EDU 6250 Blog Post 3: A Learning Object Evaluation Scale for Students

Summary

How do we know which interactive web-based tools are best for our student learning? So many of these tools are quickly popping up and they look so neat, but are they really “enhancing, amplifying and/or guiding the cognitive process of learners?”  This would be part of Kay and Knaack’s definition of a Learning Object.  The other part is “an interactive web-based tool that supports the learning concepts.”  They note most people who evaluate the effectiveness of these learning objects are the ones who develop or design the learning object.  This study, along with other studies, is trying to come up with ways to evaluate how the learning object measures knowledge.  Kay and Knaack’s study created a list of key factors to evaluate with each learning object: interactivity, accessibility, a specific conceptual focus, reusability, meaningful scaffolding, and learning.

Reflection

The data is very complicated and difficult to read.  It also states there needs to be more research before users implement the Learning Object Evaluation Scale for Students, but it does offer some great guidance when evaluating a tool. 

Since learning objects are changing ever so quickly, will we be able to use an evaluation tool and get enough data from students with it before the new version, or the better learning object is out?  Logically, it seems like an evaluation scale would by key to a district. 

A quote that really stuck out to me from this article, “No technology will transform the learning process.  Learning objects are simply tools used in a complex educational environment where decisions on how to use these tools may have considerably more import than the actual tools themselves.” (p.161).  

References

Kay, R. & Knaack, L. (2009). Assessing learning, quality and engagement in learning objects: the Learning Object Evaluation Scale for Students (LOES-S). Educational Technology Research & Development, 57(2), 147-168. Doi:10.1007/s11423-008-9094-5

EDU 6250 Blog Post 2: Teacher Talk

Summary

As most teachers know, it is very demanding to integrate technology into teaching.  Since technology companies want teachers to use their products, they are asking for teams of teachers to be volunteers to help design educational programs.  Through this study they researched teacher conversations and the in-depth meaning to it.  First, they discussed what teacher talk looked like, noting that all conversations are not deep or thought provoking.  When creating a team of teacher designs (TDT) is was important for each individual to be an expert in the common subject matter.  From one sub-study they found out that most teachers draw from their own experiences with designing programs.  Another sub-study found that content knowledge (CK) played a significant role during designing programs.  Moreover, another sub-study found out knowing how and why both experiences and content knowledge play an integral part in designing the program. 

Reflection                                                                                                                          

The findings from the studies seemed to be pretty basic and understandable.   This article brought to light a perspective for me that I never thought of, teachers going into design technology especially for specific apps for them or other teachers to use.  The studies did illustrated that during collaboration it’s important for each person to be a piece to the puzzle, asking tough questions and not automatically agreeing with one right away.

Reference

McKenney, S., Boschman, F., Pieters, J., & Voogt, J. (2016). Collaborative Design of Technology-Enhanced Learning: What can We Learn from Teacher Talk?. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 60(4), 385-391. doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0078-8

EDU 6250 Blog Post 1: Future PD

Summary

 Providing professional development (PD) to all of the teachers in a district has been a problem for many years due to the cost and time.  In recent years studies have also shown that receiving continuous PD is more valuable compared to one-time workshops.  There are many benefits that come from PD- resources, skills, knowledge, and experiences.  Many teachers receive PD from their PLCs, since they are comfortable with sharing new thoughts and ideas.  When trying these new ideas in their classrooms, teachers often times feel more confident and empowered since it comes from a familiar place.  Now, school personnel are realizing learning communities can be expanded outside of each school. 

Since districts cannot afford an individual coach per each set of teachers, these creators are thinking that it may be beneficial having a virtual coach within an online setting to meet the PD needs of the teachers.  This was the beginning of the research which started with a survey to see what teachers would benefit most from a virtual coach.  After the survey and analysis, it seems like the number one reason for a virtual coach would be for resource sharing.  Individuals are looking for resources from news, sharing free lessons and other resources, and technical support especially since education is changing so quickly.  The article also discussed creating a profile to easily find the best materials that are suited for each teacher’s needs.  This research has been insightful to virtual reality coaches, but also technology coaches as well.  To end, more studies need to be conducted and analyzed to bring this PD to (reality).

Reflection

Overall, virtual PD is a great idea.  There are an endless number of resources and social sites available on the web for teachers.  But if something more personalized and more streamlined can be created, I can see more teachers using a tool like this.  Some teachers don’t use social sites or resources sharing tools as PD, so offering a personal coach will help ease some of these fears for teachers who often do not participate on the web for PD.

Reference
Sugar, W., & Tryon, P. (2014). Development of a Virtual Technology Coach to Support    Technology Integration for K-12 Educators. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 58(3), 54-62. doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0752-7

EDU6215 Blog Entry 3 - “Students Pinpoint What They Need” #PersonalizedLearning

Summary

A Georgia school district created a personalized learning plan to apply for the Race to the Top grant.  Unfortunately, they did not receive it, but they kept with their strategy for personalized learning.  Luckily, they were able to still implement their plan and along the way they adjusted to their mistakes.  In the original plan they focused too much on technology for their personalization strategy, and now they use the technology to help individual students make decisions of what they need to work on during their What I Need, WIN, period. 

Students report to their WIN period one day a week after being assigned from teachers and the student’s input.  During WIN students receive customized support, which can be above or below their grade level.  This can be individual assignments or small group work.  Teachers act more as guides and facilitators, rather than lecture to students.  Also, teachers will create or assign each student a “playlist” of activities on the Learning Management System to complete to show mastery. 

In the article, teachers admit this personalized learning strategy can be difficult managing it at first, but eventually students learn how to take ownership over their own learning.  They note it is important for all teachers to have positive thoughts when trying a new program like this.  Lastly, they note that technology should not be at the core of personalized learning.

Reflection

Overall, I am very interested in learning more about this personalized strategy.  To implement something like this it seems like it would take a lot of time and work.  Also, the article was very general when talking about personalized learning activities.  Some questions I have regarding this topic would be: What resources do the teachers use to assign personalized learning assignments during WIN?  What LMS do they use? How much prep time is needed to for teachers to assign these activities to the students?

Reference

CAVANAGH, S. (2016). Student Pinpoint What They Need. Education Week, 36(9), 7-13.

EDU6215 Blog Entry 2 - "Capitalizing on Web 2.0 in the Social Studies Context"

Summary

Like many other subject areas, technology has changed how social studies is taught.  With technology, content can be more hands-on, interactive, and problem-based for learners.  Teachers are able to create lesson that require students to be more active, such as collaborating with peers in the classroom or around the world.  Utilizing technology in social studies lessons help it be student-centered and encourage active student inquiry.

Instead of just consuming information from the web, students can now collaborate and publish and broadcast their own products, i.e. blogs, wiki.  At times this can be at no cost.  This allows students to go beyond an understanding of the content.  It is allowing them to interpret, evaluate, and analyze the material.  Students can also have global connections that teaches them culture and culture diversity.

In this article, it talks about 4 web-based technologies to help in the Social Studies Classroom.

1. VoiceThread – “a collaborative, multimedia software that allows the interactive sharing of images, videos, and documents”

2. Gliffy – Concept mapping software

3. Community Walk - To create informational, interactive, and engaging maps.

4. Footnote - Provides Primary Sources of Military Records

Reflection

The web-based technologies have changed the way teachers teach social studies in the classroom.  For students to have a deeper understanding of the content implementing the web-based technologies can be helpful.  The examples Halcomb and Beal refer in their article seem to have changed since this article has been published, most of them having a cost.  However, Footnote seems to offer some valuable primary sources for free.  VoiceThread seems to be a valuable tool too, however with the cost it will be something to keep in mind.

Reference

Capitalizing on Web 2.0 in the Social Studies Context. (2010). TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 54(4), 28-33. Doi:10.1007/s11528-010-0417-0

EDU6215 Podcast

My first Podcast is to welcome students and their families to this upcoming school year.  Take a listen!



Record music with Vocaroo >>

EDU6215 #GoOpen Reflection

The U.S. Department of Education is creating a program where districts can have access to openly licensed educational resources instead investing in textbooks from a provider.  Looking through the information on the website, it seems well thought out on how to implement a #GoOpen district.  For example, they recognize a team of teachers, coaches, and administrators are needed to develop the strategy.  However, whoever these team members are, they must be rewarded due to their time and training.   The simile, “OER is like a puppy”  is very much true.  It will help the district financially, but will teachers and other staff members have time and resources to create and implement these lessons and/or resources?  Also, where would these textbook providers go? We know they make tons of money from districts, but what they offer has been a tool that has helped students succeed, whether it is in a written or digital format.  Now that school districts need more financial support due to the technological advancements, is this the best solution to free up some funds?  Or do we need to look somewhere else to do so?