Most recent public comments by Julie Book https://nowcomment.com/users/37236 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997311 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997311 I agree Todd. There seems to be this chasm between the perspectives of educators, researchers, and politicians who put many of these ideas in place. We have talked about the lack of freedom that teachers have, not to mention the lack of funding, and lack of quality/quantity PD to keep everything changing at the rate that it needs to. I wonder what is the starting point to changing our guidelines and how do we do that with all of these factors that seem to stand as huge road blocks? Sat, 07 Apr 2018 19:04:53 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997307 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997307 I think that is a great point, Sarah! I wonder how we go about distinguishing between teaching writing that needs to be formal versus including the informal types of writing in which we also need skills. After all, if each of us did not have some background with formal writing and using academic formats, we would have trouble at this level of writing. Do you think that there are ways we can accomplish both--including multi-modal type writing and at the same time asking for formal, academic prose? Sat, 07 Apr 2018 19:01:34 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997232 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997232 With all of the constraints on public schools with meeting the mark regarding standardized testing, it doesn't seem really plausible that this can be done any more. Yes, it is the ideal, but.... Erickson's point (week 4?) about technology not saving education because of the lack of freedom of the schools themselves to really work to create meaningful learning with technology because of these restraints echoes here to me. Sat, 07 Apr 2018 12:53:16 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997231 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997231 I am reminded of something Dr. Mishra said in the video that we watched in an earlier week about what the tells his kids. It was something like, for facts go to Google, for wisdom come to me. So, yes, we can find facts/information/knowledge from the Internet, but we have to learn/teach skills related to how to evaluate all of that information, how to make sense of it, and what to do with it. I am definitely trying to utilize questions that work to exercise critical thinking skills, and the document you shared with me before is great too. I will include it here too for everyone. https://gdcf-0916001bcltd.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/critical-thinking-cheatsheet-CLR-1.pdf Sat, 07 Apr 2018 12:40:31 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997230 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=997230 This point seems to be in line with one of the videos that I watched, I think in Week 2 about the elements of digital literacies that are essential, and he identified those as cultural, cognitive, constructive, communicative, civic, critical, creative, and confident. This connected kind of learning as shown in the case of Clarissa is centered around individual and collective interests which is just what is needed to motivate. Sat, 07 Apr 2018 12:34:59 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995695 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995695 I find them appealing because I am fascinated with learning about different things. For all that information to be out there if I want to go and learn it, that is cool to me. I think that we are going to have to find ways to pique students interest and get them interested in the world around them---to help to instill some kind of curiosity so that they want to learn and are interested and motivated to do so. One thing that kind of bothers me with some of what we have read and Ito's lecture is that everyone in the generation is lumped into one group---not all teenagers or young people are like Ito's daughter and actually have the curiosity/interest/motivation to go look something up because they want to learn. And, when we looked at the digital divide, much of what we read supposed that if one was low-income, he/she would be somehow unable to learn (although I get the whole access to technology part), but I just keep thinking that we should recognize the individuality of it all. Thu, 05 Apr 2018 08:50:21 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995694 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995694 Thank you for sharing this. It seems like such a drastic difference from where we are right now in how we approach writing, but I think we are going to have to consider that we are going to have to approach it differently. I can see this working for students who are very invested and already interested, but I wonder if students who struggle would find the freedom just too much---that they would need a more structured approach. Or is that me just wrongly thinking that is needed, I am not sure. Thu, 05 Apr 2018 08:45:35 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995486 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995486 It is interesting to me to consider why it is highly educated people accessing the MOOCs. I would think that it has something to do with interest and sticktoitness (to use Coop's term). Fascinating to consider the possibilities. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:02 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995481 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=995481 I totally do agree that there is quite a lack of interest in what we are teaching in schools, or rather, the way we go about it. I do think that we need to show students how what they are learning is relevant, and we should try to pique there interests. I think though that once we start saying we are going to eliminate subjects for students that are not relevant to their careers, we are missing out on the value of those subjects, and the students are missing out. My colleagues and I have this conversation quite often about the need to update what we are teaching in Freshman Composition. The reality is that students need to be able to write in many different modes, not just essays. Regarding content knowledge, I am really not sure that gaining content knowledge is the sum total of what we are supposed to be doing when we learn. I think that I have mentioned this before, but I don't remember a whole lot of what I studied when I was working on my undergrad or Master's degree---I think that the skills that I learned were ones that I practiced over time---I have to Google a whole lot regarding author's works, names, and dates because I don't remember most of that kind of stuff. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:02 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=994990 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100539?scroll_to=994990 I think I would have to go with smart phones. Not only can people access the Internet with them, but they can download apps specific to certain subjects that each individual is interested in. This really does put the information right at one's fingertips as Ito mentions. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:02 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=991525 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=991525 Good point, Coop. And yet correlational studies are one of those that WWC lists as ineligible. I can't help but think about the questions Dr. Hicks always asks us about what a technology assumes about teaching/teacher and student/learning, and in relation to these standards for what accounts as eligible and ineligible studies there seems to be a certain disconnect between understanding that we have human beings that are being studied, and I would think that their perceptions are as valid as a controlled trial. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:01 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=991524 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=991524 Hi Todd, One thing I noted in the WWC webinar video is that they talked about the need to have a comparison to really give a effective picture of the situation studied. Having a comparison examining a treatment group (a new process implementation) compared to the "normal" teaching process would seem to effectively measure for impact. Sun, 01 Apr 2018 13:59:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=990158 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=990158 I like how this concept was represented with the triangle showing the interconnectedness of program, participant, and trainer. So, at the learning (2) level, we would need to somehow find out what they had learned about the content of what was presented, and I would imagine what we would do at this state is to measure understanding of the content. So, maybe a survey after we have presented a certain idea (and during the PD, and prior to asking them to apply what they had learned). For behavior (3) we would allow them to try out what we have done in (2). I guess I am thinking of our own PRO GRO projects, so this would likely include allowing the participants to test out the tools we are showing. Maybe observations would work well for collecting data at this point. For impact (4), this is where collecting data over time would likely come in. So, we would need to examine the effects on students and the program over time. Wed, 28 Mar 2018 07:38:12 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=990157 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=990157 I was especially drawn to the idea of "joining research with practice"--it seems to me that this would help to bridge some of the divide between what the research shows works and what is actually carried out. Because qualitative studies do allow us, according to the WWC, to "understand context, assess(ing) fidelity of implementation"--I don't know how we could not use qualitative data along with the quantitative. So, perhaps there might be interviews of participants to examine more about their perceptions of what can be improved etc. go along with or provide more information for quantitative data collections. Wed, 28 Mar 2018 07:26:10 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988727 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988727 This is in line with my thinking above about what is needed at both the individual and organizational level. I agree that assessing the ETPD would involve checking to see if later on the teacher/instructor/educator was applying/integrating or just an overall idea of whether he or she was using what was learned and how. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:01 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988712 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988712 It seems like to me that there would be so many factors to examine and it would be difficult to see the relationship between them. For example, they mention drop out rates--if we used that as a determiner of if PD was effective or not, we could be ignoring a many number of other issues at play. The very nature of PD, whether in a particular school district, school, or other organization is based on non-randomness--it seems like to me, so I think it would be particularly challenging to set it up in one of the study designs outlined by WWC. Also, if in an educational setting, it could potentially ignore the perceptions of the instructor/teacher in regard to what he or she finds as successful teaching/learning. Mon, 26 Mar 2018 09:12:52 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988709 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988709 In my experience, not as the data collector, but on the other side, is precisely as described here. Many times, everyone is too tired at the end to provide valuable feedback, or more than oftentimes, participants feel that what was presented really wasn't what was needed. So, maybe there needs to be some measure taken prior to the PD activity that would gauge participants' needs. In regard to other measures of assessment for PD that might produce more valid conclusions over time might be to send out a survey a week after the PD to ask if participants had implemented one or more of the ideas/tools/suggestions offered in the PD. There might be a follow-up interview in which data could be collected to see if participants found the presented material to be valuable to that individual person's needs. Mon, 26 Mar 2018 09:03:28 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988707 https://nowcomment.com/documents/100529?scroll_to=988707 I think that prior to planning a PD opportunity, there has to be some measure of understanding of what is needed and necessary to help gauge the breadth and depth that is needed for the PD to begin with. I have had many experiences with PD in which administration does not have a good finger on the pulse of instructors and their needs. So, to me, part of assessing what works for the long-term has to include first assessing what is needed. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:01 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/97743?scroll_to=963947 https://nowcomment.com/documents/97743?scroll_to=963947 When the technology is a "means to an end" as mentioned in the article, rather than an "end itself" is one way it can be innovative. Rather than using a technology just because it is interesting, as in the example of Willa, using it in a very explicit way as in the example of Kathy shows innovation. Additionally, the ease of implementation of the technology itself can make it innovative. I do not think we can demand innovation from teachers because as the authors point out "teachers vary on a wide range of qualities and attributes" and perhaps much is dependent upon a teachers' personality, interests, and teaching style. Sat, 24 Feb 2018 10:37:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956940 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956940 I hadn't heard about that either, Pam. This is something we are hearing/or reading about each week--equal access to technology. Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:45:32 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956939 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956939 Hi Coop, It seemed like the convening role (to be able to bring all stakeholders together) would make sense too. Inviting researchers, educators, and administrators to share perspectives --and if they would consider the various perspectives--would make sense. Have a good Sunday. Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:44:37 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956938 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956938 Hi Pam, When I was listening to his views (especially later on), I totally could understand what he meant about students feeling like they are wasting time if they are not challenged. I was wondering though how this conception of students learning at their own pace would work. I imagined individual students working on their own 'stuff' and no involvement with each other or the instructor. It seems like that would really constrain the social and collaborative aspects of learning. And, again, it might be dependent upon the discipline. For example, in a literature course, discussion is so vital, and students learning in a bubble at their own pace really wouldn't work well, in my estimation. Have a great day! Sun, 18 Feb 2018 07:41:58 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956907 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956907 I caught the point that Finland uses very minimal technology integration into education. I would be interested to know more about this. Sat, 17 Feb 2018 19:07:13 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956906 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=956906 I am not sure if I can provide a scale of who I agree with the most ---> least. I can find points that I agree with in each of the participant's points. For example, I completely agree with Ms. Zolt regarding the importance of writing. I believe that writing is the only way for us to really demonstrate understanding at the critical level of any subject. I understand, too, the issues with assessing writing fairly, effectively, and timely. In many ways this is a huge issue right now at my institution with some even arguing that writing is not really necessary for students' future success, and it is not something that they will have to do in their careers. I also agree with Hughes's to some extent and his ideas about seat time vs. mastery of skills. However, my concern here has to do with the point that in some disciplines, the learning does take place over a period of time, and it is not really based on learning the information and moving on. I am thinking specifically about skills like analysis, evaluation, and other aspects of critical thinking that are fostered by use over time. I completely understood the points about students feeling like time was wasted in high school. My daughter graduated in 2017 and was very frustrated with high school because of the lack of challenge and the feeling of wasted time (she is in college and doing well!). Sat, 17 Feb 2018 19:06:28 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953466 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953466 Ms. Zolt mentions the common core standards related to students need to have close reading skills, ability to communicate (written/spoken), and critical thinking skills. She mentions getting away from using technology just for drill/practice and using technology to help students collaborate is essential--but it must be purposefully used. Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:29:35 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953465 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953465 Steinkuehler, C. (2010). Video games and digital literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(1), 61-63. Does anyone remember this article from week 14 in EDU 800? It gave the example of Julio. Popovic's argument seems to be in line with the findings in that article. Thu, 15 Feb 2018 19:44:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953461 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953461 Ms. Weiss mentioned several things the Dept. of Ed. is doing (or in some cases, should be doing). She mentioned the idea of having the "bully pulpit". An important consideration is the idea of having a convening role---that the Dept. of Ed. can bring folks together to come up with policies regarding how teaching and learning will look moving forward. I read the question before I listened to this section, and I initially thought, perhaps the best thing to do is to talk to the people who are doing the research, who are in the trenches, etc. She did mention providing individual school grants, which I think would be particularly effective to produce good results. Wed, 14 Feb 2018 19:37:50 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953451 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953451 His view is centered around the idea that educators would be able to identify the appropriate level at which students would be (regardless of age), and place them in that area. My question here is that it seems to be a lack of thought about the differences in discipline--how this would be carried out with Math for example would be very different than English. In regard to the "personalized" vs. "personal" the key factor to me seems to be ignoring the role of the student to his/her learning. Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:12:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953446 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96801?scroll_to=953446 I don't know if private companies are focused on encouraging innovation in education. There was a bit of discussion about how there needs to be policy changes (because they are a bit behind), and specifically it was mentioned the ideas of skills mastery, rather than focusing on "seat time". I struggle with the how to personalize learning and assess students, in real time, as suggested here. We use Cengage's MindTap, for both online English courses and in-class courses, and I think there is that immediate response to some items, but I still am searching for how to accomplish this with writing assignments. Wed, 14 Feb 2018 19:03:21 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947496 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947496 I think many of the factors are related to not having the training, time, or resources to integrate the technology. Or having technology but not knowing how to integrate it successfully (TPACK). Sat, 10 Feb 2018 15:43:43 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947495 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947495 Yes, so maybe this is not a good example of engagement since there was not a sound in the room. Liz Kolb would look at engagement as related to collaboration and active learning, so maybe this is not a good example of actively engaging students because of the lack of activity (discussion, collaboration, etc.). Sat, 10 Feb 2018 15:40:11 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947486 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947486 This is always my question Pam. As I think about this, I am wondering if the population for this study does not include all majors. The article never really does identify the population that the sample will represent, does it? I cannot find it. Sat, 10 Feb 2018 15:02:11 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947485 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=947485 That is a good point, Robert. The educational level, discipline, student population and many factors have to be considered. That is why I think it is difficult to have a one-size-fits-all approach. Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:58:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96349?scroll_to=947451 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96349?scroll_to=947451 I agree with George here. I think because it was such a new technology, they likely had not thought of the affordances related to education. I think now as we look at it, we can identify such affordances--like possible collaboration or showing the relationship between items. Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:49:06 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=944626 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=944626 Based on the purpose and research questions, what is included is sufficient, I suppose. But, particularly with the effect that was found regarding those who used the laptops and digital resources attending school less regularly, it might have shone some light on why that might have been an effect. Thu, 08 Feb 2018 15:04:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=944624 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=944624 I think in many ways it depends on the discipline, or the content of the course. For example, I have taught some writing courses that are not structured necessarily in weekly modules, but rather, units. Particularly in my Technical Writing course, it seems to work best. But, then in other courses--particularly lower level courses-- I have noted that the weekly set up with two or so deadlines (and sometimes it helps to have an initial activity midweek) keeps students motivated. The textbook we had in 811 was really helpful with describing the structure of online courses to foster student motivation. Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:58:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=944619 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=944619 That is a good point, Jennie, and the study mentions that the names on the list were randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups, but it doesn't really describe the process by which they were randomly assigned. Wed, 07 Feb 2018 10:32:49 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96349?scroll_to=943367 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96349?scroll_to=943367 This is amazing. Sorry Dr. Troy, I can't help but to say that the pink polkadot shirt was my favorite:-) To have an organizational structure designed how things are associated (wheels, eyes, etc) was very surprising to me since this was pre-WWW. Interesting to me that the hyperlinks provided both information and interaction between users--this seems to be a pre-collaborative tools function. I was considering what has really changed with the technological functions that we have today, and I was thinking that to use such a thing, one would really need to have specialized training, which would need to take place over a period of time, and yet today, much of our technologies are intuitive --which makes me wonder if they are really intuitive or if it is just that we have become more familiar with them. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943325 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943325 This helps to support the need for students to have a facilitator (ISTE 6b) to set the pace. How this might affect teaching/teacher has to do with educators supporting students with the technology, not just the technology replacing the educator. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943319 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943319 This helps to exemplify the affordance of technology related to capturing students attention and thus, interest. Remembering back to 811 last semester, students' interest is a driving factor in their motivation, particularly intrinsic motivation, so this is certainly an area where technology can fulfill a positive purpose related to students/learning. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943296 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943296 This seems to me to be key. Integrating technology for the sole purpose of integrating it seems to not produce desired results. As indicated in this study, just having laptops does not in and of itself guarantee good outcomes. The beliefs of educators (I am thinking back to our readings in week 4) in relation to the technology use have a direct impact on whether or not the technology will in fact affect outcomes. Mon, 05 Feb 2018 20:22:45 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943289 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=943289 I thought the figure in the article (in its entirety) was very helpful in representing theoretical model of technology immersion. The researchers broke up factors associated with achievement in four ways: technology use, technology proficiency, engagement, academic achievement--to show the ways in which increased access to technology would affect these factors. Further, the researchers were careful to match the treatment and control schools in terms of the variables chosen (enrollment % economically disadvantaged, % minority, %ESL, %Special Ed, % Student mobility, % passing 2003 TAKS, % passing 2004 TAKS--all which aided in the validity of the study. One disadvantage I can see from this research design is not really being able to get a good idea of the perceptions of the participants--either the students or the educators. Thu, 08 Feb 2018 15:04:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=942970 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=942970 The researchers indicate the design as quasi-experimental. The study's design allowed the researchers to identify that, in the short term, the use of the interactive multimedia improved student outcomes, particularly related to improving critical thinking skills. I agree with the identified limitations of this design/study as not giving information about long-term consequences of using this tool. Mon, 05 Feb 2018 15:23:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=942687 https://nowcomment.com/documents/96345?scroll_to=942687 Canelos et al. used an experimental design in their study. I think that using this design would produce, overall, good results in terms of a sample of the population. One of the disadvantages, I would think, might be related to different students' level of knowledge of technology etc., which might have had a bearing on the results. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=941144 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=941144 The example in paragraph 30 helped me to get the concept a bit more. The link between knowledge, previous experiences, and beliefs is very interesting to me. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 11:02:26 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=941141 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=941141 Thank you for sharing that article Robert. I think it is human nature to push back any time we are told something is mandated. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:33:29 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=941126 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=941126 Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:31:49 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941124 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941124 We probably do need to think about what the purpose of education is today as distinct from the 50s-60s. I think the ISTE standards recognize the changes that need to be made, not only with the evolution of technologies, but also the roles of educators and students. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:29:38 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941123 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941123 I think that there are some who think that this is the way to go, particularly with the ongoing ideas about the corporate model in education (students as customers etc.). Unfortunately, those in decision making roles don't always pay attention to the research that is out there. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:26:38 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941122 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941122 I agree with you, Pam. We absolutely have to consider the questions re: what effects the technology we are using will have on teachers/teaching and students/learning, but I think that having overreaching claims that pigeonhole students into certain outcomes based economic status lacks depth of thought. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:23:36 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941120 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941120 Very true, Robert. There has to be some type of "standard" to show the measure of expectation. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 14:41:52 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941118 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=941118 That reminds me of the article that we read in 811 last semester about the Acton Academy--remember that? It seems that, along with the Khan Academy, is a good model of ISTE 5a. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:18:00 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=940719 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=940719 Yes, I know what you mean, Robert. I was thinking mainly about K-12, I guess. I saw something (I think on Twitter), that a greater predictor of students' abilities (I don't think it was success, necessarily) --even more than family income, parents level of eduction, etc--was if they read for pleasure during the ages of 10-16. Fri, 02 Feb 2018 13:55:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=938429 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=938429 This section was shocking to me that only 30% of student success is related to the function of schools and 70% has to do with other factors such as family life, level of income etc. It seems to me that to gain the skills and knowledge they need (all 7 ISTE standards) is a very tough task to accomplish based on these odds. Fri, 02 Feb 2018 13:55:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=938428 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95759?scroll_to=938428 ISTE #7 Analyst: I think that this is a more difficult change to make because of standardization (management). Teachers (and I may be generalizing) don't have a lot of freedom in allowing for "alternate ways for students to demonstrate competency and reflect on their learning using technology" (ISTE Standards). Sat, 03 Feb 2018 14:41:52 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938203 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938203 This is what I was thinking. Ertmer notes too that maybe not enough time has passed to really measure teachers' beliefs. It seems like in 2005, there was still the struggle to just understand how to use the technology, let alone how to TPACK. Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:14:06 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938202 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938202 Hi Robert, I had in mind that beliefs might be more grounded, and thus, more difficult to change than perceptions. I thought paragraphs 69-70 were very interesting in that they discussed how beliefs can be changed. Do you think perceptions are easier to change than beliefs? Sat, 03 Feb 2018 11:02:26 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938200 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938200 Exposure to technology, even at a low-level as indicated here, if done so collaboratively, teachers could learn from one another and help to create these "learning experiences that leverage technologies" (ISTE Standards). Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:31:49 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938199 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938199 Giving teachers the opportunity to be learners (#1 ISTE Standard), it seems would allow them the opportunity to be exposed to technologies and its uses and creatively expand their beliefs to integrate them. I can see how pressuring, or mandating changes would produce resistance. Sat, 03 Feb 2018 10:33:29 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938197 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938197 That is a good point, Robert, and since Ertmer points out that beliefs are very much tied to experiences, I can see how experiences in the classroom (not so much conceptual frameworks) would shape teachers' beliefs. Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:03:35 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938196 https://nowcomment.com/documents/95751?scroll_to=938196 This was my question here. This article was published in 2005 at a time when I think just the addition of computers in schools was very new, so perhaps the ISTE standard LEARNER was at the stage of just integrating technology and those higher-level pedagogical skills had not had the chance to really develop? I cannot remember (or find) where I read this, but somewhere I read (maybe the Horizon Report) that it takes 5-6 years of time to pass for people to get used to a new change. Fri, 02 Feb 2018 12:13:23 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934631 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934631 I do not have an example that I can think of, but this really does get me thinking that we do have quite a responsibility to think about all of these questions. Sun, 28 Jan 2018 17:18:29 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934630 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934630 This is a good point, Sarah. It seems like as soon as something becomes a mandate, all creativity, innovation, etc. goes out the window. I read this article this morning about creativity vs. standardization in schools: https://www.educationdive.com/news/fetc-2018-ken-robinson-argues-2-key-points-in-support-of-creative-schools/515530/ Sun, 28 Jan 2018 17:17:39 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934629 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934629 Well, I have been thinking about this a lot lately. I think first we have to consider more about learning and education. For example, sometimes I don't think there is a need anymore to sit in a classroom and hear someone lecture about a topic that we can just Google and read about. Content knowledge seems to be not needed, and in some ways, this is because of technology. I have a sort-of-similar discussion with students sometimes, especially about the nature of learning when working on a degree in English. I certainly don't remember all of the content that I learned when I was working on my undergraduate degree---dates, authors, and works of literature for example---but I think what I got out of it, what I really learned, was the process of analysis, evaluation, close reading, critical thinking all done over a period of time. That seems to me to be where the deeper, more substantive learning (not just content) takes place. So, if we can find ways to integrate technology to help focus on those skills, then I think we would be going places. Sun, 28 Jan 2018 17:12:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934628 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934628 In my context, aside from the choice of LMS, instructors have freedom to use technology as they wish, for the most part. I would like to see a bit more push to encourage more technology use, not demand, necessarily. Sun, 28 Jan 2018 17:05:45 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934627 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=934627 Hi Sarah, I remember a discussion a while back (and cannot remember when) about this very topic. One question that came up is have things really changed? If we go from writing on a chalkboard to writing on a smartboard, what is really different? Yes, the technology, but what does a smartboard afford that a chalkboard doesn't? Sun, 28 Jan 2018 17:02:39 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=934296 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=934296 I have been thinking about this quite a bit, and I think it has something to do with the point that as humans, we are such creatures of habit (some more than others). I was recently at a training even that had to do with designing online courses, and the idea of creativity came up, and there were so many participants to made the point that they just don't have time to be creative. We get stuck in a rut, and we think it is efficient, and to have to learn something new is sometimes a barrier to moving forward and incorporating some of these creative uses of technology. Sat, 27 Jan 2018 18:54:02 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=933534 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=933534 Good points. Many assumptions are made about students and teachers and their levels of comfort operating in digital environments. We (co-authors) had this discussion today about the assumption that students would not want to blend social platforms such as Twitter and Facebook for educational purposes, but that may be because it is difficult for them to conceptualize how that might "look". I think I was somewhat resistant to the idea until we used those tools and I could see how it could work! Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:17:40 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=933531 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=933531 It seems that HE and K-12 are more linked than we consider, since it is in HE where K-12 teachers are trained. I agree that after the initial training has been done, it is more difficult to come from behind, if you will, with PDs that would help to instill the ideas of trans disciplinary approaches, and that idea of "cross pollination". I still see teacher preparatory programs training teachers to create poster boards and bulletin boards, and that initial training with actual frameworks such as TPACK, are lacking. I totally agree about the aspect of teachers not having freedom to be creative, necessarily, and they are bound by many constraints such as state testing etc. Which is why I still am wondering if we know it doesn't work, why are we (I don't mean US) so insistent on continuing down the same road. Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:13:58 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=933527 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=933527 That is a great tie to Twitter. As a framework, I agree that TPACK provides the opportunity for creativity. I think that in some ways it necessitates that the user be creative in the application of technology to fit the P and the C. It seems to me, after having listened to Dr. Mishra's presentation, that it is creativity that is really lacking when integrating technology. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928622 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928622 To me, it seems like we are in sort of a conundrum here. As Dr. Mishra mentioned, teacher education programs are not necessarily focusing on things like creativity and trans-disciplinary learning or approaches. Yet, we note that effective teaching needs to contain all of these things related to TPACK. This is a little bit off topic in a way, but to me it seems to come down to what it valued, most notably STEM, and as Dr. Mishra mentioned in the video lecture, the exclusion of the arts in regard to how they line up with STEM. So, I guess my question would be, what are some practical things that teachers can do if they are not necessarily provided with the tools they need to TPACK (the verb), and when, for the most part, they may not have the freedom to do so? Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928603 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928603 Congruent with Dr. Mishra's video in our other discussion, I think the trend, as identified by the Horizon report, related to emphasizing deeper learning would have to likewise be discussed here. Moving beyond the basic integration of technology, we have to consider the constant entourage of information that comes to us and the need to help develop and emphasize critical thinking and self-directed learning skills. This trend noted in the Horizon report would likely need to be considered further in the TPACK framework article if submitted today. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928580 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928580 We often talk about teachers integrating technology in their classrooms, but often there is not the freedom for them to do so. Now, it seems that state budgets are so tightly squeezing school districts and public institutions so that is a consideration that would probably need to be addressed today. I am sure that was happening a decade ago as well, but I know that in my experience, there are specific technologies that I wish that we could integrate (let alone have the training for), but there is just not the money to do so. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928393 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94522?scroll_to=928393 This resonates with the video lecture from Dr. Mishra in our other discussion area. The idea of trans-disciplinary learning as integral to creativity. I found it interesting that in the video, it was mentioned that many teachers noted that in their teacher preparatory studies, it was never stressed the importance of integration of "knowledge from different domains" is necessary. If we know that this is effective teaching is dependent upon this, I wonder why this has not been addressed, even a decade later. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=928363 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=928363 The entire time that Dr. Mishra was talking about the interconnectedness of disciplines etc., I could not help but think about our cohort and the varied knowledge that each of us brings. Yes, each of us is grounded in a specific discipline, but we have been provided with such a great opportunity to "cross-pollinate" and learn in an "in" disciplined way, as Dr. Mishra pointed out. I can remember a time when I really experienced this. When I was working on my M.A. in English, I had two courses that were very different: one was Medieval Literature, and the other was Autobiography. I had sort of an epiphany when I was enrolled in those classes that became the idea for my master's thesis. That was a cool experience in which I remember realizing the interconnectedness of things. Sun, 28 Jan 2018 21:11:48 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=928360 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=928360 I like that Dr. Mishra began and ended with this quote about creativity--that is is a way of operating not a talent. The whole concept of creativity has become somewhat of a label--I hear students say quite often that they are not creative because in earlier years, maybe they could not paint a picture or something. Regarding how this fits in with TPACK, I don't think we can say across the board that TPACK is creativity or not creativity. I will go back to my previous post about the verb/noun distinction. I think if we think about it as a construct, and framework, then it may not be creative, but if users of TPACK actively work (TPACKing), then it certainly has to propensity to be creative. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=928173 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=928173 Here is a link to my blog re: that article i mentioned. I should have included that before. https://juliebookblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/15/week-7-tpack-research ** I may be blending channels of communication a bit with literacies, but I think I see my students embrace this idea of multiple literacies particularly when it comes to texting, SnapChat, and other social media. I don't know if it is necessarily my students who push agains the idea of literacies having multiple definitions, but rather, the, dare I say, old school ideas of literacy only encompassing text-based reading and writing. I am planning to get on commenting on the other areas today. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=927741 https://nowcomment.com/documents/94516?scroll_to=927741 What I am reminded of is Olofson et al's article that discussed TPACK in terms of a verb, not a noun. So it would be something that educators actively work with, not a thing (noun) just sitting there. Dr. Mishra's points also remind me of the TED talk video provided by Dr. Hicks for, I believe it was this week (maybe last week), in which he talked about memes and the ways in which they "amplify information" and are thus a type of digital literacy. I teach American literature, and when we begin the course, we start with Native American literature, which always brings up the discussion of what is literature, and thus, what is literacy. Many students find aspects of Native American culture---the oral tradition, the dance, Kachina dolls, various art--as not really literature (or literacy). Yet, each of those items, like Dr. Belshaw's conception of memes, "amplify information"--they are content/message laden items. It is interesting to consider, and Dr. Mishra is very engaging to listen to. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:54 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93677?scroll_to=924244 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93677?scroll_to=924244 That sounds really interesting! When they would use myfitness pal, would they send you a summary of sorts, or how were you able to review/view that information? Very cool! Sun, 21 Jan 2018 17:33:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93677?scroll_to=924242 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93677?scroll_to=924242 Good points! I think that would work great, and I can see how it would significantly modify the peer review. My only question might be would it effectively demonstrate the process of revision/proofreading/editing, or maybe it would be better used in the earlier stages of the writing process? Have a great evening! Sun, 21 Jan 2018 17:31:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924241 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924241 Good point, Cedric. It reminds me of the video where Dr. Puentedura explains the SAMR model, and whether we are merely replicating traditional methods with technology or really working to modify and redefine. Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:32:43 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93677?scroll_to=924047 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93677?scroll_to=924047 Currently in my online Freshman English class, I augment peer review in an online discussion that we would do in the in-class environment. Students post their essays on the discussion board and respond to two others addressing specific questions. I am thinking that using something like Google Docs might allow for more interaction with the students. I am struggling a little bit to come up with ideas for how to significantly modify this type of writing assignment so it would not merely be replicating what is done in the in-class environment. Dr Puentedura's example of geography was understandable, but writing seems to be a different animal. With peer review, rather than just responding to two others answering specific questions, maybe the assignment could require more collaboration between writers and Google Docs could be used as the tool to do so. Sun, 21 Jan 2018 17:31:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924031 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924031 That was my thought, George. To really understand these concepts, I would think that teachers would need specific examples that would illustrate each point. Sun, 21 Jan 2018 10:19:00 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924030 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924030 Good point, Ben. I would think that constructivists would really work to develop grit in students so that they could become more active and self-regulated learners. However, I think ideas such as this are not as widespread, particularly in K-12 where the expectation is that teachers and the environment are responsible for what the student learns, not the student and his or her grit, if you will. Sun, 21 Jan 2018 10:17:25 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924029 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924029 This assumes that teachers know how to measure each of these engagement indicators. Sun, 21 Jan 2018 10:10:36 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924028 https://nowcomment.com/documents/93672?scroll_to=924028 The assumption here is that students learn only socially, not in isolation. Sun, 21 Jan 2018 10:09:45 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92741?scroll_to=918293 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92741?scroll_to=918293 I would also go back to a point that I realized on our other discussion--students' interest and its relation to motivation and learning. This tool also provides the instructor with good information about how the student is progressing, and it gives him/her the ability to intervene. Sun, 14 Jan 2018 19:12:36 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918272 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918272 I cannot help but think about last semester and student motivation. To gain that kind of quality motivation, students have to be interested. Maybe that is what technology helps us to do--get students interested. We have been focusing a lot on good teaching and how technology intertwines, but even with the best teaching methods and greatest technology, if students are not interested and thus motivated, they will not learn. Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:38:52 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918268 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918268 While reading through this set of responses, I wondered that same thing. Learning is not just gaining a repository of information. It seems to me that it is the "over time" aspect of it that makes it meaningful and worthwhile. There is a current push in my area for all high school students to have an associates degree before they graduate from high school--all designed to help with the cost of college. Sun, 14 Jan 2018 18:56:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918266 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918266 That is exactly what I was thinking George. The rate at which technology becomes obsolete is staggering and it seems to be growing every day. And this does certainly affect productivity and cost. Sun, 14 Jan 2018 18:54:09 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918253 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=918253 Hi Dr. Troy, Well, I think some of the downfall had to do with first of all students' attitudes towards the implementation of this system. Their perception (and I only know secondhand) was that it was a cheaper alternative to having a teacher, and I think they felt somewhat jilted by that. There was the assumption by the administration that students would just be able to log into the program and complete the activities. Further, the assumption is made that it is somehow "better" to have more technology. Then, there is the assumption that it can easily replace teaching. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:53 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914779 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914779 Specifically in my setting, I see that part of the problem has to do with not training instructors how to use technology to teach--so perhaps it is more of a professional development issue. There is the thought that just placing a computer and smart board in the classroom satisfies the need for using technology, but there are various degrees of instructor use--some shown to be very effective, others shown to be very ineffective. So, Cuban's point about lack of money and instructors who are not prepared is in line with my experience as to why computers and telecommunications are not used, or maybe I should say used well. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:52 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914778 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914778 In the realm of higher education, I think this element was definitely the push in the early to mid 90's. I think it is tough to say across the board what is happening now because the institution that I attended and earned my degrees in the early 2000s was certainly like the description of the scenario--computer labs everywhere, seminar rooms etc. However, where I currently work, there is limited technology available, very old computers etc. because money is so difficult to come by. We have an entirely new administration who sees the need to bolster the technological aspects, and who (after reading this article) I would identify as technophiles. I think where we have changed today is that we have to integrate technology into our teaching because that is where students are at. Our courses just began Monday, and I am teaching two online courses. They are beginning writing classes, and typically, I have a hard time getting students to respond. I decided to try something different, and I used the Doodle Poll, and the response was unbelievable. So in many ways, I see us as needing to be electronic schools as described by Cuban. Wed, 10 Jan 2018 21:55:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914765 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914765 I agree with your point about the workplace impulse. I can remember when I started college everyone had to take Intro to Computers to teach students how to use the computer. A few years ago at my institution, they did away with that requirement. Today, it seems that that impulse is not as needed as it was in the past---it is rare to find a person who needs tutelage on computer use, and with the ease of operation of computers, it is likely not necessary except for more advanced functions. Have a great day! Wed, 10 Jan 2018 05:54:14 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914761 https://nowcomment.com/documents/92739?scroll_to=914761 I cannot remember my own K-12 experience, but my daughter graduated May 2017, and I can think of many examples from my children's experiences that would demonstrate all three of these impulses. In regard to the third--productivity--and in light of many of the budget constraints schools in our area face, there is a definite push to find ways to make learning more efficient and save money. One of the ways in which this push manifest itself in my daughter's high school was the decision to not have a teacher teach Spanish; instead, they decision was made to have an teaching aide in the room while students worked through a Spanish program (I am sorry that I can't recall its name). It was disastrous. Students grades plummeted, and panic ensued. I agree with the questions Cuban brings up regarding the marginal use of computers in the classroom. Have a good day everyone. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:35:52 -0500