Final Reflection

          This course was extremely valuable because it strengthened my ability to develop courses using the GAME plan. I used the GAME plan to develop the course entitled “Using Figurative Language to Determine the Theme.” Based on instructor input, collaborating with my colleagues via the blogs and discussions, and reading the course materials, I was able to develop a good GAME plan and at the same time gain new learning.

            One of the most important items I learned is the importance of International’s (2008) five standards and performance indicators. For example, the Modeling Digital Age Work standard and performance indicator reinforced that I need to set goals in staying up to date and fluent in the newer technology systems. Therefore, my goal is to be the resident expert on most technologies by continuing my research on using the latest technologies in the classroom and submitting articles on using technology in the classroom to be published. The other standard and performance indicator that really had an impact on me was Engaging in Professional Growth and Leadership. Therefore, I will set goals to continue my research on integrating technology into the classroom but also to participate in local and global learning communities. Whenever, I get a chance to speak or be involved, I want to share my research with others. I’ll monitor my progress from the feedback received from my speaking engagements and participation. I’ll evaluate and extend my learning by improving my delivery based off of the feedback I receive.

Another item that I learned was that when I’m developing problem based learning, I need to work on my problem. Oscar provided some valuable feedback. He offered that it seems as if the problem I posted was more intended to solve a problem that I observed from my students. Instead, I need to offer more of a real world problem which will turn out to be more engaging for my students. I will definitely take his advice and make adjustments when developing problem based learning.

Overall, this course was magnificent! Learning how to develop a GAME plan, enhancing my instructional capability by being better prepared to integrate technology across content areas, and being able to incorporate problem based learning, social networking/online collaboration, and digital storytelling into my instruction have really strengthened my ability to become a more effective technology advocate.

 
References

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education technology standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-t-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

 

 

Progress Towards Goals

Laureate Education (2010) promoted how customizing instruction and using technology are encouraged to meet the needs of diverse learners. Furthermore, Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2010) suggested that the tenets of the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) can also be deemed beneficial to diverse learners by customizing and personalizing learning activities to address diverse learners. Also, digital media are a key factor when implementing UDL. Therefore, I chose to discuss how using the “Think Through Math” instructional solution found at http://www.thinkthroughmath.com/ could be used to implement alternative activities and assessments for a Math lesson plan design to help students learn simple multiplication.

 

My plan is to meet the needs of diverse learners, I will have the students work on their simple multiplication skills by completing simple multiplication learning activities using the Think Through Math instructional solution. This instructional math solution is an adaptive online math intervention that transitions students to the rigor of common core state standards and prepares them for math subjects like simple multiplication. This website meets the needs of my students because for one, it uses different scenarios to meet the needs of students with different backgrounds. Secondly, it is hands on so it meets the needs of students who prefer to learn by doing. Next, it uses intrinsic and extrinsic motivational strategies to meet the needs of students who have difficulty focusing. Finally, it provides challenging activities to meet the needs of students who require enrichment.

 

The only additional information that I need to meet the needs of my students is to ensure that I receive the proper professional development to use this website. Therefore, I will contact the Think Through Math leadership and ensure that my professional development will include, as the website suggests, data and actionable reports, on demand videos, instructional strategies, and even a classroom coach if needed.

My progress towards meeting these goals and acquiring the additional information are on track. All of the information and resources are clearly indicated on the website so I’ve found everything that I need. As of right now, no modification is necessary. Thus far, I’ve learned that surfing the website will provide me with the necessary information to address any concern or question. Additionally, if I’m still having a problem, there is a customer service number that I can call for assistance. At this point, no new questions have arisen.

 

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2010). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

 

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2010). Meeting students' needs with technology, part 1. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_2651012_1&content_id=_9381430_1

Think Through Math GAME Plan

Laureate Education (2010) promoted how customizing instruction and using technology are encouraged to meet the needs of diverse learners. Furthermore, Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2010) suggested that the tenets of the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) can also be deemed beneficial to diverse learners by customizing and personalizing learning activities to address diverse learners. Also, digital media are a key factor when implementing UDL. Therefore, I chose to discuss how using the “Think Through Math” instructional solution found at http://www.thinkthroughmath.com/  could be used to implement alternative activities and assessments for a Math lesson plan design to help students learn simple multiplication.  

My original lesson plan involved the students completing a worksheet that contained several simple multiplication problems. The instructions told the students to solve each problem and show their work. However, the goal is to take it one step further and meet the needs of students with differing abilities. To meet the needs of these diverse learners, I will have the students work on their simple multiplication skills by completing simple multiplication learning activities using the Think Through Math instructional solution. This instructional math solution is an adaptive online math intervention that transitions students to the rigor of common core state standards and prepares them for math subjects like simple multiplication. This website meets the needs of my students because for one, it uses different scenarios to meet the needs of students with different backgrounds. Secondly, it is hands on so it meets the needs of students who prefer to learn by doing. Next, it uses intrinsic and extrinsic motivational strategies to meet the needs of students who have difficulty focusing. Finally, it provides challenging activities to meet the needs of students who require enrichment.

The only additional information that I need to meet the needs of my students is to ensure that I receive the proper professional development to use this website. Therefore, I will contact the Think Through Math leadership and ensure that my professional development will include, as the website suggests, data and actionable reports, on demand videos, instructional strategies, and even a classroom coach if needed.

 

 

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2010). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2010). Meeting students' needs with technology, part 1. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_2651012_1&content_id=_9381430_1

NETS-T GAME Plan

International (2008) provided five standards and performance indicators. The two indicators that I need to strengthen my confidence and proficiency in are Modeling Digital Age Work and Learning and Engaging in Professional Growth and Leadership. My GAME plan for Modeling Digital Age Work is to set goals in staying up to date and fluent in the newer technology systems. My goal is to be the resident expert on most technologies. The actions that will take place to make this happen will include continuing my research on using the latest technologies in the classroom. My way of monitoring my progress and evaluating and extending my learning will involve submitting articles on using technology in the classroom to be published. If I’m publishing, then I’ll consider my progress, evaluation and extending my learning to be up to par.

            The other standard and performance indicator is Engaging in Professional Growth and Leadership. I will set goals to continue my research on integrating technology into the classroom but also to participate in local and global learning communities. Whenever, I get a chance to speak or be involved, I want to share my research with others. I’ll monitor my progress from the feedback received from my speaking engagements and participation. I’ll evaluate and extend my learning by improving my delivery based off of the feedback I receive.

 

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education technology standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-t-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

My personal learning theory is heavily influenced by Papert ‘s (1993) research which is based on constructionism, according to which students learn more effectively when they engage in constructing personally meaningful artifacts that can be created by using various forms of technology. These artifacts or conscious tools are developed from the meaningful experiences of a twenty-first century digital native. He suggested that taking advantage of the technological revolution would help improve learning environments because of the advantages associated with using digital information technologies. Applying Papert’s ideas, I posit that using computers should improve how schools, workplaces, and even game-playing environments function because they allow individuals to participate in constructivist-type activities.

            Based on this course, my personal learning theory has strengthened and here’s why. This course was instrumental in bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Being able to have a better understanding of how this actually works not only reinforces but strengthens my posit that using computers should improve how schools, workplaces, and even game-playing environments function because they allow individuals to participate in constructivist-type activities.

            As far as immediate adjustments, I will attempt to master the instructional strategies learned in this course to strengthen my teaching skills. Additionally, two technology tools that I would like to use with my students is the interactive smart board and the eReader. From this course I have learned some valuable information on maximizing the use of smart boards which involves the students being actively engaged. As for the eReader, my plan is to use other instructional strategies to enhance its use.

            I have two long term goals. First, I would like to master the different instructional strategies learned during this course. My plan is to use the different websites provided. My second long term goal is to write a journal article that includes using as many as these instructional strategies as possible. Therefore, I’ll need to continue to pursue research opportunities and write, write, write!

Week 5 Blog Post

Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenosk (2007) offered that “the instructional strategy of cooperative learning focuses on having students interact with each other in groups in ways that enhance their learning” (p. 139). Orey (2011) provided that the results of social learning theories depend on learners interacting with others and the environment those same learners are placed in. Therefore, the instructional strategy of cooperative learning correlates to social learning theories because in both situations, the students work in cooperative groups and construct meaning for new knowledge by interacting with others.

The social networking and collaboration tool that I explored is the voice thread. The voice thread is an interactive and web based tool that allows a student to create a problem or issue and record a verbal, pictorial, and/or written explanation of that problem or issue. Once the problem or issue is created, others can use their social networking skills to collaborate and address the problem or issue. This type of learning experience correlates to the cooperative learning instructional strategy and social learning theories because it too constructs meaning for new knowledge by allowing students to interact with others via the voice thread.  

 

 

Laureate Education, Inc. Orey (2011). Program eight: Social Learning Theories [Video webcast]. Social learning theories. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Voice Thread

This is the URL to my voice thread and it's still under construction: https://walden.voicethread.com/share/3765662/

Orey (2012) provided that constructionism, originated by Seymour Papert, means allowing students to get involve and start building stuff.  Papert asserted that students use artifacts to help them build, develop and learn. This type of learning focuses on the individual learner and what’s going on in that individual’s mind as they construct. If students are engaged in learning something deeply enough, student achievement will improve. The instructional strategy, “Generating and Testing Hypothesis” relates to constructionist type learning because Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenosk (2007) described it as being “engaged in mental processes, applying content knowledge like facts and vocabulary, and enhancing their overall understanding of the content” (p. 202). Moreover, just like when a constructionist uses an artifact to construct, the Generating and Testing instructional strategy can use technologies like spreadsheet software, data collection tools and web resources to interpret and gather data to enable the student to construct and build.

The project-based learning tool that I explored was the wiki, used during the Flat Classroom project. One of the required outcomes for the Flat Classroom projects included a personal multimedia response (digital story/video). Therefore, the students used the wiki to coordinate and collaborate when making this video. Additionally, the use of the wiki correlates to the generating and testing hypotheses instructional strategy because during the project we collected data from the wiki and used spreadsheet software when conducting the quantitative analysis.   

 

 

Laureate Education, Inc. Orey (2011). Program seven: Constructionist and constructivist learning theories [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E.R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. Denver, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.

 

WK3 Blog Post

Union Blog Post:

In the course media, Orey (2011) does a great job of relating cognitive learning theories to the information processing model and how this model can help teachers facilitate learning and students better understand, retain, and recall information because of their short term and working memory, elaboration, dual code hypothesis, and network model of memory.  Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenosk (2007) discussed two instructional strategies and here’s how they relate to cognitive learning theories. First, the “Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers” instructional strategy is designed to “enhance the students’ ability to retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic” (p. 73), which relates to the mission of the cognitive learning theories. This strategy is accomplished because they offered that cues are explicit reminders, questions trigger students’ memories, and advance organizers help students’ classify and make sense of the content provided. Secondly, the “Summarizing and Note taking” instructional strategy is designed to “enhance the students’ ability to synthesize information and distill it into a concise new form” (p. 119), which relates as well to cognitive learning theories because it helps the student to retain and recall. This strategy is accomplished by teaching students to use rule-based summarizing strategies, summary frames, reciprocal teaching strategies, teacher-prepared notes, a variety of note-taking formats, and combination notes.  

Novak and Cañas (2008) provided that “concept maps are graphical tools for organizing and representing knowledge” (p.1). Orey (2011) provided that a virtual field trip is a web based tool that can expand learning opportunities of students by creating a rich experience that the students will remember. Based off of the abovementioned definitions of Concept mapping and virtual field trips, they both correlate to the “Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers” and “Summarizing and Note taking” instructional strategies and cognitive learning theories because their premise is to enhance and expand student learning.

 Laureate Education, Inc. Orey (2011). Program five: Cognitive learning theory [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Laureate Education, Inc. Orey (2011). Program six: Spotlight on technology: Virtual field trips [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from the Institute for Human and Machine Cognition Web site: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/
TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E.R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. Denver, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.

When discussing the instructional strategy, “Reinforcing Effort,” Pitler, Hubbell, and Malenosk  (2007) provided a saying that really stuck with me. They offered that “success comes in cans; failure in can’ts” (p. 155). Enforcing this mentality when students are trying to succeed will improve their chances threefold. Additionally, teaching students about the importance of effort and tracking this effort will enhance operations as well. The other strategy, “Homework and Practice,” also enhances student performance because it gives them a chance to review and apply what they learned during the regular school day.

Both of these strategies relate to the behaviorist learning theory because behaviorist relies on reinforcement. Dr. Orey and Smith (1999) discussed B. F. Skinner’s view of the behaviorist learning theory where operant conditioning means either reinforcing good behavior or punishing bad behavior. Moreover, the reinforcement aspect is most desirable. Therefore, the basis of their definition involved reinforcement. Also, Dr. Orey offered how Skinner proposed programmed instruction in a behaviorist learning environment. Therefore, one of the technologies that was introduce in this week’s resources was the online tutorials  that are currently appropriate and effective in helping students master the no child left behind requirements. Well, these drill and practice, remediation, and traditional tutorial programs correlate to the “Reinforcing Effort” and “Homework and Practice” strategies because both of these strategies use reinforcement as their mainstay.  

Course Media: “ Behaviorist Learning Theory” by Dr. Michael Orey.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Smith, K. (1999). The behaviourist orientation to learning. In The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/biblio/learning-behavourist.htm

This week’s course media by Dr. Orey and Smith (1999) discussed B. F. Skinner’s view of the behaviorist learning theory where operant conditioning means either reinforcing good behavior or punishing bad behavior. Moreover, the reinforcement aspect is most desirable.  Therefore, the basis of my definition of the behaviorist learning theory will involve the art of reinforcement. Dr. Orey offered how Skinner proposed programmed instruction in a behaviorist learning environment. An example would be the online tutorials that are currently appropriate and effective in helping students master the no child left behind requirements. Well, these drill and practice, remediation, and traditional tutorial programs do have a place in today’s classroom but they’re hindering student progress because they mainly focus on remediation and do not take advantage of other enrichment type activities that educational technology has to offer.

My learning theory supports technology playing an important role in teaching 21^st century skills. For example, as explained in Miners and Pascopella, learning new literacies involves mastering how to use the internet. Once the students know how to effectively use the internet, they can further enhance their critical evaluation skills by working in groups and collaborating. Also, using the technique, self-inquiry (asking oneself questions about a topic) will assist in teaching these skills. Another technique is deictic learning. This technique will assist because it will teach students to deal with technologies that change on a regular basis. For instance, “an example of the deictic nature of the technologies is Web 3.0, a term being used now to describe the evolution of and a possible future form of the Internet, characterized by even more interactivity, enhanced search engines, artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and maybe even 3D graphics” (p. 5).

 

Overall, I believe there is still a place for behaviorist learning in today’s classroom and instructional technology. I would support using online tutorials on a limited basis because it can help students learn. I would also encourage the behaviorist type learning theory to be used to manage behavior in the classroom. For example, Dr. Orey offered how the clip strategy is successful in maintaining discipline. However, at the end of the day, I would support using constructivist strategies that include using 21^st century skills and mastering the use of the Internet.

Week 7 Reflection

This course has helped me develop my own technology skills as a professional teacher because I’ve learned that students are digital natives based on their experience with technology and not necessarily their age. To accommodate these digital natives, a professional teacher must be prepared to handle students that will question information that is on the edges of what the teacher knows.

I’ve deepened my knowledge of the teaching and learning process because this course reinforced the necessity to provide a variety of learning opportunities for the modern student. Not all students will grasp technology at the same pace or even at all. Therefore, an alternate means of teaching and learning must be in your arsenal.

As a result of this course I have changed my perspective from being teacher-centered to learner-centered because of the importance of allowing the student to take control of their own learning. My role as a teacher or facilitator is to guide the students and help them evaluate, synthesize, and utilize information. I plan to continue to expand my knowledge of learning, teaching, and leading with technology with the aim of increasing student achievement by continuing to conduct research, literature reviews, and write grants. Doing these type of actions will allow me to not only integrate technology into the school systems but also provide a means to pay for it.

 My two long-term goals (within two years) for transforming my classroom environment are to use portable technologies at the elementary level and develop a methodology that provides the right mix of traditional and 21^st century teaching and learning. I will accomplish this by using the data from my current research project along with the information gained from my literature reviews to determine the best methodologies. Finally, none of my answers changed from my week 1 checklist.

WK 5 APPLICATION/PODCAST

Hello everyone,
  Here's my URL for my podcast: http://cunion.podbean.com/

Craig

Wk4Assgn

The Partnership for 21^st century’s mission is to serve as a catalyst to position 21st century readiness at the center of US K12 education by building collaborative partnerships among education, business, community and government leaders. The members of its membership include some very big name companies to include Dell, Walmart, and Microsoft. I also found that they use various tools and resources on the website to include Educators, Policy Makers, Parents and communities, and Publications.

I understood most of the information on the website and agreed with their opinions. However, there was one piece of information that not only surprised me but I tended to disagree with. They have a section on the website labeled “State Initiatives.” It surprised me that there are only initiatives for 17 out of the 50 states. It was almost disappointed that one of the states that didn’t have initiatives was my home state of Georgia. The reason why I disagree with this is because I think every state should have initiatives that help encourage the use of 21^st century skills.

The implications for my students and me as an educator are very encouraging. Not only will the students benefit from all of the work being done to help them build their 21^st century skills, but the educators will benefit as well since the groundwork for creating instructional practices is being laid. This is a great website and I’m going to definitely try and get them to work in Georgia!!

 

The grade level will be 10th grade and the rationale to use this type of technology is to engage the our digital citizents with 21st century skills.

The week 2 Application assignment states to post an idea for how I might use a blog in my classroom. Therefore, every student in my class we create a blog using blogger.com and come up with a topic that relates to using portable technologies in the classroom. Each student must communicate via the blog with at least 5 other students.

I'll be posting the results of my research to this blog throughout the research process.

The Partnership for 21^st century’s mission is to serve as a catalyst to position 21st century readiness at the center of US K12 education by building collaborative partnerships among education, business, community and government leaders. The members of its membership include some very big name companies to include Dell, Walmart, and Microsoft. I also found that they use various tools and resources on the website to include Educators, Policy Makers, Parents and communities, and Publications.

I understood most of the information on the website and agreed with their opinions. However, there was one piece of information that not only surprised me but I tended to disagree with. They have a section on the website labeled “State Initiatives.” It surprised me that there are only initiatives for 17 out of the 50 states. It was almost disappointed that one of the states that didn’t have initiatives was my home state of Georgia. The reason why I disagree with this is because I think every state should have initiatives that help encourage the use of 21^st century skills.

The implications for my students and me as an educator are very encouraging. Not only will the students benefit from all of the work being done to help them build their 21^st century skills, but the educators will benefit as well since the groundwork for creating instructional practices is being laid. This is a great website and I’m going to definitely try and get them to work in Georgia!!