Sunday, 22 July 2012
Sunday, 15 April 2012
Final
Reflection of EDUC 6711
In Week I of this course, I was asked to develop my
personal theory of learning, back then I just knew I leaned towards Multiple
Intelligence, which aligned with both Social and Constructivist Learning
Theory. As I continued throughout this
course, my understanding of these learning theories has deepened
tremendously. Not only did I get to look
deeply into these two theories, but I was also able to learn about the
technology tools that go hand in hand with them. Each week we delved deeply into discussion
about the different learning theory, from the Behaviorist to the Social
learning theory, during this time I was able to get a better understanding of
each theory and the technology tool that aligns with them. I realized that the Behaviorist learning
theory is still evident in my classroom, however, it does not play a large role,
and it’s linked to classroom management.
One thing that will definitely stick with me is, the use of many
different type of strategies and technologies can contribute substantially to
the teaching and learning process (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008, p.7).
Now that I am at the final juncture of this course,
I am bombarded with so many different ideas of how I would like to adjust my instructional
practice in regards to technology integration; the big question is what I will
begin with first. The one thing that has
been nagging me the most is how to ensure that I keep using technology as a
learning tool and not as an instructional tool. Learning
technology (student-based) can be defined as the variety of tools students use
to activate knowledge and deepen content (Laureate Education, Inc. 2011a). Please don’t get me wrong, my
classroom is student-centered, however, I would like my students to have more
hands on experience and the ability to work at their own pace, especially for
my diverse students. I guess what I want is my own classroom lab (yeah right),
or access to the laptop cart. There is
so much more I would like to do in my class, but with the lack of resources,
it’s going to be a tedious process.
The first technology tool I would like to use with
my students is the blog. Blogs will
enhance my students’ learning by allowing them to communicate, collaborate,
provide feedback, and assistance. But
most importantly it allows for reciprocal teaching, where students can
summarize, ask questions, clarify and make predictions (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007,
p.137), and the best part of the blog is that the students are given an
opportunity to create an artifact, that they can share. With this form of technology like all the
others I wish to implement, I must secure lab time, to ensure that students get
the allotted time to construct their blogs,
post and provide feedback to other blogs.
The second technology tool I would like to use with
my students is VoiceThread, this is another form of collaboration tool, which
my students will have a blast using.
VoiceThread offers my students the opportunity to once again construct a
product for presentation or sharing with their peers. This form of technology, will allow me to see
how well students understand the concept, and to fix any misconceptions they
might have. With instructional
technology, students will be actively engaged and motivated in the learning
process (Laureate Education, Inc.
2011a).
My two long-term goal changes I
would like to make in my instructional practice regarding integrating
technology will be utilizing Virtual Field Trips and the concept mapping tool www.spiderscribe.com. I placed
these in the long-term goals because in order to carry out these task I will
need to have access to a computer lab or the laptop cart. Virtual field trips can expand learning
opportunities by allowing students to visit places they otherwise might not be
able to visit (Laureate
Education, Inc. 2011b). These visits
allow students to gain a deeper understanding of the content, and allows for
engagement. Like Dr. Orey states
“Virtual Field trip is a powerful tool that creates an episodic that allow
students to make rich connections that they will be able to retrieve at a later
date” (Laureate Education, Inc. 2011b).
In order to achieve this I must first take the time out to design or
research the concepts I would like the students to investigate, then plan the
lesson. I know with virtual field trips,
I must be very organized as it takes time and dedication. Given this information now, I can definitely
plan ahead this summer and align a few virtual field trips with my algebra
concepts.
With using www.spiderscribe.com advance organizer, I am giving my students a powerful
tool that they can use to help process information that they don’t usually use
(Laureate Education, Inc., 2011c). Advance organizers give students the ability to
retrieve, use, and organize what they already know about a topic (Pitler, et.
al., 2007, p.9) which leads to deeper understanding. These tools allow students
to brainstorm either at the beginning or the end of a unit. as it allows
students tonactivate prior knowledge.
The biggest draw back, as with all technology tools is getting to use
the technology, in a school with limited resources we have waiting list of
people trying to get into the computer labs, and it is also on reserve for
Reading/English teachers. With this
activity, I would have the students read throught the chaoter we were about to
begin, as they scan the chapter, they can ask questions they would like
answered, copy down key conceps or define words or terms they are not familiar
with. With doing this the students will
have their own personal study guide. My
aim is to move my students to the 21stcentury, and with these tools
we are heading in the right track.
Reference
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011a).
Program eleven: Instructional strategies, Part one [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and
technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011b).
Program seven: Constructionist and constructivist learning theories [Video
webcast]. Bridging learning theory,
instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011c).
Program five: Cognitive learning theory [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved
from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J.
(2008). Theoretical Foundation (Laureate Education Inc. custom ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Pitler,
H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using
technology with classroom instruction that work. Alexandria, VA. ASCD.
Thursday, 29 March 2012
Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
This week, I got the opportunity to explored one of
my favorite instructional strategies, Cooperative learning. I also got the chance to investigate the
technology that is embedded in cooperative learning. Cooperative learning as defined in, Using
Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works provides students with
opportunities to interact with each other in groups in ways that enhance their
learning (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p. 9). This instructional strategy aligns directly
with the learning theory we studied this week, Social learning theory, which includes
social constructivism, and connectivism.
Dr. Orey, states that if students
are actively engaged in constructing an artifact while conversing with colleagues,
then they are learning, and social learning theory is in taking place (Laureate
Education, Inc. 2011a). Culture and context plays an important role in constructing
knowledge and understanding of the world around us (Laureate Education, Inc.
2011a) thus leading to social constructivism.
Connectivism, according to Siemens, is the act of constructing
knowledge, making sense of the world (Laureate Education, Inc. 2011b). From these learning theories stem collaboration
and cooperative learning, a must when initiating social learning theories. When students work together in collaborative
or cooperative groups they are assisting each other in developing understanding
of the content.
With cooperative learning, the authors suggest five components
for establishing assignments: 1) Positive interdependence, 2) face-to-face,
promotive interaction, 3) individual and group accountability, 4) interpersonal
and small-group skills, and 5) group processing (Pitler, et. al. 2007, p.
140). With social learning theories,
students are required to “construct” something, hence the need for technology,
what better way for students to showcase their learning than with the use of
technology. As stated in Using
Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, technology plays a vital
role in cooperative learning by facilitating group collaboration, provides
structure for group task, and allows for members of groups to communicate even
if they are not face to face (Pitler et. al., 2007, p. 140).
The technology that is embedded
in cooperative learning is multimedia, Web resources, and communication
software. Multimedia
can stem anywhere
from PowerPoint, prezi, movie maker, publisher and voicethread. This year our school participated in a book
study, the book we read was The Art and
Science of Teaching, by Marzano, each department choose a topic and
presented to our faculty during our faculty meeting. My department, choose to construct a
multimedia project to present our understanding of the chapter. Each person was given a section of the
chapter they had to read and summarize, we would meet weekly to discuss our
findings and work on our product, take a look at our prezi
. With these activities teachers must ensure that students are provided with a rubric that outlines what is expected and
how they will be evaluated, since this will be the driving force for these
assignments. Web resources can include blogs, Wikis, prezi, websites, Google,
edmodo and blackboard. Last semester I
was given the privilege to work collaboratively with the member of my PLC and
construct a Wiki, I enjoyed every moment of this activity, since we worked
together to produce a product even though we were miles away from each other, see
our final product here. I incorporated edmodo into my reading class last school year; I
realized that my students liked working on edmodo much more than working in our
text. With that in mind I would post
assignments on line, and have the students respond during class using their
phones or tablets. Communication tools can also include blogs,
wikis, edmodo, facebook, twitter, text message, Skype, instant messenger, and email. At the middle school level, I had email
accounts for all my students, and with this students were able to email
assignments, questions, and suggestions for class. Now that I am at the high school level, can
use text messages, instant messenger and blogs to communicate with my students
and parents. There is no question as to
whether cooperative learning and social learning theories goes hand-in-hand. Cooperative learning strategies positively
correlates with social learning theory, as they both require students to work
together and create a product.
Resources
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer).
(2011a). Program eight: Social learning theories [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and
technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer).
(2011b) Program nine: Connectivism as a learning theory [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and
technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M.,
& Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction
that work. Alexandria, VA. ASCD
Thursday, 22 March 2012
Constructivism in Practice
This week I explored the following instructional
strategy which embeds technology: “Generating and Testing Hypotheses,” I found
this strategy to be rather informative, since I never looked at this strategy as
one that I could implement in my classroom.
So what is generating and testing hypotheses? This is a strategy that enhances student’s
understanding of and ability to use knowledge by engaging them in mental
processes that involve making and testing hypotheses (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn,
& Malenoski, 2007, p. 9). According
to the authors, when we allow students to test and generate hypotheses, we are
allowing them to engage in complex mental process, applying content knowledge,
and enhancing their overall understanding of the content (Pitler, et. al.,
2007, P. 202). To implement this instructional
strategy, we should ensure that students can explain their hypotheses and
conclusion, and we must use a variety of structured task to guide students
through generating and testing hypothesis (Pitler et.al., 2007, p. 203). We were introduced to six tasks which we can
use to aid students in generating and testing hypotheses, they are as follows:
system analysis, problem solving, historical investigation, invention,
experimental inquiry, and decision making (Pitler, et. al., 2007, p. 203)
So you’re asking, how is generating and testing
hypothesis related to constructionist learning theories? Well first we must familiarize ourselves with
the constructionist learning theory. The constructionist learning theories states
that people learn best when they build an external artifact or something they
can share with others (Laureate Education, Inc. 2011). Both constructionist learning theory and generating
and testing hypothesis learning strategy, requires students to construct a
product, using some form of technology such as; spreadsheet software, data
collection tools, or Web resources, and then present or share them with their
peers. This will also incorporate Project-based
learning, Learning-By-Design, and Problem-based-inquiry.
Project-based Learning is a comprehensive
instructional approach that engages learners in sustained, cooperative
investigation (Hans & Bhattacharya, 2001).
Learning-By-Design emphasizes the value of learning
through creating, programming, or participating in other forms of designing
(Hans & Bhattacharya, 2001),
Problem-based inquiry emphasizes learning as a
process that involves problem solving and critical thinking in situation context
(Gazer, 2001)
With these instructional strategies, we are moving
our classrooms from teacher-centered to student-centered; we are now
facilitators, and our students are now investigators.
For more information on constructionist click here
Resources
Glazer,
E. (2001). Problem Based Instruction. In
M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging Prespectives on learning , teaching, and
technology, Retrieved 3/14/2012, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Retrieved from “http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Problem_BAsed_Instruction”
Han, S. and Bhattacharya, K. (2001).
Constructionism, Learning by Design, and Project Based Learning. In M. Orey
(Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 3/14/2012,
from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title= Constructionism,_Learning_by_Design,_and_Project_Based_Learning
Laureate
Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Program seven: Constructionist and constructivist
learning theories [Video webcast]. Bridging
learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M.,
& Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction
that work. Alexandria, VA. ASCD
Wednesday, 14 March 2012
Tools for Cognitive Learning Theory: “Cues, Questions, and
Advanced Organizers” and “Summarizing and Note taking”
This week we learning resources focused on cognitive
learning theories and the learning strategies that would go hand-in-hand with
cognitivism. What is cognitive learning
theory? Cognitive learning theory focus
on learning as a mental operation that takes place when information enters
through the senses, undergoes mental manipulation, is stored, and is finally
used (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008, p. 16).
Cognitive learning theory includes; i) limited short term/working
memory, ii) elaboration, iii) dual coding hypothesis, and iv) episodic expressions
(Laureate Education, Inc., 2011). Cognitive learning theory gives students powerful
tools that they can use to help process information that they don’t usually use
(Laureate Education, Inc., 2011). Thus
our learning strategies for this week; Cues, questions, and advanced
organizers, and summarizing and note taking.
In chapter 4 of our text, “Using Technology with
Classroom Strategies that Work,” I explored cues, questions, and advance
organizers. In this chapter we look at
ways in which to enhance student’s ability to retrieve, use, and organize what
they already know about a topic (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p.
9). These tools are very important when
it comes to the cognitivism, since they allow the students to focus on what
they are learning. Cues allows teachers
to provide students with hints about what they are preparing to learn,
questions are similar to cues by accessing students prior knowledge, and
advanced graphic organizers, allow students to organize and focus their
learning (Pitler, e.t al., 2007, p. 73).
In my daily
lesson plans, I provide my students with an essential question, which they
should be able to answer at the end of the lesson. This question gears my teaching and at times acts
as a guide for classroom discussion, this question also allows the students to
think back to previous lesson and try to connect it to the new lesson. I find that it is necessary to activate student’s
prior knowledge to gage their knowledge of the lesson; I have used different
graphic organizers to carry out this process, such as Frayer’s
Model and K-W-L
charts. With these strategies comes different
form of technology applications which we can implement in our classes to engage
learning and deepen understanding. These technologies include word processing
applications, spreadsheet software and organizing and brainstorming
software. With these technology tools,
teachers are able to input students’ responses, and organize these responses in
to useful information (Pitler, et. al., 2007, p. 75).
Chapter 6 of our text dealt with summarizing and
note taking. Summarizing and note
taking, enhances students’ ability to synthesize information and organize it in
a way that captures the main ideas and supporting details (Pitler, et. al.,
2007, p. 9). To begin with the author’s
states that we should first teach students the rule-based summarizing strategy
then use summary frames and finally teach students the reciprocal teaching
strategy (Pitler, et. al., 2007, p. 120).
One way of getting students to summarize information in math is to have
them skim the text, and identify the key concepts, which are usually bold or
written in color. I also stress to
students that the formulas are necessary when summarizing.
Note taking is considered the most powerful study skills
a student can cultivate, the authors suggest that we give students teacher
prepared notes, teach students a variety of note-taking formats and use
combination notes (Pitler, et. al. 2007, p. 120). The note taking strategy that I implement in
my classroom is Cornell
Notes, this strategy allows students to question, reflect and review their
notes. This is also a requirement of our
schools’ AVID program and for our 9th
grade academy. The Cornell note also
comes with a rubric that can be used to grade the given assignment. The technology tools that are aligned with note
taking are multimedia, wiki, blogs, word processing applications and
organization and brainstorming software.
Resources
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Program five:
Cognitive learning theory [Video webcast]. Bridging
learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1
Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J.
(2008). Theoretical foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson
Education, Inc. Chapter 1: Theoretical Foundations
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M.,
& Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction
that work. Alexandria, VA. ASCD
Wednesday, 7 March 2012
Behaviorist Learning Theory and the Impact it has on Instructional Strategies: Reinforcing Efforts and Homework.
This week we were asked to explore two instructional
strategies that were embedded with technology.
These two strategies are closely aligned with the behaviorist learning
theory. Behaviorist learning theory emphasizes
changes in behavior that results in stimuli-response association made by the
learner (Orey, 2002).
The first instructional strategy I explored was
reinforcing efforts; this strategy allows students to see the correlation
between effort and achievement. In “Using
Technology with Classroom Strategies that Work” the authors gave two recommendations
on using this strategy; i) explicitly teach students about the importance of
effort, and ii) having students keep track of their efforts and achievements
(Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p.156). Since behaviorist
believes all behaviors are learned, I can definitely see how reinforcing effort
align with one of James Hartley‘s key principles that “reinforcement is the
cardinal motivator,” (Smith, 1999). Even
though I have stressed “you get what you put in” in my classroom, I never
thought to designing a rubric which my students can use to chart their effort
and achievements. As a high school math
teacher, I can see how this would benefit majority of my students, since my
students cannot see how valuable it is to study or even read over their note. With the implementation of technology, it is
now easier for teachers to develop a rubric or a spreadsheet which they can provide
to students with an opportunity to chart their effort and achievement. Once students are able to see how both effort
and achievement correlate, they will in turn want to be successful.
The second instructional strategy I explored was Homework
and practice; this strategy extends the learning opportunities for students to
practice, review and apply what they have learned (Pitler et al., 2007, p.
9). In math it is imperative that
students are given the opportunity to practice what they have learned, thus the
need for homework. In order for students
to deepen their understanding and achieve proficiency, they will need multiple
exposures to the material, (Pitler et. al., 2007, p. 188). I find when we start the assignment in class;
the students are more inclined to doing the assignment. With homework and practice, the following key
principles of James Hartley come to mind, “repetition, generalization, and
discrimination are important notions, and learning is helped when objectives
are clear” (Smith, 1999). With the use
of word processing applications, spredsheet applications, multimedia, web
resources, and communication soft ware, we can take our homework assignment to an
innovative level. One website that I
allow my students to use for practice is Khan
Academy, whenever I introduce a new topic I pull instructional videos from
this site to present the materials, my students also use the practice problems
provided on this site to check for understanding. Our text also offer an online module that
allow students to self-assess, where they can take the assessment for the given
section, this is for personal use and at times can count towards n extra-credit
activity.
For more information on instructional strategies with
technology click here
References:
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M.,
& Malenoski, K. (2007). Using
technology with classroom instruction that work. Alexandria, VA. ASCD
Smith, M. K. (1999) The behaviorist orientation to learning”, the encyclopedia of informal
education, www.infed.org/biblio/learning-behaviourist.htm. Last updated: December 01, 2011.
Strandridge, M..(2002). Behaviorism. In M. Orey (Ed.),
Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved March
05, 2012, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Behaviorism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)