EDUCATION CONTEMPLATION
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Online Learning for Students
The topic of this week's conversation is online learning for high school students. I have put together a few thoughts at http://voicethread.com/share/1874941. Enjoy.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
EDUC 6714 Reflection
When I started this course I did not know what to expect. The title of the course indicates that we would be learning about how to get all our students to use technology. My first thoughts were that this was fairly obvious. This was one of the main reasons I enrolled in this program; to better able my students to use technology. As the course progressed, I began to have a shift in the way I approached teaching.
A few weeks before this course began; the grade 7 teaching team at my school had a meeting with the divisional math curriculum support teacher (CST). We had requested this meeting because as grade level teachers, we had noticed many gaps and deficiencies in our students’ learning as a whole - not just in one class. One of the first ideas our CST had for us was that there was nothing we could do about the students we were given. This group was weak in math. The recommendation was that we had to meet our students where they were at. I reflected on this statement for some days and realized that although a simple idea, this could make the difference in my students’ school year. With this change of attitude, I changed my approach to teaching my math class. Tomlinson (2009) refers to differentiated instruction (DI) as a mindset that the teachers has about their students. I had begun this process before this course had commenced. As this course continued, I obtained more ideas as to how I could get better at making learning work better in my class.
Two features of DI stood out to me in course. Firstly, the idea of student learning styles was introduced. Tomlinson (1999) urges teachers to know their learners. At the start of the year, establish a survey or questionnaire that will give you an idea of who your students are and how they like to learn. With this information at hand, the second feature of this course, effective grouping, can be implemented. Smith and Throne (2009) and Tomlinson (1999) indicate that for effective DI, a teacher must know how to group students properly. Depending on the assignment, a teacher may use readiness, interest, or learning style to group students. This also falls into what universal design for learning stresses for higher student engagement and learning. Rose (2009) refers to three networks of the brain – recognition, strategic, and affective. When a teacher knows which one of these networks is dominant in a student, assignments can be tailored to these areas and a student will see more success.
My school may not have the best technology program available to students; however, there are many options available. Even before this course started I tried to expose my students to as many technology ideas for assignments as I could. With different assignments using different web tools, I give students a variety of choice as to how they will show their learning.
The course text, videos, and readings, have allowed me to refocus on learning profiles, grouping, and the physical set-up of my classroom. This course also gave me the opportunity to participate in a social network. Through different weeks of the program my group either posted ideas, web tools, or web sites that focused on either DI or UDL. I found this exercise to be beneficial. An activity that was particularly useful was the online chat. I have never chatted online before and it was amazing to think that ideas were being instantly shared by people in at least three countries and two continents. Who said teaching was something done in isolation? I have not been able to apply or use all the resources gathered by my classmates. I have not had a chance to go through all the information in detail. However, it is advantageous to have these resources for the future. Currently, I may not need to use all of the information found, but I have a stockpile of resources that I can use and share with other teachers as they become necessary. I had the opportunity to forward a web site to a parent shared in our social network. The parent was grateful and believes that their child would benefit from the exercises on the web site. Working with my classmates in a group like this was a hands-on exercise in DI. Different learning styles and interests came together to help each other in making their own teaching a more positive experience.
Tomlinson (1999) states that a teacher needs to know what they believe to be successful in DI. The author continues to encourage teachers to start small when using DI, set goals, give choice, and always reflect. Smith and Throne (2009) encourage teachers to include technology when incorporating DI. DI works well when a teacher plans with the end in mind to help students become independent, curious learners. Incorporating technology helps students to bridge the gap between their in school life and their out of school life. With these things in mind, I look forward to the shift in how I approach teaching and my students.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 13: Brain research and UDL [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 19: Managing the differentiated classroom [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 20: Putting it all together [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 22: Reflection [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Tomlinson, C. (1999). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Retrieved from the Walden Library ebrary.
A few weeks before this course began; the grade 7 teaching team at my school had a meeting with the divisional math curriculum support teacher (CST). We had requested this meeting because as grade level teachers, we had noticed many gaps and deficiencies in our students’ learning as a whole - not just in one class. One of the first ideas our CST had for us was that there was nothing we could do about the students we were given. This group was weak in math. The recommendation was that we had to meet our students where they were at. I reflected on this statement for some days and realized that although a simple idea, this could make the difference in my students’ school year. With this change of attitude, I changed my approach to teaching my math class. Tomlinson (2009) refers to differentiated instruction (DI) as a mindset that the teachers has about their students. I had begun this process before this course had commenced. As this course continued, I obtained more ideas as to how I could get better at making learning work better in my class.
Two features of DI stood out to me in course. Firstly, the idea of student learning styles was introduced. Tomlinson (1999) urges teachers to know their learners. At the start of the year, establish a survey or questionnaire that will give you an idea of who your students are and how they like to learn. With this information at hand, the second feature of this course, effective grouping, can be implemented. Smith and Throne (2009) and Tomlinson (1999) indicate that for effective DI, a teacher must know how to group students properly. Depending on the assignment, a teacher may use readiness, interest, or learning style to group students. This also falls into what universal design for learning stresses for higher student engagement and learning. Rose (2009) refers to three networks of the brain – recognition, strategic, and affective. When a teacher knows which one of these networks is dominant in a student, assignments can be tailored to these areas and a student will see more success.
My school may not have the best technology program available to students; however, there are many options available. Even before this course started I tried to expose my students to as many technology ideas for assignments as I could. With different assignments using different web tools, I give students a variety of choice as to how they will show their learning.
The course text, videos, and readings, have allowed me to refocus on learning profiles, grouping, and the physical set-up of my classroom. This course also gave me the opportunity to participate in a social network. Through different weeks of the program my group either posted ideas, web tools, or web sites that focused on either DI or UDL. I found this exercise to be beneficial. An activity that was particularly useful was the online chat. I have never chatted online before and it was amazing to think that ideas were being instantly shared by people in at least three countries and two continents. Who said teaching was something done in isolation? I have not been able to apply or use all the resources gathered by my classmates. I have not had a chance to go through all the information in detail. However, it is advantageous to have these resources for the future. Currently, I may not need to use all of the information found, but I have a stockpile of resources that I can use and share with other teachers as they become necessary. I had the opportunity to forward a web site to a parent shared in our social network. The parent was grateful and believes that their child would benefit from the exercises on the web site. Working with my classmates in a group like this was a hands-on exercise in DI. Different learning styles and interests came together to help each other in making their own teaching a more positive experience.
Tomlinson (1999) states that a teacher needs to know what they believe to be successful in DI. The author continues to encourage teachers to start small when using DI, set goals, give choice, and always reflect. Smith and Throne (2009) encourage teachers to include technology when incorporating DI. DI works well when a teacher plans with the end in mind to help students become independent, curious learners. Incorporating technology helps students to bridge the gap between their in school life and their out of school life. With these things in mind, I look forward to the shift in how I approach teaching and my students.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 13: Brain research and UDL [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 19: Managing the differentiated classroom [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 20: Putting it all together [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 22: Reflection [DVD]. Reaching and engaging all learners through technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Tomlinson, C. (1999). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Retrieved from the Walden Library ebrary.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
EDUC 6713 Reflection
The blog series for this course had students creating, reflecting, and sharing posts based on a GAME plan created based on the NETS-S standards. I found this series of blog beneficial. Firstly, I was not aware of the standards to a large degree. Having a consistent set of guidelines in preparing a class for using technology in the classroom is a good reminder for teachers. This set of standards is also helpful as a benchmark for teachers in many areas of the world. With these standards, students around the world will receive like standards, which is advantageous as we continue preparing learners in the 21st century. Preparing a GAME plan was a good exercise in using new methods and information on a topic area. This was a hands-on activity that gave me the experience my students would have if they would use the GAME plan in their school work.
Creating a GAME plan was another reminder that as teachers, we need to be reflective practitioners. The GAME plan is a systematic way of going through a thought process of a teaching or learning goal you have set. The monitoring and evaluating were the most helpful in the process. While you monitor and evaluate it forces you to think and reflect on what has happened. It forces you to consider changes, take a different approach, or redefine what you need to know. I can see myself using the GAME plan with my students. The entire process would be part of a self-assessment for any assignment. By going through a GAME plan I would be able to see the depth of the learning that has happened during the course of an assignment. This can also lead to a more authentic learning by students as they monitor and evaluate what they have done.
I am not sure if there are any immediate plans or changes that I will make in my teaching practice regarding the integration of technology. However, this course has reminded me of a few things I must do as a teacher. Firstly, it is imperative to always be reflecting and thinking about learning. Thinking about this is not enough; you must also be prepared to take action and make necessary changes based on monitoring and evaluations you have made about your goals. Secondly, I have realized that I have many good lessons and units that can be altered so that technology can be infused into the learning. To go along with the idea of changing lessons and units rather than starting from scratch, I have learned that you must choose where technology properly fits into a lesson. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) wisely state that technology must be used for a purpose, not just for the sake of using technology. If what I do in the classroom does not advance the learning and understanding of my students, I have not done my job.
Technology offers abundant opportunities for students to show their learning. Technology helps students become better 21st century learners. By incorporating technology into my lessons, and having a GAME plan in doing so, offer my students a better chance at success in their learning (and in my teaching).
References:
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Creating a GAME plan was another reminder that as teachers, we need to be reflective practitioners. The GAME plan is a systematic way of going through a thought process of a teaching or learning goal you have set. The monitoring and evaluating were the most helpful in the process. While you monitor and evaluate it forces you to think and reflect on what has happened. It forces you to consider changes, take a different approach, or redefine what you need to know. I can see myself using the GAME plan with my students. The entire process would be part of a self-assessment for any assignment. By going through a GAME plan I would be able to see the depth of the learning that has happened during the course of an assignment. This can also lead to a more authentic learning by students as they monitor and evaluate what they have done.
I am not sure if there are any immediate plans or changes that I will make in my teaching practice regarding the integration of technology. However, this course has reminded me of a few things I must do as a teacher. Firstly, it is imperative to always be reflecting and thinking about learning. Thinking about this is not enough; you must also be prepared to take action and make necessary changes based on monitoring and evaluations you have made about your goals. Secondly, I have realized that I have many good lessons and units that can be altered so that technology can be infused into the learning. To go along with the idea of changing lessons and units rather than starting from scratch, I have learned that you must choose where technology properly fits into a lesson. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) wisely state that technology must be used for a purpose, not just for the sake of using technology. If what I do in the classroom does not advance the learning and understanding of my students, I have not done my job.
Technology offers abundant opportunities for students to show their learning. Technology helps students become better 21st century learners. By incorporating technology into my lessons, and having a GAME plan in doing so, offer my students a better chance at success in their learning (and in my teaching).
References:
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
GAME Plan with Students
The NETS standards for students are a good compliment to the teachers’ standards. In fact, most of the standards are isomers of each other. For example, teachers are to demonstrate good ethical use of technology. Students are to demonstrate that they use technology in an appropriate way. Upon closer inspection, most of the standards work in this way. Based on some of the work done in the Walden courses, I could see myself doing a similar style of assignment with my students. I would introduce my students to all of the standards and discuss each one with them. As they year progressed, I would ask them to use a GAME plan in implementing the standards as they went through different technology assignments during the school year. These GAME plans could be uploaded into their ePearl portfolios to show that they have been thinking about and using the NETS standards in their work.
As I look at the standards, these are the many of the things I ask my students to do on a regular basis. These standards are very closely related to my provincial technology curriculum (http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/tech/lict/show_me/continuum.html). One of the toughest areas for my students in using technology is the aspect of safe, legal, and responsible use of technology. Sometimes my students forget that most of the technology they use at school is not their own. In some cases, students tend to use copyright material without permission. Other times students purposefully try to access inappropriate web sites by getting around divisional blocks. Although these incidents are low, they do happen. Here is where my teaching and examples of proper use of technology can be a guide for my students. However, if students are more aware of standards they are to work toward, this can serve as incentive for achievement. I teach middle years, and at this age, students love contests with structure. If they are to begin setting goals, taking action, monitoring, and evaluating their work towards their goal, they can start telling you and showing you that they have used technology in a proper and ethical way. It is the "look what I did" mentality.
GAME plans can be multifaceted and have uses in many applications in our everyday lives and in our professions. The NETS-T and NETS-S are only two examples where GAME plans can be implemented. Teachers are told to be reflective practitioners. When teachers use GAME plans it becomes a systematic way to be reflective. There is a focus and purpose. If students have a purpose and focus for their assignments, learning and projects become more meaningful.
References:
Literacy with ICTAcross the Curriculum; A Developmental Continuum located at http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/tech/lict/show_me/continuum.html
National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) located at http://www.blogger.com/goog_1849475459
2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf
National Education Standards for Students (NETS-S) located at http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Student_2007_EN.sflb.ashx
As I look at the standards, these are the many of the things I ask my students to do on a regular basis. These standards are very closely related to my provincial technology curriculum (http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/tech/lict/show_me/continuum.html). One of the toughest areas for my students in using technology is the aspect of safe, legal, and responsible use of technology. Sometimes my students forget that most of the technology they use at school is not their own. In some cases, students tend to use copyright material without permission. Other times students purposefully try to access inappropriate web sites by getting around divisional blocks. Although these incidents are low, they do happen. Here is where my teaching and examples of proper use of technology can be a guide for my students. However, if students are more aware of standards they are to work toward, this can serve as incentive for achievement. I teach middle years, and at this age, students love contests with structure. If they are to begin setting goals, taking action, monitoring, and evaluating their work towards their goal, they can start telling you and showing you that they have used technology in a proper and ethical way. It is the "look what I did" mentality.
GAME plans can be multifaceted and have uses in many applications in our everyday lives and in our professions. The NETS-T and NETS-S are only two examples where GAME plans can be implemented. Teachers are told to be reflective practitioners. When teachers use GAME plans it becomes a systematic way to be reflective. There is a focus and purpose. If students have a purpose and focus for their assignments, learning and projects become more meaningful.
References:
Literacy with ICTAcross the Curriculum; A Developmental Continuum located at http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/tech/lict/show_me/continuum.html
National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) located at http://www.blogger.com/goog_1849475459
2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf
National Education Standards for Students (NETS-S) located at http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Student_2007_EN.sflb.ashx
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Revising the GAME Plan
I have a reoccurring theme in my blog posts; be patient. A question I have is can you reach a goal? Is there room for complacency in teaching? Should I have my lesson and unit plans laminated? My answer is no to all. I believe I can be happy with my progress in my GAME plan. I can be happy and proud of the strides I am beginning to make, but I am not convinced that you can “make it” in teaching. I believe you can always improve. With this in mind, I suppose my GAME plan will always be evolving and changing. I am the type of person who will always seek professional development opportunities. I just received an email about a course on Kudo animation. However, I will not be attending the in-service. Does this mean I need to revise my GAME plan because I was not allowed to attend? Again, the answer is no. A colleague of mine who is finishing this program in December will work with me and we will investigate this tool together. I believe working within the context you have is a key to succeeding in any GAME plan. I will continue to lobby for programs and technology tool I believe will benefit the students at my school. Although not necessarily technology based, I have been recently appointed to a behaviour committee at my school. I am growing into a stronger leadership role in my school.
Unwittingly I have been trying to inspire student learning and creativity by the use of technology in the classroom. Without investigating the NETS-T standards, I did not know I was working on this goal. My experience is that students want to use technology in their learning. They use technology as an everyday part of their lives. Why should school be such a drastic change for them? I have two adapted students who have done research on an endangered species. They have incorporated their research into a script and will make a video for their presentation. Without my encouragement, I do not know if they would have been this excited about this project.
I look at the NETS –T and see they are separated into five distinct goals. I am not sure if you can achieve them one by one. Although I see value in a GAME plan and they are important, these standards weave themselves into each other to make a whole. You can hardly work on one of these standards without touching on the other four.
References:
National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) located at http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/
2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf
Unwittingly I have been trying to inspire student learning and creativity by the use of technology in the classroom. Without investigating the NETS-T standards, I did not know I was working on this goal. My experience is that students want to use technology in their learning. They use technology as an everyday part of their lives. Why should school be such a drastic change for them? I have two adapted students who have done research on an endangered species. They have incorporated their research into a script and will make a video for their presentation. Without my encouragement, I do not know if they would have been this excited about this project.
I look at the NETS –T and see they are separated into five distinct goals. I am not sure if you can achieve them one by one. Although I see value in a GAME plan and they are important, these standards weave themselves into each other to make a whole. You can hardly work on one of these standards without touching on the other four.
References:
National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) located at http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/
2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Evaluationg GAME Plan Progress
As mentioned in previous blog postings finishing my master’s degree is first and foremost on my agenda in terms of professional growth and leadership. The courses continue, the learning continues, and the ideas continue to formulate. I believe the area in which I am slowly changing is allowing for more student centered learning rather than teacher centered learning. Ertmer and Simons (2006) talk about problem-based learning (PBL). Taking their ideas of presenting a real world problem to students before a unit begins is of interest to me. I think there is real value in these types of lessons and units. However, as they suggest, start off with something small. In most cases this type of teaching and learning will require a learning curve on both the students’ and teachers’ sides. I would like to be patient with myself to incorporate these ideas correctly. I want to do them with skill and correctness so I can fully pass on the information to my colleagues.
I do not know if it is my nature, the master’s program, or that I am a more senior teacher in my school, but I have started to take on more issues on behalf of my fellow teachers. I do not like people standing around and complaining or comparing a situation to somewhere else. I find myself raising these issues at meetings to get a healthy discussion going. Mostly, I find myself in discussions with my principal lobbying for new technology for our school or allowing various web tools to be used on our school network. Currently I am not enrolled in any new courses or programs, but I have gained the confidence to speak my mind on issues and make proposals that I believe would make our students more successful in school.
Being so involved with work and university, my goal to use more technology with my students is going slower than I expected. I have had the chance to try Google Sketchup with my class. They really enjoyed experimenting with it and I believe I can incorporate this tool with a PBL unit. I also have three students who receive heavier adaptations to their program. These three students have elected to do research on an endangered species. They have also indicated that their preferred method of presentation will be a video. It looks like I will be learning Moviemaker with my students.
In the grand scheme of things I am happy with how my plan is unfolding. I am a person who likes to really think about things before I act. My plan may take some time to complete, but I am alright with that. I also feel that I am willing to make any changes necessary as they arise. I have also thought about changing school divisions if that is what it takes to more fully reach my goal.
References:
Ertmer, P., & Simons, K. (Spring 2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 40-54. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=ijpbl.
I do not know if it is my nature, the master’s program, or that I am a more senior teacher in my school, but I have started to take on more issues on behalf of my fellow teachers. I do not like people standing around and complaining or comparing a situation to somewhere else. I find myself raising these issues at meetings to get a healthy discussion going. Mostly, I find myself in discussions with my principal lobbying for new technology for our school or allowing various web tools to be used on our school network. Currently I am not enrolled in any new courses or programs, but I have gained the confidence to speak my mind on issues and make proposals that I believe would make our students more successful in school.
Being so involved with work and university, my goal to use more technology with my students is going slower than I expected. I have had the chance to try Google Sketchup with my class. They really enjoyed experimenting with it and I believe I can incorporate this tool with a PBL unit. I also have three students who receive heavier adaptations to their program. These three students have elected to do research on an endangered species. They have also indicated that their preferred method of presentation will be a video. It looks like I will be learning Moviemaker with my students.
In the grand scheme of things I am happy with how my plan is unfolding. I am a person who likes to really think about things before I act. My plan may take some time to complete, but I am alright with that. I also feel that I am willing to make any changes necessary as they arise. I have also thought about changing school divisions if that is what it takes to more fully reach my goal.
References:
Ertmer, P., & Simons, K. (Spring 2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 40-54. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=ijpbl.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Monitoring GAME Plan Progress
I believe that my GAME plan has some long term components to it. Firstly, the master’s program is a 20 month process. I am learning an unbelievable amount of information; however, it may take some time to fully implement some of the ideas I am formulating. Most of my time is spent doing my course work and fulfilling my teaching obligations. Also many courses and programs cost money and I have to pace my spending. My school division is not willing to pay for all courses I take. This being said, I am doing what I can to pass information to my fellow teachers and my administrator.
I am trying to model more technology with my students each week. As with the first goal, this second goal will take time. As of late, I have been introducing my students to their e-portfolios. I used my e-portfolio on the provided site as an exemplar. I got my students logged in and they have most recently personalized their home page. Within the week the class will receive instruction on how to upload assignments to their portfolios. Lambert, DePaepe, Lambert, L., & Anderson, (2007) say e-portfolios help with learning, but these portfolios also help students work with technology. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) encourage teachers to use web based grade books to help keep assessments in order. This past week I showed my students the web grade book I was now using, and that they would soon be getting user names to create student accounts for themselves and their parents. They will be able to track their progress as the term progresses. I have also been able to work with my school division to set up divisional e-mail accounts for my students. Communication should improve as well as giving students more options to hand in their assignments.
One thing I am learning as I go ahead with my GAME plan is that working at it slowly is alright. Nothing has to be done immediately. I do not think I need to modify my plans at this time other than be realistic about the time frame.
A question that has been creeping into my brain recently is what happens when I encounter road blocks in my plan? I may have it all worked out, but my plan does involve other people. I may not get the in-servicing I want. I may not get a chance to set up a committee. I may have to cross those bridges when I get there, but I will mostly work within the system. I do not want to be a pest to the division, but I will keep pitching my ideas to the necessary people within the division.
References:
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Lambert, C., DePaepe, J., Lambert, L., & Anderson, D. (Winter 2007). E-portfolios in action. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 43(2), 76–81.
I am trying to model more technology with my students each week. As with the first goal, this second goal will take time. As of late, I have been introducing my students to their e-portfolios. I used my e-portfolio on the provided site as an exemplar. I got my students logged in and they have most recently personalized their home page. Within the week the class will receive instruction on how to upload assignments to their portfolios. Lambert, DePaepe, Lambert, L., & Anderson, (2007) say e-portfolios help with learning, but these portfolios also help students work with technology. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) encourage teachers to use web based grade books to help keep assessments in order. This past week I showed my students the web grade book I was now using, and that they would soon be getting user names to create student accounts for themselves and their parents. They will be able to track their progress as the term progresses. I have also been able to work with my school division to set up divisional e-mail accounts for my students. Communication should improve as well as giving students more options to hand in their assignments.
One thing I am learning as I go ahead with my GAME plan is that working at it slowly is alright. Nothing has to be done immediately. I do not think I need to modify my plans at this time other than be realistic about the time frame.
A question that has been creeping into my brain recently is what happens when I encounter road blocks in my plan? I may have it all worked out, but my plan does involve other people. I may not get the in-servicing I want. I may not get a chance to set up a committee. I may have to cross those bridges when I get there, but I will mostly work within the system. I do not want to be a pest to the division, but I will keep pitching my ideas to the necessary people within the division.
References:
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Lambert, C., DePaepe, J., Lambert, L., & Anderson, D. (Winter 2007). E-portfolios in action. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 43(2), 76–81.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
