Reflection

The most striking revelation I had this semester about teaching new literacy skills to my students is that learning to read on the web is a complex process and involves several skills that traditional reading does not. I had never really thought about the difference in reading on the web vs. traditional reading, but there is so much more students need to know how to do when reading online. The internet is filled with millions of different web pages, each with their own unique layout and design. Children do not always instinctively know how to scan a web page for information. Web pages are also full of links that take you to other websites or to different parts of the webpage you are on. Children do not always know which links are worth clicking on or how to navigate back to the original web site. Another consideration in reading online is the grammar and syntax of a particular web page. Some web pages are more kid friendly and easy to read and some are more academic and difficult to read. Before this class I had always assumed that if you could read a book you could read online. I now believe differently. I believe that traditional reading skills are the building block for web literacy, but as a teacher I also need to teach my students the specific reading skills that are needed to be literate online.

A large part of the knowledge and experience I gained in this course has to do with conducting what I think of as good solid research online. As a long time fan of Google, I had always taken for granted the information that was presented me in a Google search. After this course I feel as though I am a little more savvy in using different search engines and typing in keywords and phrases that will yield me the most useful results. I have also learned about evaluating a web site for reliability of information. This is a new skill to me. In the past I have read some websites that I have questioned the information, but I never really had a clear process for doing it. Learning the Get REAL strategy of evaluating web pages was very eye opening for me and I believe has made me a better consumer of online information (November, 2008). This knowledge has given me fuel to teach my student to be better at navigating the web when conducting a search, and to be better at questioning and evaluating what they are reading. I have already taken what I have learned and shared it with other teachers. A teacher friend of mine would like to use my screen cast where I walk through the steps of evaluating a web site to teach her high school students this skill. I feel so much more empowered when I am online now and I want to share that feeling with as many students as I can.

Throughout this course I have developed a pretty solid research project to conduct with my class. A goal for me will be to actually do the project with my class. Sometimes I get so caught up in my everyday work that I do not do projects like this that take a lot of preparation. I have also designed smaller lessons that use new technologies such as a screen cast or a voice thread. A goal for me is to get permission through my district to use these technologies and then to not only use them with my own class, but to train other teachers at my school site how to use them as well. The steps I have taken to accomplish this goal is to give myself a timeline on when I want to have accomplished them. By January I want to have permission to do screen cast and voice thread and begin to implement them in my classroom. I would like to start working with other teachers in my school and showing them how to use those technologies by February. By giving myself a timeline and sticking to it I will achieve my goal of implementing these strategies.
References
November, A. (2008). Web literacy for educators. Thousands Oaks: Corwin Press.

Reflection

When I started this class eight weeks ago I was of the mind that my personal theory of learning was mostly constructivist. The core principle for the constructivist approach is that “knowledge is unique to the individual who constructs it” (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008, pg. 16). Now that I have learned more about other learning theories I think that my personal learning theory is still strongly constructivist but it also contains parts of each theory. I use behaviorism as classroom management and sometimes as motivation. I see the role of contructionism and the importance of student’s creating artifacts that they can share with others.

One adjustment that I will make in regards to my integration of technology is that I will make more of an effort to make my students the creators. They can help create PowerPoints, publish stories on Word, and help write on a class blog. The norm has been that I create all presentations for the class, but if by turning technology over to them I can increase their engagement and understanding in a lesson I will certainly do it. Since the brain seeks meaningful patterns, making information meaningful will help students to remember it. These tools help to create networks in their brains through concrete experiences, and the more networks to information that we can create the better chance students have of retrieving it later (Laureate, 2008).

One of my long term goals I would like to make in my instructional practice is to let my students create more. I said it before in the previous paragraph, but as a teacher of young students with limited technology in my classroom this is a very big goal for me. This will take a lot of very careful planning on my part. I will have to create organized lessons to teach my students how to use the technology and have them practice using it. Once they are comfortable using technology such as PowerPoint or Word, I will create projects where I give my students a subject such as a letter of the alphabet and they create a power point for that letter with minimal teacher help.

A second long term goal for me is to integrate Web 2.0 technologies. I currently do not do any of those technologies in my classroom. I would like to start a classroom blog next year where I can inform parents of our weekly activities and we can highlight students who did exemplary work for the week. This is actually not very difficult to do. I just need to set up a blog account and then make the commitment to update it weekly. The real key will be to do the blog with my students where they are helping to add information and create a website they can be proud of and excited about.

References
Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Laureate Education, Inc. (2008). Program number 2. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. [Motion Picture]. Brain research and learning. Baltimore.

http://voicethread.com/share/1194456/

Here is the link to my voicethread. The voicethread shows the biggest problem with technology in my classroom

Social Learning Theory and Technology

The social learning theory is based on collaboration. It is about being actively engaged/constructing learning, but it also includes an element where the learner has conversations about what they are doing. Social learning has the idea that students teach each other. Dr. Orey states that teaching others helps the learner to develop a deeper understanding of the content. Social learning also has an element of connectivism in it. Connectivism holds that knowledge resides in the pattern of how different concepts are networked. Learning is the act of forming networks and navigating networks of knowledge (Laureate, 2008).

Technology is the perfect tool for the social learning theory. “Technology can play a unique and vital role in cooperative learning by facilitating group collaboration, providing structure for group tasks, and allowing members of groups to communicate even if they are not working face to face” (Pitler, et. al, 2007, pg. 140). “Student created multimedia is a natural environment for cooperative learning” (Pitler, et.al, 2007, pg. 141). In a project such as this students often use the jigsaw strategy where each member of the collaborative team is responsible for learning information and teaching it to teammates (Laureate, 2008). These situations are great preparation for the workforce students will one day become a part of.

Technology also offers us web- enabled collaborative learning where students can engage in collaborative projects across the globe. A technology that I want to explore for use in my own classroom is keypals- an email pen pal. “Communication with students in other cities, states, and countries broadens the perspective of students and challenges them to learn about other cultures, languages, and issues throughout the world ( Pitler, et. al, 2007, pg. 145). I think my own students would really love to have pen pals from across the world. I remember having a pen pal when I was in grade school. Getting and writing letters to someone I had never met was exciting.

The amount of web based collaborative projects available to us is really limitless. Web 2.0 allows students to work together to create web or wiki pages, blogs and podcasts. These types of projects allow collaboration without restrictions to time and space. Students could work together with people from all over the globe. These types of collaborations would expose students to cultural experiences that would not have been possible a few years ago. It is these types of collaborations that I believe will be the most beneficial to students in regards to preparing them for the world outside of school.

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

Laureate Education Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program 8. Social learning theory [Motion Picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology Baltimore: Author.

Contructionism

According to Dr Orey, the constructionist theory of learning states that people learn best when they create an external artifact or something they can share with others (Laureate, 2008). There are several modes of technology that support this learning theory.

The technology that is the most practical for my kindergarten students is Power Point. We have made many class power points, where they students help write and insert pictures, but we make just one Power Point together as a class. We have made Power Points for each letter of the alphabet, with our site words, we have re written our favorite stories, and we have made Power Points to tell about other specific academic content. While my students are not creating their own Power Point, they still have a major part in creating one as a class. As students get older they can be even more independent in the creation of a Power Point project to share with the class.

Using software to generate and test a hypothesis “enables students to see the bigger picture and recognize patterns” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, pg. 210). Microsoft Excel enables the teacher to set the formula so all students have to do is input their data. This allows them to focus on the product instead of the process. I can see how this would really be of benefit for upper grades. I struggle with the idea of having my 5 year old students input data into a spreadsheet. I cannot even think of what lesson that would fit with.

There are several web resources that allow students “to use background knowledge, make decisions, and see the outcome of their hypothesis, often in virtual situations that would be impossible or financially unfeasible in real life” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, pg. 212-213). Again, I feel that this is a tool probably better suited to upper grades, but I am curious to explore some of these resources to see if any of them can be used in my class.

In all of these instances students are creating projects that can be shared with others. This fits in with what Dr. Orey states is the constructivist learning theory and in turn will help students to learn better.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories. [Motion Picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author

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

For about six years my school district has been really into the use of thinking maps. Thinking maps are a type of graphic organizer. I have been to several trainings on the use of thinking maps and have implemented them into my classroom because it is district required. This week I had a bit of an “aha!” moment. I now have a good reason to use thinking maps in my classroom- aside from doing it because it is required.

Thinking maps along with other concept mapping tools replicate the network model of cognitive learning. They are a way to organize and link ideas. One of the primary modes for storing information into long term memory is through elaboration. When we help our students make many connections to information they will have more connections with which to retrieve the information (Laureate, 2008). Because my students cannot read, when I do thinking maps I use graphics instead of words most of the time. According to Pavio’s duel code people store image more than text (Laureate, 2008).

I can say from experience that using thinking maps has greatly increased my student’s acquisition of information. The easiest way for me to use them is when retelling a story. A flow map is relatively easy to make and helps the students see the flow of a story and aides in their ability to retell it. I also use thinking maps to classify and group objects, and to make comparisons. Once my class has done a thinking map I leave it up on the wall. I am always pleased to see them going back to a thinking map months later, during choice time and retelling stories or discussing the information presented on the organizer. It shows me that this tool is effective at helping students to learn and retrieve information.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2008). Cognitive Learning Theories [Motion Picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

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

This week I read about some instructional strategies. One of the strategies that I read about is reinforcing student’s effort. The concept is that if you show your students that their academic achievements are based on how much effort and work they put into school, they will start to put forth more effort. This strategy can be easily supported with technology such as Microsoft Excel. Using this strategy to have students chart and graph their own effort and achievement can certainly be eye opening for some students.

This strategy fits in with the behaviorist theory of teaching. It is a type of positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement is presenting a stimulus that improves the likelihood for a response (Orey, 2001). The stimulus in this strategy is getting better grades. When students can physically see that their effort increases their achievement they are more likely to continue trying hard. “Students work for things that bring them positive feelings, and for approval from people they admire. They change behaviors to satisfy the desires they have learned to value” (Orey, 2001).

This strategy is also a type of behavior modification. Behavior modification can be achieved by finding and using a suitable reinforcer- in this case an intrinsic one, and then reinforcing certain behaviors until students start to become successful with that behavior (Orey, 2001).

A second strategy I explored this week is homework and practice. “As an extension of the classroom, homework provides opportunities for students to deepen their understanding of the content and to gain proficiency with their skills” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p.187). Homework reinforces the materials covered in class.

A great way to tie practice with technology is through the use of websites that employ programmed instruction. “Online educational games have an inherent appeal and generate immediate feedback that allows a student, parent, and teacher to monitor progress toward mastery” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p.195). My favorite programmed instruction site is starfall.com. I use it all the time in my class. It uses reinforcement to teach letters and letter sounds, and to teach beginning reading. My students love to read and do the games on that website, and I believe it is through the practice we do whole class on starfall that my students have reached their current level of mastery so quickly.

Reference:

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

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page