Journal 8
Fingal, D. (2009). Have You tweeted today?. Learning and Leading, 37(2),
Have You Tweeted Today?
Diane Fingal’s article is about the positive affects of social networks, mainly Twitter. She does acknowledge that much of Twitters bad rap is brought on by it’s self. Twitter’s opening question is “What are you doing?” Many people do not care what the typical person is doing at any given moment, however when used to follow or communicate specific information many find it invaluable. One person sited in the article was Beth Still, an educator from Nebraska. In Beth’s resource article she lists the positives that have come from her Twitter experience.
In Beth’s blog, she also list opportunities she has taken advantage of through Twitter. She as been able to attend streaming conferences, taken part in wedinars she learned about through the Twitter network and has even linked teachers from New York through her Tweets. Still also points out that Twitter and virtual friends do not take the place of real life face to face interactions instead it enhances them.
What would it take for districts and administrators to embrace Twitter as a teaching tool?
I think a teacher would have to find qualitative data to present. Districts, the ones usually in charge of firewalls and protected sites, need to see a bottom line of increased test scores and student improvement. If a teacher could make case that their access to Twitter helps them raise test score than I think it might be considered. I realistically do not think that the powers that be will give much weight to this type of technology, mainly because they themselves don’t understand it.
How can a teacher increase the uses of social networks like Twitter with populations that do not have the resources to access it?
I think this is a tough question. If the teacher feels strongly enough about it they will find a way. One option would be to give students the opportunity during class to access it with school computers. Students could check their account in class and communicate back to the group. The more interesting the conversation the more likely students will find a way to be involved.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Journal 7
Journal 7
The term "SmartBoard" is actually a trademarked brand of device generically referred to as an Interactive White Board (IWB). In the US, the term SmartBoard has become the common name used to refer to IWB’s even though there are many different companies that currently manufacture and distribute similar IWB technologies. But what exactly is a SmartBoard or an IWB?
A Simple Definition of What Interactive White Boards and Smart Boards Are an Interactive White Board is a broad name for a device that, when used with a computer and some type of large video display, makes the surface of the display become touch sensitive in some manner and allows it to be used to control the computer. In the United States SmartBoards (sold by Smart Technologies Inc.) are the most well known manufacturers of IWB’s. Another company, Promethean Technologies, is equally popular in Europe, but is only recently making a push in the American market. Both the Promethean and the SmartBoard products are compatible with both Windows and Macintosh computers and both come with numerous tools for creating resources.
Like everything else there is give and take. Following the post, many comments were about the pros and cons of each system and how best to use them. Each system had ways to interact by either using the main screen or by portable tablets. These both sound like very cool tools to use in a classroom and allow the teacher to continue a lesson away from the board.
The term "SmartBoard" is actually a trademarked brand of device generically referred to as an Interactive White Board (IWB). In the US, the term SmartBoard has become the common name used to refer to IWB’s even though there are many different companies that currently manufacture and distribute similar IWB technologies. But what exactly is a SmartBoard or an IWB?
A Simple Definition of What Interactive White Boards and Smart Boards Are an Interactive White Board is a broad name for a device that, when used with a computer and some type of large video display, makes the surface of the display become touch sensitive in some manner and allows it to be used to control the computer. In the United States SmartBoards (sold by Smart Technologies Inc.) are the most well known manufacturers of IWB’s. Another company, Promethean Technologies, is equally popular in Europe, but is only recently making a push in the American market. Both the Promethean and the SmartBoard products are compatible with both Windows and Macintosh computers and both come with numerous tools for creating resources.
Like everything else there is give and take. Following the post, many comments were about the pros and cons of each system and how best to use them. Each system had ways to interact by either using the main screen or by portable tablets. These both sound like very cool tools to use in a classroom and allow the teacher to continue a lesson away from the board.
Journal 6
Journal 6
Kohn, A. (2006). The Trouble with rubrics. English Journal, 95(4),
In the trouble with rubrics, Alfie Kohn discusses the difference in grading systems primarily rubrics. Mr. Kohn at the beginning brings up three points that cast doubt that rubrics are the new saving grace for assessing student achievement.
First, He questions one of the proponents’ claims that it helps to justify grades to parents. He contends that we should not be assessing student work with parent justification in mind.
Second, he acknowledges three effects that letter grades have on students. One, they tend to think less deeply. Two, they avoid taking risks. Three, they lose interest in learning.
Finally, he looks at the idea of making grading more quick and efficient. While a great idea, it does not account for all variables that go into grading a student’s work.
Mr. Kohn also looks at the fact that is not just teachers who are relying solely on rubrics. Students who are laden with rubrics begin themselves become attached to the rubric. Students will use the rubric to ensure that they meet the criteria for the grade they want and not show what or how the information they are writing about pertains to them. These cause this “authentic assessment” to become a class standardized assessment.
The use of rubrics can be useful in student assessment, however they are not the end all be all tools that some make them out to be. If we are going to authentic assessments that meet the needs of our students than the students ability and effort also needs to be accounted for.
Kohn, A. (2006). The Trouble with rubrics. English Journal, 95(4),
In the trouble with rubrics, Alfie Kohn discusses the difference in grading systems primarily rubrics. Mr. Kohn at the beginning brings up three points that cast doubt that rubrics are the new saving grace for assessing student achievement.
First, He questions one of the proponents’ claims that it helps to justify grades to parents. He contends that we should not be assessing student work with parent justification in mind.
Second, he acknowledges three effects that letter grades have on students. One, they tend to think less deeply. Two, they avoid taking risks. Three, they lose interest in learning.
Finally, he looks at the idea of making grading more quick and efficient. While a great idea, it does not account for all variables that go into grading a student’s work.
Mr. Kohn also looks at the fact that is not just teachers who are relying solely on rubrics. Students who are laden with rubrics begin themselves become attached to the rubric. Students will use the rubric to ensure that they meet the criteria for the grade they want and not show what or how the information they are writing about pertains to them. These cause this “authentic assessment” to become a class standardized assessment.
The use of rubrics can be useful in student assessment, however they are not the end all be all tools that some make them out to be. If we are going to authentic assessments that meet the needs of our students than the students ability and effort also needs to be accounted for.
Journal 5
Journal 5
Groff, J, & Hass, J. (2008). Web 2.0 today's technology, tomorrows learning. Learning and Leading, 36(2),
In Web 2.0, Today’s Technology, Tomorrow’s Learning the authors discuss the impact of social networking, simulations and digital gaming in the classroom. Students in today’s world often are using these technologies outside of the school setting. Sites like Facebook, Second Life and World of Warcraft get and keep students engaged. There are a collection of educators, researchers and designers that are working together to bring technologies into the classroom that are engaging and foster student learning. Many of the sites and software allow teachers to bring in interactive situations. One example was studying the human circulatory, something that they can not physically experience. With the use of software students are giving the opportunity to experience the system from an interactive perspective, it also allows for advanced learning were students can be given situations which they can then apply what they have learned to solve problems. Another technology is Ning. Ning is a social networking site that can be created by teachers to create a private network for their students. The site can be used to communicate between teachers and students and student to student. Students can share information on projects and expand class discussions.
While with everything new there are bumps and set backs. Knowing this going in will allow teachers to be open to try new software in the classroom. The ultimate goal is student learning, if the use of technology can help facilitate that then it is definitely worth shot.
Groff, J, & Hass, J. (2008). Web 2.0 today's technology, tomorrows learning. Learning and Leading, 36(2),
In Web 2.0, Today’s Technology, Tomorrow’s Learning the authors discuss the impact of social networking, simulations and digital gaming in the classroom. Students in today’s world often are using these technologies outside of the school setting. Sites like Facebook, Second Life and World of Warcraft get and keep students engaged. There are a collection of educators, researchers and designers that are working together to bring technologies into the classroom that are engaging and foster student learning. Many of the sites and software allow teachers to bring in interactive situations. One example was studying the human circulatory, something that they can not physically experience. With the use of software students are giving the opportunity to experience the system from an interactive perspective, it also allows for advanced learning were students can be given situations which they can then apply what they have learned to solve problems. Another technology is Ning. Ning is a social networking site that can be created by teachers to create a private network for their students. The site can be used to communicate between teachers and students and student to student. Students can share information on projects and expand class discussions.
While with everything new there are bumps and set backs. Knowing this going in will allow teachers to be open to try new software in the classroom. The ultimate goal is student learning, if the use of technology can help facilitate that then it is definitely worth shot.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Journal 4
Journal 4
swatelle, s. (2008). Does this really Work?. Learning & Leading with Technology, 35(8), Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=June_July_No_8_&Template=/MembersOnly.cfm&NavMenuID=4010&ContentID=21346&DirectListComboInd=D
In Does this Really Work, the author Sara Sawtelle explores using the scientific method to implement new technology into the classroom. She uses a fictitious District to tell a story of how this could play out. The scientific method is based on five standard parts, observation, creation of a hypothesis, making predictions, testing and repeating. Along with the scientific method the Software and Information Industry Association has created a checklist to insure proper implementation for new technology.
They are:
• You must have objectives before you plan
• You must plan before you implement
• You must involve all stakeholders in the planning process
• Your plan must include evaluation criteria
• You must assign an effective leader.
• The physical environment and equipment must match the intended use of the software
• Adequate training
• Prerequisite knowledge and skills
• The entire implementation must be monitored
• Each stage of implementation must be evaluated
The implementation of a new software program is a daunting task. Successful implementations require multiple groups and people working on a common goal and yet still remain objective. Success of programs is ultimately based on resulting test scores; however other means of evaluation can also provide useful data. Attendance records and student participation along with more subjective information received through surveys and questionnaires can also be enlightening.
Is it realistic that a teacher alone can facilitate this type of process?
Every teacher no. I think well established and connected teachers could begin this process alone. For newer teachers who are learning about technology and wanting to implement it would need help from various people to begin this process. I think for any real change to begin a collection of teachers, parents and students would need to be put together. Having a group that includes all the stakeholders will at least get the attention of district personnel.
swatelle, s. (2008). Does this really Work?. Learning & Leading with Technology, 35(8), Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=June_July_No_8_&Template=/MembersOnly.cfm&NavMenuID=4010&ContentID=21346&DirectListComboInd=D
In Does this Really Work, the author Sara Sawtelle explores using the scientific method to implement new technology into the classroom. She uses a fictitious District to tell a story of how this could play out. The scientific method is based on five standard parts, observation, creation of a hypothesis, making predictions, testing and repeating. Along with the scientific method the Software and Information Industry Association has created a checklist to insure proper implementation for new technology.
They are:
• You must have objectives before you plan
• You must plan before you implement
• You must involve all stakeholders in the planning process
• Your plan must include evaluation criteria
• You must assign an effective leader.
• The physical environment and equipment must match the intended use of the software
• Adequate training
• Prerequisite knowledge and skills
• The entire implementation must be monitored
• Each stage of implementation must be evaluated
The implementation of a new software program is a daunting task. Successful implementations require multiple groups and people working on a common goal and yet still remain objective. Success of programs is ultimately based on resulting test scores; however other means of evaluation can also provide useful data. Attendance records and student participation along with more subjective information received through surveys and questionnaires can also be enlightening.
Is it realistic that a teacher alone can facilitate this type of process?
Every teacher no. I think well established and connected teachers could begin this process alone. For newer teachers who are learning about technology and wanting to implement it would need help from various people to begin this process. I think for any real change to begin a collection of teachers, parents and students would need to be put together. Having a group that includes all the stakeholders will at least get the attention of district personnel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
