Application 2: Developing Your Personal GAME Plan

An educator should always look for ways to strengthen competency and effectiveness in their teaching. The reason I am trying to earn my Master’s degree in technology integration is because I want to become more proficient in this field. In addition to my coursework I need to devise a plan for self-directed learning after my degree has been earned. Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer have developed a “GAME plan (that) enables you to customize your approach to learning tasks, to develop relevant skills that are important to you, and prepares you for lifelong learning” (2009). This plan requires you to set goals (G), take action (A), monitor your progress (M), and evaluate your learning (E).

The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) website presents five standards, and indicators for each, in their National Educations Standards for Teachers (NETS-T). There are two of those indicators that I feel less than proficient in and in which I would like to strengthen my confidence and ability. The first indicator is found under standard number one. It states: “Engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources” (ISTE 2008). In order to follow the GAME plan I would first need to set a goal. I want to learn how to better present specific and relevant real-world problems that interest my students and then use the Internet and other digital means to solve them. My plan of action is to discuss with my students the issues and problems they care about and focus on one or two that are the most prominent. Then, develop objectives that cover that content. Finally, I would research technology that would enhance my lessons. “Technology should be used as a tool to enhance your objectives,” not the other way around (Laureate 2009). To monitor my progress I will consistently reassess the strategies I am using for effectiveness and adjust accordingly. After completion of the lessons I will evaluate whether or not I attained the goal I first set for myself. At this point, it is essential for the teacher to determine “whether (he or she was) successful in meeting (their) goals” (Cennamo et al, p. 5 2009).

The second indicator in which I want to increase my confidence is found under standard number two. It states: “customize and personalize learning activities to address students’ diverse learning styles, working strategies, and abilities using digital tools and resources” (ISTE 2008). Technology can be used in various modes to reach all of the different ways in which students learn (Laureate 2009). Following the GAME plan, my purpose for this indicator is to set the goal of providing my students with multiple opportunities to use their varied learning styles. The action I will take is to first make myself more knowledgeable on the subject of multiple intelligences. Next, I will develop lessons that reach as many multiple intelligences as possible. Subsequently, I will seek out digital tools that may help enhance my lessons and engage the learners in my classroom. The Smart Board is one example of technology that reaches many learning styles including audio-visual, kinesthetic, spatial, musical, and interpersonal (Laureate 2009). My classroom does not contain a Smart Board; However, I do have the means for creating a tool similar to one. When monitoring my progress I will ensure that I am including activities that get students moving around, include plenty of images and sounds, and group activities. The evaluation step is essential for establishing concrete evidence that a teacher is meeting their goal in a timely and efficient manner. To identify my level of progress I will create a rubric for myself that contains key criteria for reaching my goal.


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.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas. Baltimore: Author.

National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) located at: http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/
2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf

Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology Reflection

At the beginning of this course I developed a "Personal Theory of Learning" that summarized my current approach to teaching as being aligned with a behaviorist perspective. I also set a goal for myself to move my strategies and practices toward a constructionist point of view. Upon completion of this course I still have this goal in my sights. I believe constructionist methods of teaching are the most effective at demonstrating student comprehension and to foster collaboration and teamwork.

As a result of my learning in this course I plan to use technology on a more consistent basis and in more effective ways. Previously, I saw technology as a teaching tool instead of a learning tool. I have used it as a way to present information to students. Now I know that technology is more effective as a learning tool that is student-focused and used by them to gain knowledge and to create artifacts that exhibit understanding. Two of these learning tools that I plan to use with my students is virtual field trips and concept mapping software. Virtual field trips will enhance student learning because they allow you to take your students to places that you otherwise might not be able visit due to financial or logistical reasons. Concept mapping software supports learning in that it enables students to organize their thoughts in a way that promotes knowledge retention.

Integrating technology in my classroom has always been a focus and I have two goals I would like to reach for accomplishing this task. First, I must reserve the computer lab more often. In my school we have two mobile computer labs, one for primary and one for intermediate. Right now, I have a one hour time slot each week in which I can use the lab. I must find other times during the week to have the lab in my room so that computers are accessible to my students. Second, I must introduce my students to more technology tools earlier in the school year. Typically, I slowly integrate technology in my classroom out of fear that my students will not be able to handle new complications. What I have learned is that I am the one who is fearful of new technology. I have found that my students are quick learners when it comes to technology because they have grown up with it.

Link to my Voice Thread artifact

Here is the link to the Voice Thread artifact:

http://voicethread.com/share/1038020/

Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice

In this week’s learning resources we explored one strategy for social learning called cooperative learning. In Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski’s book, they provide many examples of social networking and collaboration tools that correlate to this strategy and social learning theories in general. Dr. Michael Orey states that “collaborative and cooperative learning are when kids are working together to construct an artifact and everyone in the group is responsible for the work” (Laureate 2009).
There are many types of multimedia in which students can create. A video is an excellent way for students to demonstrate their understanding and apply what they have learned. Along with multimedia there are a vast amount of web resources available to teachers and students. Web 2.0, also called the “Read Write Web” has made it possible for teachers and students to create and share their artifacts with others around the world. This form of cooperative learning shows just how education has become more global than ever. In addition to web resources there is communication software that enables students to share their ideas with others. Blogs and wikis allow students to post their work, share it, and comment on others work. A wiki is an online collaboration tool that facilitates the working together of students to create projects and artifacts.

Resources:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Program 8. Social Learning Theory. [Educational video]. Baltimore: Author.

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

In this week’s learning resources we explored the strategy of “Generating and Testing Hypotheses” (Pitler et al, 2007). The core tools for implementing this practice contain an overriding technology component. Traditionally, this concept is considered scientific in nature; however, it can be applied in many other subjects not related to science. Generating and testing a hypothesis can be accomplished using six different tasks. They are systems analysis, problem solving, historical investigation, invention, experimental inquiry, and decision making. Many, if not all, of these tasks relate to constructivist/constructionist learning theory. In each instance students have the opportunity to create an artifact of some kind that builds upon their knowledge and strengthens their comprehension of the concepts.

There are several technologies that relate to the concept of generating and testing hypotheses and make this strategy more engaging for students. Spreadsheet software enables students to gather, organize, and analyze data and then draw conclusions based upon their findings. The artifact that is created provides a tool for students to learn the content the curriculum entails. Data collection tools use inquiry as a means of learning. They “enable students to see the bigger picture and recognize patterns (in data)” (Pitler et al p. 210, 2007). Web resources and gaming software allow students to put themselves in real-world situations that might not be possible to achieve otherwise due to financial or impractical reasons. These include virtual simulations, multiplayer strategy games, and online role playing games.


References:

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

Cognitivism in Practice

After reading the sections “Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers” and “Summarizing and Note Taking”, I noticed some correlations between these strategies and cognitive learning theory. According to Dr. Michael Orey, technology such as word processing, spreadsheet, and organizing software can be used effectively by “integrating multiple senses in presentations (which) improve learning” (Laureate 2009). Pintler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski mention specific benefits of these types of software in their book, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works. Word processing programs have the capability to create charts and tables for note taking as well as data organization. Spreadsheets can also be used to organize data and greatly decreases the amount of time taken to create them due to the multitude of calculations that the program does for them. Organizing and brainstorming programs allow students and teachers to organize their ideas and put them in a visually appealing array that promotes processing of information.

All of the above mentioned tools employ cognitive learning theory. Dr. Orey believes that short-term memory and working memory are most important in classroom practices and they provide a bridge to long-term memory which is the location educators ultimately want information to reach. These technology tools also relate to Paivio’s Dual Coding Hypothesis which Dr. Orey states in this fashion: “People remember images better than they can remember just text” (Laureate 2009). Spreadsheets, concept maps, and word processing all have the capability of incorporating visual images in the products students create. These images then help to imprint information in their short-term and working memory which is eventually transferred into their long-term memory.



References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Program 5. Cognitive Learning Theories. [Educational video]. Baltimore: Author.

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

Behaviorism in Practice

In this week's learning resources we were introduced to two concepts for combining technology with behaviorist theories of learning. In the book, "Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works", we learned about two strategies, "Reinforcing Effort" and "Homework and Practice". Both of these ideas use the behaviorist notions of reinforcement, rewards, and consequences. For example, the chapter on reinforcing effort provides several activities that use technology to reinforce good behavior. Spreadsheets programs can be used to help students track the relationship between effort and success. They soon realize that the amount of success they achieve is proportional to the amount of effort they put forth.

Another activity demonstrated the usefulness of homework and practice. Homework assignments should be given to reinforce what was learned in class. They should be used for practice and students should be given appropriate feedback. This relates to behaviorist theory because it accentuates positive results while trying to eliminate less desirable results. When a student is given specific feedback on their work, they will know exactly what they have done correctly and what they need to do improve.

Similar to the previously mentioned spreadsheet activity, another example from the learning resources mentions an activity done by a physical education teacher and football coach. By having his team members track their workouts, they were able to see the progress they were making. They saw the amount of weight they were lifting, as well as their speed increase. this allowed their positive athletic behaviors to be reinforced while minimizing their negative results.


References:

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