Teaching with Technology has been the most challenging course since the initial course I have taken in this program. The amount of research and writing alone has been prodigious. We were also required to complete a complex group project. Added to the mix is the fact that I have been team leader for this project. Having the responsibility of others’ grades on your shoulders adds a certain amount of stress, but in the long run also provides a level of satisfaction at the end when you are pleased with the group’s project.
It is interesting to me how, with all of the new technology and new education theories I am learning about, some things either do not change, or just come back around, renamed and revamped. Examples of this are the theories of constructivism and connectivism. Years ago, when I was student teaching, it was brought home to me how important it was to provide background knowledge for students, to ask probing questions and to utilize tools such as K-W-L charts. Now this is called constructivism. The root word of constructivism, construct, means to “to make or form by combining or arranging parts or elements: build,” according to the Merriam-Webster (2012) website. It makes sense because when you use the above tools you are building learning; hence, the term “constructivism,” which includes using the above tools with technology. (Sprague & Dede, 1999). Connectivism is a theory I use every day in my classroom, as I teach Social Living across the curriculum, connecting math, language, and reading, with science and social studies. Now I am learning to do so with “technology as a key factor.” (Solomon & Schrum, 2007, p. 40).
Extensive reading was required in this course; some of it has been useful in ways I would not have expected. In The Impact of Education Technology on Student Achievements (Schacter, 1999), it was interesting to read studies conducted over ten years ago, on technology that was considered cutting edge at the time. So much has changed, just in the last five years, let alone over a decade. My two favorite books in this course have been our textbooks, Using technology with classroom instruction that works (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007), and Web 2.0: new tools, new schools (Solomon, & Schrum, 2007). Both of these books are so full of resources, real life situations, and examples of technology integration, I think they will both be two of my major resources on my desk for a long time.
I have learned about many new types of technology in this class. I was familiar with e-books, but I certainly never thought I would be writing one. This amazing technology is already going to solve a dilemma for my first grade colleagues and me. Our state is adopting the CCC Standards next year, and we will have neither textbooks, nor the books on the reading list with which to teach reading. So, e-books may come to our rescue. A few of the books on our list are already in the CAST library site. We will spend the summer making more. Some of the projects we had to complete in this course were very frustrating at the time, but in the end I was always proud of the end product. Solomon & Schrum (2007) make the point,
“One of the most successful [ways to learn to use technology] 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.” (p. 111)
It seems using the technology to learn the technology works best for me. 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. At the beginning, I had trouble with simple Word commands; now I know how to make e-books, digital stories, and Google documents.
One of the most enjoyable aspects of this course has been the collaboration with my group members. They are so creative and knowledgeable; they are very different from me, from different places, with very different lives, but all of our strengths seem to bring out the best in each other. If it works for adults who are set in their ways to some extent, imagine how working collaboratively will benefit children. Professor James Gee perhaps said it best in Big Thinkers: James Paul Gee on Grading with Games,
“Next [in the education system] will be schooling that stresses the
ability to solve problems, but not just to solve problems. To be able
to do it collaboratively. That you could work in a group that is smarter
than the smartest person in the group.”
I am grateful and honored to have been associated with my group members. I look forward to our next adventure in technology.
References:
Construct. (n.d.). Merriam-Webster's online dictionary. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/construct
Edutopia.org (n.d.). Big thinkers: James Paul Gee on grading with games. Retrieved March 30, 2012, from http://www.edutopia.org/digital-generation-james-gee-video
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA; Milken Exchange on Education Technology. Retrieved on March 30, 2012, from http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf
Solomon, G., and Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: new tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Sprague, D., & Dede, C. (1999). If I teach this way, Am I doing my job: Constructivism in the classroom. Leading and Learning, 27(1). Retrieved March 30, 2012 from http://imet.csus.edu/imet9/280/docs/dede_constructivisim.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment