Technology standards are currently so broad and all-embracing that embedding them into a semester of Science was a natural fit. I think this reflects the fact that the tech standards define themselves as tools for a set of skills that are universal (as far as education is concerned).
For example, communication is a standard that probably exists in every content area. In the case of science, communication is one of the important parts. After all, it's been said scientific research is worth very little if it isn't communicated to others. So meeting the communication standard of technology is easy. The added bonus of blogs and similar technology is that students can communicate their experiments to others who have not witnessed their experiments. In my current classroom, communication is somewhat artificial because the students and I conduct the same experiment and all know what our results. My hope is that by communicating with a classroom of students who were not involved in the same experiment, their communication becomes more authentic. I would hope students to see what it means to explain procedures and results clearly and why it's necessary.
The standard of collaboration was also an easy fit for science experiments and one that seems applicable to many school assignments. 6th grade science is not an one-student affair. Students work with a partner to conduct experiments. Linking two classrooms with blogs allows my students to solicit feedback about hypotheses and experimental designs from other students with different perspectives. Collaboration in 6th grade science has a chance to expand outside the classroom walls.
Ultimately, embedding a technology standard into a non-technology course is as natural as embedding a standard about students using language (e.g. how to explain, persuade, etc.) into any course besides English. Technology, or language, gets used across the curriculum regularly without standards being identified, because technology or language is a tool. The technology standards are written in a way that makes them easy to identify as being used in a content area classroom.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Managing Technology Peripherals
Aside from the SmartBoard, my most frequently used technology peripherals (from the perspective of the Tech and Info literacy) are cameras and cell phones, which I use with my students for identical purposes--taking pictures and capturing video. It turns out students these days are likely to have cameras on their cell phones, which has been a great help, since students are not as likely to leave their cell phones at home as they might their digital cameras. Students also won't have parents worrying about them taking the family camera to school.
As with all technology devices, there are some details that I have learned to be aware of while using cameras and cell phones.
1. In general, transfering the pictures/videos to computers can be a hassle.
A. Often these devices store data on memory cards. Computers need card readers to be able to access this data. Sometimes the memory card does not fit the card reader, but students have fortunately turned up with adapters. In either case, a test is necessary because some computers cannot read the data even when they "see" the memory card. Other times students need cables to transfer the data from their camera/cell phone to computers.
B. There are similar issues with the data, but the need for a cable requires students to keep track of one more item besides their camera/cell phone. Ideally, all phones will eventually connect to the internet at which point images/videos can be posted directly online or emailed.
2. On many cell phones, image quality is an issue when a video is used on a computer. I've seen videos that looked spectacular on a cell phone turn to a jerky, accelerated, pixelated mess. We didn't make much of an effort to fix this problem, just tried transfering it a few different ways, none of which made a difference. Fortunately, there are many cell phones that work fine, and I expect they will only improve with time.
Areas where I have not focused as much time with peripherals are the typical class management areas. Typical class management that one would associate with any piece of class equipment, for example, a technology peripheral before computers had the monopoly on the word technology. A microscopes is the main one I use through science class. And every teacher knows that class management specifies all sorts of appropriate procedures for the use of such equipment: proper usage, storage, maintenance, etc. In the case of cell phones and digital cameras, my use has been casual and that has led to occasional chaos regarding who has whose memory card, cable, adapter, etc. It's time I used appropriate procedures for the use of equipment with which students are so familiar.
It's also about time I fully integrated a document camera into my teaching. It replaces the overhead projector and allows students to display their paper directly to the class without the use of plastic transparencies. ISBangkok has purchased some for the teachers and I have one at my disposal. Jonothan Steenwijk, fellow ISB teacher and COETAILer, blogges about the power of his in his math lessons. It is a low maintenance peripheral with relatively simple management since students barely touch it. I imagine that I only need to set it up, and after that there would be no further management issues. Hopefully, when I blog again, I will have already integrated it to my lessons.
As with all technology devices, there are some details that I have learned to be aware of while using cameras and cell phones.
1. In general, transfering the pictures/videos to computers can be a hassle.
A. Often these devices store data on memory cards. Computers need card readers to be able to access this data. Sometimes the memory card does not fit the card reader, but students have fortunately turned up with adapters. In either case, a test is necessary because some computers cannot read the data even when they "see" the memory card. Other times students need cables to transfer the data from their camera/cell phone to computers.
B. There are similar issues with the data, but the need for a cable requires students to keep track of one more item besides their camera/cell phone. Ideally, all phones will eventually connect to the internet at which point images/videos can be posted directly online or emailed.
2. On many cell phones, image quality is an issue when a video is used on a computer. I've seen videos that looked spectacular on a cell phone turn to a jerky, accelerated, pixelated mess. We didn't make much of an effort to fix this problem, just tried transfering it a few different ways, none of which made a difference. Fortunately, there are many cell phones that work fine, and I expect they will only improve with time.
Areas where I have not focused as much time with peripherals are the typical class management areas. Typical class management that one would associate with any piece of class equipment, for example, a technology peripheral before computers had the monopoly on the word technology. A microscopes is the main one I use through science class. And every teacher knows that class management specifies all sorts of appropriate procedures for the use of such equipment: proper usage, storage, maintenance, etc. In the case of cell phones and digital cameras, my use has been casual and that has led to occasional chaos regarding who has whose memory card, cable, adapter, etc. It's time I used appropriate procedures for the use of equipment with which students are so familiar.
It's also about time I fully integrated a document camera into my teaching. It replaces the overhead projector and allows students to display their paper directly to the class without the use of plastic transparencies. ISBangkok has purchased some for the teachers and I have one at my disposal. Jonothan Steenwijk, fellow ISB teacher and COETAILer, blogges about the power of his in his math lessons. It is a low maintenance peripheral with relatively simple management since students barely touch it. I imagine that I only need to set it up, and after that there would be no further management issues. Hopefully, when I blog again, I will have already integrated it to my lessons.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Classroom Laptop Use & A Best Practice to Add
Laptop carts are a classic case of an area where students might accumulate, linger and get rowdy. With each cart being accessible to realistically only two students at a time (even that many constitute a crowd), when more than two students try to get laptops from the cart, there is inevitably conflict. I should say that I'm speaking of 6th and 7th graders. To minimize crowding and potential conflict, I ask that students take turns to collect laptops, with students waiting until the group before them has collected their computers.
With my students, there are also issues of proper care, so I have assigned them a number which corresponds to a computer on a particular cart. Students know that they are accountable for their particular computer and if theirs is not properly stored or located, they will have to check the entire cart before leaving on the following day.
As we at ISBangkok are not a one-to-one school regarding computers, we share the carts between classrooms. Often computers arrive non-functional or without a charged battery. Sometimes one computer's wireless card isn't working. Sometimes one computer does not load a student's profile. Rather than solve the problem by asking students to double up, I make sure to have extra computers on hand so that a student can use a back-up computer if necessary. I'd say that the need for extra computers comes up at least once each class.
Beyond these basic practices of mine, I've gotten some new ideas from a blog post at Design 4 Learning called 23 Things about Classroom Laptops. One has been to not use labtops like textbooks. When I've done some writing activities, I've asked students to use a Word Document because I feel they spend more time and give the writing more care than if they handwrite it. But I'm missing out on the opportunity for students to include images, videos and links to various related websites. In other words, I've been using the laptop a bit like a textbook, when I should be maximizing it's usage and letting kids "go digital," which would no doubt be more engaging to them. I could imagine that a student would take more pride and more stake in the writing portion of an assignment if they were generally more motivated in the assignment because it included multimedia.
With my students, there are also issues of proper care, so I have assigned them a number which corresponds to a computer on a particular cart. Students know that they are accountable for their particular computer and if theirs is not properly stored or located, they will have to check the entire cart before leaving on the following day.
As we at ISBangkok are not a one-to-one school regarding computers, we share the carts between classrooms. Often computers arrive non-functional or without a charged battery. Sometimes one computer's wireless card isn't working. Sometimes one computer does not load a student's profile. Rather than solve the problem by asking students to double up, I make sure to have extra computers on hand so that a student can use a back-up computer if necessary. I'd say that the need for extra computers comes up at least once each class.
Beyond these basic practices of mine, I've gotten some new ideas from a blog post at Design 4 Learning called 23 Things about Classroom Laptops. One has been to not use labtops like textbooks. When I've done some writing activities, I've asked students to use a Word Document because I feel they spend more time and give the writing more care than if they handwrite it. But I'm missing out on the opportunity for students to include images, videos and links to various related websites. In other words, I've been using the laptop a bit like a textbook, when I should be maximizing it's usage and letting kids "go digital," which would no doubt be more engaging to them. I could imagine that a student would take more pride and more stake in the writing portion of an assignment if they were generally more motivated in the assignment because it included multimedia.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Relevance of NETs for Teachers and Admins
How relevant are the NETs for Teachers and Administrators to being a "Good Educator" today?
The NETs for Teachers is as general as the NETS for students, in that if you removed the technology piece, those standards could come from an Ed Psych textbook from a teacher prep program. Insert the word digital or technology and you have NETs for Teachers. Few people would argue with their validity.
Who could imagine being a Good Educator without facilitating learning or inspiring creativity? The same is true for authentic learning experiences; modeling the use of a tool or a skill; citizenship or responsibility; and professional growth. This list comes directly from the NETs for Teachers.
As in the NETs for Students, technology is a cross-curricular vehicle for these qualities of a good educator.
I haven't read any literature on educational administration, but once again, the list of NETs for Administrators reads like a commonly-accepted list of qualities of good administrators: vision, a culture of learning, professional learning, school improvement, and citizenship. Just insert technology and you have good DIGITAL qualities of administrators. Would anybody argue with those?
Honestly, NETs almost seem too simple to be Earth shattering. Technology has always been a tool/means for humans to meet objectives. I don't believe NETs is proposing anything new in that respect. ISTE seems to be steering clear from the fact that educational technology is an end in itself. It's just the most current means to achieve the ends that education deems appropriate. Am I missing something here?
The NETs for Teachers is as general as the NETS for students, in that if you removed the technology piece, those standards could come from an Ed Psych textbook from a teacher prep program. Insert the word digital or technology and you have NETs for Teachers. Few people would argue with their validity.
Who could imagine being a Good Educator without facilitating learning or inspiring creativity? The same is true for authentic learning experiences; modeling the use of a tool or a skill; citizenship or responsibility; and professional growth. This list comes directly from the NETs for Teachers.
As in the NETs for Students, technology is a cross-curricular vehicle for these qualities of a good educator.
I haven't read any literature on educational administration, but once again, the list of NETs for Administrators reads like a commonly-accepted list of qualities of good administrators: vision, a culture of learning, professional learning, school improvement, and citizenship. Just insert technology and you have good DIGITAL qualities of administrators. Would anybody argue with those?
Honestly, NETs almost seem too simple to be Earth shattering. Technology has always been a tool/means for humans to meet objectives. I don't believe NETs is proposing anything new in that respect. ISTE seems to be steering clear from the fact that educational technology is an end in itself. It's just the most current means to achieve the ends that education deems appropriate. Am I missing something here?
Friday, November 27, 2009
Ensuring students are learning the tech and info lit they need
How can teachers and schools ensure that their students are learning what they need when it comes to Technology and Information Literacy?
I'll start with the idea that the "What they need" about Tech and Info Lit is defined by the IETS and AASL standards, which is the use of current technology for general skills that are found in all subject areas. I'll also draw from my current experience which is at International School Bangkok.
1. Give teachers time and training to use it themselves, so their use with students will be based on their own authentic use. A good example of this is the series of ISB Certificate of Educational Technology and Information Literacy courses.
2. Embed the use of tech into the school at the teacher and admin level, for example, online learning environments like a Moodle (ISB's version is PantherNet), for teachers to post and share course work. Another example would be web-based Office products like Google Apps, which include Gmail and Google Docs.
3. Give students some room to use the tools they think are relevant. We all know students can teach themselves plenty about technology just by exploring and experimenting with their tech discoveries. An example of that comes from my colleague James Denby. He gave his students the option of making presentations on various applications, such as VuVox, Prezi or one more I can't remember.
Obviously, the particular applications will continue to change over the years, but it will likely advance and become more complex. Exposing students to or allowing them to use current technology will keep them as prepared as possible to use new technology.
I'll start with the idea that the "What they need" about Tech and Info Lit is defined by the IETS and AASL standards, which is the use of current technology for general skills that are found in all subject areas. I'll also draw from my current experience which is at International School Bangkok.
1. Give teachers time and training to use it themselves, so their use with students will be based on their own authentic use. A good example of this is the series of ISB Certificate of Educational Technology and Information Literacy courses.
2. Embed the use of tech into the school at the teacher and admin level, for example, online learning environments like a Moodle (ISB's version is PantherNet), for teachers to post and share course work. Another example would be web-based Office products like Google Apps, which include Gmail and Google Docs.
3. Give students some room to use the tools they think are relevant. We all know students can teach themselves plenty about technology just by exploring and experimenting with their tech discoveries. An example of that comes from my colleague James Denby. He gave his students the option of making presentations on various applications, such as VuVox, Prezi or one more I can't remember.
Obviously, the particular applications will continue to change over the years, but it will likely advance and become more complex. Exposing students to or allowing them to use current technology will keep them as prepared as possible to use new technology.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Teaching NETS and AASL Standards - Whose Job Is It?
At first glance, a question about where standards are taught has an easy answer - in the course where they belong. Take science standards, for example, about scientific inquiry or physical science concepts like Forces and Motion. Nobody would even ask where those standards should be taught. The answer is obviously science class.
But technology standards are not as clear cut as other content standards such as science. Traditionally, one thinks of tech standards as skill specific knowledge. Use Excel. Make a PowerPoint presentation. Etc. But the most recent body of technology standards doesn't sound like that at all.
Take the National Educational Technology Standards whose logo is pictured and hyperlinked below.
The standards from this document read like a general skill set that could be found in any content area.
A look at the Standards for the 21st Century Learner linked through the picture below show the same general skill set.
As a matter of fact, my first reaction was "What do these have to do with tech?"
What becomes clear as you read these standards is that they don't intend to describe technology as a content area, but perhaps more as a method or tool that applies to all content areas through a set of general skills.
As an ESL teacher, I realized this was no different than a holistic view of ESL as being the use of language across the content areas. Language is a method or tool to apply to any content area. It is used in every content area, and often specifically taught specifically as it applies to certain content areas, for example, science and the genre of lab/research reports. Few people would fail to see the applicability of language to a content area. The dream of ESL teachers is that content area teachers teach and use the language of their discipline to all their students. It is in fact the ideal context for the development of language. Pulling students out of their classes to teach them language is the same thing as removing language from its context.
I'd have to guess that it would be the dream of tech coordinators for content teachers to use and teach technology in the content areas. By analogy with ESL, I would agree that embedding technology into the content areas and teaching and using it in that context is the way to go. In other words, it's not just the job of tech teachers to teach teach, it's content teachers' job too.
But technology standards are not as clear cut as other content standards such as science. Traditionally, one thinks of tech standards as skill specific knowledge. Use Excel. Make a PowerPoint presentation. Etc. But the most recent body of technology standards doesn't sound like that at all.
Take the National Educational Technology Standards whose logo is pictured and hyperlinked below.
The standards from this document read like a general skill set that could be found in any content area.
A look at the Standards for the 21st Century Learner linked through the picture below show the same general skill set.
As a matter of fact, my first reaction was "What do these have to do with tech?"
What becomes clear as you read these standards is that they don't intend to describe technology as a content area, but perhaps more as a method or tool that applies to all content areas through a set of general skills.
As an ESL teacher, I realized this was no different than a holistic view of ESL as being the use of language across the content areas. Language is a method or tool to apply to any content area. It is used in every content area, and often specifically taught specifically as it applies to certain content areas, for example, science and the genre of lab/research reports. Few people would fail to see the applicability of language to a content area. The dream of ESL teachers is that content area teachers teach and use the language of their discipline to all their students. It is in fact the ideal context for the development of language. Pulling students out of their classes to teach them language is the same thing as removing language from its context.
I'd have to guess that it would be the dream of tech coordinators for content teachers to use and teach technology in the content areas. By analogy with ESL, I would agree that embedding technology into the content areas and teaching and using it in that context is the way to go. In other words, it's not just the job of tech teachers to teach teach, it's content teachers' job too.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Final Project Reflection
Being introduced to a new technology, namely Photo Story 3, I thought of retrying a project in EAP Math/Science (an ESL support class) that I had done last year using Movie Maker. The idea was to prepare students for a difficult text they would face in their mainstream Science class. They jigsawed the text by each making a digital story for a few sentences from the article and then watched the combined digital stories before embarking on a solo read. Using Movie Maker turned out to be overkill and more complicated than necessary. It was also too time-consuming to ask students to learn the technology and make a digital story for as much text as we gave them.
When introduced to Photo Story 3, I knew it was the simpler technology I was looking for. I also had the luxury of having more students this year and being able to divide the text into smaller segments. But I realized that the text was still too long, so I took it upon myself to make the example digital story from the first third of the article.
I also decided to try and apply my recent Zen-ization of Power Point slides to use as images in my digital story. This added an extra level of complexity, because instead of just importing images into Photo Story 3 and using the built-in text editor to add text, I made the Zen-ified slides and added text in Power Point, then exported each slide as an individual .jpeg image file. (Is there an easier way to do this?) Even though this was more complex, it meant I could design the slides to be more Zen than they might have been if I had designed them in Photo Story 3. I also used this opportunity to do two additional things. First, I was able to model giving credit to images from Flickr or anywhere else. And second, I made some screen casts to cover the various procedures involved in the technology. Here's one of those.
Making such a long digital story myself with carefully designed slides in Power Point and proper URL citations gave me a lot of perspective on what students would have to do. Over the course of two COETAIL class afternoon work sessions and one afternoon in a coffee shop, I think I logged about 6 hours of time making a nearly 4 minute digital story. The bulk of that time was actually spent making Power Point slides. Once I had the slides, importing them into Photo Story and recording my voice was a fairly quick. Photo Story was simple to figure out on my first time to use it. I ended up using almost 50 slides in the story, including some text-only slides. No kidding that making a presentation more Zen makes presenations longer. Unbelievable. But probably the most visually pleasing and helpful bunch of slides I've ever made. I'm not sure I would ever want to spend 6 hours again though. A shorter model would do the job just as well.
As for the students, the digital story making took 4 periods on average. Some students finished in 3, but others needed another period. Although the students needed one to two days to design their slides, I'd say the new-technology-learning-curve factor added an extra day or two as well. That included showing some students how to use Power Point and all students how to use Photo Story 3, and even some how to uplode their files to PantherNet, ISB's version of Moodle. Students learned or at least were exposed to a lot of technology. Most of them picked it up quickly. We had a major technology hurdle with the voice recordings and microphone settings. Even with some tech support, it was still a bit of a mystery as to when the voice would be recorded loud enough to be heard in the published digital story. About half the times it was and half the times it wasn't. Because we didn't have access to the same computers on different days, one day's settings would not carry over to the next.
When I saw the students' final stories, I was impressed by the students more Zen slides. Absent were the usual dull bullet lists of point after point after point. Images took the center stage. I was also impressed by some particularly creative students who drew their own digital images using some program like Paint to capture difficult concepts that they couldn't find photos or other images for. I'm not sure if I was blinded by the charming creativity of the young artists, but I'd be willing to bet that the students graphic interpretations of the concepts were better than using someone else's images. This is an interesting return to student art for concepts, but now in digital form. It hadn't even occurred to me that students could still make drawings on their computers.
Ultimately, using Photo Story 3 was better than Movie Maker. Much simpler. The ultimate product of the jigsaw activity could be compiled and viewed as a whole. A traditional jigsaw for the same length article would have been hard pressed to compile so many different parts for viewing in a whole. However, the technology element reduced the direct student interaction that characterizes traditional jigsaws. Students worked individually, although they could have worked in pairs. As a matter of fact, when a few students finished early, I put them in pairs to create a second digital story. In this case, the students interacted extensively. So the trade off doesn't necessarily justify replacing a traditional jigsaw with a digital one, but perhaps supplementing it. If students were "fluent" in the technology and didn't need to practice it independently, they could work in pairs and interact more in this manner. For the purposes of comparison, a traditional jigsaw would have taken about half the time, I'd estimate. Hopefully, the gap between the traditional and digital methods will decrease with time as the student become more and more proficient.
When introduced to Photo Story 3, I knew it was the simpler technology I was looking for. I also had the luxury of having more students this year and being able to divide the text into smaller segments. But I realized that the text was still too long, so I took it upon myself to make the example digital story from the first third of the article.
I also decided to try and apply my recent Zen-ization of Power Point slides to use as images in my digital story. This added an extra level of complexity, because instead of just importing images into Photo Story 3 and using the built-in text editor to add text, I made the Zen-ified slides and added text in Power Point, then exported each slide as an individual .jpeg image file. (Is there an easier way to do this?) Even though this was more complex, it meant I could design the slides to be more Zen than they might have been if I had designed them in Photo Story 3. I also used this opportunity to do two additional things. First, I was able to model giving credit to images from Flickr or anywhere else. And second, I made some screen casts to cover the various procedures involved in the technology. Here's one of those.
Making such a long digital story myself with carefully designed slides in Power Point and proper URL citations gave me a lot of perspective on what students would have to do. Over the course of two COETAIL class afternoon work sessions and one afternoon in a coffee shop, I think I logged about 6 hours of time making a nearly 4 minute digital story. The bulk of that time was actually spent making Power Point slides. Once I had the slides, importing them into Photo Story and recording my voice was a fairly quick. Photo Story was simple to figure out on my first time to use it. I ended up using almost 50 slides in the story, including some text-only slides. No kidding that making a presentation more Zen makes presenations longer. Unbelievable. But probably the most visually pleasing and helpful bunch of slides I've ever made. I'm not sure I would ever want to spend 6 hours again though. A shorter model would do the job just as well.
As for the students, the digital story making took 4 periods on average. Some students finished in 3, but others needed another period. Although the students needed one to two days to design their slides, I'd say the new-technology-learning-curve factor added an extra day or two as well. That included showing some students how to use Power Point and all students how to use Photo Story 3, and even some how to uplode their files to PantherNet, ISB's version of Moodle. Students learned or at least were exposed to a lot of technology. Most of them picked it up quickly. We had a major technology hurdle with the voice recordings and microphone settings. Even with some tech support, it was still a bit of a mystery as to when the voice would be recorded loud enough to be heard in the published digital story. About half the times it was and half the times it wasn't. Because we didn't have access to the same computers on different days, one day's settings would not carry over to the next.
When I saw the students' final stories, I was impressed by the students more Zen slides. Absent were the usual dull bullet lists of point after point after point. Images took the center stage. I was also impressed by some particularly creative students who drew their own digital images using some program like Paint to capture difficult concepts that they couldn't find photos or other images for. I'm not sure if I was blinded by the charming creativity of the young artists, but I'd be willing to bet that the students graphic interpretations of the concepts were better than using someone else's images. This is an interesting return to student art for concepts, but now in digital form. It hadn't even occurred to me that students could still make drawings on their computers.
Ultimately, using Photo Story 3 was better than Movie Maker. Much simpler. The ultimate product of the jigsaw activity could be compiled and viewed as a whole. A traditional jigsaw for the same length article would have been hard pressed to compile so many different parts for viewing in a whole. However, the technology element reduced the direct student interaction that characterizes traditional jigsaws. Students worked individually, although they could have worked in pairs. As a matter of fact, when a few students finished early, I put them in pairs to create a second digital story. In this case, the students interacted extensively. So the trade off doesn't necessarily justify replacing a traditional jigsaw with a digital one, but perhaps supplementing it. If students were "fluent" in the technology and didn't need to practice it independently, they could work in pairs and interact more in this manner. For the purposes of comparison, a traditional jigsaw would have taken about half the time, I'd estimate. Hopefully, the gap between the traditional and digital methods will decrease with time as the student become more and more proficient.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)