Monthly Archives: January 2017

In going through the various examples of technology in the classroom, I found Cases 3 & 6 to be good examples of some ways students can use technology.  Case 3 demonstrated how technology can be used to facilitate problem-based learning activities, helping to minimize, as Teacher A notes, the amount of traditional, transmissive teaching needing to be done.  In doing so, it allows students to construct their own knowledge particularly as the activity shown in the example was a problem-based one that challenged students to not only identify and verify scientific concepts, but to also devise their own testing method using the equipment available.  In addition, it allowed students to develop skills in many areas from scientific (usage of computers and lab equipment), social (collaborative learning environment), and analytic (troubleshooting equipment set ups and reviewing of data).

From this though, two questions did arise, one of which was address in the interview with Teacher C in case 6. In Case 6, technology is used as a way to facilitate more avenues of creativity by leveraging all the ways that computers and tablets can take various inputs (voice or picture/video) and synthesize various outputs (podcasts, slideshows/powerpoints, edited video).  The issue that Teacher C discusses is that of time and professional development as when he was asked how he learned how to use all the various programs, he lamented that much of it was done on his own with some provided by the district.  While teachers are granted regular prep blocks, it seems that there is more needed (and unbroken sessions of time) for the planning and implementation of these programs.  It is and always will be an issue but discussions about the realistic and pragmatic time needed and provided to teachers to work with these technologies will always be necessary.

The other question that Case 3 touched on was that of whether technology’s ability to remove more menial components of tasks is a detriment to skill development.  Teacher A mentions that measuring lengths and angles and using other tools are certainly skills in their own right, but also rightly points out that technology proves more time efficient by removing the more mundane tasks so that students can quickly get to the concepts at hand.  Developing fundamental skills may or may not necessary to accomplish a certain task (ie- one does not need to know how to develop film in a dark room to take a photo), but it does help to provide a depth of understanding.  Perhaps one of the approaches to this issue is to have a department discussion on how to develop these skills in earlier grades and transition towards more complex technology use in the higher grades.

I feel that these considerations are useful when thinking about how to integrate technology with any past activities or methods that teachers felt comfortable with.

After reviewing all of the video cases presented, there were a few things that stuck with me. The first one is that the more things change, the more the seem to stay the same. I was surprised to see that pre-service teachers had little exposure or teaching regarding technology and its use in the classroom, in spite of this being an important aspect of the need for 21st century learning skills, and that, when they were shown how to use various programs and hardware, they were still reluctant to incorporate this into their classroom teaching and learning plans. Particularly in Case 4, many of the teachers acknowledged the the integration of technology is important, and what they were learning was interesting and engaging, they stated that they would still be reluctant to use it in their own classroom because they were not “experts” and it would take too much time to implement it. I still find it odd that there are people who still consider themselves not “tech savvy”. To me this is like saying you are not math smart. Everyone is math smart and everyone can be tech savvy, it is a learning experience, not an innate talent. This tells me that there is not enough technology education for educators to allow them to feel competent about including this as part of their teaching. Many of the teachers using the technology in the classroom stated that they had educated themselves by taking classes, or learning from others, or just trying things out on their own. Many pre-service teachers seemed to be not willing or able to put the required time in to learning or using technology with their students.

Technology should not be used for the sake of using technology, it should be integrated as seamlessly as possible into the daily routine of the classroom, as a tool, not as a special event. Unfortunately, in many cases, this is impossible due to the lack of available devices. If a teacher has to sign out the devices well in advance it becomes a logistical nightmare to arrange the curriculum to be at the point when you can get the devices. Many projects require the devices to be available every day for most of the day, which is impossible in the sign them out scenarios. In a lot of cases, teachers will forgo using the technology and revert to older ways just for ease of use. This is one of my issues in the classroom. I would love to be able to teach my students how to use a variety of programs as the need arises, and as they would do in their future lives. You need to use programs, software, and devices for specific purposes and times. My computer is on all day with usually about 5-10 tabs open at any one time. I am constantly switching between programs and platforms as I go about my day planning, grading, researching, and creating. These are skills that my students need to learn also, but it would require a 1:1 classroom, which is impossible at the moment. This means it is very difficult to move into the 3rd stage of integration where students are using the tech to learn at their own pace. It seems to me that although there is a push from the ministry and school boards to integrate technology, there is not the equipment or training available to make this a reality.

The last thing that caught my attention was that a lot of the technology being used seemed to be older technology. In particular I was surprised to see Clickers being used in the post secondary classroom. I used them when they first came out and agree with everything the professor was saying, they do engage the students more as they are being made accountable for their learning in a large environment, it is easy to participate as they are anonymous in that they are numbered instead of names, however it is important for everyone to participate because you can see when someone has not responded. However, Clickers would be an expensive proposition for a class of 100 students, especially when there are programs like Kahoot or Plickers that utilize phones and personal devices to do a very similar activity. Of course, Clickers would likely be a one time expense and could be used very effectively for a number of classes over many years.

Overall, it seems that technology is advancing at a great rate in terms of its applicability to the classroom and the variety of programs and platforms available to use, but technology education, training, and understanding seems to continue to lag behind. I think that there should be a mandatory course or courses for the education of pre-service teachers in the use of technology in the classroom. This is the future.

It is an understatement to say that Teacher F is a fan of the TI-83.  The issue that he raised that was most compelling to me was the notion that using technology within the classroom is a way to bring the boys back into the academic arena.  I would also agree that in the last ten years, girls have been dominating in both my Math 10 and Physics 11/12 courses. Another voice on this issue would be Stanford professor and psychologist Philip Zimbardo, who did a Ted Talk a few years ago titled, “The Demise of Guys?” (< 5 minutes, if you have a moment).  Even today, I attended a meeting with my son’s Grade 5 teacher who remarked that Jaxon is the first to finish the worksheet, the journal entry, the art work, etc., however, when it comes to anything that is technology-based, he is the last to finish. In these activities, he goes beyond the minimum requirements; he loses himself in the task. As my family will be attending two Late French Immersion Open houses this week, I will be definitely favouring the school that has a better grasp on weaving technology into the curriculum, as it is clear to me that this is where my son shines.

On the topic of gender differences in technology-based environments, Teacher A raised a couple of interesting issues, as well. He noted that girls prefer to experiment with the computer simulations on their own, saving themselves any embarrassment as they navigate through their learning process, whereas boys appreciate the immediate gratification that technology can afford in the lab.  In my experience, most people would prefer to save themselves from any embarrassing moments in their high school career! In the two years that I have been integrating technology into my courses with purpose, I have equal numbers of sexes come to me with inhibitions and apprehensions. Being a female teacher, it is very possible that my female students have more confidence in themselves, and hence ask fewer questions.  (At least 50% of my students in Physics are female; sometimes more.)

Questions that I would like to leave with…

1. Does student engagement increase with the incorporation of technology into a unit?
2. Does engagement differ between male students and female students?
3. If there are gender differences surrounding student engagement, what are they and where do they stem from?

I thoroughly enjoy watching video cases. Part of this could be because I am more of a visual learner, but I also like the switch up from having to read article after article.

First of all, I have to say I LOVE the 360 video and am blown away by the possibilities it could bring to the classroom. I was so captivated by the first 360 videos that I decided to focus on Video Case 1: Secondary STEM and then I picked something a little more relevant to me with Video Case 5: Elementary Space Science.

Underlying Issues:

• Time
• Information or Knowledge and Tech Support

Time is something that is a very prevalent factor in many aspects of our profession as educators. It often comes as the first defence in numerous situations where we feel overwhelmed.

As teachers, we desperately need to get away from this notion that we are the information keepers, the brains, the knower of all, in order to effectively teach our 21st century learners. No longer is it possible for us to know all, nor should we as our curriculum in BC now facilitates this switching of thought to make us the facilitators, the coaches, the mentors who can help guide students to acquire the skills and knowledge they need to succeed. With this new understanding and acceptance of our changed role comes a more natural relationship to be built with technology in the classroom. As one of the teachers in Video 1 states, “go in with a flexible approach to what we need to get done and how we’re going to get it done and we always have 2-3 options available”. Teachers need to be problem solvers in some situations while also providing their students with tools to become problem solvers themselves.

Further Questions:

• Where do we find time to explore and play with technology ourselves?
• How can we build appropriate tech support within our districts that facilitate both hardware support, teaching needs, and inspiration models for moving forward?

Response:

I think one of the ways to explore a response to my further questions was discussed in the first video case where teachers were talking about seeking release time to go and visit other schools with models they were interested in and also to talk with other educators about new directions that could and should be taken. In my district we can apply for collaborative grants and I see how this type of teacher inquiry could be very meaningful and impactful. One of the most enriching things about my experience in the MET program has been through connecting with other educators around the province, country, and globe in similar and diverse situations than my own and hearing their triumphs and challenges. Outside of this program, where do we find and build these networks? Social media seems to be one platform to support this desire. What about others? How can we reignite the fire, while being respectful of time, to build better support networks amongst our own colleagues? I look forward to exploring some of these questions in my interviews this week.

Analysis of: Case 5 – Learning Environment 4 with Teacher S (Elementary Space Science); Case 6 – Learning Environment 5 with Teacher C (Middle School Life Science); Case 8 – Learning Environment 7 with Teacher E (Science, Elementary Preservice Teacher Education).

I was most interested in the elementary and middle school cases, as they most closely related to my current teaching position (grade 4/5 split class). I found watching the videos interesting, especially from the perspectives of educators at various stages of their careers. I found that I could connect to many of the points discussed, both for and against technology, as I believe (increasingly) in the important role digital technology plays in our classrooms, but I also have tended to shy away from using technology much in the past because I felt that students were receiving enough “screen time” (yes, I generalized and assumed screen time was screen time), and for many of the reasons that were given in the videos (i.e., time constraints, feeling ill-equipped, and so on).

I found there were many significant similarities and important educational threads linking the three videos. To begin, and probably most importantly, teachers and students alike all appeared to agree that the integration of digital technology into the classroom enhanced engagement and meaningful learning experiences. In addition to being interested by the ability to use digital technology, students were cognisant of the fact that they were “publishing” their work for others to see, which meant fact accuracy and effort were both increasingly important. Along with this, was the fact that digital technology, in all examples presented, meant that students were developing collaboration skills as they worked in a “team” environment with peers to complete group projects, rather than simply working independently. When we consider the diverse learners in our classrooms, the videos also demonstrated how digital technologies helped to create an inclusive environment for all students. For example, Case 8 discussed the support digital technology provided for visual learners, and in Case 5 and Case 8, the importance of learning and/or presenting knowledge for English language learners was addressed. More specifically, in Case 5, “Teacher S” addressed the fact that with digital technology, students who could understand concepts but were prevented from sharing their knowledge due to language barriers were able to demonstrate their understanding in ways other than written language, providing all learners with an equal playing field. The integration of technology also allowed for teaching diversity in terms of integration of subjects. While in Case 6 and Case 8, students focused on a science-based task, students in Case 5 incorporated language arts, science, math and fine arts into their projects.

I found there was a significant difference in the comfort and enthusiasm of teachers, even new teachers, in relation to integrating digital technology into the classroom. The new teacher in Case 5, who had been enrolled in a teacher-education program without much focus on technology, felt it would have been helpful to have more training during her education program. As a result of this, she shared that while she would like to incorporate more digital technology into her classroom, she found it difficult to do due to time constraints as well as feeling ill-equipped. While all teachers felt that options were available, some, both retiring and new, felt that there was not time to apply skills learned in workshops, and so they were forgotten (Case 5). In addition to this, the retiring teacher admitted that she found digital technology “extremely frustrating” due to the lack of understanding and time. While there were other teachers within the building who could act as mentors, there were concerns of relying too much on another teacher as they all had busy lives and other teachers were busy teaching their own classes as well. While teachers vary widely in their teaching styles, I feel that there is a relatively great divide today between teachers who are comfortable with their ability to incorporate technology and those who are not, as was evident in the interviews presented.

Two of the teachers (Case 5 and Case 6) both alluded to the fact that much of the digital technology they use was learned on their own or from their students. I found this interesting because I think it highlights that for some people, incorporating digital technologies into the classroom comes more naturally as it is already an interest or area they feel confident enough to explore on their own. As more educators begin to feel comfortable exploring new technologies independently, the amount of digital technology used in the classroom will increase. Waiting for workshops is a way to engage with new technologies in a more comfortable learning environment, but as digital technology develops so rapidly today, attending a workshop every six months will no longer keep educators up-to-date with current educational technologies.

I found the points given by the teacher education professor (Case 8) summed up two important points for me regarding the “good” use of digital technology in the math and science classrooms. “Teacher E” discussed the fact that digital technology should not be treated as a stand-alone subject area, but must instead be integrated into our classrooms. In addition to this, digital technologies should be used only when they are enhancing students’ learning. “Teacher E” pointed out that if a student can learn just as well from a book, then perhaps we should simply allow them to read the book. However, if learning can be enhanced by using digital technology, then we must be prepared to use digital technology. This was an important point for me because it emphasized the fact that we do not have to try to integrate digital technology into all aspects of our classroom. Sometimes, more traditional methods continue to work quite well, but it is up to us as educators to be able to identify and understand the difference. Finally, “Teacher C” (Case 6) highlighted the fact that while his students had prior knowledge in emailing, social media, and games, they had limited knowledge of how to use digital technology to help them learn subjects in science. I believe this is one last important “take away” point because it reminds us as educators that while students may appear to understand technology, they often still need adult guidance to teach them how to use technology effectively to support their educations.

Through the ‘Case 4’ video clips, the educator effectively summarizes his opinions on the three possible levels of incorporating technology in the classroom. Briefly, they are:

• Level 1 – Lecture enhancement (through direct control by the teacher)
• Level 2 – Lockstep student usage (students perform a technology based activity simultaneously)
• Level 3 – Self-directed and self-paced student learning (students progress as their own rate through a study guide)

These three levels are a great reminder of how digital technology could be effectively used in the classroom and perhaps, how they should be appropriately or better used to enhance learning.

Level 1 remains the most simplistic and easiest use of technology without any changes to pedagogy. A lecture can be enhanced with a PowerPoint presentation or digital projections of images but the essence of the lecture remains the same. Lawrence mentioned in his blog post last week that the use of technology should be for more than just a replacement of archaic methods. Current digital technology has the ability to surpass previous methods of lecture with increasingly complex representations of information and media. For instance, animation or video clips can now be easily integrated into a lecture.

Both Levels 2 and 3 introduce a greater integration of technology in the classroom with each level increasing the change in pedagogy. Level 2 promotes direct technology usage by students. Through simulations or similar activities, small groups of students interact with their learning. For example, online digital dissections provide an avenue for students to prepare for, or even in place of, actual dissections. Level 3 seems to be the pinnacle of digital technology and learning with students largely directing their own study at their own pace. As evident in the video, students were investigating a problem with guidance by the educator.

Through the video clips, the benefits of effectively implementing and integrating digital technology are evident. Students are engaged and challenged with their learning. As described in the ‘Case 3’ videos, students develop transferable skills that will inevitably enhance their own lives outside of the classroom. Despite these advantages, however, there are likely some limitations or issues. The instructor himself mentions the need for a support unit, especially to troubleshoot any potential problems with the technology. As technology increasingly advances, it will likely be more difficult to have mentors to support and fix this cutting edge material. Further, the hardware and software itself needs to be constantly updated, which can be both costly and time-consuming without the proper support; thus, resulting in funding complications. For example, in attempting to spontaneously run a PhET simulation this past week, the school computers did not have the proper update and administrative rights to correct the problem. Unfortunately, since this needs to be completed by the district tech support, the class has to omit that simulation. Other concerns at Level 2 are also evident in the ‘Case 3’ video, which demonstrated a physics class attempting to perform a laboratory exercise with digital technology. The use of computer programs and other apps do require some front-end loading. As mentioned in the video, curriculum is a key factor in determining lessons and often, time constraints prevent the full exploration of technological uses. This specific problem poses another challenge – the balance in using technology or not. I appreciate that throughout the year certain labs required technology and others did not; but a key issue remains how much do educators immerse their lessons in technology. The video mentioned for that specific lab they would not have to be “bogged down by data collection” and could instead focus on analyzing the physics but retrieving and data collection is still an aspect of science that should be valued.

Finally, while Level 3 is the ideal merging of technology and learning, I wonder about the ability of executing the realities of such a task in a secondary school setting. While this type of learning is well suited for a post-secondary, university level program, other audiences (secondary or elementary) or a more diverse classroom might not always be as receptive or have positive results, as described in the video.

With changes to the secondary curriculum in B.C. through the elimination of the provincial exams and the promotion of ‘core competencies’, there seems to be more freedom in creating lessons and units allowing educators the opportunity to incorporate advanced technologies to their teachings. Inevitably there are both benefits and challenges to incorporating technology to promote learning, where do you stand at integrating technology into your practice?