Week 4 Reflection

            The readings this week covered quite diverse topics:  cooperative learning, professional development, “fair” assessment, technology integration.  Judging from the discussion boards, these are topics that most of the class feels very strongly about.  “Giving the same written test to all students is neither fair nor accurate.” (Rose & Meyer, 2002)  This quote elicited a large number of comments.  The point was made that fair does not necessarily mean equal.  Students of different learning styles and levels need different teaching methods because they face different academic barriers to learning.  Ongoing assessments that support differences in the three learning networks will make it possible to give a fairer, accurate assessment of students’ learning.  Unfortunately, standardized tests do not provide the supports many of these students need, and teachers have no choice where standardized tests are concerned.

         Professional development was another important topic covered in the readings this week, regarding technology integration into instruction.  It seems from the research in the book Web 2.0: new tools, new schools  (Solomon & Schrum, 2007), many of the professional development methods used are ineffective.  Administrative support for a technology program is vital, as is positive support from the teachers themselves. “Once the goal of enhancing teaching and learning through technology is agreed upon, there are many ways to accomplish it.  One of the most successful is to use the technology to learn how to use the technology, or some might say, not just talk the talk, but truly walk the walk.” (Solomon & Schrum, 2007, p. 111)  I feel like this exactly describes the method we have been using in these classes.  Sometimes I get so frustrated trying to figure out how to use a program; I think to myself, “How can I use this to teach children when I can’t even figure it out?”  Then it all comes together.  When I stop and look back at where I was in my technology knowledge when I started this program, and where I am now, I realize that I have come so far and learned so much.  During the first course I actually spent hours trying to get my name at the top of a paper (duh, header!) and line things up on the page.  Another source of frustration came during the very first week when I could not add my name and e-mail address to the Cohort document.  My daughter listened to me fuss for a couple of days, then finally walked over to the computer, looked at it, laughed, and said, “It helps if you sign in, Mom.”  Now I know how to use Google documents, make digital movies, and e-books.  I’ve come a long way in less than a year.  As frustrating as “using the technology to learn how to use the technology” can be, it is the method that works for me. 

References:

Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Chapter 7. Available online at the Center for Applied Special Technology Website. Retrieved March 23, 2012 from http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes/

Solomon, G., and Schrum, L. (2007).Web 2.0: new tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.