missmillerslearningjourney

My ideas, thoughts, and experiences

Page 2 of 4

Module #5 Reflection

What?

Funes, M., & Mackness, J. (2018). When inclusion excludes: A counter narrative of open online education. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(2), 119–138. http://ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1444638

  • Key questions:
    • Is participation in open education social media environments inclusive?
    • Does open online education succeed in breaking up exclusionary structures?
  • This article states that the outlook on open education is one of aspiration and not based in reality
    • Pasquale (2016) suggests two potential approaches for dislodging mainstream ideology
      • critique cumulative research and challenge the premises of the mainstream narrative to cast ‘suspicion’ on its givens (confirm own theories with research and disregard relevant dis-confirming literature)
      • move outside of the mainstream ideology by offering a counter-narrative

Knox, J. (2019). What Does the ‘Postdigital’ Mean for Education? Three Critical Perspectives on the Digital, with Implications for Educational Research and Practice. Postdigital Science and Education. http://ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00045-y

  • Intention of this paper is to highlight the need for educational practice and research to pay more attention to the ways digital technologies are shaping the core of education
  • Three different perspectives on shifting relationships with digital technology, with specific relevance for educational concerns
    • economic rationales underpinning educational technology, focusing on the platform and assumed benefits of sharing (digital as capital)
    • role of the digital in educational policy
    • increasing attention paid to issues of labour and the exploitation of natural resources required to produce digital technologies

Caines, A., & Glass, E. (2019, Fall). Education before Regulation: Empowering Students to Question Their Data Privacy. EDUCAUSE Review, 54(4). Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2019/10/education-before-regulation-empowering-students-to-question-their-data-privacy

  • privacy violations have whittled away consumers trust when it comes to data online
  • in order to better understand how your data is collected and the potential risks of this collection, consider these questions:
    • What types of personal data do you think are collected through your use of digital tools for educational activities?
    • What value does your personal data have for different contexts and entities?
    • Who owns your personal data, who can sell it, and who can use it?
    • Do you have concerns about how your personal data can be used? If so, what are they?
    • Are there aspects of your identity or life that you feel would put you in a place of special vulnerability if certain data were known about you or used against you?

So What?

  • How is the counter-narrative going to help improve the flaws in open education?
  • The concern about how technology is changing the ‘humanness’ of the world = postdigital
    • There is no moving away from technology right now, it is infiltrating every part of our lives, so what is the point?
    • seems very altruistic and not based in reality

Now What?

  • Conversation came up in class about how even as adults we are unaware of how much personal information is shared online
  • We are not getting away from technology…so what are ways in which we can equip students to be more aware of what they are sharing and where?
  • Are people really aware/scared enough about sharing their information? (lots of companies, school districts, and universities do not have restrictions on what/how information is shared online by their employees)

Module #4 Reflection

What?

OPEN SCHOLARSHIP

Veletsianos, G., & Shaw, A. (2018). Scholars in an increasingly open and digital world: Imagined audiences and their impact on scholars’ online participation. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(1), 17–30. http://ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2017.1305966

  • More and more scholars are using social media for a variety of teaching, learning, and professional activities (e.g. share and disseminate research finding through their own blogs or on dedicated sites like ResearchGate, LinkedIn for professional branding, or use of Twitter to cultivate networks to connect, support, and share resources)
    • only a few post secondary institutions have clear and accessible social media policies in regards to engagement and sharing online
  • Being acutely aware of ones audience is an essential aspect of communicating effectively online
    • rely on limited cues
  • When engaging on social media for professional purposes, recognition of blurred personal and professional boundaries
  • ALL academics engaging online reflected on these: SHARING, FILTERING, and PROJECTING
  • Study adds to increasing evidence that scholars online participation is intentional and thoughtful

OPEN DATA

Atenas, J., Havemann, L., & Priego, E. (2015). Open Data as Open Educational Resources: Towards Transversal Skills and Global Citizenship. Open Praxis, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.7.4.233

  • Open Data is the name given to datasets which have been generated by international oganizations, governments, NGO’s and academic researchers, and made freely available online and openly-licensed
  • These datasets can be used by educators as OER to support different teaching and learning activities
    • good for developing critical analysis of data sets

MASSIVE OPEN ONLINE COURSES (MOOCS)

Rohs, M., & Ganz, M. (2015). MOOCs and the Claim of Education for All: A Disillusion by Empirical Data. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2033/3527

OPEN ACCESS RESEARCH

Couture, M. (2017, July 12). Academic Publishing at a Crossroads. University Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.universityaffairs.ca/opinion/in-my-opinion/academic-publishing-crossroads/

  • There are 5 publishing giants that now publish the majority of academic papers – in excess of US$10billion
  • Librarians are hard pressed by finding cuts and subscriptions cost increases well above the inflation rate – but still need to meet demands of researchers

So What?

  • Teaching students about developing their online portfolio
  • How does the imagined audience impact what and how you interact online?
  • Developing of academic capital by engaging with a variety of people and providing insight on a topic over a period of time (George Curous talked about this in our summer course) – how to create a presence online
  • OpenData makes learning more relevant to students (information is real and not ‘made up’ for the purpose of doing the work)
  • Why would publishers move to open access when it is a profitable business right now? Pressure from users?
  • Librarians are big supporters of open access

Now What?

  • If we had not had the opportunity to see each other and connect over the summer, would our interactions in this course be different? Would there be as much discussion and conversation synchronously and asynchronously?
  • How can we use Open Data in the elementary context? Is there relevant, accessible, and easily understandable data out there for kids? How do we know it is valid and reliable?
  • Using OpenData to develop global citizenship – compare and contrast data from different areas and have conversations about the reason

Module #3 Reflection – Open Educational Practices and Learning Design

“Learning is Hanging Out” by cogdogblog is licensed under CC BY 2.0

This week’s readings are about open educational practices and learning design for online education.  I have used a ‘What?-So What?-Now What?’ critical reflection framework to guide my thinking on the topic based on the assigned readings, annotations on those readings, and class discussion.

What? 

When it comes to educational philosophies, there are many theories that help teachers determine their thoughts and beliefs about students needs, abilities, and the way they learn best. These approaches have always been discussed in terms of traditional classroom teaching. However, as times are changing, it is important to review pedagogical approaches and schools of thought when planning and teaching in a digital world.

To teach online you have to have the same skills as a classroom teacher – it is the same. This comment riled up the conversation in our large group discussion like never before. Initially I had the same perspective and thought that a good online educator had to have the same skills as a classroom teacher. However, through conversation, I learned that it takes those skills and more. Leanne and some of her other U-Connect colleagues shared that there is so much that they have to think about as online educators that classroom teachers just intuitively do when face-to-face with students (e.g. formative assessment, classroom management, time spent on task, access to technology, testing, pacing, and accessibility of units of study.

The role of an online educator is changing and it has now become a facilitator, content expert, manager, pedagogical expert, socialite, technical guru, and quality assesor (Shé Ní, Farrell, Brunton,  Costello, Donlon, Trevaskis, & Eccles, 2019). Shé Ní et al. (2019) completed research that clearly noted the competencies that characterize effective online teaching. See chart below.

Conole et al. (2004) thoughtfully mapped out key learning theories, their main characteristics, and how they might be effective in the context of online learning. Two of the most interesting approaches were activity-based and experiential learning.  Activity-based theory is a recent realization that the development of content alone does not lead to more effective learning and that there is a need to structure and foster learning environments to enable communities to develop. By using the web as a networking tool, learners have more diverse access to different forms of expertise, experiences, and collaborative groups. An experiential learning approach in online education could be the use asynchronous communication. This offers a new form of discourse which is not bound by time, allows opportunities for people in a variety of places equal access, and offers increased opportunity for reflective thought before participation.

However, over the past ten years, researchers have found a lack of application of models and theories by educators in the field of online learning (Conole et al., 2004). They speculate that is due to overwhelming array of perspectives. Which I totally agree with. Even through my experience in my undergrad education courses, there were so many different philosophies and approaches to teaching and learning. And we just noted which ones were similar to our own beliefs of children. But on a day to day level, it is not something that I think about and/or reference when planning my teaching. So I can understand how it would be the same for teachers teaching online.

But I also understand the importance of understanding and applying a few of the approaches in an online teaching environment because there is often a lack of structure everywhere else (e.g. communication, grading, communication, etc.). Through the research, it has been found that toolkits are and effective way of having teachers consider and plan with theoretical concerns in mind.

“By mapping and aligning learning theories, it will be possible to outline the features of theories in a way that scaffolds users’ engagement with these ideas; in addition, representation of this process using the model provides an opportunity to make the relationship between theory and practice more explicit” (Conole et al., 2004, p. 22).

Another approach to designing programs for online learning is presented by Dabbagh in 2005.  She presents a theory-based design framework for e-learning that focuses on the  interaction between pedagogical models, instructional strategies, and learning technologies (Dabbagh, 2005).

This frameworks reminds me of the TPACK framework that is released in 2006 by Mishra and Koehler. Both models take into account the physical technology, instructional strategies, and peoples personal pedagogical constructs in order to build effective and sustainable practices.

Learning design has also emerged in the last 20 years as a new methodology to help educators make more pedagogically informed design decisions that make appropriate use of digital technologies. There are a variety of learning theories that can be used to promote different pedagogical approaches. Each emphasize different ways to foster communication, collaboration, and reflection as well as different types of blended learning approaches (e.g. experiential learning, embodied learning, multiliteracies, and gamification) (Conole, 2018).  Digital technologies can be used to implement these approaches, however they require new approaches to design. Learning Activity Management Systems (LAMS) and Learning Management Systems (LMS) are tools for designing, managing, and delivering online learning activities and content.

So What? 

My number one question that comes out of these readings is – what does mapping pedagogy for e-learning look like in elementary schools? I would assume that at a district level, the superintendents reflect on their personal pedagogical approaches to teaching and learning as well as research based on what is best for children. And then based on their (and their team’s values) they push out information and opportunities to their employees. However, I have a harder time when it comes to individual schools. Each educator is going to have a different pedagogical approach. I have been thinking about different frameworks to share and discuss pedagogical approaches with our school staff in order to develop a school-wide technology plan. And I think that by discussing pedagogical approaches, it will ensure for more buy in, and therefore, a more sustainable plan.

Through readings and class discussions, we have come to the agreement that teaching online is, in fact, different than classroom teaching. However, why are we not educating our online teachers in a different way? The U-Connect teachers have had the same education that classroom teachers have had. And the only additional training they have received on LMS’s has been through their own district or school-based professional development. Who is teaching these new approaches to design? Is it part of the undergrad programs within the education department now? And how are we teaching teachers that are already in the field? These are all questions that I still have around online education. If we want the community to see it as a valid alternative to a classroom environment, then we need to ensure that teachers feel competent and confident. And this means putting the time and money into changing some post secondary programs to include more education on e-learning. The community will buy in when they see the the movement is supported by the education system as a whole.

Shé Ní et al. (2019) has provided a framework that notes the most effective way of delivering professional development to online educators. See graphic below.

Another conversation that came up in class discussion was on the topic of Learning Management Systems (LMS’s).  LMS’s are platforms that are used by teachers to organize, manage, and share content for online courses. There are only a few out there that are widely used by educational institutions (e.g. Blackboard, Moodle, etc.). They seem pretty static and have been relatively unchanged over the past five years. Some questions that came up and do not really have a definite answer are:

  • Who is providing input on LMS? Are we getting parent/student feedback in order to update systems?
  • How often are systems updated to integrate new technology?
  • How are LMS’s using artificial intelligence to support students and provide more detailed information to teachers teaching online? (e.g. tracking eye movements, etc.)

Now What?

Now, how does this affect me? I am a grade two teacher and Vice-Principal at my school site. Throughout these readings, I thought about how I, as a leader, could start mapping out a technology plan using a pedagogical framework as support. I hope to start by having a conversation based on the ISTE standards and which ones they agree that they are doing well and which ones are important and need more time being spent on it. I am hoping that that will start to give me an idea where peoples pedagogical approaches are within the context of educational technology.


References:

Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M., & Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effective learning design. Computers & Education, 43(1–2), 17–33. http://ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.018

Conole, G. (2018). Learning Design and Open Education. International Journal of Open Educational Resources. Retrieved from https://www.ijoer.org/learning-design-and-open-education_doi-10-18278-ijoer-1-1-6/

Dabbagh, N. (2005). Pedagogical Models for E-Learning: A Theory-Based Design Framework. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 25–44. http://ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/login?url=http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.475.4593&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.523.3855&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Shé Ní, C., Farrell, O., Brunton, J.,  Costello, E., Donlon, E., Trevaskis, S., & Eccles, S. (2019). Teaching online is different: Critical perspectives from the literature. Retrieved from Dublin City University website: https://openteach.ie/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Teaching-online-is-different.pdf

Module #2 Reflection

What?

Below are summary notes of concepts and topics covered in each article. Following that is how it is important to the field of Educational Technology and me as a teacher and administrator in BC.

Friesen, N. (2009). Open Educational Resources: New Possibilities for Change and Sustainability. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(5). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i5.664

  • results of an informal survey about collections of online educational resources (specifically longevity and attributes associated)
  • some downfalls from old open educational resources  in regards to lack of sustainability
    • none prioritized open content through creative commons licensing
    • not limited to specific subject area (too broad)
    • started between 2001 and 2003
    • lack of ongoing funding
  • Therefore, these things need to be in place for a new platform to have more hope for long term usage

Conole, G., & Brown, M. (2018). Reflecting on the Impact of the Open Education Movement. Journal of Learning for Development – JL4D, 5(3). Retrieved from
http://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/314

  • Critiques the rise and impact of the Open Education movement (primarily in higher education) – in terms of impact on learning it focuses on three aspects: open educational resources, e-textbooks, and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC’s) in regards to learning, teaching and research
  • Describes three frameworks that help structure the implementation – 7 C’s of Learning Design, the SAMR model, and the ICAP framework
  • Open Education definition: “resources, tools, and practices that employ a framework of open sharing to improve educational access and effectiveness worldwide” (Open Education Consortium, n.d.) *evolving term that covers a range of philosophies and practices aiming at widening access to learning
    • Not a new concept, but new tools due to new digital technologies (especially social media)
    • They aren’t all good – depends on how they are used
  • Benefits of Open Education (from the OpenEdOz project, 2016)
    • economies of scale through collaborative co-production of learning resources
    • opportunities to raise the quality of learning at decreased time and financial cost
    • enable provision of learning materials that are richer and more appropriate to the contexts and styles of learning of an increasingly diverse student community
    • opportunities to provide learning to disadvantaged communities in remote and rural locations
    • promote greater collaboration between universities in fostering peer review and collegial development of learning materials
    • when used appropriately, they facilitate greater levels of transparency into the teaching process
  • in order to effectively implement digital technologies to support open learning, teachers need to adopt new approaches to learning design (7 C’s, SAMR, ICAP)
  • 7 C’s of Learning Design (see visual from article below)

  • ICAP Framework (Interactive, Constructive, Active, and Passive) *defines cognitive engagement activities
    • this hypothesis predicts that as students become more engaged with the learning materials, from passive to active to constructive to interactive, their learning will increase
  • SAMR Model (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition)
    • framework for designers to create optimal learning experiences
    • learning activities that fall within the substitution and augmentation classifications are said to ENHANCE learning, while learning activities that fall within the modification and redefinition classifications are said to TRANSFORM learning

So what?

  • SUSTAINABILITY – 6 of the sites listed in the resources are no longer available
  • Online educational coursework is available through MIT, but you cannot get a degree unless you pay to be a part of the program (This is becoming more prevalent – eg. MOOC’s through UBC)
  • Tracy had a great comment of Hypothesis – “Why limit myself to a collection when I can google what I need and source from there?”
  • Use of site with collections of online material for teaching (TeachersPayTeachers) – there is so much out there already, there is no need to reinvent the wheel unless you have to
  • How to make MOOC’s accessible to all yet differentiated for different types of learners (what does mass produced really mean?)
  • E-Textboks allow learners to access their learning resources from anywhere
  • E-texts also help to decrease students environmental impact (no need to print and reprint texts based on updated information)
  • Makes learning accessible to a wider demographic
  • lack of understanding in the post secondary world about how to recognize learning through OER and MOOC’s

Now what?

  • Hard for some teachers to move away from textbooks and online (especially with the ‘new’ curriculum – not a lot of resources provided) *teachers have to work harder to collate and develop their resources *easy for them to move through the chapters (but this limits access and students understanding of concepts)
  • How are we getting devices into the hands of less privileged demographics in order to level the playing field of access to education?
  • Class discussion about the digital component of high school courses in Ontario
    • good for students to start developing the skills and strategies to independently move through course content online
    • is there a conversation about balance of digital vs. classroom teaching and learning (how much time are students spending online per day – inside and outside of the classroom?) *some of the teachers at my school right now are struggling with this issue*

Module #1 Reflection: History of Open Education

Below are short summary notes of each reading along with my reflection on some of the major topics, why they are important, and how it affects my personal perspective and approach to teaching .

What

Weller, M. (2018, August). Twenty Years of Edtech. EDUCAUSE Review, 53(4). Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2018/7/twenty-years-of-edtech

  • EdTech is a fast changing field
  • Over the last 20 years, here are the most popular edtech topics:
    • Wikis – a jointly editable website
    • E-Learning (primarily post-secondary focused)
    • Learning Objects
    • Standards for E-Learning platforms
    • Open Educational Resources (OER’s)
    • Blogs
    • LMS (Learning Management Systems)
    • Videos (e.g. Youtube, Vimeo, etc.)
    • Web 2.0
    • Virtual Worlds
    • E-Portfolios
    • Twitter and Social Media
    • Connectivism
    • Personal Learning Environments (PLE’s)
    • Massive Open Online Communities (MOOC’s)
    • Open Textbooks
    • Learning Analytics
    • Digital Badges
    • Return of Artificial Intelligence
    • Blockchain

Weller notes that technologies in education tend to come back around. For example, Learning Objects were the first step to making teaching content reusable; and the ideas that were generated from learning about them lead to the creation of Open Educational Resources (OER’s). He states the importance of anyone working in the field of educational technology to understand the history in order to use and improve ideas to move forward.

Zawacki-Richter, O., & Naidu, S. (2016). Mapping research trends from 35 years of publications in Distance Education. Distance Education, 37(3), 245–269. http://ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1185079

This article maps out trends in education by analyzing the titles and abstracts of research papers on the topic of distance education over a 34 year time period (1980-2014) in five year intervals. So much has changed over the last decade in educational technology, yet not much is documented or remembered as things change and warp so fast. The trends are dictating that OER’s and MOOCs are an evolving part of the distance education field.

Peter, S., & Deimann, M. (2013). On the role of openness in education: A historical reconstruction. Open Praxis, 5(1), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.5.1.23

Peter and Deimann review the history of openness in education from the middle ages to the present. In the middle ages, open education began with student universities and public lectures.  Then moving on to coffee houses, open universities, and more recently MIT OWC, MOOC’s, and Coursera. There is much to be learned from the history of open education in order to continually develop the current space of open education.

So What

As discussed in our class meeting, one of the comments in Wellers article seem to be counter intuitive – things have changed massively, yet nothing has changed. Through conversation we came to the agreement that the structure of education is still the same, but the ways in which we interact and engage students is changing.  For example, new technology is always being  introduced into classrooms and they are often engaging students in a different way, however, it hasn’t changed education as a whole. And that the technology revolution is more about managing the experience of education, not changing the education system as a whole.

One of the important tidbits of information that came out of these articles was the fact that learning about the history of open education is important in order to figure out what has been done before and how to implement that  in the future. As we looked through the list of past open education resources, things have tended to repeat themselves. So the question for new innovations in educational technology is to develop sustainability in open communities. There are often so many new ‘toys’ or applications that come and go. But how can we ensure that they are going to be effective and sustainable long term?

Another topic that came out of the class discussion was how to open source education and research. How/why would researchers spend time on a project if they weren’t getting compensated in some way. So in turn, what company is going to provide resources free of charge from people who are providing them free of charge?! It is hard to get people to do work and then give it away for ‘free’.

Now What

Here are some questions that are going to help guide me in my technology implementation:

  • What open education resources do I use and take advantage of?
  • What open education resources do I provide for staff and/or students?
  • How can I choose open educational resources that will sustain? Are there indicators based on historical research?

Reflection on Technology Handbook Summaries – What’s in it for me?

What issues were the most interesting for you and why?

It is clear across all articles in this book, that knowledge has not increased at the same rate as technology innovation has. New technology applications and platforms are being introduced faster that teachers and students have time to experiment with and dabble in. The important thing that Information Technology leaders in schools need to remember, is that it is not the quantity of technology or even the usage of current technology, but how it is helping the learners in the space. Just because a platform or software is new, doesn’t mean that it is the best thing to support students. There is no perfect delivery system, it depends on the individual what is going to work best.

“good usage is the usage that matches instruction and gets the best outcomes for students”

Something that really stuck out to me from one of the chapters was the idea that just because students are exposed to a lot of technology at home, we should not assume that because they are competent technology users. I have seen this first hand as a primary teacher. Students self-report extended technology access and programming at home. This usually entitles video games and YouTube. However, these applications do not help students develop skills to use technology appropriately. For the most part, they do not know how to type, do not know how to search information, use technology to make life easier, or what applications are outside of the gaming ones they are always on.

One thing that my district is quite interested in right now is assessment. As our curriculum in BC has changed, our assessment practices need to change as well. With the increase in technology, assessing the use of technology and using technology to assess has revolutionized assessment. As mentioned by one of the groups, assessment needs to be multifaceted. In our district, we have developed an assessment visual that shows the different things you need to consider when developing your assessments – insure its clear and intentional, timely and ongoing, inclusive, communicates student learning, and is a shared responsibility between student, teachers, and family.

Another aspect of technology that I found interesting was the use of game simulation to help solve real world problems. Students are building engagement through the use of this new approach and not only developing technology skills but also problem solving and collaboration skills. It is something very interesting in theory but something else in practice I think. I was in one of our Grade 6/7 classes last week doing coverage and I decided to bring in something fun. I decided to have the students do a Breakout EDU game. I made quite a few assumptions before bringing it into the class – such as, they had knowledge of breakout games and that they had strong problem solving and persistence. I was quickly shown otherwise. Students were quickly frustrated when the instructions did not tell them exactly what to do. And they did very little to move closer to the answer. I had to start providing hints in order to get them re-engaged and successful. For next time, I will ensure I start with an easier activity and maybe do one as a whole group before having them engage in small group work.

Technology is an interesting concept in elementary classrooms. There are so many opportunities to provide students in order to develop curricular and core competencies, however, it’s hard to know what is best.

 

Which issues have implications for you in your own personal situation (both in your current position and in your current research topic for your MEd project.?

I am coming to understand this more and more. I originally thought of my job as constantly bringing in new things to staff to explore. But that can be extremely overwhelming, especially for those staff members that are already uncomfortable with technology and are hesitant to change their ways. I am coming to the realization that instead, it is important that teachers feel that they have input, time to practice, and support from other teachers and admin in the building. Trevor and I’s chapter was all about Educational Leadership in the field of IT. The main message was about how to create the space for optimal learning and growing and how to foster that as a leader within a school staff.

This means spending time having discussions as staff about our pedagogy and values around technology in education. Until you do that, as a leader, you will not have a solid understanding of where the staff are coming from and will not be able to choose new technology initiatives that fulfill the schools needs, wants, and goals.

It’s also important as a leader, to understand what the possible factors for disruption there are, in order to mitigate as many as we can. There can be a lack of time given to staff to experiment and play with technology before bringing it into their classroom. As a result, there is a lack of experience which leads to being uncomfortable. And we all know that no teacher wants to teach from a place of discomfort. In addition, depending on what generation you grew up in – you may have more or less risk tolerance and self-help strategies when it comes to technology. Availability is a huge factor as well at schools around the world. It is a rarity that all students have access to a device. Therefore, it’s important to have some supplemental devices and activities that do not need to be completed online. And access to funds could either help or hinder this. In many schools in my districts, there are strong PAC’s which raise a lot of money to help buy and maintain technology. Whereas in other schools, that is not always the case. There is also the agendas of stakeholders to keep in mind. When  technology is introduced to a school or a district, there are usually already agendas that administrators have before presenting. It’s difficult to get buy-in from teachers when it is an initiative that is being done to them and for them instead of with/alongside them.

One thing that I really liked from the K-12 Tech Usage Report linked below, was the Batavia district strategy in regards to technology integration. It consists of 3 levels:

    • Core materials that get widespread use
    • Supplemental materials for remediation or enrichment
    • Materials that might just meet an individual school/student/teacher need *these are few and far between and often transition into the second section

This provides a good way to categorize technology apps and usage with staff in a way that is clear.

Something I would like to learn more about, connected to my M.Ed project:

  • How to use technology to enhance assessment – especially when job sharing/have multiple teachers?
  • How to use technology to share the learning that is going on in my classroom/community through digital portfolios for primary students?
  • Where is the balance between technology use in classrooms and place-based learning outdoors? What skills can we develop with the use of the one over the other? Or both?
  • How to harness students experience with social media/technology to share their outdoor learning experiences? (YouTube? Class Instagram? FreshGrade?)

Resources:

  • Voogt, G. Knezak, R. Christensen, & K-W, Lai (Eds.) Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education, pp. 3-12. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9]

Models for Technology Implementation in Schools – TPACK vs. SAMR

My context is that I am currently a grade two teacher, the Vice Principal, and the technology support teacher at my school. The school district that I am a part of strongly supports technology use in the classroom and are often pushing out different types of opportunities. With the school and PAC funds that we have access to, our school is equipped with iPads and Chromebooks and students in Grades 4-7 are strongly encouraged to invest in a personal device. We also have dropdown projectors in all classrooms and a SmartBoard in our school library. I would say, for the most part, that the technology devices and applications that we use within our school have either been suggested by the district or apps that are gaining public popularity. As I applied for this Master’s program, I was hoping that it would help me to tighten up our systems, develop a vision for our school, and a structure to more thoughtfully reflect on what and how to implement ‘new’ technology into our practice.

Through these readings, I am leading more towards the TPACK model. There seems to be more research behind the implementation and use of the model to develop and create deep learning experiences for classroom teacher and students. As an administrator, it would push me to be extremely thoughtful and intentional with what I brought to staff. I would have to think about the content knowledge, technologic knowledge, and pedagogical knowledge of all staff.

“The basis of effective teaching with technology, requiring an understanding of the representation of concepts using technologies; pedagogical techniques that use technologies in constructive ways to teach content; knowledge of what makes concepts difficult or easy to learn and how technology and help redress some of the problems that students face; knowledge of students prior knowledge and theories of epistemology; and knowledge of how technologies can be used to build on existing knowledge to develop new epistemologies or strengthen old ones” (Koehler & Mishra, 2009).

Teaching is a complicated and confusing profession and with the addition of technology, it often just becomes an add on. In the past, I have found that our school brings in technology that is new and exciting but it often sits unused because teachers don’t have an understanding of how to use it, how it will assist in developing their pedagogical understanding, and how it will help enhance content knowledge – a perfect example of that is our SmartBoard. Something that could change the way that technology is perceived and understood would be to go through the different types of knowledge need to be developed before the full introduction of a new technology or application. Providing the research, having conversations with staff about our collective understanding and vision in regards to technology, providing sessions for educators to play around an explore with the technology, and building content capacity before introducing a technology to support.

However, I think the SAMR model also has a place in the school. I think it serves as a great reminder to implement a variety of technology in the classroom. We shouldn’t be spending all of our time at the bottom with substitution and augmentation and challenge ourselves to modify and redefine the learning in classroom with technology. The reference of the SAMR model with staff, could provoke thought provoking question and reminders about what we are doing in our classroom – such as why are we using what we are using in the first place? Is it the best thing to do? Is it going to have an impact on the learning? It provides a starting point to have conversations about technology. Based on the articles given for this week’s readings, there doesn’t seem to be much research about the process of implementing the structure and many questions surrounding the efficacy of the SAMR model. In the education community, there seems to be concerns around the contextual implementation of the model, rigid structure where activities are only supposed to fall within one of the four levels, and the primary focus on product instead of process of learning (Hamilton & Rosenberg et al., 2016). Therefore, I would start by moving through the TPACK model when implementing or introducing new technology, and use the SAMR model to facilitate discussion around what we are already doing and what we can move towards.

 

Resources:

Hamilton, E.R., Rosenberg, J.M. & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) Model: a Critical Review and Suggestions for its Use. TechTrends 60(5), 433-441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y

Koehler, M. & Mishra, P. (2009). What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)?. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education.  https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/29544/.

Clark vs. Kozma – Media and Learning

Image result for technology fighting
The Clark versus Kozma debate on the connection between media and learning has been going on for decades.  It all started in 1983 when Clark stated that media “are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence students achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causing changes in nutrition” (Clark, 1983, p. 445).  Based on articles on the topic at the time, Clark made the definitive argument that there are no learning benefits to the use of technology and to not continue wasting effort on the question until a new theory was developed. He was hoping to start a conversation – and start one he did.

Kozmas response to these findings are that we should not have to change the question, but reframe it – not does technology influence learning, but will media influence learning? In his perspective, educational technology is not a natural science but a design science. That meaning that the relationships between the two might not yet be there because we have not yet made one.  As we have come to understand, learning is not a static activity or something done to us. It is “not the receptive response to instruction Image result for kids on computer with friendsdelivery, but an active, constructive, cognitive, and social process by which the learner strategically manages available resources to create new knowledge” (Kozma, 1994). Learning is the interplay between the individual and the environment – which includes the mode of instruction

As I reflect on this debate, I wonder what repercussions it had in the field of education. Did it stop schools from investing in technology? How did this affect classroom teachers? Was it an excuse for teachers? What was Clarks motivation for negating it in the classroom? What does he believe are the benefits of technology? How would  he suggest we prepare students for the world we live in today – which is primarily digital.

As we think educational technology in the 21st century. Many things have changed since this debate started. Technologies have changed, access has changed, families have changed, schools have changed, and the economic environment around us have changed. Although there remains to conclusive evidence that any one medium is more effective than the other, I believe technology plays an integral part in the education of young people today.

As our third perspective on this topic stated, “five decades of research suggests that there are no learning benefits to be gained from employing different media in instruction, regardless of their obviously attractive features or advertised superiority” (Becker, 2010). In my own experience, this has been the use of technology in the past. Educators have used technology as a way to improve student engagement on the conceptual topic. However, as times, technology, and the world around us have changed, students need to learn the skills to utilize technology to their advantage.

Image result for bc core competency visual

The new BC Core Competencies are the skill that we want students to leave our school system knowing and demonstrating. These skills will allow our youth to transition into successful roles and relationships within their communities. And technology is an avenue in which they need to be able to demonstrate those skills. Students need to learn how to be effective communicators, thinkers, collaborators, and connected to each other and their environment. All these things can not only be accomplished in the four walls of a classroom, but through the use of different applications and resources online. According to an article by Visual Capitalist, over the past decade, the technology industry has created more than 1 million jobs across the United States. Between 2010 and 2017 there was a job growth average of 6% – more than four times the national average across all industries.

Visualizing Job Growth in Top Tech Markets in North America

I agree with my colleague Rochelle’s perspective on the debate: When content is the goal I fully agree with Clark, media is not going to make a difference to the learning. However, when building skills and competencies is the goal, I believe Clark’s argument is outdated and no longer applicable to education.

The most impactful and truthful quote came at the end of the third article in;

“the truth of the matter is that technology, in and of itself, can neither improve or impoverish instruction. Instructional technology only works for some kids, with some topics, and under some conditions – but that is true of all pedagogy. There is nothing that works for every purpose, for every learner, and all the time” (Mann, 2001, p. 241)

This quote accurately describes teaching approaches clearly.  As educators, we try to use as much as we can that is available to us in order to both engage students and provide new opportunities for learning. This, all in the hopes that it will reach one of our students in the right way and push them towards learning in a deeper way.

Resources

Becker, K. (2010). The Clark-Kozma Debate in the 21stCentury. Paper presented at the Canadian Network for Innovation in Education 2010 Conference. Published under Creative Commons. (http://mruir.mtroyal.ca:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11205/143/clark_kozma_21century.pdf?sequence=1)

Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development. 42 (2),  21-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088

Kozma, R.B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development. 42 (2), 17-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299087

EdTech Trends – from MSN Messenger to VR

Photo from: https://www.nsnews.com/news/virtual-reality-brings-the-world-to-west-vancouver-students-video-1.23298859

 

Introduction

Our generation has seen a large shift in technology over our lifetime. Growing up, personal computers were just coming out. Our home computer was in an open space and it was not used much. As I transitioned into school, we would have weekly visits to the computer lab for typing practice (All the Right Type). In high school, I had my own device and was using it to take notes, type papers, research information for school projects, and instant message friends of course! As we got older, Apple products started to be released, personal computers become more prominent, and the wealth of knowledge shared on the internet has grown substantially.

As we have gone through these different phases of technology use, we have adapted extremely well. Most people my age are quite technology literate and can adeptly problem solve and troubleshoot.

However, just a few generations above and below, they both seem to be at a loss. As the resident technology support at school and at home, I am constantly asked questions from students, colleagues, and family members about how to stop pop ups, how to reset passwords, and how to change the settings to project presentations.

It was been exciting to watch and engage with new and exciting trends in the world of technology. Especially as I have moved into my role as an educator. As I moved into the classroom, the conversation about students and technology was that students were more technology literate and we, as educators, needed to start leveraging those skills in order to increase engagement and excitement for learners.

However, in my experiences. That has not been the case. Students come in knowledgeable about how to use and access specific apps on phones and tablets, but when it comes to using devices to find information and share ideas – which I believe is the primary purpose – they seem to be unsure.

 

Summary

As Leanne mentioned in her blog, here are the top trends in educational technology as per our course readings:

  1. According to Labullier  the top trends are: 1:1 learning devices, mobile devices, wearable technology, cloud computing, collaborative computing, robotics, internet of things and game based learning, STEAM/STEM and AR (augmented reality).
  2. Randles identified computational thinking, Professional Learning, AR, VR (virtual reality) and mixed reality, AI (artificial intelligence) and global learning, learning sciences and digital citizenship and student centered learning.
  3. Jobanputra identified them as customizable learning experiences, cloud computing, speech to text options, VR/AR, 3-D printing, learning analytics.
  4. Lambda Solutions identified coding, seamless resource access, remote learning and gamification and learning management systems.
  5. According to Technology in Education 2019: 5 Trends to watch, the top trends are classroom learning as a supplement to online learning, MOOC’s ( Massive online open courses), AR, 5G ( faster networks), content on demand, inclusivity/ exclusivity and collaboration.
  6. Jarman, sees them as: Smartboards, AI, AR, VR, blockchain technology, learning analytics and adaptive learning.

The commonalities between all of these are: AI, AR, VR, anytime/ anyplace learning (enhanced by mobile devices, 1:1 devices), global/collaborative computing/ learning and student centered/focused learning results.

 

Reflection

There are many things to consider when reflecting on these readings. When looking at these articles, it is important to question and wonder who is writing the articles. If an author has a connection or relationship with a technology company, it could easily persuade and direct the messaging that comes out. It is also important to think about how the author got their information, and for what audience is it for. It would be important to know if these trends were city, province, state, or country specific. And because the articles are not academic pieces of writing, how can we determine how reliable the information they are providing are.

I am currently teaching grade two in a small affluent school district in Metro Vancouver area. In our district, we are very lucky to have support and access to a variety of technology. At our site, we have iPads, Chromebooks, SmartBoard (not that anyone uses it anymore), access to the district set of VR headsets, use of Google Suites, FreshGrade learning and reporting portfolios, coding arcades, Math IXL, and free access to the Discovery Education platform. Students from kindergarten to grade seven have exposure and access to these different avenues. And our teachers are adept at making sure that the learning is developmentally appropriate and that it makes sense for their context.

We are also lucky enough to have quite a high ratio of students to devices. Students in grade four to seven are required to bring their own device and younger students have access to iPads and are starting to explore the use of a Chromebook. This access is invaluable as it allows learners to develop a sense of independence and connect with peers in their classroom, a classroom down the hall, or half a world away.

The exciting thing about AI, AR, and VR as mentioned in one of the articles, was that the predictive nature of it, it could take some pressure off the teacher and allow them to work more closely with the student in developing a learning plan and providing targeted support based on feedback from the automated device that is designed to catch irregularities.

In addition, many trends in education seem to be moving in the direction of student centered – as it should be! The classroom is a place for students to be excited and engage with the curriculum. With the addition of inquiry and concept based teaching, students are pushed to think critically and ask questions that go beyond what you can search on Google. Technology helps everyone to access information to help them on their learning journey.

However, here is where I agree with Holland and Holland. I strongly believe that students shouldn’t be given the technology just for the sake of using it. As they mentioned in their article:

“Students still need to have the knowledge and command of effective two-way communication skills including recording their thoughts, knowledge, opinions, discoveries, and inventions in a clear and concise way” (Holland & Holland, 2014).

There are many applications that can help students explore and practice those skills, but they are not the only way. Adoption of programs and types of educational technology is projected to increase, however, we as educators need to make sure that we are supplementing with other ways of knowing.

 

Biggest Trends in Educational Technology – My Perspective

In my context, things seem to change from year to year as excitement for the latest and greatest technology shift and change. But as it stands right now,  these are the biggest trends in educational technology in my context.

  • Global Learning – Not only connecting globally, but also connecting online with peers in order to be inclusive of students who are not able to make it into the building. Also, by connecting with people from all over the world, gaining real time news and information from all over the world, communication platforms (e.g. Mystery Skype, KidBlog, FlipGrid, etc.).
  • Collaborative Computing – GoogleSuite, Kidblog, Padlet, FreshGrade – Allows students to share their information with a community in order to gain feedback and develop their understanding of a topic or concept.
  • Coding – Learning the mechanics of computers and how to get it to do what you want (Coding Mice, BlueBot, Wonder, Dash, etc.)
  • AI, AR, VR – Programs could not only help the teacher manage and catch any inconsistencies and patterns in student work, AR and VR are extremely motivating and exciting opportunities for students (Google Expeditions).

As you probably noticed, all of these trends are student centered and accessible for all learners.

 

Conclusion

I am so excited for all the amazing things that technology is bringing to the world of education. I think it is great that we are providing opportunities and the audience in which to safely share ideas, thoughts, and work. However, this quote really stuck out to me as thought provoking:

“It is not a bad things, but there are implications, whether it is simply a new medium, or whether we might be missing some of the underlying bits of important knowledge needed to carry us forward in a digital era” (Holland & Holland, 2014).

Is new always better?

There are so many new technologies out there and we want to ensure our students have access to exposure to the latest greatest thing. however, I am finding that we did so in the past, with out taking the time to consider the consequences. Something that is starting to come up more and more now is data security. Where is the information that students are sharing being housed? What information is being shared? What am I agreeing to in the Terms and Conditions? These are just a few questions that are now coming up.

I look forward to continuing on my edtech learning journey this term!

Resources

Holland, J. & Holland, J. (2014). Implications of Shifting Technology in Education. Tech Trends. 58(3), 16-25. http://vincross.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Holland-Holland-2014.pdf

Where am I now? – Final Blog

As I began these courses at the beginning of July, I thought that transitioning into this program would be easy. I have only been out of the post-secondary world for five years and felt like my classroom experience, leadership exemplars, and ability to hoop jump would guarantee smooth sailing throughout the program. I was incorrect. The platform, layout, and thoughtful guest speakers have allowed my classmates and myself to reflect on our own pedagogy, consider new ideas and perspectives, and be vulnerable to sharing the strengths and struggles that go on in our own school contexts. EDCI 515 and EDCI 568 specifically, have pushed my thinking in ways I was not expecting.

At my school, I am not only a classroom teacher, new administrator, but the technology support teacher – a role I took on from a colleague as after she left on maternity leave. Being a millennial, I have an understanding of technology and digital platforms. But as I learned throughout this month, there are many other things I need to consider in my role.

My school has a range of technologies that we are working with – iPads, Chromebooks, and personal devices of students as they bring them from home. We have had staff and classroom conversations about how the technology is to be used, however, I think going forward we need to be more clear and intentional with our use of technology school and district wide. Throughout the revised BC Curriculum, digital literacy has been included, however, I had no idea that there were international standards for technology integration  that we should also be referencing in order to ensure students are capable learners in the twenty first century. I hope to share this with my school staff. And to build off of that, I am planning on developing a school technology agreement with my staff. As a collective, we need to decide what our shared understandings, government and district privacy policies, creative commons, copyright, and our school expectations around technology are. We cannot continue to be willfully blind. Now that I have been directed to this information, I feel obligated to share and ensure, as educators, we are modeling safe and respectful technology for our students. As Jesse Miller says, “we cannot change the world of technology that we and our students live in, therefore, we should be focusing on building networked citizens” (personal communication, July 9, 2019)

As society is delving deeper and deeper into the world of technology, it is important to be intentional in our teaching. As Dr. Martin Weller mentioned, “we need to think critically about the resources and tools that we are going to use” (personal conversation, July 22, 2019). This means, to find the balance – not cut it out completely, but also not to champion it blindly.

One of the benefits of digital media is the ability to connect through social spaces online. Christine Younghusband explained that through the use of Twitter she has been able to make connections with educators around the world which has grown her own wealth of knowledge and understanding on different topics. Through our exploration of academic articles such as ‘Twitter Use and its Effects on Student Perception of Instructor Credibility’ by DeGroot and VanSlette, I have begun to understand the use of social media for digital scholarship. Something that I continue to struggle with though, is considering whose voices are heard through published research online. In my experience, research favours a certain demographic. I believe that in order to develop a clear and unbiased understanding of something, we need different perspectives. It becomes tricky, however, to get gain a variety of insights in digital scholarship when there are some cultures that are “still predominately based on orally shared intergenerational knowledge” (Bowers, 2018). This starts to create a gap between cultures and generations. Digital scholarship should be used to connect people, not to drive them further apart. As Dr. John Willinsky put it, “how can we use open digital scholarship to become a better educated society?” (personal communication, July 23 2019).

Another idea that has transformed my thinking over the past three weeks was when Shauneen Pete said that it is an educator’s responsibility to get informed and educated about Indigenous history (personal communication, July 16 2019). First of all, Indigenous knowledge is “not a uniform concept spread across all Indigenous peoples, it is a diverse knowledge that is spread throughout different people in many layers” (Onwu & Mosimege, 2004). It is not the responsibility of the first peoples to educate us. I have been feeling this idea inside of myself for a while now. In B.C. there is a big focus on Indigenous ways of knowing as it has been embedded in all aspects of the curriculum. Support teachers and district principles have been hired, but they are constantly being pulled in so many directions. How do we gain knowledge without putting pressure on our local communities as a result of being uncomfortable with our settler history? Through Shauneens’ sharing, I have realized that we should connect and learn through story (personal communication, July 16, 2019). That is how she communicated her masters and doctoral theses and shared her story with us. Based on her suggestions, I have added a list of books that share stories of different perspectives that I hope with confront and challenge my settler identity.

Listening to some of the guest speakers this week, have also led me to question the learning design that takes place in my classroom. Coming into this program, I have five years of teaching experience, have taught in IB schools {Level 1 Trained}, have participated in a district inquiry club, and helped to create and integrate an inquiry cycle at my school. Listening to Jeff Hopkins speak about how he has thoughtfully designed spaces, places, and people to create an environment of inquiry at his school is phenomenal. I appreciated his thoughtful prompt in his TedxTalk – “the world is changing so fast, is our learning serving a purpose in this world?” (TEDx Talks, 2014). If I think about my own classroom, I would have to say no. Students are learning what is in the curriculum in a combination of ways, but I do not think that they see a connection between what they are learning and how that applies to the world around them. I do understand that I need to consider age and stage of my students and how they are able to inquire into the world around them. I have a wide range of learners in my classroom, as most teachers do. I have readers, non-readers, English language learners, native English speakers, students with Ministry designations, some without designations, and students from a variety of home lives. Recently, I heard about this visual that helps educators to plan competencies and curriculum for a unit of student exploration. Picture an upside-down triangle split into three equal sections; in the biggest section at the top, the teacher will write what all students will understand, in the middle, the teacher will write what most students will understand, and in the smallest section at the bottom, the teacher will write with he or she wants some students to understand. This allows educators to plan for a wide variety of learners and to provide effective learning activities for all.

Trevor Mackenzies’ sharing also reminded me that I was on the right track when scaffolding my students through inquiry activities throughout the year (personal communication, July 15 2019). I am hoping that this next year, with older students, I am able to start in the guided inquiry section and move more quickly into the free inquiry portion in order to provide opportunities for my students to explore their own passions and interests – similarly to the PSII students with Jeff Hopkins.

How these understandings are shaping my research area of interest

There seems to be research about the importance of play and inquiry in the classroom for primary students; but how does that translate to intermediate students? As I transition into an intermediate classroom this year, I am hoping to take some teaching and learning strategies from primary and applying them in the middle years. Outdoor exploration and free-play are of particular interest to me. Over the past few years, I have noticed an increased number of students who are unsure and uncomfortable in nature. As I am exploring, there are many factors to consider for this, but one of them is the increased use of technology for our students.

Through the exploratory outdoor play, I am hoping to increase students’ sense of place and connection to the environment. This approach is closely linked to the First Peoples Principles of Learning. Along with the integration of effective applications, I hope to use technology to capture, record, and reflect students’ experiences in nature. Through the interconnection of these two approaches, all learning is accessible and it allows for an even playing field with shared experiences and natural differentiation. With this two-pronged approach, I hope students create a strong understanding of themselves through ‘two eyes’, as Colin Madland shared – one colonizer perspective and one indigenous perspective (personal communication, July 16 2019).

Because being outside and engaging with technology is an experiential process, I think the inclusion of multiple research methodologies would allow for a well-rounded understanding of the topic. I am looking forward to my literature review as I am wanting “to understand what has been doing before, the strengths and weaknesses or existing studies, and what they might mean” for me (Boote & Beile, 2005). The mixed methodologies approach will help to provide quantitative and qualitative data for me to analyze. Built into this approach is validity, trustworthiness, credibility, quality, and rigor (O’Cathain, 2010).  The action research approach might also be beneficial as it would allow me to move through the process of questioning, testing, gathering results, and moving forward, similarly to Dr. Simon Breakspears’ Learning Sprints. In order to enhance my understanding of students’ experience of outdoor learning, I could also engage in a phenomenological approach to gathering data. This would, rightfully so, put students at the center of the research.

As my students and I delve into the world of social media and sharing, we need to be conscious about the use of technology. My educational technology pedagogy is aligned to the SAMR model of technology integration (Hamilton, Rosenberg, & Akcaoglu, 2016).

I believe that it is important to use technology for modification and redefinition of learning activities as opposed to using it for the sake of a new and exciting app. I think it is okay to move through the different types of technology integration at different times, but we should be aiming for the top two tiers of this model. And in order for technology use to be effective, educators need to be proficient in the tools and the ecosystems in which they exist (Alec Couros, personal communication, July 8 2019). In my search for effective tools, I will need to ensure that the platforms comply with the FIPPA standards. As well, alongside teaching the use of the app, my students and I will have to explore what it means to be digitally literate in the twenty first century so they know the ‘manners’ of online communication.

What I hope to aim for with the interconnection between outdoor free-play and documentation and reflection using technology, is ensuring balance. There seems to be a focus for primary students on experiential learning and in later intermediate it seems to be on technology. How can we find a balance of both in the middle years? What should students be engaging with and for how long? I look forward to continuing to develop my understanding and adding new insights and approaches to my journey as an educational researcher.

 

Resources

Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars Before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006003

Bowers, C. A. (2018). Ideological, Cultural, and Linguistic Roots of Educational Reforms to Address the Ecological Crisis: The Selected Works of C. A. (Chet) Bowers (1st ed.). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315193403

Guskey, T. (2002). Professional Development and Teacher Change. Teachers and Teaching, 8, 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512

Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The Substitution Augmentation Modification Redefinition (SAMR) Model: A Critical Review and Suggestions for its Use. TechTrends, 60(5), 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y

O’Cathain, A. (2010). Assessing the Quality of Mixed Methods Research: Toward a Comprehensive Framework. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie, SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (pp. 531–556). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n21

Onwu, G., & Mosimege, M. (2004). Indigenous knowledge systems and science and technology education: A dialogue. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10288457.2004.10740556

TEDx Talks. (2014). Education as if people mattered | Jeff Hopkins | TEDxVictoria. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5O5PK6LsymM

« Older posts Newer posts »