Author Archives: kimd

Final Reflection

Overall Course Experience

This course has provided a multitude of learning opportunities both for myself and for my students. The thought that resonates most strongly with me is that of “Prensky asks not how students learn, but more specifically how do they learn what?” (Anderson, 2008, p. 62). This course has provided us with many options for best learning under a variety of learning situations.

As educators, we are frequently asked to evaluate appropriate technologies for our school. This can be a daunting task, particularly with the large volumes of apps, devices and sites continually  becoming available. Developing an understanding of the SECTIONS framework (Bates, 2014) gives us a frame of reference for evaluating technologies that is comprehensive and easy to follow. I found it amazing that it could be used for massive choices such as an LMS for a University and yet still be relevant for a classroom based app application. Not every section is applicable each time or to the same extent each time we use it, however it gives us a solid framework to delve into these decisions. We can feel confident we have considered most angles effectively after applying this framework to the decisions.

The assignment for designing with an LMS was a challenge worth pursuing. Although I have experience with a similar platform, it was interesting to see the limitations and opportunities that differ between the various LMS platforms. Using Moodle allows me to better understand LMS as a whole and also the technical applications of the program. I typically have used an LMS platform as a supplement to my regular classroom. I have not to this point, ever developed an entire unit to be delivered almost entirely online. Within the elementary setting, students typically perform their unit as a blended experience, however this unit would afford me the time to spend with individual students rather than on instructing each segment as we go. It also allows students to adjust their pace of learning and extend their learning to their home environment. Parents being able to view the assignment from start to finish develop a stronger understanding of the way project based learning works in schools. Spending time developing the unit in consideration of all elements the students would need to perform in order to be successful in advance of them undertaking the unit, made for critical thinking and planning. The challenge is losing some level of adaptability as the course progresses, that would normally be found in a f2f classroom.

The case studies were an effective way to apply the knowledge gained in the reading. It was a helpful process to read the reflections of others, who are tackling the same case. Seeing the perspective of our classmates helped to fill in gaps or perspectives we had not considered. The collaborative nature of the discussions sparked new ways of thinking. Putting the learning in context defines and synthesizes the content bringing an authentic experience to life. I would like to use case studies more often with my students in a variety of curricular areas.

Personal Goals- Reflection of Flight Path

Teachers as Learners

After participating in the learning tasks for this course, I feel better prepared to assist teachers in implementing technology into their classrooms. Have a task such as designing a digital story for a course they are teaching, results in teachers learning a variety of digital story programs through a meaningful product. Rather than simply showing them a digital story program first and asking them to create a story, the reverse was used in this course. Envision your digital story and then determine the program that best suits your needs. This does take a much greater amount of ‘play’ time, however I believe it would be worthwhile. As teachers move through a project they learn the components of the program that they need, expanding as they go. For example, with the digital story in Videoscribe, I learned how to place objects first, and then add sound later. Unfortunately I watched the section of the tutorial after the fact that explained to do the voiceover first. This is all part of the learning experience. As teachers gain familiarity with a program, they are able to assist others and look for additional possibilities for application in their classrooms. Effective implementation begins with visible support of technology by the school leadership team. Modelling new strategies, supporting trying new things, recognizing the effort and progress of staff, providing time for technology learning and resources, positively impact implementation (CITEd, 2015).

Effective PD needs to be ongoing and anchored in authentic learning tasks. It is beneficial to create an environment where teachers have input into their PD options, are encouraged to take risks, participate in conversations that critique current pedagogical strategies and determine ways to implement technology in meaningful ways. (CITEd, 2015).  PD that implements relatively simple uses that help teachers achieve their current goals is often more effective than introducing technologies to achieve new goals (Ertmer, 2005). Building knowledge through incremental steps, increases teacher confidence and willingness to attempt larger changes (Ertmer, 2005). I now feel more capable of implementing these ideas.

Assessment Through Technology

I was fortunate early in my career to be introduced to an LMS platform. Although neither Moodle or Connect has been approved by our school board, they are both similar to D2L which is the platform we currently use. Having this background allowed me to explore more of the pedagogy that goes with an LMS system. I typically use our LMS for delivering course content, housing links for further exploration and class discussions. Having assessment as an assignment component was a new way for me to leverage technology. I found creating the online quiz particularly useful. Providing feedback to 25 grade 5 students can be extremely challenging Understanding the importance of feedback thorough the work of John Hattie, who states in his bookVisible Learning, that feedback was one of the top 10 influences on student achievement (Hattie, 2009). The more ways meaningful feedback can be provided, the greater the impact on student achievement. Designing a quiz that provides corrective feedback for incorrect answers and positive affirmation in terms of score for correct answers is a way to increase immediate formative feedback with minimal teacher time. Inserting hints into questions can also be used to trigger memory and review content. Adjusting the settings so that students can take the exam more than once to demonstrate improved learning is also a great way to increase achievement. Lastly, using the question bank, weekly exam questions could selected as a unit review before summative testing or as a review throughout the unit.

Social Media

I do not feel I met my social media goal. I did gain a greater understanding of the possibilities but did not apply these programs in meaningful ways. I appreciated the Twitter feed on the side of the course and did use these suggestions throughout the course. I did renew my Twitter account and follow the class conversation, however I do not find Twitter intuitive and it is a struggle for me to participate in this way. I was hoping as I became more familiar with the program, I would become more comfortable and see a stronger fit into my teaching. This did not develop which perhaps speaks to the fact that technologies are personalized and not every technology works for every person. I much prefer to read blogs, webpages and chats. I will continue to persevere in improving my Twitter comfort zone.

Next Steps

Next year I will likely be tasked with teaching Kindergarten for the first time in my career. As a Learning Leader I have consistently challenged the concept that Kindergarten kids are not able to use technology effectively in school, as has been often suggested by the Kindergarten teachers I work with. This will be my chance to demonstrate my belief that in fact, all school age children can use technology in tremendously valuable ways. I would like to challenge myself to use the technologies we have explored such as LMS and digital stories with this age group. When many students are pre-literate, a reliance on visuals and auditory cues becomes highly important. Watching my son and his friends play on the iPad and our computer, I have no doubt about the ability of children to navigate technological resources when they are motivated by a purpose. An LMS at this age would also be largely geared towards engaging the parents. Information, educational links, videos, student work, responses to homework, etc. can provide a consistent home/school link.

In terms of assessment, I would like to produce an attempt at using computer-aided assessment as suggested by Jenkins. “It is also possible for CAA to be adaptive, in that the outcomes of an assessment can be used to determine further questions or information that the student needs to address. Thus it is possible to guide students through a programme based on their responses at key stages, in a way that is appropriate for their specific learning requirements.” (Jenkens, 2004, p. 69) I am as of yet, unclear of how to use the technology available in an LMS to program responses to personalize next steps in learning however I motivated to try. This would be another example of improved feedback for learning with a reduction to teacher workload.

As new technologies are constantly being introduced an evolving, I plan to continue to delve into new products and possibilities. I plan to apply strategies that align with the future trajectory as outlined in the NMC Horizon Report (NMC, 2015). Forecasting where our students are going and what they will need to be successful is highly valuable. I will continue to read this report in the future to keep up with trends and new possibilities for our staff and our students.

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Toward a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.) Theory and Practice of Online Learning, Chapter 2 (pp. 45-74).

Retrieved from: http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120146

Bates. T. (2014). Teaching in a digital age. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/chapter/5-8-assessment-of-learning/ (Appendix 1. A8)

CITEd (2015) Technology Implementation in Schools: Key Factors to Consider. Retrieved from:  http://www.cited.org/index.aspx?page_id=187.

Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development , 53(4), 25-39.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

Jenkins, M. (2004).  Unfulfilled promise: Formative assessment using computer-aided assessment. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, i, 67-80. Retrieved from http://www2.glos.ac.uk/offload/tli/lets/lathe/issue1/articles/jenkins.pdf

New Media Consortium. (2015). NMC Horizon Report 2015: Higher ed edition. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2015-nmc-horizon-report-HE-EN.pdf

LMS & Digital Story Reflection

This assignment combined multiple relevant teaching elements. Blending an online learning environment with strong pedagogical strategies to complete an entire module of learning was new to me. As an elementary generalist, we typically would use some of these elements but do not typically develop fully LMS directed courses. For my project, students would undertake many of the course components while under my supervision and facilitation. When moving towards a more constructivist design of teacher where learning is more personalized, finding time to manage all the student’s needs can be overwhelming. Have an LMS module in a blended learning classroom would allow students to have a set direction and instruction without having the need for content delivery by the teacher. Students can gain and explore content through the activities. The teacher can then monitor progress within the class as well as online. Work is recorded and shared with classmates and the teacher. Interventions can happen as just-int-time learning opportunities. Assessment becomes more visible and a record of learning is housed within the project.

There are multiple challenges to using this platform within my teaching context. Primarily, access to technology can be a significant barrier. Although BYOD is becoming more common, we continue to rely on school based technology. In order to run a module like this, large amounts of computer time are required and may not always be available. Secondly, students require significant skills to work independently. They must follow this module in sequential order or the project will not be successful. Management tools such as the order established and the check boxes for completion are designed to help students manage their progress. Thirdly, a reasonable amount of technological skills are required for students to navigate the LMS and complete the assignments. Fourth, setting up the module is considerably time consuming as is the review of all student work housed within the module. This is beneficial if one teaches the same grade or similar content in following years or for multiple classes. The LMS is easily adaptable for future use and scalable for no additional cost, but the time commitment is significant.

In terms of course development, I worked towards adherence to the belief that effective learning is community-centred, knowledge-centred, learner-centred, and assessment-centred (Anderson, 2008). Though developing lessons to assess and then build background knowledge accessible to each student, I was able to create a learner centered environment. Information was presented through video, audio, text (variety of reading levels) and with a variety of scaffolds such as graphic organizers. Assessment occurred through multiple types, including a quiz with immediate feedback, written discussions, project rubric and self and peer assessment opportunities. Students worked collaboratively and at some points created curriculum together and at other times took on a specialized role within their group. Students were given a purpose of sharing their project with others in the school as a way to promote healthy living and a homework assignment to introduce yoga to their families.

The digital story was for me like many new learning platforms, exciting to learn but frustrating as well. I had never used VideoScribe. I wanted to use the opportunity to learn a new platform and potential form of delivery. To assess my choice I applied the SECTIONS framework (Bates, 2014).

Students at the grade 5 range are a demographic that respond well to video learning and animations in particular. VideoScibe animations would likely appeal to them as it uses digital representations ‘drawn’ as if by magic. Using visuals along with audio overlay and musical enhancements, appeals to a wide range of students. The students can access the video and replay in order to review or repeat content. In terms of access, students can view the video on personal devices or it could be displayed with a projector as a whole group. Very little technical knowledge is required.

Ease of Use- This program worked differently than other digital story telling programs I have used before. Although some video tutorials were available, they tended to be quite lengthly and difficult to isolate the one element I was trying to learn. It became an investment of several hours to watch all of the videos I needed to feel confident. I tried ‘playing’ with the software on my own, however this only lead to high levels of frustration. If I was going to teach this to the students I would want to develop my own tutorials. Once I got the hang of the program, it was more simplistic in its options than I thought. Adding voiceover could not be done in sections, but rather as one large recording. Matching the pictures to the audio was straight forward and generally accurate, however, the music overlay was an all or nothing. It had to over all the track with an option to loop or not at all. I found this very limiting.

Cost- Part of the allure of this program was the trial version is free for 1 week. This provided me with an opportunity to test out its capabilities without being held to a subscription. With options to pay monthly or yearly, flexibility was built in. They do offer educational pricing by application so I am unsure of the accessibility of cost to a school.

Teaching- In designing my video, I worked to align with Talbert’s key design principles (Bates, 2014):

Keep it Simple: focus on one idea at a time.

Keep it Short: keep videos to a length 5-6 minutes max. to maximize attention.

Keep it Real: model the decision making and problem solving processes of expert learners.

Keep it Good: be intentional about planning the video. Strive to produce the best video and audio quality possible.

Using Videoscribe allows one picture to be drawn at a time which isolates and slows down the presentation of information. Each visual need to be chosen to represent a concept and the program builds these together for effect. Some animation programs use a computer to read an entered script, while Videoscribe requires you to record a human voice, much more pleasing for the listener (Bates, 2014).

Interaction- In terms of interaction with a recorded digital story, limited interaction occurs. Students view this information but are not required to respond inherently with the content. How the digital story is used creates the interactions. After watching this video and other information sources, students are required to demonstrate their learning. This learning is evident individually during the building background stage and collaboratively when students are asked to apply this information into their final projects.

Organization- My current employer has not included Videoscribe on the approved Web Tools list. This restriction would allow me to create a digital story on my own as a teaching tool and share it Youtube for example, however I would not be able to teach this program with my students. Other programs such as Scribjab have received approval so an application could be made after due diligence on the safety and security of information was cleared.

Networking- This, as with most digital storytelling platforms, has limited networking capabilities. The file can be easily saved and converted into a video file shareable on Youtube. The video can then be used to share using discussions, blogs, social media, etc.

Security and Privacy- Videoscribe has a detailed security and privacy policy. Additionally it is one of the more secure options as it does not use personal photos or identifiable student features. The only identifiable features would be the voice over which is would be difficult for recognition. Other digital story software often incorporates  student photos which if stored off-site are typically not used in our school setting. The files you do create on Videoscribe remain associated with your login even after your free trial is over. If you decide to purchase at a later date, your creations from the trial period are again available to you.

Although the SECTIONS framework had some limitations, it was helpful in weighing out potential options for digital storytelling.

Overall this project provided opportunities for learning many technological skills alongside solid pedagogical considerations. This LMS could be readily used with students to achieve a variety of curricular outcomes in ways that appeal to students in a digital age.

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. Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

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

Copyright in Education

Management of digital property in schools is becoming increasingly complex. Students assume that digital resources such as pictures, music, videos and documents are available for their use simply because they are ‘copyable’ resources. Spending time teaching students about who actually owns the property and how to utilize it is tricky. Even companies and  large corporations such as Blackboard and Microsoft cannot agree on the rules or how they should be followed.  Students are not typically trying to do anything illegal, or immoral, they simply assume that share sites such as Limeware are available and therefor useable. Educators need to explain the rules in forms that our students can understand, even at a very young age. Are teachers equipped with the necessary information and resources?

Here are a few resources available to help address this rather complex topic:

Your Digital Presence offers a basic overview and links to documents regarding Canadian Copyright laws in relatively easy to understand language: http://www.2learn.ca/ydp/copyrightabout.aspx

MediaSmarts lesson for grades 7-8 which addresses the relationship between intellectual property, copyright and trademark concepts:  http://mediasmarts.ca/lessonplan/up-and-away

Copyright Matters is a booklet designed to help teachers to understand and deliver accurate content regarding Canadian copyright laws: http://cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/291/Copyright_Matters.pdf

Of particular growing concern is the use of original content for reworking assignments. As digital representations become more popular as a means for sharing knowledge and learning, concerns around this property in classrooms is substantially heightened. I was particularly interested in #13 from the Copyright Matters booklet mentioned above,

“13. Can students and teachers use copyright-protected works to create new works?©

The Copyright Act contains a users’ right permitting anyone, not just students and teachers, to use copyright-protected works to create new works. This users’ right is referred to in the Copyright Act as “non-commercial user-generated content.” This users’ right can be found in section 29.21 of the Copyright Act as amended by the Copyright Modernization Act. The following conditions apply to the creation of non-commercial user-generated content:

1. It can only be used for non-commercial purposes.

2. The original source must be mentioned, if it is reasonable to do so.

3. The original work used to generate the content must have been acquired legally.

4. The resulting user-generated content does not have a “substantial adverse effect” on the market for the original work.

This users’ right permits students to use copyright-protected works to create videos, DVDs, or mash-ups, as long as the conditions above are all met.

The users’ right permits user-generated content created under provision of the Copyright Act to be disseminated. Dissemination includes uses such as posting a video to YouTube or a Web site.”

This excerpt clearly demonstrates the usage laws for content in schools. I was reassured of my own usage and my expectations of my students after reading this.

Overall, it is important for students and teachers to understand is that the rules are more open for educational purposes than for other industries. Bill C-11 allows for the expansion of ‘Fair Dealing’ law which states, “ “Fair Dealing is an exception that permits limited and non commercial copying for specific purposes. Fair Dealing is a user’s right that facilitates creativity and access to information by balancing the restrictions in the Copyright Act.” (2Learn.ca Education society, 2012) to educational means. Education has been included as an exemption in the following categories:

“-Publicly Available Materials on the Internet

-Distance Education

-Cinematographic works

-Reproduction in Class”

(2Learn.ca Education society, 2012)


Education as an expansion category and exempt from some of the restrictions of other industry should be communicated to students. Knowing that the rules that apply to them under and educational standard are different than when they are independently creating works outside the school domain, during their school years or beyond, when they enter the workforce. This difference is largely due to the purpose of educational works, for the greater good, rather than for profit. The spirit of these laws is that if works are properly cited, obtained in a way that is not prevented by protection strategies such as passwords and are used for educational rather than commercial means, generally the use of such resources is permitted.

Teachers should also be well informed. Incorrect use of digital resources whether intentional or not, is a serious issue. Lack of information regarding these laws may result in teachers shying away from using valuable resources. Teachers should demonstrate responsible digital citizenship in their own practice by informing themselves, their students and modelling compliant practices with copyright laws.

Noel, Wanda & Snel, Jordan. (2012) CMEC. Retrieved from: http://cmec.ca/publications/lists/publications/attachments/291/copyright_matters.pdf

Social Media Enhancements

  • What new learning outcomes could the use of social media help develop?

Social media in my experience, has been met with especially strong resistance by the school community. Social media tools are seemingly much more difficult to monitor and control than other types of technology such as internet searching. In order to maximize the benefits such as access to a globalized community (November & Mull, 2012), school boards will need to permit the usage of these technologies more quickly. Digital citizenship becomes highly important to ensure our students are communicating in appropriate ways and know how to handle a situation where other users may not be behaving appropriately.

That being said many new outcomes could be supported by the social media tools. Collaboration, critical thinking and creativity in general can be supported. The example in the November article of a teaching posing real world problems as she sees them in her day-to-day life and students responding in their out of school time (November & Mull, 2012) is essentially just-in-time homework. Data collection (Bates, 2014) is one area I had not previously considered. Using hashtags to group and sort information could be used in social studies, math and potentially science class. Group work linked in this same sorting style and viewed by all other students or perhaps the world, provides not only authentic reasons for completing the work, but also flexibility to group and regroup, and share information beyond your own group. Blogs can be used not only to document the learning items but also as a portfolio of the journey of learning. This type of platform can requires minimal technical knowledge but has the multimedia flexibility to afford many options for the student to express themselves.

  • Would it be better just to add social media to the course or to re-design it around social media?

While social media is a powerful communication and learning tool, I am not a supporter of building new courses to leverage the benefits. Like all technologies, social media tools are exactly that, tools. Re-designing course elements to take advantages of new ways of learning and demonstration of knowledge extends the strong learning avenues already established. Increasing collaboration and extending learning beyond the classroom, are two very beneficial elements to add to a course. Some social media supports asynchronous while others support synchronous communication. Both can be leveraged within a course to provide communication options that were not possible prior.

Assignment 2 Reflection

Setting out to design my LMS, I thought first of pedagogy. What is it I want the students to take away from their learning. How can this be assessed? What technologies can best support this learning? From this point I began an outline of the unit I wanted to design. Once the general outcomes were established, the learning activities were much easier to create.

Being new to Moodle created several interesting challenges. I have learned from past attempts using new software, that having a back-up is always a solid plan. I created most of my tasks in a word document with links and references in a sequential pattern. I initially watched the videos provided by our ETEC 565A course and then attempted to ‘play’ with the software. I always find this part frustrating, what I refer to the students as the ‘struggle to learn’ concept. After a bit of play time, I searched up more advanced videos on Moodle features. I now had enough knowledge to understand their directions and suggestions. Chunking the introductory module into sections, allowed for more manageable experimentation. If I made an error and ‘lost’ that section, it was easy to re-do and rework. Although Moodle shares similarities to D2L, the LMS system I have previously used, the differences in structure and loading information were substantially different.

My second focus after entering in the basic data, was to consider and revisit design elements. The primary elements I looked to achieve were based on Outten’s LMS Design Principles of appearance, navigation, accessibility, personalization and structure (Outten, 2012). Based on my audience of learners, grade 5 students who likely have not yet used an LMS, I wanted a streamlined appearance that was easy to follow.  I chose a clean look for the theme that used color to separate different components with visual interest that was not overwhelming or distracting. Increased interest and learning options were created by adding visuals and a variety of media such as video, discussion forums and surveys. I felt Moodle made navigation somewhat restrictive. Adding each element as an activity or a resource, limited the flow of a page into a resource as I have used before in website design. As far as I could tell, there is not a way to link one course element to the next i.e. through the use of buttons in Weebly. To overcome this challenge of navigation for elementary students, I kept the structure primarily sequential and added check boxes to keep track of progress. Where possible, activities and resources were added in a pop-up window, allowing students to close the activity and return to the main page without reloading, reducing extra steps. A forum for overall course questions and suggestions was kept separate and always accessible. Screen shots of the course were used as a reference where possible, to assist with navigation. Although BYOD is gaining ground in school, I based my accessibility for computer use only, as this is typical of a class I would teach. I tested all links to ensure they were working and went through the site in ‘student’ mode to ensure the site was working as planned. Several adjustments were identified using this method. Personalization was the most limited element of the introduction. Especially considering the audience, the design of the LMS for a first project would largely flow the same for all students. Moving onto course content, creating groups or variations may be more appropriate. The structure of the course was meant to loosely follow; resource, then activity, resource, activity format. Students first read the introduction and then participated in a forum unrelated to the course content to practice using some of the features and to get familiar with their classmates. This course would be used with students who attend face-to-face class together, however an introductory activity helps with the technical knowledge needed and further knowledge of their peers. Students were presented with some introductory information then asked to do a short pre-assessment. Research was followed by a discussion activity. Exploration of the final project was then followed by a quiz to assess understanding and show students areas they need to review.

In terms of assessment, I chose a shorter quiz and will design a project assessment. The quiz is summative of the learning in the introductory lesson. The questions were designed to ensure understanding of basic vocabulary and assess observations of what would be required for the final project. Using the student responses, a project assessment rubric will be created for the final project and listed in the content sections. This rubric will be used as a measure for feedback as suggested by Jenkins in an ongoing, frequent and comprehensive manner  (Jenkins, 2004). Students will refer to the rubric for self and peer assessment. It will provide feedback for where they currently are, as well as where they will need to be going. I would collect student ‘notes’ from their research through the class dropbox I typically have set up with my students, as this is a process that would be familiar.

Moving forward will be an exciting challenge. Communication with students will be ongoing and continue with discussion forums. Support through the project would be supported in a blended environment but I would aim for much feedback to delivered through the LMS. Students will continue to have tasks chunked, i,e, story writing, pose selection and filming as separate sections.

References

Jenkins, M. (2004).  Unfulfilled promise: Formative assessment using computer-aided assessment. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, i, 67-80. Retrieved from http://www2.glos.ac.uk/offload/tli/lets/lathe/issue1/articles/jenkins.pdf

Outten, Chad. (2012) LMS design principles. My Learning Space. Retrieved from: http://www.slideshare.net/mylearningspace/lms-design-principles

Boris: A review dilemma

I am wondering if Boris could be more intentional during the course as well as looking for review at the end. If he created touchpoint assessments, that could then be repeated at the end of the unit, he would get maximum student impact for less teacher workload. For example, if Boris created a multiple choice exam that provided information for incorrectly answered questions, students would have the review and a place to receive immediate learning opportunities. For example, if they get a question incorrect on one particular element, an interactive periodic table could pop up with information about that element. Other possibilities could be lab simulations, videos, review notes, connections to discussion forums, etc. This way the review is more frequent, more manageable and could be again used before the summative unit exam.

 

Purposeful Assessment

Assessment seems to be largely linked to purpose. Why are we using assessment? What is the assessment trying to achieve for the student? For the teacher? How do we know we are assessing what we aim to assess?

My first MET course was a surprise to me in this regard. In the entire course I received 11 sentences of feedback from my instructor. After pouring hours into the final paper, the feedback I received  was that I should have included headers. It felt like quite a let down. I had invested all this time and valuable learning into a paper, which was assigned a grade but the comments almost dismissed my work as of little importance. Thankfully, since then, I have discovered most courses have provided ample assessment opportunities, primarily through peer feedback of discussions and group assignments, but also regular and meaningful feedback from the instructors. Assignments with part A and part B submissions in particular I have found helpful. When receiving written feedback that is summative on part A but formative towards learning for part B, then a clear direction can be tackled.

The Gibbs & Simpson article this week raised a concept I hadn’t thought much about, mainly I believe, because my experience is in elementary school. They referred to, “different kinds of students: the ‘cue seekers’, who went out of their way to get out of the lecturer what was going to come up in the exam and what their personal preferences were; the ‘cue conscious’, who heard and paid attention to tips given out by their lecturers about what was important, and the ‘cue deaf’, for whom any such guidance passed straight over their heads.” (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005, p.4). In elementary school, grades are typically only provided twice a year at report card time and summarize an entire unit of study i.e. ‘Writes to communicate and express ideas and information”. Throughout the term, assessment is provided as verbal or written teacher feedback, rubric scores, peer or self assessments, none of which assign a ‘grade’. You never hear the question, Will this be on the test?, even if tests are one form of assessment used by teachers.  For these students, how do they maneuver or prioritize their learning or ‘hidden curriculum’ (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005). Is this a developmental concept that develops with age? Does the assignment of number or letter grades in later years change the way students approach the tasks? How does digital assessment change the way students identify the essential elements to achieve a higher grade rather than more solid understanding of the concepts? How can we ensure our assessments are leading our students to deeper understanding rather than grade chasing?

If the purpose of our assessment is formative and to advance student learning, then digital assessment can be very powerful. For example, a multiple choice test that is designed to assess what is learned at the end of the unit is not likely to achieve our outlined purpose. Several multiple choice exams spread throughout the unit provides a greater opportunity for learning, however changing the style of the multiple choice exam is likely to have the greatest impact of all. Adding media, i.e. pictures or video, questions with a ‘hints’ option, feedback for questions that were answered incorrectly or that include a student’s level of confidence in their answer are a few ways improve this traditional form of testing. Also, how teachers use the information obtained from these tests is relevant. Rather than simply recording a grade, if teachers compile answers and determine where most students answered incorrectly, an opportunity for class discussion arises. Was the question worded in a way that was difficult to understand? Does the concept require review? Would having students work in peer groups to debate their answers lead to increased understanding? Having students be able to re-try exams can also be beneficial to learning. This has traditionally been viewed as cheating. However if the purpose is for students to identify areas needing improvement, then students can learn those concepts and confirm their new understandings, which is the primary purpose of the assessment. Traditional assessment practices can be used in new ways to increase student achievement.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31. Retrieved fromhttp://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf

Jenkins, M. (2004).  Unfulfilled promise: Formative assessment using computer-aided assessment. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, i, 67-80. Retrieved fromhttp://www2.glos.ac.uk/offload/tli/lets/lathe/issue1/articles/jenkins.pdf

Learning Attributes Online

As I was reading the article, I was picturing primarily the online learning environment that we are using in this master’s program. I was wondering, does learning need to be all of: community-centred, knowledge-centred, learner-centred, and assessment-centred for effective learning to occur. In other words are each of these characteristics weighted equally in their impact on effective learning? What about if we vary the context (face-to-face versus online), the learner (child versus adult), or the content (math versus how to fly a hang glider)?”

I began questioning why I hadn’t been thinking about the learning in relation to my own classroom of elementary students. The quick answer is, the delivery of our course is completely online, whereby my classroom instruction is a blended environment of both face-to-face and online. I am interested to explore how these learning theories apply also to the blended classroom. If learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered and community-centered environments are essential elements in both face-to-face and online, would they be even more effective with a combination of both?

I particularly liked Prensky’s list of best practices for the various learning outcomes. He says, “ask not how students learn, but more specifically how do they learn what?” (Prensky, 2001). Anderson continues to state the belief that all of these activities can be achieved through online community activities or independent study activities (Anderson, 2008). I’d be interested to explore at a more detailed level, which activities would be best supported by face-to-face and which through e-learning. Schools have the option to harness the best of both worlds, if in fact we learn which option demonstrates best practice.

In my personal experience, I have used the D2L platform, similar to Blackboard. Even with young Elementary students, many of the features of the platform connect with the 4 types of learning environments mentioned in the article. Teaching students how to share through threaded discussions, author blogs, collaborate through document sharing such as Google Docs and student & teacher generated surveys and quizzes are some of the ways I tried to increase meaningful interactions. I would like to move into students having greater input into online content. Students could post videos (self-created or found) to demonstrate learning, create their own post topics and request feedback on work samples they have chosen i.e. piece of art, testing procedure for a science experiment, etc.

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Toward a theory of online learning. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.) Theory and Practice of Online Learning, Chapter 2 (pp. 45-74).

Retrieved from: http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120146

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Time Crunch

Trinh certainly has some challenges to overcome. Seeing that all her students are already on-line rather than face-to-face allows her some opportunities. She could create forums for general questions and encourage other students who know the answers to help out. There are often many ‘experts’ who could help with technical issues for example. Also by having a central question bank, answering a question once will likely clarify the same question for other students.

She could schedule an ‘office’ time where any students could join via video conferencing such as Skype. As was done with this course, these sessions could be taped for those who couldn’t make it, but were still interested in the information. (This was very helpful by the way, thank you).

Trinh could have one email account forwarded to the other, creating only one place to check which would also avoid people sending communications to both. She also could use the Do Not Reply feature depending on the information she was sending.

I had a professor who explained that they would be highly active during the week but took their weekends away from the course, so to only expect communication on weekdays. She could choose a time when she is not available for communication.

Students working in groups could be directed to ask questions within the group first, then select one team member to communicate with the instructor and relay the messages.

Using feedback from previous years of commonly asked questions, she could make changes to the course reflecting clarified instructions or expectations.

 

In a Mobile World

My primary teaching role is with grade 5 students in my own classroom environment. Additionally, I have the opportunity as a Learning Leader to work with other teachers or in an administrative capacity for a small portion of my work week. My experience with mobile devices is specific to both environments.

In our school, all teachers have an iPad. The philosophy of this investment was the belief that  teachers having ubiquitous access and shared learning experiences were more likely to integrate this type of technology into their classrooms in meaningful ways. Just after the purchase, we had a change of administration. This led us down a completely different path and professional development was shifted in a new direction. Teachers continued to have access but significantly less support.

Students have access through a mixed computer cart, half iPads (10) and half computers (10). Teachers sign out the cart on a individual need basis, with no present blocks of time or length of study requirements. Generally, the same handful of teachers consistently use this technology week to week, while other teachers have never been on the sign out sheet.

My challenge in the implementation process was to explore multiple ways to use the iPads. We wanted as a staff to identify highly engaging apps that did more than have the student follow a game such as Starfall. My partner Learning Leader and I were able to create a variety of projects which were then presented to staff and replicated at PD. For example, we created the Halls of Hogwarts. Each teacher created a Comic page (previous PD) introducing themselves to the students. We then taught the teachers how to use Aurasma an Augmented Reality site to bring their pages ‘to life.” They linked the page to a video recording, welcoming the students to the school. This project worked very well at the teacher level, but lead to limited replication in classrooms with students.

I was highly fortunate to be chosen to pilot a class set of Chromebooks. While maybe not exactly a mobile device in the sense of a phone or tablet, they are highly transportable and use app based programs. This was a huge success. Students having one-to-one access at all times during the school day afforded us opportunities for just-in-time learning and personalization of the resource. During my weekly time out of the classroom, a supply teacher covers my class. She couldn’t believe the difference in their behaviour and on-task time after receiving the Chromebooks. She was impressed with the level of engagement and the quality of the products they were producing. I found it especially helpful as we began to access Google docs frequently with the students. I even was able to leave an assignment for them, on a day I went to PD, and ‘observe’ their progress on my break at the workshop. 

The following are some examples of how we undertook projects in each of the motivational areas outlined in the Ciampa article (Ciampa, 2013).

Challenge- School wide use of Mathletics, an online learning platform that is customizable to student ability and support in class learning objectives. Students advance at their own pace, feedback is immediate and results are recorded for the student and teacher. New challenges become available as the student improves their skill.

Control- During a study of Literary Devices, students were asked to represent their topic i.e. alliteration or metaphor, using any representation platform. Almost all chose a digital representation; video, comic strip or digital book.

Curiosity – Cognitive curiosity was accessed during our debate unit. Students used a variety of digital sources (Youtube, websites, simulations, etc) to explore complex issues. The unit culminated with a debate on whether animals should be kept in zoos. Students brainstormed categories and worked together via a Google doc for their research. Each student was responsible for a specific topic but could also add information to someone else’s topic. When the final debate came, all students in the group were knowledgeable on each topic and developed a debate script collaboratively.

Cooperation -My student teacher used the Book Creator app for math. She was working with a group of students with identified learning disabilities in math. In partners, they explored the types of triangles and angles associated with each. They created a digital book that documented their learning along with examples of each in the everyday world. Working together led them to justify their ideas and check it against the reference documents. The evidence of learning was especially evident when after the unit was complete, several of the students continued to point out real world examples.

Competition- Interestingly, the greatest example of competition was with the typing program. A small group of students became highly competitive with their previous accomplishments and challenged each other to advance the levels. They began to practice at home and have typing competitions during indoor recess.

Recognition- When learning how to use the Chromebooks, we began to use an Experts board. Each time a student acquired a new technical skill or knowledge of an app, they added the skill to the board along with their name. This way, if another student wanted to learn that skill they quickly could discover who to ask for support.

Overall, the mobile device implementation was highly effective for those who tried. I believe much of our classroom success came from knowing we had continual access to the technology. Students would use the Chromebooks whenever the need would arise in the day which was different for each student. For example, some students chose to read websites instead of paper books in individual reading time, while others followed online stories or books we did not have in our library. Our biggest obstacles are sharing access, time and support for teachers to learn and explore the technologies, wireless access gets overloaded and can become painfully slow and networking problems with the server or student access. 

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