This paper, prepared for publication in a professional journal, makes the point that through well-designed used of video, learning outcomes can be better identified and achieved. The authors go on to provide research to support the value inherent in the use of visuals to enhance learning. The examples used are certainly valuable and well thought out; the authors are correct in every case cited. The value of well-designed video in learning is unquestioned.
I did have two issues with this article: First, it is written like a third-year undergraduate research paper, with too much use of pronouns and short, repetitive sentences. I was surprised at this level of writing being published; the message was hard to decipher. They took 25 pages to gives us three pages of information.
Second, the authors decry the lack of research on the use of designed video for classroom or learning use. As a teaching tool, video in some form has been around for 60 years or more, from the days of filmstrips and 8mm short features to the modern student-produced, studio-polished masterpieces we see now. I daresay the use of video in learning is better researched than the authors would lead us to believe. At least they included the research from my favorite learning theorist, Albert Bandura.
In many ways, this article states the obvious. The authors do provide a matrix to identify the steps that depend on each desired outcome, but the matrix is not intuitive, at least not in the circular form they used. As a learning tool itself I found this article wanting.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Friday, April 1, 2011
Do Web 2.0 Right - L&L
Article - Do Web 2.0 Right by Daniel Light, PhD. Learning and Leading with Technology. February 2011
The author starts with the premise that "Web 2.0 tools, such as wikis and blogs, are a great way to get students engaged and motivated to practice their writing skills." It's something we've heard for years, but Light demonstrates the best practices by people already successfully incorporating these tools.
Light listed three best practices:
1. Instituting daily practice
2. Carefully considering the audience
3. Teaching and enforcing appropriate behavior
The daily practice of effective users is just what it sounds like - the teachers don't just assign it as a special project, they incorporate into the daily classroom practice, with blogs (both student and classroom) being the primary tool. Users find that it frees up communication between students, teachers and each other because of the less-threatening private nature and the better consideration given to the postings, as opposed to the more spontaneous and intimidating classroom.
Effective 2.0 users also designed systems for the intended audience as opposed to a broader one. Blogs are student-centered and use the language they use, and students are directed toward the proper resources. As additional needs arose, system access could be easily widened.
Finally, appropriate behavior is taught, modeled, and enforced. These users built true learning communities in which this technology plays a key role., so all participants are mutually supportive. Use of the tools was fully understood and regularly used, so proper communication became a natural part of the process.
What he really found was that effective users of Web 2.0 tools plan out and execute the process, making it a key component of their classroom practice. Their success is no accident; they use it every day and become expert. Teachers who want to accomplish the same ends must do the same.
The author starts with the premise that "Web 2.0 tools, such as wikis and blogs, are a great way to get students engaged and motivated to practice their writing skills." It's something we've heard for years, but Light demonstrates the best practices by people already successfully incorporating these tools.
Light listed three best practices:
1. Instituting daily practice
2. Carefully considering the audience
3. Teaching and enforcing appropriate behavior
The daily practice of effective users is just what it sounds like - the teachers don't just assign it as a special project, they incorporate into the daily classroom practice, with blogs (both student and classroom) being the primary tool. Users find that it frees up communication between students, teachers and each other because of the less-threatening private nature and the better consideration given to the postings, as opposed to the more spontaneous and intimidating classroom.
Effective 2.0 users also designed systems for the intended audience as opposed to a broader one. Blogs are student-centered and use the language they use, and students are directed toward the proper resources. As additional needs arose, system access could be easily widened.
Finally, appropriate behavior is taught, modeled, and enforced. These users built true learning communities in which this technology plays a key role., so all participants are mutually supportive. Use of the tools was fully understood and regularly used, so proper communication became a natural part of the process.
What he really found was that effective users of Web 2.0 tools plan out and execute the process, making it a key component of their classroom practice. Their success is no accident; they use it every day and become expert. Teachers who want to accomplish the same ends must do the same.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Scaffolding math learning with spreadsheets
This article by Margaret Niess (Learning & Leading with Technology, Volume 32, Number 5) is one of the best and simplest explanations I have seen regarding the use of spreadsheets in math education. Easy to use problems with well-explained rationale are presented. Dr. Niess illustrates how having students use formula functions in a spreadsheet not only enhances their understanding of the subject matter, but also uses NETS-S standards to enhance their use of technology.
Having taught many Excel classes, I try to get the students to think like the computer. Writing the formula in the proper way requires linear understanding. I especially liked her explanation of absolute versus relative values when copying formulas. The years of having students write out long lists of computations are past - spreadsheet programs are here for that reason, and learning to use them gives the students solid preparation for working life. Employers don't care if you can do math in your head - they care if you can solve a problem correctly.
I think all math teachers should read and heed this article.
Having taught many Excel classes, I try to get the students to think like the computer. Writing the formula in the proper way requires linear understanding. I especially liked her explanation of absolute versus relative values when copying formulas. The years of having students write out long lists of computations are past - spreadsheet programs are here for that reason, and learning to use them gives the students solid preparation for working life. Employers don't care if you can do math in your head - they care if you can solve a problem correctly.
I think all math teachers should read and heed this article.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
A New K-12 Computer Science Curriculum - L & L, April 2004
At first, I thought a seven-year-old article on computer science in schools would be hopelessly outdated and quaint. Not so - the author, Allen Tucker, presents a case for the teaching of computer science that retains its currency even now.
Basically, the author make the case that it's not enough to use the digital resources we have. What is needed is a core curriculum that progressively builds the knowledge base of all students, whether destined for a computer science career or not. It is no longer possible to enter a career without at least rudimentary knowledge of computers and their use. In his view, all need to use them, some need to design them, others need to run them. And we need to train them all.
Tucker lays out a good foundation for structuring such a curriculum, outlines the importance of each step, and defines the commitments necessary to fully implement such a curriculum, not the least of which is money and resources. One personal experience brought this message home for me this week when I taught a high school Excel class. The students were learning Excel 2003 - two iterations outdated - on computers running on Windows XP, also outdated by Vista and Windows 7. The class was an elective, nowhere near a requirement, and the learning was extremely elementary and worksheet-based. By that point in their academic careers, the students should have been able to design relational databases from scratch. Even now, technology is not taken seriously enough.
Basically, the author make the case that it's not enough to use the digital resources we have. What is needed is a core curriculum that progressively builds the knowledge base of all students, whether destined for a computer science career or not. It is no longer possible to enter a career without at least rudimentary knowledge of computers and their use. In his view, all need to use them, some need to design them, others need to run them. And we need to train them all.
Tucker lays out a good foundation for structuring such a curriculum, outlines the importance of each step, and defines the commitments necessary to fully implement such a curriculum, not the least of which is money and resources. One personal experience brought this message home for me this week when I taught a high school Excel class. The students were learning Excel 2003 - two iterations outdated - on computers running on Windows XP, also outdated by Vista and Windows 7. The class was an elective, nowhere near a requirement, and the learning was extremely elementary and worksheet-based. By that point in their academic careers, the students should have been able to design relational databases from scratch. Even now, technology is not taken seriously enough.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Digital Edition: Shifting The Landscape
It's funny how almost anything published about technology is dated or outdated as soon as it comes out. The points raised in this August 2009 article seem so quaint since it has all come to pass and alreadyt been update, yet the authors do make some solid points.
I especially liked the concept of fabrication on demand. The content sits on a server somewhere and only turns into a "book" when someone orders it. The current generation of e-readers and pad computers can hold thousands of these books, and do not even require an Internet connection if equipped with 3G or 4G connectivity. I have purchased e-books while at the airport by pushing three buttons, and my Kindle is a lot easier to carry than even a small paperback. Imagine a student carrying a single e-reader instead of 40 pounds of books.
It remains to be seen how this movement proceeds in the textbook arena. Digital publication allows for instantaneous updating, but there is a large commitment to physical textbooks at every level of the educational infrastructure. All in all, though, I think the ability to take the library with the individual, rather than the opposite, will be transformational.
I especially liked the concept of fabrication on demand. The content sits on a server somewhere and only turns into a "book" when someone orders it. The current generation of e-readers and pad computers can hold thousands of these books, and do not even require an Internet connection if equipped with 3G or 4G connectivity. I have purchased e-books while at the airport by pushing three buttons, and my Kindle is a lot easier to carry than even a small paperback. Imagine a student carrying a single e-reader instead of 40 pounds of books.
It remains to be seen how this movement proceeds in the textbook arena. Digital publication allows for instantaneous updating, but there is a large commitment to physical textbooks at every level of the educational infrastructure. All in all, though, I think the ability to take the library with the individual, rather than the opposite, will be transformational.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Review - Beginner's Guide to Interactive Virtual Field Trips (Jan Zanetis, Learning and Leading with Technology, March/April 2010)
Virtual field trips (VFTs) have been around for a while, allowing students to experience locales away from the school at little or no cost. Interactive VFTs (IVFTs) take that to the next level and bring active, involved learning into the mix.
Zanetis begins with a description of traditional, asynchronous VFTs, even offering a selection of links to aggregator sites (p. 20). Her description of interactive VFTs outlines the additional advantages these synchronous events bring and the enhanced learning that occurs when students can further engage the presenter, making the experience personal. I was especially impressed by not only her description, but the list of IVFT sites and introduction of the Center for Interactive Learning and Communication (CILC) as a resource for teachers.
I did have one issue with the article, namely that the author jumped into a discussion of the technical considerations at the beginning and did not fully explain the tech requirements. For example, what exactly is a codec, and why is it required over available technology like webcams and existing meeting software? That part of the article took up the first three paragraphs and risked losing the audience before getting into substance. I know what that technology is and I was even confused by her explanation.
Overall, Zanetis makes a good case for IVFTs. There are clear advantages to this kind of learning experience, and she describes those advantages well. IVFTs also meet several NETS-S standards, especially in the areas of communication and collaboration, research and information fluency, and critical thinking. The article should be reprinted in educational publications with a broader audience.
Zanetis begins with a description of traditional, asynchronous VFTs, even offering a selection of links to aggregator sites (p. 20). Her description of interactive VFTs outlines the additional advantages these synchronous events bring and the enhanced learning that occurs when students can further engage the presenter, making the experience personal. I was especially impressed by not only her description, but the list of IVFT sites and introduction of the Center for Interactive Learning and Communication (CILC) as a resource for teachers.
I did have one issue with the article, namely that the author jumped into a discussion of the technical considerations at the beginning and did not fully explain the tech requirements. For example, what exactly is a codec, and why is it required over available technology like webcams and existing meeting software? That part of the article took up the first three paragraphs and risked losing the audience before getting into substance. I know what that technology is and I was even confused by her explanation.
Overall, Zanetis makes a good case for IVFTs. There are clear advantages to this kind of learning experience, and she describes those advantages well. IVFTs also meet several NETS-S standards, especially in the areas of communication and collaboration, research and information fluency, and critical thinking. The article should be reprinted in educational publications with a broader audience.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Speak Up 2009
I just finished reviewing the Speak Up 2009 report, and I must say that it contained pretty much what I expected. Students want to use all sorts of technology in school, but teachers are afraid of distraction and cheating. Without knowing the context of the survey - how the questions were asked - it's hard to draw too many really definitive conclusions.
Student use of technology, as illustrated by the survey, shows that in one way or another they meet virtually every one of the NETS-S standards 1, 2 and 6. The components of standards 3,4, and 5 were not addressed in enough detail to draw any conclusion at all, and a deeper analysis of some of the results shows that there is still a gap between student expertise and broad school application. For example, one result that stood out for me was that although students use electronic communication methods, they do so primarily to talk to friends through text or IM, updating profiles, or commenting on social network sites (p. 5). Students' primary use of electronic resources outside school consist mostly of posting pictures and videos and playing games. Student ideas for using technology in learning may just be giving the expected answer, thus the need for context.
At the same time, schools in general and teachers in particular do not use electronic resources nearly enough. On an anecdotal level, I have taught in a dozen classrooms, and the printed policies of the teachers and behaviors of the students indicate that teachers all too often are still in the desks-in-a-row, students-silently-working-alone mode of instruction. I see a lot of worksheets, in class essays, and silent reading. Except for discussion groups, there appears to be little student engagement and no classroom technology except a projector and document reader. All in all, I see a huge gap between student desires and abilities on the one hand, and teacher willingness to use technology correctly on the other. Technology is not magic, but teachers certainly need to develop a better understanding of its use.
Student use of technology, as illustrated by the survey, shows that in one way or another they meet virtually every one of the NETS-S standards 1, 2 and 6. The components of standards 3,4, and 5 were not addressed in enough detail to draw any conclusion at all, and a deeper analysis of some of the results shows that there is still a gap between student expertise and broad school application. For example, one result that stood out for me was that although students use electronic communication methods, they do so primarily to talk to friends through text or IM, updating profiles, or commenting on social network sites (p. 5). Students' primary use of electronic resources outside school consist mostly of posting pictures and videos and playing games. Student ideas for using technology in learning may just be giving the expected answer, thus the need for context.
At the same time, schools in general and teachers in particular do not use electronic resources nearly enough. On an anecdotal level, I have taught in a dozen classrooms, and the printed policies of the teachers and behaviors of the students indicate that teachers all too often are still in the desks-in-a-row, students-silently-working-alone mode of instruction. I see a lot of worksheets, in class essays, and silent reading. Except for discussion groups, there appears to be little student engagement and no classroom technology except a projector and document reader. All in all, I see a huge gap between student desires and abilities on the one hand, and teacher willingness to use technology correctly on the other. Technology is not magic, but teachers certainly need to develop a better understanding of its use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)