Reflection is cyclic.  We plan, we do, we reflect.  For Module A we had 6 objectives and I am going to provide my thoughts on my progress! See my Module A Meritorious Post at the bottom too.

• 1.  Become familiar with the course structure, purpose, tools, and resources.

Since this is my last course I am more than familiar with the structure of ETEC courses.  However, this course has it’s differences.  The way this course is being assessed for example is very different.  An inquiry ePortfolio is a new challenge for me as it requires constant upkeep (not that my ETEC 590 didn’t, but this is different, it is ‘real time’).  I have wanted to take this course since I applied for MET and cancelled my enrollment in ETEC 522 Ventures in order to take it.  In terms of tools and resources, I have been introduced to CiteULike as a bookmarking tool for resources which is highly useful (I wish I knew about it for my other research papers!).

• 2.  Participate in building an on-line community.

I have to admit that I haven’t contributed to as many posts in as many threads as my usual MO.  However, I have engaged in enough discourse with enough of my colleagues to feel that I am a contributing member of our CoL.  I have asked some thought provoking questions and contributed some resources for investigation as well.  It is my goal to have a greater presence in Module B now that some of my work pressure has subsided (fingers crossed!).

• 3.   Begin an inquiry e-folio that will be used to document the process and context of your learning throughout the course.

I am continually improving and adding to my inquiry e-folio as required with a few extras!  I chose to use my existing ePortfolio that I began in ETEC 565 rather than use my ETEC 590 eP or starting from scratch.  I felt this was a meaningful choice as it ‘completes’ my ePortfolio and is enabling me to learn how to use webpress as a blogging tool- I am still learning!

• 4.  Examine personal assumptions that underlie the use of digital technology for teaching and learning math and science.

Staring with my auto-e-ography I began to unpack my own assumptions regarding the use and integration of technology in the maths and science classroom.  This lead me to revist a lot of my previous assignments and especially to re-read my ETEC 590 eP.  It was fascinating for me to see how much my perspectives have changed since I embarked on this MET learning journey.  My current context in Kuwait (3 schools with very limited hardware) where our focus is on improving quality teacher practice is not at the moment conducive to technology integration so I have been asking myself if teachers really DO need to LEARN technology?

• 5. Locate and frame issues related to the use of digital technology for teaching and learning math and science. Drawing upon analyses of personal experience, personal questions regarding digital technology in science and math education, interviews in authentic school contexts, and video cases of technology use.

I began further research on a few issues that rose to the surface from the video case studies and my own interviews.  My current context is not exactly a technology-rich context and I was struggling with identifying an area of interest-concern-passion.  I wanted to look at the affordances of blended learning, the potential for pre-service and in-service PD and at Web 2.0.  I had a difficult time selecting ONE issue to frame but I did get there in the end “Can technology facilitate differentiation (in the Science classroom) effectively?”  This was an epiphany one day.  I realized that although I was in a technology-poor context at the moment, we were having a huge focus on differentiation.  I decided to frame this issue in the hope that my research will provide me with ammunition for a greateer infusion of technology in our schools.

• 6. Examine scholarly evidence and opinion to challenge, situate, extend and/or support framed issues, and employ these resources to develop ideas on a major issue related to using technology for teaching and learning math or science.

This is a work in progress at the moment.  I am selecting my research carefully by reading many articles.  I am hopeful I will find supporting evidence that technology can support (and should support) differentiation in science.  I have used CiteULike, the UBC Library and a general online search to locate some very interesting articles/research.  Wish me luck!

 ——————————————————————————————————————————

Promoting a Learning Community

 Class Participation Assessment Rubric- Module A, Meritorious Post

MA-L2: Unpacking Assumptions (Tues Jan 10)

5 key characteristics to good use of technology..

What is good use of technology in the maths and science classroom?

I believe that good use of technology in the maths and science classroom is evidenced by 5 key characteristics:

1. Visible Learning–  where teachers: provide clear learning intentions, challenging success criteria, a range of learning strategies (incl. ET), provide feedback and scaffold learning, identify gaps, learn themselves and students: can articulate the learning intentions, are extended by the success criteria, develop a range of learning strategies (incl. ETs), seek feedback, can identify when they don’t get it, teach others and make independent choices about their next steps- all of which can be done using ETs

2. Connectivism at work: students access networked knowledge freely (animations, websites, webquests, forums, videos, flat classroom projects, wikis, blogs, Moodles) and work collaboratively with other learners from around the world to build on it

3. PBL in the house!– by using games, simulations, virtual reality, discussion forums and online resources for problem inspiration and problem solving students are encouraged to learn in a constructivist manner where they build knowledge, make meaning and co-construct potential solutions using technology

4. Personalized Learning– individual learning plans created online, feedback provided online, students creating their own games/simulations/websites/mashups/media productions, independently using online resources (interactivities, simulations, games), ETs (IWBs, laptops, desktops) or classroom technology (Beebots, tablets, mobile phones,calculators etc.) as part of a personalized learning program

5. Blended Approach: good teaching is about balance and pedagogical strategies do not have to involve new ETs.  A blended approach ensures students still get some ‘hands on’ practice and f2f time with their teacher along with opportunities to learn digitally in a connected, online environment

I also think it is interesting that regardless of how a teacher’s Personal Learning Theory (PLT) is influenced, technology can effectively weave its’ way into any Science, math or other lesson, ie.:

Behaviourism- Online games and reward systems (points), online competitions

Constructivism-Wikis, blogs, paired webquests, knowledge forum, assessment for learning via Clickers and ARS, CSILE, knowledge forum

Cognitive Development of Learning-collaborative tools via Wiki, google docs, problem solving and adventure games, virtual simulations of problems to solve, use of beebots and other hands on technologies, software that enables exploration (LOGO etc.)

Sociocultural Theory-communication tools via DimDim, Elluminate, chat, forums, well designed, program/application created to target specific ZPD (tutoring), internet, provision of visuals/multi-media, flat classroom projects, pen pals

Discovery Learning-Augmented reality tools (AR), online puzzles/riddles/ games, webquests, tablets

Social Cognitive- video technology, virtual worlds (Secondlife, social networking applications, virtual simulations or multi-media presentations

CIP-Online videos/games/ puzzles, KWL chart in wiki, online surveys, webquests: inquiry/problem based, self-marking online quizzes or LMS

Meaningful learning- concept map software (CMAP), glogster, spicynodes, prezis, blogs, social network sites,

Schema Theory- Online websites for kids like BBC and discovery where information is provided and follow up activities, LMS modules, collaborative or independent graphic organizers in a wiki

Situated Cognition- LMS such as Moodle, Blackboard, Odijoo, producing a product/innovating a Web 2.0 application, google docs

Activity Theory-Wiki, collaborative Moodle/LMS modules, flat classroom projects, online surveys/polls, real time conferencing/chat, IWBs, web 2.0

Distributed Cognition-Wiki, PlanetQuest, image software, computer simulations, applets, collaborative tagging, social networks, cloud computing/tag clouds, virtual field trips, goggle docs, CSILE

Challenges with good use of technology in the maths or science classroom remain related to Bates and Poole’s SECTIONS model:

• Students- who are our students? Are they really digital natives? Do they like to learn with technology? Will they have opportunity to access these and practice at home?

• Ease of use- is the program intuitive so as to prevent the teacher from having to teach technology skills in ‘maths or science’ time?

• Costs- will the technologies used have a cost?

• Teaching and Learning- are the technologies enhancing teaching and learning or are they inhibitors? Is there a better or easier way?

• Interactivity- does the technology ensure the students are ‘doing’ something rather than just consuming?

• Organizational Issues- is there an infrastructure to support these technologies?

• Novelty- is this really supporting learning or just the latest cool craze?

• Speed- does the technology take too much time (to learn? To download? To teach? To work?!)

Ultimately, technology, when used appropriately can enhance the learning process in maths, science or any subject provided the teachers are trained and/or willing to learn, the students are encouraged to build capacity and the technology is current.  Cheers, Di

3.  Apply the assessment rubric below to your post:

 

Criteria	Indicators	Score (total 15/ 5 each)
Sense-making	Post demonstrates understanding of readings (if applicable) using quotations and is substantiated with references to the literature, discussions, or course materials Post is original and attempts to make meaning of prior personal experiences and reflections on activities in the lesson Post introduces new factual, conceptual, and theoretical knowledge into the discussion	5/5
Building community and leadership	Establishes a social and cognitive presence online with the expression of constructive perspectives and affect or emotions and moods.  (This can take the form of agreeing or disagreeing to a comment, evidence that you are attending to, understanding, and thinking about other’s responses, consensus building, forming group goals, objectives, encouraging, acknowledging, and reinforcing one another’s contributions). Extends discussion by asking peers or group members literal (not rhetorical) questions Instructor posts are responded to where appropriate (eg. where the instructor has asked a question to you personally) Post is on time Rules of netiquette are observed; all posts are constructive in nature	5/5
Communicating	Post makes a concise point that is clearly relevant to the topic Subject header is a unique summary of the topic Spelling and grammar do not detract from the message Where applicable, references are cited with at least author, year, and title of publication- need to do this next time	4/5
TOTAL		14 /15

4.  Provide a rationale.

I believe that this post demonstrates my willingness and capacity to connect my prior learning to the current topic. The majority of the post is original, although the section connecting technologies to the various learning theories tapped into previous learning activities (ETEC 512).  The post clearly articulates how I believe technology can make an impact in the Maths and Science classroom, and I evidence this with a plethora of suggestions.  I also endeavoured to expose my classmates to ideas/topics/literature that they may not yet have encountered.  My post highlights what an educator or inspector (or even administrator) should/could look for to witness effective integration of technology in a maths/science classroom.

I believe that my post established a connection with those of like-mind as when DP wrote “You have created the utopian classroom. When you lay it all out there as well as you did it seems a little overwhelming. The funny thing is that we all strive to do all these things on a daily basis in our classrooms.” yet enabled others to challenge my thinking as instructor SK queried “I like how you paired digital technologies and how these digital technologies can be used with particular theories of learning and teaching. Some of these theories have untested assumptions about learning with technology, but they provide us with a rationale on which technologies to select and how we might best use them for particular purposes. For science and math education, is there a particular theory that resonates with you?” and TW challenged me with “I really keyed on your inclusion of blending learning. This is a reality that is becoming more evident each and every day as technology becomes more ubiquitous in our professional and personal lives. ….But what can we do as teachers, schools, districts, etc… to better prepare educators for this eventual reality?”  All three of these responses to my original post lead to further discussion involving agreement and additional dialogue- thus extending the discourse.

Furthermore, I believe that my post clearly represented my perspectives, my experience and was a direct reflection of my learning in MET.  My heading “5 key characteristics to good use of technology…” depicts the direction of my reflective post.  Though no specific references were included at the end- one was referred to within the text (Bates and Poole’s SECTIONS framework) and it is apparent that I have done considerable research on a range of topics related to Educational Technology.  Overall, I believe that this post was a noteworthy contribution to our learning community.