all types of learning modalities. A portfolio allows students to display their work as they master content.

The third thing I will do to immediately change my instructional practices is to use technology to add differentiated elements within the instruction. According to Dr. Rose, the brain has three networks that are responsible for doing different things yet they work together to identify and process information. The recognition network identifies patterns such as chairs, dogs, cats etc. The strategic network helps a person problem solve and the affective network identifies emotions. The brain “not only distributes processing to different places according to what kind of task it is but it also distributes processing differently when you’re a beginner at a task than when you’re an expert at a task” (Laureate Education, 2009). Each person has these networks but they are specific to that person which creates different learning modalities. I will meet different learning styles by presenting information in a variety of ways such as concept maps using Inspiration, visual imagery using power points and/or outlines using Microsoft Word. In addition, to replace lecture and a one-size-fits-all lesson, I will create choice boards to allow students options in how they prefer to learn content. The choice board could include activities that provide support for reading using technology and/or project-based learning using technology to research and create products. Finally, I will include additional opportunities for students to reinforce skills using technology skill-based activities such as Academic Skill Builders for Wii (http://www.arcademicskillbuilders.com/wii/).

Technology will allow me to differentiate in ways that were not as easily possible previously. As I immediately adjust my instruction using technology, I will need to remember that differentiation is not about creating many lessons for one topic (Laureate Education, 2009). It is about allowing flexibility for readiness, interest and learning profiles within one lesson and topic. Students enter the classroom with different background knowledge and preferred methods of learning. It is my responsibility to make sure that all students have equal access to learning in the classroom. Technology will help me fulfill this responsibility.

References

Academic Inc.,. (n.d.). Play the games on Wii. Retrieved from http://www.arcademicskillbuilders.com/wii/

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Brain research and universal design for learning. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas. Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Initials. (Producer). (2009). Learner differences. [Educational Video].Baltimore:Author.

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

Orchard Learning, Inc., . (2010). Orchard. Retrieved from http://www.orchardsoftware.com/target.php

Parker, Jennifer. (2010). Get to know you survey.Retrieved from http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/8T37G5L.

Science Education Resource Center, . (2010, May 26). Assessment. Retrieved from http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/assessment/index.html

GAME Plan Reflection

I had chosen for my goal to strengthen two of the ISTE National Educational Technology Standards (NETS-S). The two standards were to use technology to provide thinking that is more critical and problem solving in addition to providing more opportunities for my students to demonstrate creativity and innovation using technology (National Education Standards for Teachers, 2009). I understood the content knowledge and I understood the uses of technology. My challenge was to overcome how to integrate the two areas together. As I met this goal, my students now have the opportunity to be able to self-direct their learning while they solve a problem of interest to them and create a digital product that displays their learning process. These skills are teaching my students how to be critical thinkers of information and how to apply what they have mastered. These skills are preparing my students for jobs of the 21st century.

According to Dr. Ross, it is an educator’s responsibility to provide students with access to the curriculum (Laureate Education, 2009). Children learn differently using various modalities and we as teachers need to find avenues for students to utilize and maximize learning opportunities. My GAME Plan focused on integrating more inquiry-based lessons using technology into instruction. I had chosen to focus on this because I wanted my students to maximize their learning of content and 21st century skills. As I completed my plan during the course, I realized the opportunities that technology created in inquiry-based lessons. By using technology, I was able to build in levels of rigor and scaffolds to support different learning modalities and levels of learning. It took me a lot of time and thought to create the unit but now I have it to use in all of my classes. I learned that creating these types of lessons require more research and time on the front end but will have great benefits for my students in the long run.

As an instructional coach for my district, I am making some immediate adjustments regarding technology integration into content areas. I am asking the computer teachers to teach our students how to use blogs, wiki spaces, podcasts, Voice Thread etc. using content from core subjects. My hope is that as the students learn how to use these applications, content area teachers will be more comfortable allowing students to use them as a learning tool in the classroom. Due to time constraints, it is difficult for teachers to teach the applications and the content. With my plan, computer classes and content areas are horizontally aligning to provide maximum learning opportunities in academics and in 21st century skills.

Jennifer P.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas. Baltimore: Author.

National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/ 2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf

Linking GAME Plan to NETS

The ISTE National Educational Technology Standards for students and teachers (NETS, 2007) are two lists of technology standards and performance indicators for teachers and students. When I compare these lists, I notice that they complement each other. For example, the student standard to be creative and innovative complements the teacher standard to facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity. The teacher may use the teacher standards to facilitate the student standards.

A teacher may use the GAME Plan model to facilitate mastery of these standards. The GAME Plan supports self-directed learning which means that learners are driven by their own desire and actions to learn something new. Self-directed learning can be divided into four steps called the GAME plan. The “G” stands for set goals, the “A” for take action to meet the goal, “M” for monitor progress towards the goal and “E” for evaluate if the goals were achieved and extend the learning (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009). As an educator and lifelong learner, I need to continue my GAME plan to self-direct my learning towards integrating more technology into my content area with more confidence and proficiency. As I become more empowered in the use technology as part of my instruction, students will have the opportunity to learn and master the 21st century skills that ISTE supports.

Upon the completion of my problem-based unit plan, I want to use it in a science classroom. The unit will teach students the necessary content required by the state but will support NETS too. This will be another step towards a classroom that reflects 21st century learning.

Jennifer P.

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.

National Education Standards (NETS) (2007). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org

Week 6 GAME Plan

I am in week six of my GAME Plan. My district was on fall break so I was unable to work in my classrooms but it did allow me time to look at some more technology-based lessons. My professor posted a great website, http://www.bie.org/ that shows project-based learning in action using technology. I found it to be very helpful because it gave me a visual of how a classroom looks during this type of learning.

My plan is to become effective when integrating technology and content together for student learning. As I worked on a lesson plan this past week, I kept in mind the benefits and challenges of integrating technology into lessons. I made sure that I provided times for students to organize and reflect on their learning. It is through these opportunities that I will be able to assess student learning of content. I also had to remind myself that I need to provide scaffolds such as helpful websites and graphic organizers to support the learning process. I am excited about trying this lesson in a science class when they get to the specific chapter.

I am also considering how I might integrate “educational networking” (Laureate Education, 2009) into my classroom. Using technology to communicate and learn will tear down the walls of my classroom. I am facing some obstacles such as time, computer access and administrational support. These are challenges that I will seek solutions to during this upcoming week.

Jennifer P.

References

Bucks institute for education. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.bie.org

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas. Baltimore: Author.

GAME Plan Week Five

This week I am more overwhelmed as compared to previous weeks. I am having troubles wrapping my head around the concept of problem-based learning (PBL) using technology in the classroom. As I work towards my GAME Plan goals of being able to link student learning with content and technology, I am realizing that it has definite benefits and challenges. According to Dr. Ertmer, some of the benefits of PBL are it supports self-directed learning, collaboration (a 21st century skill), integration of core subjects and authentic learning (Laureate Education, 2009). Students are engaged in inquiry-based thinking while determining solutions for a problem that has meaning to them.

The challenges that I am trying to overcome is how to link the learning with the content (standards) so that it is more than just fun and I am comfortable knowing that my students know the standards. I am not sure how to teach this or model this. Is it something that I teach? Do the students learn it naturally during the process? Dr. Ertmer suggests that as students progress through PBL, have them reflect on their learning through journaling, using checklists or blogs (Laureate Education, 2009). Since my students have not done this previously, I would need to model how to articulate one’s thoughts using a journal or blog. These items would provide a formative assessment as the learning progresses and reassure me that the students are mastering the standards in addition to learning how to think on a higher level.
I will continue to work on my PBL unit plan to help fulfill my GAME Plan. My PBL unit plan supports the STEM initiative in my state.

Is anyone else experiencing the same concerns?

Jennifer

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Program 8. Spotlight on Technology: Problem-Based Learning Part 1. [Educational video]. Baltimore: Author.

My GAME Plan Continues

It is week three in my efforts to master my GAME plan. This past week, I continued to research STEM projects using the internet. An abundance of information is available about inquiry-based and project-based lessons. I am learning what a good inquiry-based lesson should look like to use as a comparison when evaluating other lessons. I am learning to look at the objectives and ask myself whether or not the lesson supports the standards and if it will have real-life meaning for a student. I am looking for organization and how well the unit flows for student understanding.

When I originally had written my GAME plan, my focus was on integrating science and math together using inquiry-based units or project-based units using technology. I had not given thought to how student learning would be assessed in these lessons and units. Dr. Ross suggests that I “…develop a cadre of techniques to monitor and evaluate” (Laureate Education, 2009). I need to consider how student learning would be assessed during and at the end of the unit. I need to consider what parts of the unit need to be assessed and in what ways. For example, how will academic content be measured as compared to how will the growth in technology use be measured? Are those skills of equal importance? Dr. Ross suggests using the following steps in determining effective assessment. First, I need to identify the learning objectives. Second, I need to determine the instructional method and finally, what technology supports the objectives and method of delivery (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009). During this week, I will focus on determining how I will assess student learning when using this type of instructional delivery in my classroom.

Jennifer P.

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.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Program 7. Assessing Student Learning with Technology. [Educational video]. Baltimore: Author

My GAME Plan Journey

Authentic instruction focuses on the person being an active participant in his or her learning process. An old proverb says, “Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Involve me, and I will understand.” (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009). This week I attended several seminars about STEM during the LEAD conference in Nashville, Tennessee. Part of my game plan is to educate myself on the STEM initiative in Race to the Top so that I can effectively and seamlessly integrate math, science and technology into my classroom instruction. I started fulfilling my GAME plan by attending this conference. My next goal is to involve myself in the process of integrating STEM projects. I will take the information back to my classroom to implement in the curriculum and to educate other teachers about the STEM initiative.

In order for me to continue working towards my GAME plan goals, I will need to continue to participate in more professional developments, webinars and educators networking sites to learn about this type of project-based curriculum. I need to obtain a schedule of future professional developments and webinars. In addition, I will need to research the STEM websites that were brought to my attention during the conference. Since I am a visual learner, I would like to find sites that have video clips of this type of learning unfolding in a classroom. I need to set aside some of my planning time to research these websites.

My plan is to journal my thoughts, ideas and successes as I complete each part of the GAME plan. Since the conference ended today, I have not had a chance to journal any thoughts yet but I plan on doing so in the next few days.

I am recognizing that I have a learning style just like my students. As I sat in some of the classes during the conference, I found my mind wandering because the presentation was lecture format with a power point of all text (no pictures). I am a visual learner and like to be engaged in the learning process. I found myself interested in the classes that engaged us with small group activities. I also like the idea that I am able to pick and choose the way in which I am gathering my knowledge about STEM. “Research suggests that collaborative learning can improve the effectiveness of most activities, and the same is true for technology-based activities” (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009). I am choosing to use technology and collaborative work to fulfill my GAME plan. I need to remember that my students can manage their learning if I provide support and the opportunities that match their needs.

Jennifer P.

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.

Application Two: My GAME Plan

I am a lifelong learner. I am driven by self-motivation to do what I need to do to master the many uses of my camera, cell phone and Facebook account. Self-directed learning is driven by one’s own desire and actions to learn something new. Self-directed learning can be divided into four steps called the GAME plan. The “G” stands for set goals, the “A” for take action to meet the goal, “M” for monitor progress towards the goal and “E” for evaluate if the goals were achieved and extend the learning (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009). As an educator and lifelong learner, I am making a GAME plan to self-direct my learning towards integrating more technology into my content area with more confidence and proficiency.

I have chosen for my goal to strengthen two of the ISTE National Educational Technology Standards (NETS-S). The two standards are to use technology to provide thinking that is more critical and problem solving in addition to providing more opportunities for my students to demonstrate creativity and innovation using technology (National Education Standards for Teachers, 2009). I understand the content knowledge and I understand the uses of technology. My challenge that I would like to overcome is how to integrate the two areas together. When I meet this goal, my students will be able to self-direct their learning while they solve a problem of interest to them and create a digital product that displays their learning process. These skills will teach my students how to be critical thinkers of information and apply what they have mastered. These skills will help prepare my students for jobs of the 21st century.

I will take action to master this goal. I need to know more about how to integrate the two areas and what this type of learning looks like. STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) is a part of my state’s “Race to the Top” grant. I could attend professional developments and research STEM websites to learn more information. In addition, I could observe other educators modeling inquiry-based learning and ask other educators questions on educational social networks. I would consider co-planning and co-teaching an inquiry-based unit with technology. When I feel comfortable enough to venture out and teach my own inquiry-based lesson, I would ask another teacher to observe the lesson to provide feedback for me later.

I will need to monitor my progress towards this goal. I can do this by keeping a journal of information that I learned from professional developments, online teacher social networks and STEM websites. In addition, I would monitor how many lessons I co-teach with other educators. The more hands-on practice I have, the better I will be able to do it on my own. In addition, I would record in my journal how often I observed other teachers and the critical things that I learned from each observation. As I review my progress, I would continue to assess if I am ready to facilitate my own inquiry-based unit using technology. I would need to be objective and know when to push myself out of the safety of the nest and fly on my own. If I find that I am not able to do that after a reasonable time, I would need to reevaluate my sources and look for new ones.

Finally, I would evaluate if I met my goal. My goal is to integrate inquiry-based learning using technology into my math classroom. If after a reasonable time, I have not at least started co-teaching a unit then I would need to reevaluate my goal and strategies. When I can successfully facilitate a lesson, I will know that I met my personal goal to integrate critical thinking and creativity into a lesson to provide a better learning opportunity for my students. To extend my learning and goal, I would look at the other NETS-S to assess how I might be able to strengthen those in my classroom using the same strategies or different ones.

Jennifer P.

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.

Hargadon, Steve. (2010). Classroom 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.classroom20.com/group/classroom20beginnergroup

I-stem. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.istemnetwork.org/resource/educational/lesson.cfm

National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/
2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf

US Department of Education, . (2010). Delaware and tennessee win first race to the top grants. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2010/03/03292010.html

Evaluating a Website Using REAL

This screencast will walk a viewer through how to apply Dr. November's REAL method to evaluate the reliability and validity of a site. Click on the above title to link to the screencast or copy and paste the link below.

http://www.screentoaster.com/watch/stUElWR0BJRFtXQF1VXFhfVl5c/evaluating_a_website_using_real

Reflection on Classroom Instruction

As I finish the last week of this course, I have taken some time to reflect on what I have learned and how it will affect my ability to effectively and appropriately integrate technology into my classroom. I have reflected on my personal theory of learning prior to completing this course, made some immediate changes in my instructional practices regarding the integration of technology and set two long-term goals that support integration of technology.

As I reflect on my own personal theory of learning, I still support the continued use of the constructivism/constructionist learning theory. I believe that students need to be able to construct their own meanings for the knowledge to be useful and remembered. Originally, I did not recognize that my classroom also models behaviorism. Behaviorism seems to be viewed as old school methods of teaching. I use behaviorism through grades, point systems and extrinsic rewards to help reinforce a desirable behavior or help a student modify his or her behaviors. Used when needed, this learning theory can provide positive and effective results. I have observed the presence of the social learning theory in my instructional practices. My students are building knowledge by working together to solve problems or build projects. This will help them be ready for the 21st century workplace.

I have learned about several technology tools that I can use effectively in my instructional practices to enhance student engagement and learning. I am incorporating concept maps with graphics into the note-taking instructional strategy. Concept maps allow my students to organize and synthesize information in a way that “...replicates the network model of memory” (Laureate Education, 2009). “Graphic representation has been shown to produce a percentile gain of 39 points in student achievement (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). In addition, I have added Voice Threads within my instructional practices. Voice Threads support the social learning theory “…cooperative learning focuses on having students interact with each other in groups in ways that enhance their learning. When students work in cooperative groups, they make sense of, or construct meaning for, new knowledge by interacting with others” ( Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). Voice Threads will allow my students the opportunity to share thoughts, ideas and gain knowledge from each other.

I have set two long-term goals that support the integration of technology into my instructional practices. First, my goal is to follow the “Matrix of the Four Planning Questions, the Nine Categories of Instructional Strategies, and the Seven Categories of Technology” as I plan instruction for my students (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). The matrix provides a checklist of all of the things that I need to consider as I plan what instructional strategy will be used with what technology. This will assure that the technology used is appropriate and effective for student learning. My second goal is to stay a lifelong learner myself by attending staff developments and finishing my master’s degree. This is important because technology is constantly changing and so the way my students think and learn is constantly changing. I want to stay abreast with the new so that I can maximize my students’ learning by using current forms of technology and prepare them for the 21st century workplace.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories. Baltimore: Dr .Michael Orey.

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

Voicethread:"Race to the Top"

My state recently won the "Race to the Top" grant. Although I welcome change, I have concerns about what this will mean for my students and me in the classroom. Please view my voicethread by clicking on the title and let me know your thoughts.

http://voicethread.com/share/1040668/

Social Learning and Technology Linked Together in the Classroom

According to Dr. Orey, the social learning theory states that learners cannot learn by themselves. They need the aid of an outside source such as a classmate, teacher or computer to construct meaning (Laureate Education, 2009). The cooperative learning strategy as described in my textbook “Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works” supports this theory. “Technology can play a unique and vital role in cooperative learning by facilitating group collaboration, providing structure for group tasks, and allowing members of groups to communicate even if they are not working face to face” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Maleonoski, 2007). Multimedia projects and web resources may be used to support the social learning theory.

Student-created multimedia projects encourage learners to work together building knowledge. Students research, analyze and make conclusions together as a group. I have my math class complete a stock market multi-media project. Students are divided into small groups that act as an investment company. Each student within the group is assigned a different task. The students work independently to complete their part but have the group members to help them as needed. The members depend on each other to complete his or her share. Students are learning about the stock market and the roles and responsibilities of corporate employees.

Web resources also support the social learning theory. With the unlimited amount of access to outside sources and people via the internet, students can interact with others. Students can blog and create a wiki space with students that are from a different part of the world. They can share information through an online calendar. I use an online website to communicate grades and a schedule of assignments with my students and their parents. Web resources allow students to seek information and respond to others creating an online environment of continuous learning.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories. Baltimore: Dr .Michael Orey.

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

Embedded Technology in the Classroom Supports Constructivist/Constructionist Learning Theory

The constructivist learning theory explains that an individual creates their own knowledge and understanding through experiences. The constructionist learning theory takes it a step further and the individual builds a project that represents his or her understanding or knowledge. In one of my resources this week, the authors talk about embedding technology in “Generating and Testing Hypothesis…When students generate and test hypotheses, 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). Using spreadsheet software, data collection tools and Web resources to generate and test hypothesis support the constructivist/constructionist learning theory in the classroom.

The internet has changed how we access information. Information is at our fingertips with a stroke of a key. Technology allows students “…to spend more time interpreting the data rather than gathering the data…” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). Spreadsheets allow students to organize their data in a way that makes sense and it allows them to change the data to investigate different outcomes. Data collection tools such as graphs and charts enable students “…to see the bigger picture and recognize patterns” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). They also allow students to collect data quicker so the students have more time to evaluate the information. Web resources such as gaming software allow students to try different scenarios (hypothesis) in a virtual situation that may be impossible in real life (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). These embedded technologies help students gather information, hypothesize, reevaluate data and build a product that represents the learning that occurred.

Just yesterday, I had my math students complete a computer-generated table to record data from a math activity involving the relationship between volumes of solids. My students were able to use the chart to identify the pattern that occurred between the volumes of the solids throughout the lab. It really helped them see the big picture of where the volume formulas derived from. Do you use embedded technology to encourage constructivism/constructionism in your classroom? If so, what do you use and how do you use it?

Jparker119

Reference

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Technology Supports Cognitive Learning in the Classroom

This week in my master’s class, I learned how to use technology to enhance my students’ cognitive skills during learning. The cognitivist perspective “focuses on learning as a mental operation that takes place when information enters through the senses, undergoes mental manipulation, is stored, and is finally used” (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008). My textbook, “Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works” describes two instructional methods that embed technology in lessons to increase student cognitive processes.

The first instructional strategy is cues, questions, and advance organizers. Cues are clear hints about what the student is going to learn and questions prompt a student’s memory to help them retrieve prior knowledge (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, pg 73). These cues and questions are incorporated in organizers. Dr. Orey describes organizers such as concept maps as a “graphical way” to organize data (Laureate Education, 2009). Word processing applications such as creating a brochure support cognitive thinking by helping students focus on important concepts thus eliminating the distracting, unnecessary information. Spreadsheet software that can create a rubric allows teachers to prepare students for a lesson by introducing them to the topic and expectations beforehand. Students can brainstorm and organize thoughts before a lesson by completing a KWL chart. They can view a video clip to trigger prior knowledge before completing a concept map to organize facts and answer higher-order thinking questions. These ideas focus “…on enhancing students’ ability to retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007) therefore they support the cognitivist perspective.

Technology can also help students’ cognitive processes while summarizing and taking notes. Teachers can use word processing capabilities to provide students with teacher-prepared notes where students fill in missing pertinent information. Students can also use software that allows them to pick out the essential information in a paragraph in their textbook. Students can create a pictograph to go with their notes or create a graphic organizer such as a concept map that has embedded graphics to help organize information. “Graphic representation has been shown to produce a percentile gain of 39 points in student achievement” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007). Various web resources such as blogging and wikis allow students to experience reciprocal teaching creating higher-order thinking. Like the first instructional strategy, this instructional strategy also supports the cognitivist learning theory because it assists mental processing.

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

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

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

Behaviorism Meets Technology

BF Skinner, a well-known psychologist helped define behaviorism through many studies. “Behaviorism sees learning as the response to an external stimulus” (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008). In this cause and effect relationship, the effect can be positive, negative or neutral. Positive results tend to reinforce a behavior as negative ones help modify or change an undesirable behavior. Some technology applications mirror the behaviorist theory. One tries to navigate the maze and gain the correct weapon to slay the dragon in a video game. If the player slays the dragon, then points are earned and the player moves to the next level (positive). If the dragon eats the player, player dies and the game is over (negative). Player tries again but this time the player modifies his or her choices to avoid being eaten.

After reviewing this week’s resources, I am also convinced that behaviorism is present in instructional technology in classrooms. “Research shows that the level of belief in self-efficacy plays a strong role in motivation for learning and achievement. The instructional strategy of reinforcing effort enhances students’ understanding of the relationship between effort and achievement by addressing their attitudes and beliefs about learning.” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenolsi, 2007). Students can use technology such as online rubrics, spreadsheets and graphs, as suggested by Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenolsi, to track the relationship between their effort and their grades instead of through other methods such as praise from a teacher or their “A” paper being posted in the hallway. Students would be able to monitor and modify their own behaviors to get the desired outcome of better grades.

In addition, behaviorism is seen in a student’s homework and classwork. “Multiple exposures to material help students deepen their understanding of content and become proficient with skills. Typically, students need about 24 practice sessions with a skill in order to achieve 80-percent competency (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn & Malenoski, 2007). As mentioned earlier, most students are tech savvy and relate well in the use of technology. In our resources, they suggest that instructional technology be used to practice and reinforce skills. Students can create spreadsheets to track grades or skill speed and accuracy. Students would be able to see the correlation between practice and increase in speed and accuracy of a skill or lack of practice causes lower times and less than proficient grades. Online tutorials and educational games allow students to practice skills that are specific for that student and offer immediate feedback. Students want to get as many correct answers to win the chance to play the bonus game. Students associate correct answers with bonus games and points, a positive reward.

As students become more technology oriented, instructional technology can help modify or reinforce behaviors. Although behaviorism may have changed its look in the classroom, it still remains alive through instructional technology.

JParker

References

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

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