Author Archives: Allen Wideman

Allen is an elementary based educator with the Calgary Board of Education. His experience as a classroom teacher has been primarily in Grades 5 and 6, with a focus on technology integration to support and enhance learning experiences for students and staff. Allen is currently teaching as a Physical Education specialist for Grades 1-4, and he is a graduate student at UBC in the Master of Educational Technology program.

Final Synthesis Reflection

Flight Path

The transition from the classroom to the gym has been a rewarding experience for me, and I have continued to explore the ways in which technology can be leveraged to support and enhance student learning, whether that be in the classroom setting or within the context of physical education. I have maintained my connection to student learning in the classroom setting by working with students during extracurricular activities, and this helped to form the basis for my LMS modules on Scratch 2.0. As I’m potentially moving into a classroom based teaching assignment for the next school year, I envision the LMS modules that I created in ETEC 565A as a potential component of my teaching in Grade 5 and Grade 6. I feel that this connects with one of the focus areas that I had initially identified in my Flight Path, and this aligns with the first ISTE standard (2008), as I continue to aim my teaching practice to be centered around facilitating and inspiring student learning and creativity.

Prior to my enrollment in this course, my experience with LMS had been limited to D2L/Brightspace, with a very brief foray into Moodle, and the opportunity to experiment with different LMS was an aspect of ETEC 565A that I was very much looking forward to. After having had the opportunity to review and assess different LMS styles and strategies for supporting and enhancing student learning, I feel that I have developed a deeper understanding of how LMS may be utilized to address diverse student learning styles, as well as ways to customize and personalize learning activities, as stated in the ISTE standards.

In my Flight Path, I had expressed my interest in exploring ways that technology integration could be utilized to apply neurological understandings in order to promote physical activity and engagement. In particular, I continue explore this as a means of helping students to support their ability to learn while managing concerns such as depression, anxiety and ADHD through exercise and healthy lifestyle choices, and this is an area of interest that I will further expand upon in the Next Steps section of this Final Synthesis.

 

ETEC 565A Experience

My experience in ETEC 565A has been both challenging and rewarding, and the design component of the course was perhaps the most practical experience of any of the courses that I have completed thus far in working towards my MET degree. The opportunity to learn and experiment with different learning technologies, in particular Moodle and WordPress, have helped me to develop a deeper understanding of the importance of design considerations when planning for diverse student needs, both academic and social. My own understanding of Design-based learning has been expanded as a result of my experiences in ETEC 565A, and I would define this as an educational approach that emphasizes designing (creating things, not just using or interacting with things), personalizing (creating things that are personally meaningful and relevant), collaborating (working with others on creations), and reflecting (reviewing and rethinking one’s creative practices). Throughout ETEC 565A, we were provided with opportunities to engage with all four of these important considerations, and I feel that the practical application of Moodle and WordPress were perhaps two of the more significant learnings that I will take away from this course and utilize in my teaching practice immediately.

The diversity of the assignments, and thus the assessment methods, that were incorporated into ETEC 565A allowed us to work with both structured and experimental tasks, and this challenged us to plan, design, collaborate, write and reflect as part of our experiences in the course. Spiro (2014) speaks to the fundamental importance of the course layout and design in creating adaptive content to meet changing needs and learning objectives, and these diverse and changing needs must be mirrored in the creation of adaptive student assessment opportunities. The challenge of working within both Blackboard and WordPress throughout the course forced us to evaluate and assess the strengths and limitations of both platforms, as we viewed both from the student point of view. When planning and designing our modules in Moodle, we were working from the perspective of the teacher or educator, and I found this change in perspective to be both challenging and illuminating. While simultaneously learning and designing with Moodle, I sometimes felt limited by my practical skills in that the ideas that I had for the course modules seemed to be beyond the scope of my abilities to translate appropriately into the context of an LMS. Nonetheless, throughout the course assignments and discussions, one aspect that I seemed to continually return to was the importance of supporting students in working within their creative and personalized means to demonstrate their learning. Much like our own experiences as graduate students in ETEC 565A, the experiences for our students should be based around providing varied assessment opportunities to demonstrate learning in personalized and creative ways while supporting the development of essential skills. Throughout the discussions in ETEC 565A, and through working collaboratively in creating the LMS evaluation rubric, I felt that we engaged in learning situations where the input and experiences of our peers represented a positive and meaningful impact on supporting the knowledge and skill development of others.

The opportunity to learn from our peers was an essential aspect to successfully working through the weekly expectations of ETEC 565A. With the use of both Blackboard and WordPress, I felt challenged in keeping up with the weekly readings, discussions and assignments through the first month or so of the course as I had to quickly adjust my expectations and learn how to best utilize two learning spaces for one course. The questions, ideas and contributions of the students and instructor in the course were instrumental for me in helping to navigate this steep learning curve, and without this peer support having been built into the course, I likely would have struggled immensely to complete the requirements of the course. This was an important point of reflection for me, as I feel that I have a deeper understanding of the potential struggles that our students might have in learning to work within a given LMS, and as a designer, these are considerations and supports that must be incorporated into any successful LMS design. According to Ciampa (2013), students enjoy having their efforts and achievements recognized by others, and in order to make this learning visible, an environment must be created that allows for the engagement of motivation through recognition. The structure of ETEC 565A provided these supports and recognition through opportunities to view and reflect on the work of our peers during the course, and I found that the postings around the digital stories and the Moodle course examples were two of the most valuable supports and recognition available to us within the course. Essentially, the importance of being able to learn from the ideas and the work of others is an essential component of student success, and this was evident throughout our shared experiences in ETEC 565A.

In terms of our course readings, the literature that represented the most significant and important ideas for my own, personal reflection were presented with the Bates SECTIONS framework (2014). Any consideration of technology assessment and selection should start with the fundamental questions of who our students are and what learning outcomes we’re aiming to achieve with them. As educators, we also need to gain an understanding of the skills and interests that our students already possess, and the areas that need to be addressed either prior to beginning the process, or to be undertaken in the early stages of our students’ engagement with technology. In particular, Bates (2014) addressed these considerations by stating that the first step in selecting technology is to know your students, their similarities and differences, what technologies they already have access to, and what digital skills they already possess or lack. In addition, the modules on Social Media and Copyright have highlighted the value and importance of digital citizenship and the ways in which the definition has changed and how the considerations evolved along with the technology itself. Effective technology integration can not be successfully attempted without the fundamentals of digital citizenship being a part of this process. Throughout my experience in ETEC 565A, these were considerations that I frequently returned to and reflected upon, and I believe that I now possess a greater understanding of my own skills and areas for future growth with regards to educational technology. As I move into my next courses in the MET program, and further my career as an educator, there are a number of ideas and understandings that will help to guide and support my pedagogy.

 

Next Steps

As originally stated in my Flight Path, I envision a return to a classroom based teaching assignment (perhaps as early as next school year), and one of the focus areas for my MET experiences will be a continued exploration of how my learning in the MET program will apply to cross curricular teaching situations and contexts. With my previous experience as an elementary school based technology leader, I may find myself travelling down that career path again, perhaps at the conclusion of my MET degree.

Regardless of what my teaching assignment for the next school year, and beyond, may look like, one of the key ideas that I will take away from this course will be Bates’ (2014) notion of perceptions of technology integration when he states that “the use of these tools or approaches should be driven by a holistic look at the needs of all students, the needs of the subject area, and the learning goals relevant to a digital age, and not by an erroneous view of what a particular generation of students are demanding.” I feel that the importance of starting with student needs and learning goals first, and planning for the integration of technology to help meet those needs and goals, are of paramount importance and should guide whatever next steps I undertake as an educator. Furthermore, it will be essential to continue to view technology in terms of what students need, rather than trying to determine what students want, as we can plan creative, engaging, and authentic learning experiences for our students without falling victim to the seductive nature of technology in the classroom. As I stated in the previous section of this reflection, there exists a need for continued emphasis on student learning around digital citizenship, and the responsibility of educators to stay updated and informed about the technologies readily being used by our students both during school time and at home.

Drawing on the experience of creating an LMS evaluation rubric, I intend to continue to build on my knowledge and understanding of LMS planning and design to create engaging, collaborative learning spaces for my students. I enjoyed the successes and the challenges of working within Moodle and WordPress, and I will aim to further align and integrate my pedagogy through developing online environments to meet cross curricular outcomes. I am quite new to the world of Augmented Reality, but I have attended several workshops on implementing AR into the classroom setting, including through physical education, and I would like to become more knowledgeable and experienced in working with applications such as Aurasma and Daqri and their potential for engaging and supporting student learning. I feel that there is a definite interest amongst school staff in learning about new educational technologies, and this could be an opportunity to share and collaborate around my MET experiences through professional development, collegial support and technical assistance. By having these types of collaborative supports in place within our schools, we can create positive environments, in league with school administration, to enhance the ability to promote and build teacher capacity with integrating technology amongst staff in order to maximize the impact on student learning. Technology implementation must be well designed and contextualized to be effective. Therefore, how are we supporting staff and schools in balancing the functionality and purpose of educational technology?

In one of my previous postings, concerning the future of educational technology, I had discussed the ideas of Bryan Alexander (2014), and in particular, how he envisions the early 21st century as a “Renaissance” in education, with future classes being based around the students creating multimedia projects in various forms through developing rich content in gamified classroom structures. According to this vision, Alexander states that “games and social media are delivery mechanisms for curricular content. Much of the curriculum involves creation: storytelling, game making, collaborative media work” (2014). This vision of the future of technology integration within education is an area that I feel a personal connection with, and I am interested in fostering the potential to engage and motivate our students in ways that create powerful connections between their learning and their own personal interests and values.

To end my final synthesis, I wanted to reference a TED Talk by Sherry Turkle (2012) that I had viewed during a previous MET course. The message of this TED Talk resonated with me in terms of my own interests in continuing to explore ways that technology integration impacts communication and physical activity, and how this potentially connects to social concerns such as depression, anxiety and ADHD. Turkle raises several intriguing points for consideration during her TED Talk on the “culture of distraction,” and the implications are considerable both within the field of education and well beyond. One of the key issues that Turkle discusses revolves around the notion that “technology is seductive when its affordances meet our human vulnerabilities.” She further explains that the need for constant connection via technology (internet, social media, texting, etc.) has fundamentally begun to change the ways in which we interact and communicate with each other, and how this flood of connection potentially leads to a “dumbing down” of our levels of communication. Essentially, we are vulnerable to the constant feelings of connection that technology offers, to the extent that time spent away from our devices can lead to feelings of depression and anxiety.

The impact on the development of skills pertaining to communication and interaction within our students, at an increasingly young age, becomes a primary consideration with this need for constant connection. If, as Turkle argues, many of us would now rather text or send e-mail instead of making a phone call or having a face-to-face conversation, how will this affect the ways in which we view communication skills as educators? Are we looking at a shift in terms of the practicality of “quick and easy” communication when we simply don’t have time for a conversation, or are there deeper beliefs being cultivated as a result? If constant connection leads to a failure in developing our ability to be alone, how do we approach the skills of personal reflection and self development? Daunting questions, to be sure, but important considerations in terms of the technological and social development of our students into their futures.

 

References

Alexander, B. (2014). Higher education in 2014: Glimpsing the future. Educause Review, 4(5) Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/higher-education-2024-glimpsing-future?

Anderson, T. (2008a). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University.

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a Digital Age. http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/(Chapter 8 on SECTIONS framework)

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96.

Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11,(1), 19-36.

Spiro, K. (2014). 5 elearning trends leading to the end of the learning management systems. Retrieved from http://elearningindustry.com/5-elearning-trends-leading-to-the-end-of-the-learning-management-system

Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching Digital Natives: Partnering for Real Learning. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Publishing.

Turkle, S. (2012). Connected, but alone? TED 2012: Filmed Feb. 2012.                                   https://www.ted.com/talks/sherry_turkle_alone_together?language=en

 

Renaissance and Reflection

Bryan Alexander (2014) envisions the early 21st century as a “Renaissance” in education, and by the year 2024, classes are based around the students creating multimedia projects in various forms through developing rich content in gamified classroom structures. According to this vision, Alexander states that “games and social media are delivery mechanisms for curricular content. Much of the curriculum involves creation: storytelling, game making, collaborative media work” (2014). I feel that this vision of the future of technology integration within education is what interests and excites me the most. Within this particular area of emerging technologies, there exists a potential to engage and motivate our students in ways that create powerful connections between their learning and their own personal interests and values.

Game-based learning functions to leverage student engagement, achievement and collaboration opportunities in order to promote the development of communication and problem solving skills, as well as creativity and self-confidence. Gaming has played a significant role in the lives of our students outside of the school context for years, and likely many of us were once engaged (or perhaps still are engaged) through participating in gaming opportunities, whether they be system based, online or otherwise. With this prevalence of gaming in the lives of our students, beginning at seemingly early ages, how do we as educators build this interest into our own design thinking to create learning opportunities that enhance skill development and digital literacies?

To help facilitate the integration of game-based learning into classroom and educational settings, I hope that we can approach the notion of technologies for learners by creating opportunities for students to plan and design their own games through various programming and design options. Through student involvement in the design process of game-based learning, our students can utilize technologies that are designed to be flexible, customizable, and adaptive to learner needs, while supporting students in planning for and achieving their own personal goals.

Despite the benefits of enhanced student engagement and motivation, and the development of skills in creativity, problem solving and collaboration, technologies for learners (including programming) have been slow to gain entry into formal educational settings, as their integration necessitates major changes in school cultures. In some cases, it seems that technologies for learners have not been widely accepted in school instructional programs because they challenge the standards-based perspective on instructional change in schools. As educators, how do we effectively manage and best align the implementation and integration of technologies for learners with institutionally based requirements, while engaging our students and impacting their development through approaches to game-based design and learning? Finding a balance between these considerations seems to hold the key for moving educational technology forward into the future.

By reflecting on the roles that technology plays in the current educational climate, we also need to reflect on past approaches to technology, and to consider how we’ve ultimately arrived where we are. While reading about Alexander’s envisioning of the future of education, I was continually reminded of the work of Seymour Papert, and the ways in which Papert’s ideas and perspectives on educational technology can help move us toward an exciting and engaging future for our students.

Seymour Papert’s influence extends throughout current pedagogical approaches to the integration of educational technology, constructionism, and the teaching of science and mathematics, to name but a few areas of significance. Papert and Solomon’s Twenty Things to Do With a Computer (1971), raises key questions and issues around educational technology that are still current and overwhelmingly relevant, more than 40 years after the report had been written. Papert and Solomon question the reasons as to why schools seemed to be “confined” in their approach to educational technology to uses that limit students to problem solving uses rather than opportunities to produce some form of action. The answer to this, according to Papert and Solomon, is that “there is no better reason than the intellectual timidity of the computers-in-education community, which seems remarkably reluctant to use the computers for any purpose that fails to look very much like something that has been taught in schools for the past centuries.” (1971). The approaches to educational technology proposed within the report are designed for all learners “of whatever age and whatever level of academic performance,” and this introduction to programming connects with our current knowledge of applications to Logo, Scratch, and beyond.

In some way, educators could utilize Papert’s Twenty Things to Do with a Computer as a benchmark of sorts, to assess where our schools and districts currently reside with regards to the implementation of educational technology and approaches to student application. It strikes me as astounding, and somewhat frightening, that a 1971 report on technology could still hold such a crucial level of relevance, especially when we consider how technology itself has changed over those decades. This relevance is a testament to the profound and fundamental importance of Papert’s passion and influence, and his impact continues to challenge and drive progression in pedagogical approaches and planning. By reflecting on the significance of Papert’s legacy, perhaps we can move more productively and purposefully toward the future of education as envisioned by Bryan Alexander.

 

References

Alexander, B. (2014). Higher education in 2014: Glimpsing the future. Educause Review, 4(5) Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/higher-education-2024-glimpsing-future?

Papert, Seymour and Solomon, Cynthia. (1971). Twenty Things to Do With a Computer. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: A.I. Laboratory.

 

 

Reflections on the Digital Story and Assignment #3

The Digital Story

My intention with creating the digital story was to provide an introduction and establish a learning context for the content module on Scratch programming. With the high interest that students have with regards to video games, the opportunity to design and create original animations and games will provide support to students in terms of integrating the creative and imaginative use of technology into their learning experiences. In order to create the digital story, I selected Videoscribe as the tool to be utilized, and I developed a digital story aimed at Grade 5 and Grade 6 students that would get them thinking about programming and the ways in which it can benefit and support their learning across different curriculum areas. Essentially, I had hoped that by engaging in the modules on Scratch 2.0, the students would come to view programming as a new learning tool that could help develop essential skills through authentic learning situations. Through their involvement in the design process of computer programming, students can utilize technologies, such as Scratch 2.0, that are designed to be flexible, customizable, and adaptive to learner needs, while supporting them in planning for and achieving their own personal goals.

The fact that Videoscribe is a digital animation tool was an important consideration, and I believe that the Grade 5 and Grade 6 students, as the target audience, would be interested and engaged in the animated digital story being told. By creating a scenario and characters that the students could identify with, I wanted my class to consider the importance of advocating for their own learning and striving to be creative and imaginative with their tasks and assignments. By creating a digital story that was almost entirely visual and auditory, I feel that the message would be more accessible to all students, regardless of their reading levels, as the use of text was kept to a minimum. In the areas of the digital story where text was used, I intended for the narration to match and essentially read the text on screen to the students, thereby supporting all learners in the class. The information in the digital story was kept simple and easy to follow while including opportunities for the students to stop and reflect, with limited distractions from an overabundance of visuals or quick transitions. Videoscribe allowed me to maintain a narrative pace that would keep the students engaged without becoming bored, and I aimed to keep the video to less than 5 minutes in duration as a means of maintaining student interest.

According to Coates (2005), an important aspect for consideration is the ability of a given technology to be adaptable to the needs of diverse academic cultures and communities. As a digital tool, Videoscribe was appropriate for creating a digital story intended for an audience of Grade 5 and Grade 6 students, and I believe that it would be a suitable tool for use with students at any grade level, as well as for use in post-secondary institutions or within the professional world. Due to its user friendly toolset, Videoscribe could be utilized by the students in my class to create their own digital stories. The application allows for use at a simplistic level, with opportunities for more advanced techniques and approaches to be applied as the students learn more and become increasingly confident in its usage. Ultimately, another reason why I choose to use Videoscribe to create the digital story for the content module was to provide an example of how the application could be utilized, with an eye on having the students approach this as another learning tool to support and help demonstrate their own learning and understanding in different curriculum areas.

 

Assignment #3 – Moodle LMS

Marc Prensky (2010) argues that students are incredibly eager to create, but don’t get nearly enough opportunities to do so within their time in the classroom. Access to technology has given students the capacity to design and create far beyond the scope of student projects in the past, and one of the goals in creating my content module within Moodle was to further provide opportunities for students to make their learning meaningful and relevant. To help facilitate the integration of creative learning through technology into classroom and educational settings, I hope that we can approach the notion of technologies for learners by creating opportunities for students to plan and design their own games through various programming and design options.

Although I had some limited previous experience in working with Moodle, I found developing the introductory module to be challenging. At times, I felt limited by my abilities with creating in Moodle, as it was difficult to develop my ideas into the course while maintaining an organization and ease of use that would be suitable for students in Grade 5 and Grade 6. My ideas sometimes seemed too large and beyond the scope of my Moodle abilities, and I often had to settle for what I was able to create, rather than what I had hoped to create. One significant learning piece that I will take away from this experience is that the amount of time required to create and develop the module content far exceeded what I had initially planned for it to be. When working with Moodle for Assignment #3, I felt that I had established a reasonable starting point for the online course, and I found that I was able to add details more readily into the content. In accordance with the feedback that I received on Assignment #2, I went back into the introductory components and added additional information that the students would require as they started to work within the online course. By adding these new details to the course introduction and goals, I believe that the progression of the course flows more logically and will more effectively support the students in understanding the organization and expectations.

Bates’ SECTIONS framework (2014) states that assessment should also be influenced by the knowledge and skills that students need in a digital age, which means focusing as much on assessing skills as knowledge of content. In turn, this encourages the development of authentic skills that require understanding of content, knowledge management, problem solving, collaborative learning, evaluation, creativity and practical outcomes. Through the inclusion of relevant and practical project work in the Scratch 2.0 course, students will have opportunities to demonstrate a high level of skill and imagination. For Assignment #3, I have developed the first three weeks of content for my students, and I tried to maintain a balance between guiding the students through the course content while still providing authentic opportunities for students to create, experiment, and problem solve. I used Canva.com to help create the GUI for my Moodle course, and I aimed to implement a design that allowed for ease of use with Grade 5 and Grade 6 students. Visually, the organization of the course is (I hope) simple for the students to navigate, while maintaining a learning flow that will both engage and challenge them at an appropriate level.

Anderson (2008) discusses the ways through which the affordances of the web can be leveraged to enhance generalized learning contexts, and the importance of the roles that collaboration and reflection play in creating these contexts. The Scratch 2.0 course is centered around student collaboration and communication, as the students are required sign up for groups early on in the course, and these groups will work collaboratively in discussions, problem solving tasks, and designing and planning a final project. Prensky (2010) states that “it is important for teachers to understand that what today’s students want to create, and can create, is not the stuff of the past, not the same old homework essays, science projects, and construction paper assignments that have been used for ages and were the basis of their teachers’ education.” Through the collaboration and exchange of ideas within the course, students will have opportunities to design and create according to their collective interests and goals.

As I had mentioned previously in my reflection for Assignment #2, Anderson’s (2008) ideas around the overlapping attributes of learning offer insight into how online and blended or flipped learning environments can move us away from the constraints of didactic content and traditional learning models. The Scratch 2.0 course is intended for students to complete outside of classroom time, as the focus of the learning during school hours will focus on the discussion and collaborative support around the content reviewed within each module. In this way, we can benefit from more active, collaborative classroom learning through more meaningful, engaging conversations and interactions. This removes the lecture component from classroom practice and shifts the emphasis onto the students to learn and engage with the content at home.

 

References

Anderson, T. (2008a). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University.

Bates, T. (2014). Teaching in a Digital Age. http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/(Chapter 8 on SECTIONS framework)

Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11,(1), 19-36.

Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching Digital Natives: Partnering for Real Learning.  Thousand Oaks: Corwin Publishing.

 

Here is my digital story:

Intellectual Property – International Perspectives

Issues involving copyright and privacy represent an ongoing ethical concern that sometimes takes on an imperialist ‘Old vs. New World’ perspective. It seems that the cultural connotations with beliefs on intellectual property are entangled with value associated with culture and nationality. For example, Asian markets appear to be conducive to the proliferation of copyright violations in many different forms, material and otherwise. By imposing our Western/North American values and perspectives on copyright and intellectual property, we fail to recognize and understand the cultural values that exist and fundamentally impact other cultural markets and economies internationally.

There seems to exist a need to understand educational networks not just for academic reasons, but also to develop an understanding of the social and cultural context that leads to the protection (or not) of intellectual property. These contexts are essential in moving forward with our approaches and dealings towards ethics and jurisprudence as related to technology in both commercial and educational terms. It’s important for our students to understand that technology itself isn’t inherently designed in favour of either positive or negative, good or bad functions and uses, but that ongoing trends of technological innovation and use are shaped by social and cultural considerations that are impacted by examples of meaning and practice that vary internationally.

The implications for education and intellectual property are profound and require careful thought and consideration. If we are viewing the creative and distributive functions of online sharing and learning through a Western/North American perspective, then we are applying our belief and value systems to regions of the world that do not necessarily share the same values and priorities. Is this a direct result of the Western domination and English linguistic superiority of the Internet? When applied to the field of education, these considerations need to be recognized and effectively addressed in order to provide opportunities for students to learn in ways that are personally meaningful (socially and culturally) and relevant while allowing for multiple means of expression. In terms of global learning, Western educators must consider the needs of other regions and cultures internationally, and it should not be assumed that the educational values or perspectives on intellectual property developed in North America will effectively match the interests or needs of students outside of the continent.

Without culture-specific material, there is the legitimate concern that different learning styles internationally may not be compatible with Western (primarily American) creations and developments. The perceived need for opportunities to discuss, collaborate, and argue around opinions and ideas may or may not hold real value in all social contexts and cultures around the globe. In a similar manner, the students in our own classrooms approach discussion and collaboration with different attitudes, both positive and negative. When planning instructional tasks for the classroom, we take the diverse and complex needs and values of our students into account, and the development of perspectives on intellectual property and online sharing should likewise be held to the same accountability.

Our students require (and deserve) personal connections and input into their learning, and the success of online learning is dependent upon the incorporation of relevant social and cultural values, as these values will vary widely across the globe. While the potential for online sharing and protection of intellectual property continues to develop, the success of their regulation hinges on the ability to identify with different cultures and nationalities in order to provide value and significance to diverse learning experiences. This will be no small feat, to be sure.

Social Media and Learning Environments

Bates (2014) emphasizes that students need structured support and selected content when engaging with social media. Students require structured educational experiences in order to provide support in developing skills in knowledge management and the responsible use of social media. One of Bates’ concepts that resonated with me was the statement that “students look for structure and guidance in their learning, and it is the responsibility of teachers to provide it” (2014). It seems to be so simply stated, and yet I feel that the need for structure and guidance sometimes gets overlooked when engaging students with new technology and media tools. New learning outcomes centered around knowledge and skills for developing responsible and effective use of social media should be an essential component of the classroom learning environment. As students are taught the skills to become independent learners, new opportunities emerge to engage students in authentic, collaborative learning environments.

By connecting students to real world problems through the use of social media, teachers such as Mrs. Caviness, as described by November (2012), expand teaching and learning beyond the confines of the physical classroom environment. Within the context of social media, ideas around the Blended and Flipped classroom models have been discussed within our school board for the past few years, but as of yet, these models seem to exist more as ideas rather than reality in classrooms. However, several colleagues at schools I have taught at use different aspects of each model to a certain degree, but resist using the “blended” or “flipped” label as applied to their classroom practice. Within these classrooms, the integration of digital access and content with face-to-face learning has come to shape the learning environment, and the students are motivated and engaged by the learner focused activities that are afforded to them through a flipped or blended model.

Considering the organization and structure of the Khan Academy, I’ve found the ideas of Salman Khan to be interesting in that blended and/or flipped learning environments are a means to “liberate” classrooms from the constraints of traditional learning models and text based or memorized content. I liked this idea, especially in terms of how both teachers and students can benefit from more active classroom learning as a result, and opportunities exist for linking social media with these learning models. Salman Khan describes this as being a means to take lectures “off the table,” thus liberating students and teachers to have more meaningful, engaging conversations and interactions during their time together in the physical classroom. Through the integration of social media, content may be accessed at home at any time, and students are then able to return to the classroom equipped with the key questions and considerations already in place to help move their learning and engagement forward. In this manner, teachers become role models in the effective integration of classroom learning, and students follow their teacher’s lead in engaging with content and learning in active, authentic ways.

One consideration to bear in mind, in accordance with Bates’ SECTION framework (2014), requires that the realities of student access to technology are an essential component of planning and designing learning tasks for social media integration. As November (2014) states, “unfortunately, many students do not see the educational value of a tool they might be using every day.” As educators, we must also appreciate the fact that daily interactions with technology outside of the school context will vary greatly from student to student.

 

Video retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/salman-khan-academy-flipped-classroom-video

 

References

Teacher Voice, Reading and Assessment?

I recently came across a statement in John Hattie and Gregory Yate’s Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn (2014) that resonated with me and shed some light on the perspective of teacher talk and its impact on student learning and assessment strategies.  As Hattie and Yates (2014) state, “a great deal of information flows through teachers’ talk. But when a teacher exposes students to high levels of their talk, the students’ basis for knowing what is relevant or not can be undermined.” As teachers, how does a lecturing style of instruction or overuse of teacher talk negatively impact the learning and development of our students? We see it in our classrooms frequently, and we identify areas of concern for students who can’t seem to sit still or can’t seem to listen. But are our expectations reasonable, or even appropriate for the learning of our students?  In turn, I’m wondering how this translates into online learning, and whether a reliance on reading texts and materials might have a similar impact on student focus and learning.

According to Hattie and Yates, studies into the characteristics of effective teachers have found that material is best suited to learning when explained in 5 to 7 minute bursts (2014). Mental focus drops off significantly after 10 minutes, and other information overload factors come into play, as students’ ability to listen and focus intensively (or to try and focus) literally runs out through biological exhaustion in accordance with glucose levels available to the brain. As students try and conserve these energies for upcoming tasks and trials in the school day, mind wandering or other inattentive behaviours become adaptive strategies for the conservation of their physical and biological resources for learning (Hattie & Yates 2014).  If we are basing online learning around a “new” style of lecturing, whether that be through videos or reading, what effect will this have on student behaviour?  Is it reasonable to base assessment strategies around these methods of instructional delivery?

With information processing and mental organization, our minds aim for simplicity, but the input through excessive teacher talk creates an implication of complexity. Creating opportunities for meaningful student discussion, enhanced with authentic student voice, can help support students through building opportunities to promote higher order thinking. By reducing, and refocusing, teacher involvement in these discussions, students can be guided towards deepening their knowledge and understanding while shifting teachers’ roles away from more traditional models, both in the classroom and in online learning environments.

References

Hattie, J. & Yates, G. (2014). Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn. New York: Taylor & Francis.

 

Assignment #2 Reflection

After selecting Moodle as my LMS of choice, I found that determining a topic or focus area for the course was challenging, as I intended to create modules that would be as interactive and engaging as possible for students at the Grade 5 and 6 level. I was aiming to create a course that would be challenging, interactive and collaborative for students, without a heavy focus on reading materials or passive acquisition of information. Basically, I intended to have the students designing, creating and guiding their own learning, while working to support the learning of their peers. With gaming being such a prevalent focus in the lives of our students, I eventually selected the Scratch 2.0 programming language as a focus area that would engage students with opportunities to design and create multimedia projects, such as video games, while connecting with cross curricular subject areas for students to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding.

Scratch 2.0 is a visual programming language that provides students of all ages with an opportunity to create interactive stories, projects, games and animations. Scratch 2.0 was developed by the Lifelong Kindergarten Group at MIT, and is a free web based programming language that supports students in learning to work with code in a user friendly, visual educational environment. Users program in Scratch 2.0 by working with blocks of code and attaching them together like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle in order to create programs called scripts. Through designing and building with blocks of code, the students participate in “Drag and Drop Programming,” and the online environment of Scratch 2.0 allows for collaborating and sharing ideas and projects amongst users across the Scratch community.

Inspired by constructivist approaches to learning, programming using Scratch 2.0 emphasizes the concepts of designing, creating, personalizing, collaborating, sharing and reflecting. Within the context of the modules of the LMS, my students will have an opportunity to familiarize themselves with Scratch 2.0 by creating their own personal accounts, which allows for collaboration amongst Scratch users, as well sharing projects and ideas while learning from each other. By completing the 8-week series of learning modules, students will learn the basics of Scratch programming through the use of discussions, resources, and video tutorials. This work forms the foundation of programming skills in Scratch 2.0, and will support the students in completing the design challenge and multimedia project, which allows for exploration of more complex programming concepts through the design and creation of an original project linked to the Grade 5 and 6 Language Arts curriculum.

According to the Bates SECTIONS framework (2014), the first step in selecting technology is to know your students, their similarities and differences, what technologies they already have access to, and what digital skills they already possess or lack. Students have extensive interest and experience in playing video games, and through immersion in the design and creation of games and multimedia projects, students will be able to engage in opportunities within stimulating and challenging learning situations that support and reward their knowledge acquisition and skill development.  Immersion further provides students with affordances for creativity and independence to learn within the environment of the Scratch 2.0 programming language while being encouraged to develop skills quickly through design and play. The reality is that if students are able to engage in tasks that enable their attention to be fully engrossed and absorbed in the activity, the end result will be significant learning through knowledge and skill development.

With these considerations forming the basis of the planning and design for the Scratch 2.0 coursework, I worked within the Moodle LMS to begin to create modules with the following goals and learning opportunities in mind:

  • provide opportunities for students to engage in self-directed, independent learning
  • promote a collaborative, supportive learning environment whereby students are able to teach and learn from each other
  • reinforce the importance of skills in designing, planning, creating, problem solving, sharing and evaluating
  • develop student understanding and application when working with programming tools for designing and creating multimedia projects
  • enhance student knowledge and awareness of emerging standards and practices in media creation
  • support students with opportunities to reflect and evaluate throughout the project while providing actionable feedback through formative assessment
  • provide opportunities for students to apply planning and problem solving strategies to authentic learning opportunities in order to attain fundamental skills and experiences necessary for 21st century learning environments

According to Anderson (2008), the affordances of the web can be leveraged to enhance generalized learning contexts, and collaboration and reflection play an important role in creating these contexts. Through the student discussions in the LMS, as well as through interacting within the confines of the Scratch 2.0 website and wiki, the students enrolled in the course will be exposed to ideas and opinions of their peers and will be challenged and motivated to demonstrate their learning through creative outlets in the Scratch 2.0 environment. As part of the culminating assignment in the final weeks of the course, students will share and discuss their original project work with their peers, and they will provide independent reflective feedback on the design process that they engaged in throughout the project work. The modules will present the students with a variety of different project and assessment opportunities, including reflective, metacognitive assignments that enable them to track and critique their own learning processes.

As the course layout and design becomes crucial in creating adaptive content to meet changing needs and learning objectives (Spiro, 2014), the assessment opportunities for students must also be adaptive to these diverse and changing needs. By providing varied assessment opportunities that allow students to demonstrate their learning in personalized and creative ways, students are presented with opportunities to develop essential skills. Through engaging in tasks and projects that allow for meaningful, collaborative problem solving and the demonstration of creativity in developing a solution, students are assessed in situations where their learning experiences can positively and meaningfully impact the experiences of their peers. According to Ciampa (2013), students enjoy having their efforts and achievements recognized by others, and in order to make this learning visible, an environment must be created that allows for the engagement of motivation through recognition. In order for an environment to engage the motivation for recognition, the results of the individual’s activities must be visible to other people, and the work of the students enrolled in the Scratch 2.0 course will be shared and discussed amongst all members of the learning community, not just through interactions with myself as the course teacher.

Bates’ SECTIONS framework (2014) states that assessment should also be influenced by the knowledge and skills that students need in a digital age, which means focusing as much on assessing skills as knowledge of content. In turn, this encourages the development of authentic skills that require understanding of content, knowledge management, problem solving, collaborative learning, evaluation, creativity and practical outcomes. Through the inclusion of relevant and practical project work in the Scratch 2.0 course, students will have opportunities to demonstrate a high level of skill and imagination. According to Gibbs (2005), students need to understand criteria in order to orient themselves appropriately to the assignment, and assessment must perform a role in conveying the standard that students have to aspire to. The final design project includes a rubric that students will be able to reference throughout the course in order to determine where they would situate themselves in the assessment categories. By making these categories visible and explicit to the students, they are provided with opportunities to engage in formative, self-reflective assessment throughout the 8-week course timeframe, while ultimately being held accountable for their own efforts and engagement in their learning. When Bates argues that “nothing is likely to drive student learning more than the method of assessment (2014),” it seems that this statement holds significant truth in terms of how assessment can both positively and negatively impact the learning experiences of our students.

 

References

Anderson, T. (2008a). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University.

Bates, J. (2014). Teaching in a digital age. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31.

Spiro, K. (2014). 5 elearning trends leading to the end of the learning management systems. Retrieved from http://elearningindustry.com/5-elearning-trends-leading-to-the-end-of-the-learning-management-system

 

 

Online Affordances

Within the contexts of online learning its affordances, students and teachers are both consumers and producers of media. Digital citizenship and media literacies emphasize the importance of developing the essential skills and perspectives that enable us to interact with media in meaningful, productive and creative ways. For our students, this is an especially important area of focus, as these are skills that translate beyond the confines of classrooms or schools. Media literacies aim to enhance the sense of citizenship and creative expression that allow us to participate in the production of media while contributing to a collective intelligence, whether that be amongst students or professional colleagues. Building on the foundations of traditional literacy skills, media literacies are skills and approaches that can be applied to new media artifacts, such as blogs, wikis, games, graphics or movies.

The collaborative nature of the wiki, and the wider audience that the wiki entries would potentially reach, create a sense of greater importance for the need to revise and revisit work continually during the process of writing and creating. In my own grade 5/6 classroom, I found that my students took a keen interest in writing their entries initially, but would continue to revise their work as they realized that their entries were receiving an increasing number of views. Through this work, the students placed an importance in the process of writing, and they came to understand that their wiki entries weren’t a finished product, but rather a changing document that continued to be a work in progress. In this sense, the approach to new media literacies supported the students in further developing their traditional literacy skills.

Anderson (2008) discusses the ways through which the affordances of the web can be leveraged to enhance generalized learning contexts, and the importance of the roles that collaboration and reflection play in creating these contexts. The notion of “repackaging” content resonated with me, and I started thinking about how we, as educators, often repackage content for our learners both in terms of classroom and online learning. When we take texts or lectures and make these available to students online, we’ve simply given traditional methods of instruction the appearances of a 21st century look, and Anderson offers guidance as to how we can take the affordances of new media to create transformational learning experiences.

Anderson’s ideas around the overlapping attributes of learning offer insight into how online and blended or flipped learning environments can move us away from the constraints of didactic content and traditional learning models. Teachers and students can benefit from more active, collaborative classroom learning, resulting from more meaningful, engaging conversations and interactions, both in terms of teacher-student and student-student connections. By removing the lecture component from classroom practice and shifting this emphasis onto the students to engage with at home, the time spent by students at school in the classroom environment can be more effectively utilized for inquiry and project based learning. Students access and learn the online content at home, and they return to school prepared with the knowledge to engage in meaningful tasks in the classroom. This places a considerable responsibility and onus on the part of the student (and parents) to ensure that content is learned at home in time for classroom application. For motivated and engaged students, this model seems to hold significant learning potential and possibilities, but for students who lack support or suitable learning environments at home, how would the flipped model appeal to the realities of their social and educational needs?

In terms of assessment, in online environments, students may decide which endeavours are most deserving of their time by determining where the greatest opportunity for reward exists. If the regurgitation of information on an exam is required for this reward, then students will aim to achieve according to this goal, despite the fact that these approaches limit the amount of real learning that takes place. Where the focus needs to be placed is upon providing varied assessment opportunities that allow students to demonstrate their learning in personalized and creative ways. Students are often assessed in situations where they are isolated from their peers, and essentially cut off from accessing information. In these assessment situations, students are not provided with opportunities to develop essential skills, and they are not responsible for taking ownership of assessment. Online learning offers affordances to help overcome these obstacles by allowing for meaningful, collaborative problem solving and the demonstration of creativity in developing a solution. Thereby, students are provided with affordances to further develop their problem solving skills, while continuing to build their personal resilience and perseverance when faced with difficulties or challenges during the learning process.

 

References

Anderson, T. (2008a). Towards a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University.

 

 

Rethink the course, Trinh.

The number of students that are enrolled in Trinh’s courses has become totally unmanageable. She may need to start by considering the ways in which she is setting up her course and delivering the course content. In particular, what are the learning goals that she intends for her students to achieve, and does the course currently manage to support and guide students in meeting these goals? The course itself may need to be completely redesigned in order to accommodate the large number of enrolled students, or perhaps the course needs to be offered at multiple times during the term or semester, but for a shorter duration and with a smaller enrollment for each course.

As far as Trinh’s communication management is concerned, the need to streamline her accessibility seems to be the most pressing need. Instead of having multiple methods for her students to contact her to ask questions, there should really only be two: online discussion postings and e-mail. The benefits of creating discussion threads have already been discussed within our group, so I won’t get too detailed here so as to avoid being redundant. But creating online discussion threads would allow for all enrolled students to view the questions and responses of their fellow classmates before submitting their own, which would hopefully eliminate repeated questions being asked. The discussion threads would also allow for students in the course to answer and respond to each other questions, and this would help support the enhancement of social presence, as described by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (1999), that functions in a supportive context to develop open communication for building understanding within the group.

Trinh could help to manage the discussion threads by organizing these into groups according to topic, week, or technical vs academic queries, in similar ways to those experienced in the MET program. For any questions that are more personal or individualized in nature, Trinh should establish at the outset of the course a single means of e-mail communication, either through Blackboard e-mail or another e-mail address. She would need to be clear that any questions posted outside of these two methods would not be addressed and answered. As suggested in other postings for this week, creating an FAQ section would also be useful as a means for Trinh to share information about common queries, and these could be repurposed and posted at the outset of her next course offering to provide additional support and guidance for her students.

 

References

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. Retrieved from http://www.anitacrawley.net/Articles/GarrisonAndersonArcher2000.pdf

 

Phys Ed and Mobile Technology

In my own experiences at several different elementary schools across Calgary, the most significant mobile technology has been the iPad, as the overwhelming majority of our students at the K-4 grade level do not own phones nor bring them to school. We currently have a district wide mobile technology contract that students and parents need to read through and sign before permission can be granted to individual students to bring mobile devices to school. Some of our grade 4 students bring their phones to school, but they turn them off during the school day and only use them at the end of the day to communicate with parents or friends. Truthfully, the schools that I’ve taught at over the years have been very well equipped with iPads and laptops, and the students haven’t demonstrated much interest in using their phones during class time, despite the fact that they would have permission to do so while under teacher supervision. With regular access to iPads and laptops across the school, our students don’t seem to feel the need or see the benefit in using their phones to complete tasks and assignments that could just as easily be completed with our school owned mobile devices.

As far as my own pedagogy is concerned, mobile technology has been an important part of my teaching practice in Physical Education. While I don’t often make use of laptops in the gym, iPads have become a part of our shared experiences in daily physical activity. In particular, even a single iPad in the gym can be implemented in a variety of ways to support student learning and achievement while encouraging collaboration and feedback. Compared to other curriculum areas, Technology and Physical Education are not quite as readily connected with each other, despite the fact that there exists tremendous potential for the use of mobile technology, including iPads, in daily physical education classes. With the demand for focus and funding in other curriculum areas oftentimes being driven from administration or district levels, teachers are often left lacking the knowledge or support to connect technology with Phys Ed. Nevertheless, teachers can integrate mobile technology into daily physical activity to help enhance and support student learning, progress, and achievement.

A single iPad in the gym, especially when connected to a projector, becomes a powerful means of presenting or displaying information to students. This could include demonstrating skills, instruction of new games and activities, sharing of goals and objectives, and communicating information and ideas in ways that get students excited, motivated, and engaged about physical activity. The use of iPads offers opportunities to utilize a wide variety of instructional videos and game demonstrations to provide visual support for student learning. Scoreboards and timers are no longer required tools in physical education sessions, as iPads offer a wide variety of apps for use in keeping score in games or timing student performance. These scores and times can be saved and documented as part of daily formative assessment in Phys Ed.

With an iPad on hand, teachers always have a camera to photograph or video record student activity and document progress. According to Ciampa (2013), students enjoy having their efforts and achievements recognized by others, and in order to make this learning visible, an environment must be created that allows for the engagement of motivation through recognition. Mobile technology, including iPads, provide affordances for this type of collaboration and recognition, and students’ ability to learn and perform motor skills increases with the use of tools such as digital video. By recording students performing a skill or task, teachers have a means of providing meaningful formative assessment directly to students to help guide their learning and development. Through the opportunity to watch themselves performing these skills or tasks, students are able to analyze techniques and self-reflect to guide further progression in Physical Literacy. Collaboration becomes an important component of video analysis, as students are able to watch and critique the work and progress of their peers, while providing constructive feedback to help guide reflection and further skill development. Videos may also be used as a method of summative assessment to document student achievement at the end of a particular unit, or while performing a routine or planned series of skills. Numerous apps are available for use in Video Analysis, with many of these allowing for complex and detailed examinations of skills and techniques, including those utilized by athletes and coaches at high levels of competition.

With the ultimate goal of promoting student motivation and increasing overall participation and engagement, iPads can be used to infuse gamification into daily physical activity. Apps that guide or instruct students in learning skills and movements can enhance teaching and learning in Physical Education, and these can be utilized by individual students, small groups, or during whole class activities. Augmented Reality offers exciting new possibilities in delivering engaging physical activity to students. The use of iPads in physical education can help support and enhance student knowledge, motivation and skill development, while providing teachers with opportunities to engage in varied methods of documenting student progress and achievement in formative and summative assessment. When implementing technology in Physical Education, it becomes essential that lessons follow the guidelines outlined in Bates’ SECTIONS framework (2014) and continue to be based on achieving a maximum level of student activity, rather than focusing on the skill of using the technology. The use of iPads offers students and teachers significant benefits while requiring minimal time to learn and implement during Physical Education lessons.

 

References

Bates, J. (2014). Teaching in a digital age, Chapter 8. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12036/epdf