Feeling very overwhelmed at the moment with all the new information coming my way via Twitter, blogs and RSS feeds...
But unlike Orwell's 1984 were the government controls all the information, or Huxley's Brave New World in which people no longer seem to care about information, are we more like Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death where we stop paying attention because there is just too much?
I don't want the form to become the function so perhaps I should just treat it all like a giant buffet (is that French for bad food you have to get yourself?) or smorgasbord (is that Swedish for bad food in gravy you have to get yourself?)
and try what looks appetizing, knowing that I can always go back and
try something new, or get more of something I like; with a new clean
plate of course.
I'll glean the results that show up, avoiding the junk and looking for
the pearls and thereby "glean what afflicts me" (bastardized from
Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead).
Tongue firmly in cheek.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Transformative Technology (From Rowan & Bigum 2012)
Great quotes from book “Transformative Approaches” about technology and education reform:
Parker Palmer 1998, p 3: “reform will never be achieved by renewing appropriations, restructuring schools, rewriting curriculum, and revising texts if we continue to demean and dishearten the human resource called the teacher on whom so much depends” (p. 10).
Future Proofing, “a commitment to educational agendas which look beyond the boundaries of schools to think about how every single educational moment is working (or not working) to provide diverse kids with the attitudes, dispositions and self belief that will serve them well in a future that no-one is in any real position to describe” (p. 10).
“a disposition or commitment to re-thinking the purposes, content and processes of schooling with a view to ensuring that all children, from all backgrounds are prepared by their educations to cope, engage with and actively shape the futures that could be ahead of them” (p. 10).
Further goal should be not only preparing children, “to be good at doing school, but rather to be good at doing life” (p. 10).
“the impact that past ways of doing things have upon what is done and also what can be imagined is significant” (p. 30).
“An example away from schools illustrates well the longevity of choices and decisions made in the past. Kevin Kelly (2010, p. 179–180) recounts the story of the influence of Roman carts on roads and rail through time. Since the carts followed in the ruts of the war chariots the carts were built to the same specifications. The chariots were built to allow two warhorses to pull them side-by-side. In time, as the English began to use carriages, they too were built to fit the existing ruts which had become roads of similar width. When railways were built, the horseless carriages were also built with the same width of almost 5 ft. labourers from England built the first American railway tracks and because their tools were designed to build the British tracks the end result was that rail tracks in the US also ended up being a little under 5 ft. More recently, the rockets which launch the space shuttle were brought via rail to Florida. They had to pass through a tunnel not much wider than the 5 ft wide track, so their diameter could not be much greater than that same measure. Kelly quotes the conclusion of one wag who commented that: “So, a major design feature of what is arguably the world’s most advanced transportation system was determined over 2,000 years ago by the width of two horses’ arse” (pp. 30-31).
We need to stop limiting students futures by limiting their present, what they call “future proofing”.
From:
Rowan, L. & Bigum, C. (Eds.) (2012). Transformative approaches to new technology and student diversity in futures oriented classrooms: Future proofing education. Dordrecht, Germany: Springer.
Parker Palmer 1998, p 3: “reform will never be achieved by renewing appropriations, restructuring schools, rewriting curriculum, and revising texts if we continue to demean and dishearten the human resource called the teacher on whom so much depends” (p. 10).
Future Proofing, “a commitment to educational agendas which look beyond the boundaries of schools to think about how every single educational moment is working (or not working) to provide diverse kids with the attitudes, dispositions and self belief that will serve them well in a future that no-one is in any real position to describe” (p. 10).
“a disposition or commitment to re-thinking the purposes, content and processes of schooling with a view to ensuring that all children, from all backgrounds are prepared by their educations to cope, engage with and actively shape the futures that could be ahead of them” (p. 10).
Further goal should be not only preparing children, “to be good at doing school, but rather to be good at doing life” (p. 10).
“the impact that past ways of doing things have upon what is done and also what can be imagined is significant” (p. 30).
“An example away from schools illustrates well the longevity of choices and decisions made in the past. Kevin Kelly (2010, p. 179–180) recounts the story of the influence of Roman carts on roads and rail through time. Since the carts followed in the ruts of the war chariots the carts were built to the same specifications. The chariots were built to allow two warhorses to pull them side-by-side. In time, as the English began to use carriages, they too were built to fit the existing ruts which had become roads of similar width. When railways were built, the horseless carriages were also built with the same width of almost 5 ft. labourers from England built the first American railway tracks and because their tools were designed to build the British tracks the end result was that rail tracks in the US also ended up being a little under 5 ft. More recently, the rockets which launch the space shuttle were brought via rail to Florida. They had to pass through a tunnel not much wider than the 5 ft wide track, so their diameter could not be much greater than that same measure. Kelly quotes the conclusion of one wag who commented that: “So, a major design feature of what is arguably the world’s most advanced transportation system was determined over 2,000 years ago by the width of two horses’ arse” (pp. 30-31).
We need to stop limiting students futures by limiting their present, what they call “future proofing”.
From:
Rowan, L. & Bigum, C. (Eds.) (2012). Transformative approaches to new technology and student diversity in futures oriented classrooms: Future proofing education. Dordrecht, Germany: Springer.
Big Picture 407
Re-Post from C&I 407, Summer 2011:
I think the most important reminder I got from this class was to always to remember to think about the students, what they know, and how they think. I try to model tasks for students but I know I need to go back and remodel more often for them as a reminder. I think though that if I want to reflect back on the course I should also go back through my old posts and try to pull out the main points and common threads that I plan to implement in the future.
Declarative knowledge is important and becomes the database from which students can draw facts that they need to solve problems. While declarative knowledge—like that described by E.D. Hirsch in “Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know” (1987)—is important, it is also necessary to keep students moving towards conditional knowledge which according to Bruning, et al, “is needed to help students make effective use of their declarative and procedural knowledge.” (p.37)
With my URQs—a way I try to move students in that direction—I plan to change how those are introduce at the beginning of the year. Instead of me telling them why I plan to use the questions I will put them in groups and have them look at a standard set of questions in the text, asking them to list things they think are good about the questions and to see if they can identify any problems that might be inherent in the questions. This will hopefully get some of them to engage in divergent thinking as described in Bruning et al. (2004) p. 166. I will then ask them to read a section as a group and develop a set of answers to those questions. I will then have them repeat the process with the URQs and see if they can see why I think they are a more useful set of questions. I can also use their answers as a form of, “inexpert modeling,” to improve their self-efficacy. I can then provide other examples to help demonstrate, “expert modeling” (Bruning et al., 2004, p. 119).
In my history classes my students’ least favorite reading question at the beginning of the year is the third one that asks them to make a connection to something else. But, what good is it if you know a set of historical facts if you are not required to connect the dots and to see how those facts can and should be applied to new or similar situations. I use my URQs to try to get students to engage historical readings in a way they normally do not. Often they need to answer question from the end of a section or from a study guide and instead of reading, then answering questions, they read the questions and hunt for the answers. The problem with that method is that they often take things out of context and it can be hard to correct the misconceptions that they develop. By the end of the year I can only hope they can at least appreciate the importance of my connection question.
In trying to remember how my students think I remember in Bruning et al. (2004) when they mentioned several times about students who feel that they are, “no good at math.” I think that applies to students in any other subject as well. They have “learned—perhaps become acclimated is better—from being told (by teachers, parents or peers) that they are not good at a subject. I think that this negative reinforcement has turned them into performance oriented, essentially taking an entity theory model stance that they are not good at something and so they avoid it or don’t try. In a previous post I noted that Bruner et al. stated on page 143 that, “[f]rom a practical viewpoint, all theorists agree that goal orientations are changeable, given careful consideration on the part of the teacher and an awareness by students of the consequences of adhering to different types of goals.” They go on to give the suggestion, of [e]phasizing daily academic improvement while simultaneously deemphasizing the importance of ability are central to establishing a learning oriented environment, and that this must be, “emphasized from the onset.”
Finally, I want to make sure that if I want students to make relevant connections then my assignments should be relevant as well. With my Renaissance and Cold War projects I want to make sure I address some issues from the “Factors to Consider” (Popham, 2008, pp 178-9) to make sure my students recognize the larger importance of those assignments in terms of:
1. Generalizability—I would hope that the ability to research and summarize information in a coherent manner could be used in a variety of tasks. The presentation part is as well as Power Point and video production skills are useful in a variety of areas.
2. Authenticity—I think that for many jobs, and for future schooling, the ability to put together a researched report and to be able to present information from that report are important skills. Power Point has been important but with the rise of YouTube and instructional video and asynchronous communication, video production is perhaps becoming as important. Just look at this class!
3. Fairness—Perhaps there is a problem here. I usually book many days in the library for research and in the computer labs for students to work on these projects. The problem is that they still need to work from home and not all of our students have internet access at home.
As for me I need to make sure that I remember the teachability aspects of the project and that reinforce skills from other classes that are now applied to history content. The researching and writing are reinforcing skills taught in English classes and are part of the new Common Core English standards applied to social studies. The oral communication reinforces our English II classes and my dual credit communication course. The video production skills are also used in our media classes.
I’m perhaps going to take the easy way out and say that I think both are needed to measure learning. True-False, multiple-choice, and short answer are needed to check for declarative and some procedural knowledge, but obviously when I think of “academic skills” I would certainly think that performance assessment (and portfolios) provide a much deeper and richer understanding of a student’s skills and abilities than the “snapshot” that is given in other forms of testing.
David Ausubel says the most important thing to know in teaching is what the student already knows, so perhaps Socrates had it right, question and answer. Students don’t like it—they just want to the answer to the question—and teachers get tired of it or just give the answer so that they can cover everything. I will try to take the time to have the students think, then guide them to the answer so that they can see the answer and how it is connected or related to other events and to their lives today. To quote from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead, “the old ways are the best ways. Question and answer, glean what afflicts.”
I think the most important reminder I got from this class was to always to remember to think about the students, what they know, and how they think. I try to model tasks for students but I know I need to go back and remodel more often for them as a reminder. I think though that if I want to reflect back on the course I should also go back through my old posts and try to pull out the main points and common threads that I plan to implement in the future.
Declarative knowledge is important and becomes the database from which students can draw facts that they need to solve problems. While declarative knowledge—like that described by E.D. Hirsch in “Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know” (1987)—is important, it is also necessary to keep students moving towards conditional knowledge which according to Bruning, et al, “is needed to help students make effective use of their declarative and procedural knowledge.” (p.37)
With my URQs—a way I try to move students in that direction—I plan to change how those are introduce at the beginning of the year. Instead of me telling them why I plan to use the questions I will put them in groups and have them look at a standard set of questions in the text, asking them to list things they think are good about the questions and to see if they can identify any problems that might be inherent in the questions. This will hopefully get some of them to engage in divergent thinking as described in Bruning et al. (2004) p. 166. I will then ask them to read a section as a group and develop a set of answers to those questions. I will then have them repeat the process with the URQs and see if they can see why I think they are a more useful set of questions. I can also use their answers as a form of, “inexpert modeling,” to improve their self-efficacy. I can then provide other examples to help demonstrate, “expert modeling” (Bruning et al., 2004, p. 119).
In my history classes my students’ least favorite reading question at the beginning of the year is the third one that asks them to make a connection to something else. But, what good is it if you know a set of historical facts if you are not required to connect the dots and to see how those facts can and should be applied to new or similar situations. I use my URQs to try to get students to engage historical readings in a way they normally do not. Often they need to answer question from the end of a section or from a study guide and instead of reading, then answering questions, they read the questions and hunt for the answers. The problem with that method is that they often take things out of context and it can be hard to correct the misconceptions that they develop. By the end of the year I can only hope they can at least appreciate the importance of my connection question.
In trying to remember how my students think I remember in Bruning et al. (2004) when they mentioned several times about students who feel that they are, “no good at math.” I think that applies to students in any other subject as well. They have “learned—perhaps become acclimated is better—from being told (by teachers, parents or peers) that they are not good at a subject. I think that this negative reinforcement has turned them into performance oriented, essentially taking an entity theory model stance that they are not good at something and so they avoid it or don’t try. In a previous post I noted that Bruner et al. stated on page 143 that, “[f]rom a practical viewpoint, all theorists agree that goal orientations are changeable, given careful consideration on the part of the teacher and an awareness by students of the consequences of adhering to different types of goals.” They go on to give the suggestion, of [e]phasizing daily academic improvement while simultaneously deemphasizing the importance of ability are central to establishing a learning oriented environment, and that this must be, “emphasized from the onset.”
Finally, I want to make sure that if I want students to make relevant connections then my assignments should be relevant as well. With my Renaissance and Cold War projects I want to make sure I address some issues from the “Factors to Consider” (Popham, 2008, pp 178-9) to make sure my students recognize the larger importance of those assignments in terms of:
1. Generalizability—I would hope that the ability to research and summarize information in a coherent manner could be used in a variety of tasks. The presentation part is as well as Power Point and video production skills are useful in a variety of areas.
2. Authenticity—I think that for many jobs, and for future schooling, the ability to put together a researched report and to be able to present information from that report are important skills. Power Point has been important but with the rise of YouTube and instructional video and asynchronous communication, video production is perhaps becoming as important. Just look at this class!
3. Fairness—Perhaps there is a problem here. I usually book many days in the library for research and in the computer labs for students to work on these projects. The problem is that they still need to work from home and not all of our students have internet access at home.
As for me I need to make sure that I remember the teachability aspects of the project and that reinforce skills from other classes that are now applied to history content. The researching and writing are reinforcing skills taught in English classes and are part of the new Common Core English standards applied to social studies. The oral communication reinforces our English II classes and my dual credit communication course. The video production skills are also used in our media classes.
I’m perhaps going to take the easy way out and say that I think both are needed to measure learning. True-False, multiple-choice, and short answer are needed to check for declarative and some procedural knowledge, but obviously when I think of “academic skills” I would certainly think that performance assessment (and portfolios) provide a much deeper and richer understanding of a student’s skills and abilities than the “snapshot” that is given in other forms of testing.
David Ausubel says the most important thing to know in teaching is what the student already knows, so perhaps Socrates had it right, question and answer. Students don’t like it—they just want to the answer to the question—and teachers get tired of it or just give the answer so that they can cover everything. I will try to take the time to have the students think, then guide them to the answer so that they can see the answer and how it is connected or related to other events and to their lives today. To quote from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead, “the old ways are the best ways. Question and answer, glean what afflicts.”
Using Assessments to Influence Instruction
Re-Post from C&I 407, Summer 2011:
While I try every year to make changes to my assessments, I think that I need to work harder at making sure that those assessments are kept in mind when making teaching decisions. One of the things I plan to do is to move faster into transitioning students from selection answers into creation answers. For next year all of my social studies classes are once again at the freshman level. I start tests off early in the year with all selected response and gradually add in constructed response level questions; short answer and then longer essay questions. Over the years I have found that they get very little of those in our junior high and I want to build them up to it.
I teach history and as a result need to find out how many historical facts my students know, making selected response questions a good choice (Popham, 2008, p 166). Over the years I have noticed something that seems odd to me; some of my students do very poorly on matching questions. I have students that won’t miss a single multiple choice question, but will miss almost all of the matching ones! One thing I will try to improve that is to work with them in class on those types of question, giving them practice and tips. Another thing that I might try for next year is to use pre-test and post-test to help me measure the effectiveness of my teaching (pp 102-103).
As I attempt to move my students up Bloom’s Taxonomy to application and synthesis (or to conditional knowledge in Bruning et al.) I will work with them to improve their short answer and essay questions. Doing so will take time, but if I have them analyze sample responses to essay questions, I can hopefully show them specifically why and answer is great or not so great.
As for my assessment types, I don’t think I will change them radically, but as I mentioned, attempt to incorporate higher level questions earlier. I will continue with my Universal Reading Questions (URQs) but I will make changes in how I use those to improve student involvement in the classroom. I will attempt to involve the students more in my responses to those questions. My goal with those questions was to get them beyond “seek and find” questions that often come at the end of a section or chapter, and to engage with the text. I also get to find out the things that the students find to be interesting and the things they don’t understand or want to know more about.
In the future instead of me explaining the answer or background to their questions, I will try to get them to look up that information and guide them to the connections instead of simply pointing them out. To be fair, they do make connections, but I would like for them to make most of the connections. I plan to grade their individual responses then group them by those with similar responses or questions. Their follow up assignment will be a series of questions concerning related facts and topics I will ask them to look up to help them answer their own questions providing them the opportunity to make deeper connections. I can still provide additional information and connections as needed.
I always tell my students that history textbooks are boring because they contain a lot of facts and very few of the really good stories—don’t get me started on why that is, it would require another blog page! I tell them that if they read and learn the basics I will tell them the interesting human twists and possible explanations that get left out. Now they will hopefully learn how to go about finding out more about those things on their own with additional guidance on my part.
Finally, I plan to limit my instructional objectives by combining what Popham calls, “lesser, smaller-scope objectives,” (p. 104) into curricular aims that will improve what I teach and how I assess it. I want to avoid the super specific goals (like Illinois’ pages of social studies standards) in favor of ones that help the students learn historical connections and support the English and Language Arts goals of the Common Core Standards. I hope that having these broader curricular aims will help guide my instruction by helping me to focus on larger concepts and avoid getting bogged down by the myriad of standards, or as Popham says, “end up paying attention to no objectives at all (p. 103).
In today’s world a historical fact can be looked up in 0.05 seconds (for 3,373,000 results!) My selected response tests will continue to monitor their knowledge of the basic facts, but the URQs, essay questions, connection essays and projects will address higher levels. What I think is most important is that students can correctly arrange those facts into related ideas, themes and connected concepts that can help answer the questions of “who we are,” “where we came from,” and “where we are going,” thus making the past capable of being seen as relevant in the world, both today and tomorrow.
While I try every year to make changes to my assessments, I think that I need to work harder at making sure that those assessments are kept in mind when making teaching decisions. One of the things I plan to do is to move faster into transitioning students from selection answers into creation answers. For next year all of my social studies classes are once again at the freshman level. I start tests off early in the year with all selected response and gradually add in constructed response level questions; short answer and then longer essay questions. Over the years I have found that they get very little of those in our junior high and I want to build them up to it.
I teach history and as a result need to find out how many historical facts my students know, making selected response questions a good choice (Popham, 2008, p 166). Over the years I have noticed something that seems odd to me; some of my students do very poorly on matching questions. I have students that won’t miss a single multiple choice question, but will miss almost all of the matching ones! One thing I will try to improve that is to work with them in class on those types of question, giving them practice and tips. Another thing that I might try for next year is to use pre-test and post-test to help me measure the effectiveness of my teaching (pp 102-103).
As I attempt to move my students up Bloom’s Taxonomy to application and synthesis (or to conditional knowledge in Bruning et al.) I will work with them to improve their short answer and essay questions. Doing so will take time, but if I have them analyze sample responses to essay questions, I can hopefully show them specifically why and answer is great or not so great.
As for my assessment types, I don’t think I will change them radically, but as I mentioned, attempt to incorporate higher level questions earlier. I will continue with my Universal Reading Questions (URQs) but I will make changes in how I use those to improve student involvement in the classroom. I will attempt to involve the students more in my responses to those questions. My goal with those questions was to get them beyond “seek and find” questions that often come at the end of a section or chapter, and to engage with the text. I also get to find out the things that the students find to be interesting and the things they don’t understand or want to know more about.
In the future instead of me explaining the answer or background to their questions, I will try to get them to look up that information and guide them to the connections instead of simply pointing them out. To be fair, they do make connections, but I would like for them to make most of the connections. I plan to grade their individual responses then group them by those with similar responses or questions. Their follow up assignment will be a series of questions concerning related facts and topics I will ask them to look up to help them answer their own questions providing them the opportunity to make deeper connections. I can still provide additional information and connections as needed.
I always tell my students that history textbooks are boring because they contain a lot of facts and very few of the really good stories—don’t get me started on why that is, it would require another blog page! I tell them that if they read and learn the basics I will tell them the interesting human twists and possible explanations that get left out. Now they will hopefully learn how to go about finding out more about those things on their own with additional guidance on my part.
Finally, I plan to limit my instructional objectives by combining what Popham calls, “lesser, smaller-scope objectives,” (p. 104) into curricular aims that will improve what I teach and how I assess it. I want to avoid the super specific goals (like Illinois’ pages of social studies standards) in favor of ones that help the students learn historical connections and support the English and Language Arts goals of the Common Core Standards. I hope that having these broader curricular aims will help guide my instruction by helping me to focus on larger concepts and avoid getting bogged down by the myriad of standards, or as Popham says, “end up paying attention to no objectives at all (p. 103).
In today’s world a historical fact can be looked up in 0.05 seconds (for 3,373,000 results!) My selected response tests will continue to monitor their knowledge of the basic facts, but the URQs, essay questions, connection essays and projects will address higher levels. What I think is most important is that students can correctly arrange those facts into related ideas, themes and connected concepts that can help answer the questions of “who we are,” “where we came from,” and “where we are going,” thus making the past capable of being seen as relevant in the world, both today and tomorrow.
Technology and Education Theory
Re-post from C&I 407, Summer 2011:
So I feel like I’m lazy for picking Chapter 10 as it is the first on the list to choose from, but education technology is certainly the area I am most interested in, so here goes.
Chapter 10, Technological Contexts for Cognitive Growth, looks at the use of new technologies, the connections of those to cognitive theory, and how those technologies can best be used to improve student attention and learning at all levels. The chapter looked at cognitive load theory, the 4C/ID model and social cognitive theory and the implications each has for designing and implementing technology into classroom situations.
Before looking at these areas the chapter includes two detailed charts that look at; 1) how students can use technology and 2) key cognitive skills students need to use technologies effectively. These two charts make for a nice concise reference for ways to use technology with students and how to make sure that the technology enhances teaching and learning rather than leading to cognitive overload that can stop the learning process. (I wish now that I had the newer version of the text to have updated charts, especially at the pace technology options and preferences have changed!)
Cognitive load theory looks at, “the role of working memory in instructional design” (Sweller, 1999; Sweller, van Merrienboer, & Paas 1998 in Bruning, et al. 2004). Two of the key concerns they point out are avoiding cognitive overload and ways to improve student learning through select applications of simultaneous presentations. Intrinsic cognitive load deals with the material that is being learned and is relatively set in difficulty. The key is to balance the extraneous cognitive load, how the presentation media are organized, and what information is included (Bruning et al. 2004, p. 220). They look at long term memory schema and describe how making subgoals of tasks automatic is needed to better complex tasks. The second area they look at is the avoidance of overload by limiting the number of ways in which information is presented at one time. Their example from Mayer & Moreno, 2002 shows that showing a task while narrating what happens is effective, but that adding the text of the narration is not as the visual text interferes with the visual of the actual task.
The second theory is the Four Component Instructional Design of 4C/ID. The basis of this theory is, “that complex skills are learned by performing them” (p. 223). This has four components; 1) learning task, 2) supportive information, 3) Just-In-Time (JIT) information, and 4) part-task practice. The idea behind learning task involves learning skills in an integrated versus individual manner while supportive information, “provides a bridge between learner’s prior knowledge and the learning tasks” (p. 224). JIT information is given as needed while performing a task with the goal of making those skills, “as automatic as possible as soon as possible, thereby freeing cognitive resources” (pp 224-225). Finally, part-task practice is a way to try and improve procedural expertise by intermixing task practice with, “complex, authentic tasks” (p 225).
The final section of the chapter looks at social cognitive theory the developing classroom communities. This theory focuses on, “technology’s role in classroom interactions and knowledge construction,” (Bruning et al. 2004). The authors look at the work of the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV), and CSILE (Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment). CTGV created a series of problem-based materials called the Adventures of Jasper Woodbury that improved mathematical thinking through complex problems solved by groups. According to Bruer, 1993 the, “primary goals are ability to reason, think critically, reflect, argue, and learn independently.” CSILE on the other hand looks at creating knowledge-building communities that allows for students to, “interact with their classmates about,” ideas concerning the topic being studied (p. 229). What is interesting from this is how it allowed shy and soft-spoken students can better interact in the conversations.
One project I plan to modify using information from this chapter is the Cold War video project I use in my history classes. In this project students research a Cold War topic, write a summary that becomes a narration script and then find pictures and video (provided by me from Discovery Streaming) to illustrate the script. These are then shared with classes and discussions develop around the topics and their connections. In the past we have taken up to three weeks of time for research and production of the videos. Every year some groups get panicked at the end, especially as it is a new skill and the project comes together at the end of the school year around finals time.
To try and improve this (beyond yearly tweaks) I plan to apply ideas from cognitive load theory (from Chapter 2) to make sure that the multimedia presentations I use for presenting storyboarding and editing limit the number of simultaneous presentation to prevent overload. From the 4C/ID theory I plan to expand to process to a semester long assignment. I will take a day a week to introduce material and allow students time to practice. JIT information will be provided to help transition students from controlled processes to automatic information processing (in Chapter 2), moving as Chapter 3 says from schemata to procedures.
Breaking the project down from an intense three weeks to over a semester will hopefully allow students to work together to finish subtasks and allow me to give the students part-task practice to improve the slow moving process of practice leading to expertise (Chapter 8). I also hope to employ aspects of CSILE to get the quiet students more involved in the learning process. If we move to one to one net books this can be accomplished through students creating mini blog posts involving journal entries of what they have accomplished and questions that they may have. Without net books, computer lab time will have to be booked as not all students have internet access at home.
p.s. If I do get to pilot net books I plans to implement that with my URQs as well, allowing students to post their entries which I can then review and call up in class to improve participation, plus that will allow the technology to address the needs of some student I have with IEPs and 504 plans.
So I feel like I’m lazy for picking Chapter 10 as it is the first on the list to choose from, but education technology is certainly the area I am most interested in, so here goes.
Chapter 10, Technological Contexts for Cognitive Growth, looks at the use of new technologies, the connections of those to cognitive theory, and how those technologies can best be used to improve student attention and learning at all levels. The chapter looked at cognitive load theory, the 4C/ID model and social cognitive theory and the implications each has for designing and implementing technology into classroom situations.
Before looking at these areas the chapter includes two detailed charts that look at; 1) how students can use technology and 2) key cognitive skills students need to use technologies effectively. These two charts make for a nice concise reference for ways to use technology with students and how to make sure that the technology enhances teaching and learning rather than leading to cognitive overload that can stop the learning process. (I wish now that I had the newer version of the text to have updated charts, especially at the pace technology options and preferences have changed!)
Cognitive load theory looks at, “the role of working memory in instructional design” (Sweller, 1999; Sweller, van Merrienboer, & Paas 1998 in Bruning, et al. 2004). Two of the key concerns they point out are avoiding cognitive overload and ways to improve student learning through select applications of simultaneous presentations. Intrinsic cognitive load deals with the material that is being learned and is relatively set in difficulty. The key is to balance the extraneous cognitive load, how the presentation media are organized, and what information is included (Bruning et al. 2004, p. 220). They look at long term memory schema and describe how making subgoals of tasks automatic is needed to better complex tasks. The second area they look at is the avoidance of overload by limiting the number of ways in which information is presented at one time. Their example from Mayer & Moreno, 2002 shows that showing a task while narrating what happens is effective, but that adding the text of the narration is not as the visual text interferes with the visual of the actual task.
The second theory is the Four Component Instructional Design of 4C/ID. The basis of this theory is, “that complex skills are learned by performing them” (p. 223). This has four components; 1) learning task, 2) supportive information, 3) Just-In-Time (JIT) information, and 4) part-task practice. The idea behind learning task involves learning skills in an integrated versus individual manner while supportive information, “provides a bridge between learner’s prior knowledge and the learning tasks” (p. 224). JIT information is given as needed while performing a task with the goal of making those skills, “as automatic as possible as soon as possible, thereby freeing cognitive resources” (pp 224-225). Finally, part-task practice is a way to try and improve procedural expertise by intermixing task practice with, “complex, authentic tasks” (p 225).
The final section of the chapter looks at social cognitive theory the developing classroom communities. This theory focuses on, “technology’s role in classroom interactions and knowledge construction,” (Bruning et al. 2004). The authors look at the work of the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV), and CSILE (Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment). CTGV created a series of problem-based materials called the Adventures of Jasper Woodbury that improved mathematical thinking through complex problems solved by groups. According to Bruer, 1993 the, “primary goals are ability to reason, think critically, reflect, argue, and learn independently.” CSILE on the other hand looks at creating knowledge-building communities that allows for students to, “interact with their classmates about,” ideas concerning the topic being studied (p. 229). What is interesting from this is how it allowed shy and soft-spoken students can better interact in the conversations.
One project I plan to modify using information from this chapter is the Cold War video project I use in my history classes. In this project students research a Cold War topic, write a summary that becomes a narration script and then find pictures and video (provided by me from Discovery Streaming) to illustrate the script. These are then shared with classes and discussions develop around the topics and their connections. In the past we have taken up to three weeks of time for research and production of the videos. Every year some groups get panicked at the end, especially as it is a new skill and the project comes together at the end of the school year around finals time.
To try and improve this (beyond yearly tweaks) I plan to apply ideas from cognitive load theory (from Chapter 2) to make sure that the multimedia presentations I use for presenting storyboarding and editing limit the number of simultaneous presentation to prevent overload. From the 4C/ID theory I plan to expand to process to a semester long assignment. I will take a day a week to introduce material and allow students time to practice. JIT information will be provided to help transition students from controlled processes to automatic information processing (in Chapter 2), moving as Chapter 3 says from schemata to procedures.
Breaking the project down from an intense three weeks to over a semester will hopefully allow students to work together to finish subtasks and allow me to give the students part-task practice to improve the slow moving process of practice leading to expertise (Chapter 8). I also hope to employ aspects of CSILE to get the quiet students more involved in the learning process. If we move to one to one net books this can be accomplished through students creating mini blog posts involving journal entries of what they have accomplished and questions that they may have. Without net books, computer lab time will have to be booked as not all students have internet access at home.
p.s. If I do get to pilot net books I plans to implement that with my URQs as well, allowing students to post their entries which I can then review and call up in class to improve participation, plus that will allow the technology to address the needs of some student I have with IEPs and 504 plans.
Self Efficacy
Originally from C&I 407, 2011
In reflecting about the three topic areas of beliefs in Chapter 6; self-efficacy, attribution theory and autonomy, I found the information on self-efficacy to be the most informative for me. I might feel this way as it was an area the details of which I was least familiar. As teachers we are often told to praise our students to help raise their self esteem but, as is the case with most professional development, we are rarely given examples of how to best do this let alone the research detailing why it should be done. I found it interesting that Bruning et al. not only clarify the differences between self-efficacy and self esteem, but also provide research explaining its importance and examples of how to implement those ideas into the classroom.
Bruning et al. pointed out a critical distinction about what I had been told about students "believing in themselves" in the past; that self-efficacy is not to be confused with self esteem. As defined by Bandura (1997) self-efficacy is, “a judgment of one’s ability to perform a task within a specific domain. “ An importance aspect of this for me was the four influences on the level, generality, and strength of student self-efficacy. Learning how student self-efficacy develops through influences described by Bandura (1987) as: 1) information acquired during the performance of a task, 2) observation of others, 3) verbal persuasion and 4) psychological state. I find this fascinating because it gives insight into how students develop the perceptions they have about themselves and their abilities.
When being told to praise and encourage students to bolster their self esteem there was often a problem for me when it came to some students, I felt that they actually needed to do something to get praise for. I wasn’t looking for something grand, just something, anything in some cases, for which I could give them some positive feedback and encouragement. I would remind them about an assignment, the importance of doing their work and vividly demonstrate the effects on their grade of not doing their work. What I didn’t not realize—or had forgotten—is that often the students had decided in advance whether or not they were good at a subject and had already determined the approximate level their grade would be regardless of my insistence on doing their work.
I have now come to realize that I need to find a way to assess student efficacy immediately at the beginning of a school year or semester and begin to guide those students that have low self-efficacy. At my school we are even fighting negative impacts on school efficacy, a general negative attitude started by some parents and nurtured by the students themselves. You hear it every day with comments like, “this school sucks,” or, “this place is so gay.”
As a teacher I plan to try and incorporate the implications for improving self-efficacy on pages 118-19 of Bandura et al. (2004) to help students become more aware of the learning processes. I think it is important that students realize that they have already developed set patterns of actions (and inactions) that have an incredible influence on how they learn. Once they become aware of the concept of self-efficacy and how perhaps we as teachers can (opefully help them to enact changes to the negative learning behaviors that they did not even know that they had. (This is expanded upon in Chapter 7 with ideas about implicit beliefs of both students and teachers.)
I would like to think that I am not one of those experienced teachers that has moved to the, “custodial view of classroom control,” described on page 115 by Bruning et al. (2004). I was told my student teacher field supervisor not to eat lunch in the teacher’s lounge as all you will hear are complaints and get negative ideas about students before you even have them. I was even luckier that my supervising teacher felt the same way. I have already found a few simple tests I can administer to my classes at the beginning of the year that I can incorporate into the beginning of the year process of setting student expectations and hopefully starting a new learning chapter for my students. Once I have set a baseline for them and made them aware of the concept I can follow through with the modeling ideas listed on pages 116-117 and the implications listed on pages 118-119. This school year isn't even over and I already have new plans for next year!
In reflecting about the three topic areas of beliefs in Chapter 6; self-efficacy, attribution theory and autonomy, I found the information on self-efficacy to be the most informative for me. I might feel this way as it was an area the details of which I was least familiar. As teachers we are often told to praise our students to help raise their self esteem but, as is the case with most professional development, we are rarely given examples of how to best do this let alone the research detailing why it should be done. I found it interesting that Bruning et al. not only clarify the differences between self-efficacy and self esteem, but also provide research explaining its importance and examples of how to implement those ideas into the classroom.
Bruning et al. pointed out a critical distinction about what I had been told about students "believing in themselves" in the past; that self-efficacy is not to be confused with self esteem. As defined by Bandura (1997) self-efficacy is, “a judgment of one’s ability to perform a task within a specific domain. “ An importance aspect of this for me was the four influences on the level, generality, and strength of student self-efficacy. Learning how student self-efficacy develops through influences described by Bandura (1987) as: 1) information acquired during the performance of a task, 2) observation of others, 3) verbal persuasion and 4) psychological state. I find this fascinating because it gives insight into how students develop the perceptions they have about themselves and their abilities.
When being told to praise and encourage students to bolster their self esteem there was often a problem for me when it came to some students, I felt that they actually needed to do something to get praise for. I wasn’t looking for something grand, just something, anything in some cases, for which I could give them some positive feedback and encouragement. I would remind them about an assignment, the importance of doing their work and vividly demonstrate the effects on their grade of not doing their work. What I didn’t not realize—or had forgotten—is that often the students had decided in advance whether or not they were good at a subject and had already determined the approximate level their grade would be regardless of my insistence on doing their work.
I have now come to realize that I need to find a way to assess student efficacy immediately at the beginning of a school year or semester and begin to guide those students that have low self-efficacy. At my school we are even fighting negative impacts on school efficacy, a general negative attitude started by some parents and nurtured by the students themselves. You hear it every day with comments like, “this school sucks,” or, “this place is so gay.”
As a teacher I plan to try and incorporate the implications for improving self-efficacy on pages 118-19 of Bandura et al. (2004) to help students become more aware of the learning processes. I think it is important that students realize that they have already developed set patterns of actions (and inactions) that have an incredible influence on how they learn. Once they become aware of the concept of self-efficacy and how perhaps we as teachers can (opefully help them to enact changes to the negative learning behaviors that they did not even know that they had. (This is expanded upon in Chapter 7 with ideas about implicit beliefs of both students and teachers.)
I would like to think that I am not one of those experienced teachers that has moved to the, “custodial view of classroom control,” described on page 115 by Bruning et al. (2004). I was told my student teacher field supervisor not to eat lunch in the teacher’s lounge as all you will hear are complaints and get negative ideas about students before you even have them. I was even luckier that my supervising teacher felt the same way. I have already found a few simple tests I can administer to my classes at the beginning of the year that I can incorporate into the beginning of the year process of setting student expectations and hopefully starting a new learning chapter for my students. Once I have set a baseline for them and made them aware of the concept I can follow through with the modeling ideas listed on pages 116-117 and the implications listed on pages 118-119. This school year isn't even over and I already have new plans for next year!
Learning New Material
This was originally from C&I 407, Summer 2011
When it comes to learning new material the most important thing for me to do is make it relevant. I’m at the point now that for me to take the time to learn something it is because I have a specific reason that I plan to implement that skill or knowledge. This makes some people think I can be a bit intense, because when it comes to things I am interested in, “I’m in.” If I can’t see—or be made to see—a way I can utilize it now or in the future, count me out. That makes it good when I want to learn something, I’ll allocate all the resources I can. However, I would make a bad politician because I have a tough time remembering the names of people I’m sure I’ll never meet again. Not my classmates of course, but then again we haven’t actually met!
When I am “allocating resources” to learning something new, what steps to I take? First I try to relate the new material to prior knowledge. What similar situations, activities, or processes that I already know are similar to the new material? If it is similar to something I already know then I can recall a similar schema (Bruning, 2004, pp 22-23) from long-term memory and hang the new information on it. When learning new video editing programs I make comparisons to Windows Movie Maker or Adobe Premiere. (I plan to introduce Final Cut to my Media II students next year and they will have to make connections to the similarities in Premiere, as well as the differences.)
If the material is new and I can’t make a connection to a long-term memory schema, then I find I use a few different strategies including chunking, including visual components, and practicing if applicable.
First, I like George Miller’s idea of organizing material into chunks to increase the amount of information retained (Bruning, pp 26-27) is what I do in a lecture or when reading. I take notes, usually in an outline form. I teach speech as well as history and that discipline’s emphasis on outlines works well for me because I have always used them. Now I realize I am using them as a way to chuck information to help me retain and recall it.
Second, I always had a hard time remembering student names at the beginning of the year. I used to make name cards for them to set on their desks for the first week until I made the connection between the name (a word) and the person it represents. This is one way in which I discovered that I like to have visual and auditory presentational aspects to material that I am learning. On page 22, Bruning, et al states under the “Implications of Research on Sensory Registers” that, “there may be real benefits to presenting information both visually and auditorially.” Perhaps because I like to learn that way, I try whenever possible to do the same for my students. From overheads, to video clips, to an interactive whiteboard—that makes it easier and faster to integrate visuals—I have found through the years that having both is something I not only like to include but that I am including more of as it becomes easier to do. Now I get their picture included in my electronic gradebook and can make the connections through a seating chart that includes faces and names—works great for substitutes.
Finally, I like to practice, practice, and practice. I am guess I am trying for automaticity (Bruning, p. 25). Don’t just show me how to do something, let me actually do it. My pet peeve with a lot of professional development is that it only shows you how to do something and tells you to practice it when you get back to your classroom. Unfortunately, they showed you an overload of new things to try and when you get back to the classroom you have to deal with the things you left for the substitute, get the students and course back on track and soon there is no time to practice what they showed me. I was asked by my local ROE to teach some workshops on video editing. I told them I would with a big if. If they would make the training a day long workshop so that participants had time to practice what I showed them. I had them bring in materials and an idea of some type of video they wanted to create. By giving them time to practice (play around) they got to know the program and most came away with a newly created video to share or use in the classroom. Malcolm Gladwell in his book Tipping Point points this out in terms of the hours of practice that it takes to learn something, to become proficient at it, and the point at which the skill tips and a person can become an expert at it.
When it comes to learning new material the most important thing for me to do is make it relevant. I’m at the point now that for me to take the time to learn something it is because I have a specific reason that I plan to implement that skill or knowledge. This makes some people think I can be a bit intense, because when it comes to things I am interested in, “I’m in.” If I can’t see—or be made to see—a way I can utilize it now or in the future, count me out. That makes it good when I want to learn something, I’ll allocate all the resources I can. However, I would make a bad politician because I have a tough time remembering the names of people I’m sure I’ll never meet again. Not my classmates of course, but then again we haven’t actually met!
When I am “allocating resources” to learning something new, what steps to I take? First I try to relate the new material to prior knowledge. What similar situations, activities, or processes that I already know are similar to the new material? If it is similar to something I already know then I can recall a similar schema (Bruning, 2004, pp 22-23) from long-term memory and hang the new information on it. When learning new video editing programs I make comparisons to Windows Movie Maker or Adobe Premiere. (I plan to introduce Final Cut to my Media II students next year and they will have to make connections to the similarities in Premiere, as well as the differences.)
If the material is new and I can’t make a connection to a long-term memory schema, then I find I use a few different strategies including chunking, including visual components, and practicing if applicable.
First, I like George Miller’s idea of organizing material into chunks to increase the amount of information retained (Bruning, pp 26-27) is what I do in a lecture or when reading. I take notes, usually in an outline form. I teach speech as well as history and that discipline’s emphasis on outlines works well for me because I have always used them. Now I realize I am using them as a way to chuck information to help me retain and recall it.
Second, I always had a hard time remembering student names at the beginning of the year. I used to make name cards for them to set on their desks for the first week until I made the connection between the name (a word) and the person it represents. This is one way in which I discovered that I like to have visual and auditory presentational aspects to material that I am learning. On page 22, Bruning, et al states under the “Implications of Research on Sensory Registers” that, “there may be real benefits to presenting information both visually and auditorially.” Perhaps because I like to learn that way, I try whenever possible to do the same for my students. From overheads, to video clips, to an interactive whiteboard—that makes it easier and faster to integrate visuals—I have found through the years that having both is something I not only like to include but that I am including more of as it becomes easier to do. Now I get their picture included in my electronic gradebook and can make the connections through a seating chart that includes faces and names—works great for substitutes.
Finally, I like to practice, practice, and practice. I am guess I am trying for automaticity (Bruning, p. 25). Don’t just show me how to do something, let me actually do it. My pet peeve with a lot of professional development is that it only shows you how to do something and tells you to practice it when you get back to your classroom. Unfortunately, they showed you an overload of new things to try and when you get back to the classroom you have to deal with the things you left for the substitute, get the students and course back on track and soon there is no time to practice what they showed me. I was asked by my local ROE to teach some workshops on video editing. I told them I would with a big if. If they would make the training a day long workshop so that participants had time to practice what I showed them. I had them bring in materials and an idea of some type of video they wanted to create. By giving them time to practice (play around) they got to know the program and most came away with a newly created video to share or use in the classroom. Malcolm Gladwell in his book Tipping Point points this out in terms of the hours of practice that it takes to learn something, to become proficient at it, and the point at which the skill tips and a person can become an expert at it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)