Upon my reflection of my personal theory of learning, I have come to the conclusion that on completion of this course, Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology, I have not made any modifications of my personal theory of learning. The learning process implemented within my classroom is demonstration and explanation followed by student practice and fabrication. This type of learning theory compliments the styles of each of my students. Whether they are a visual, aural, reading / writing, or kinesthetic / tactile learner, every one of my students is able to walk away with new knowledge. If I have learned anything from this course, I have become more aware of the different types of learners in my classroom.
Immediate adjustments that I have made in my classroom instruction are two new technology tools that I am using with my 8th grade Woodworking class. During week 3 we learned about Virtual field trips that would allow our students to leave the classroom without really leaving the classroom. I was able to find a virtual fieldtrip that takes place at a sawmill. Before the virtual fieldtrip I would have the students look at the textbook as I described the process that a tree goes through in order to become a piece of usable lumber. Now I can literally take my students there, and they can watch the whole process from start to finish. The other technology that I have implemented, is the VoiceThread, I use this in both my 7th grade and 8th grade classes. With this tool I have the students post a picture of their completed projects and explain the process they went through in order to complete the project. They get feedback from their classmates as well as me. The principle has even chimed in on a few threads. They really enjoy this new tool.
I don’t know if I have two long term goal changes that I would like to make to my instructional practice regarding technology integration, but I definitely have one. I would like to implement more technology into my 6th grade Industrial exploration class. The main problem to overcome is the time limit. This class is a six week long class, and the curriculum would have to be revamped. In order to do that, I would have to meet with the other Industrial Technology teacher at the other middle school, and then we would have to go in front of the school board in order to get our curriculum changed. However, I feel that it would be worth the time and effort to implement a change to my sixth grade curriculum. This will be a long process that I would like to start at the end of this school year and have the summer to make the necessary changes. I would like to implement a sixth grade technology exploration class where the students would be able to come into my Hi-tech classroom and experience the 12 different modules we have. This would give them the opportunity to start thinking about different career paths that they might be interested in. Right now this class is set up for 8th graders only.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Voice Thread
Here is the link to my voice thread. What a great little tool. I hope everyone had as much fun making their voice thread as I did.
https://voicethread.com/#q+Woodworking+room.b889800.i4742293
For some odd reason I can not create a link, so please just copy and paste the address into your browser. Thanks
https://voicethread.com/#q+Woodworking+room.b889800.i4742293
For some odd reason I can not create a link, so please just copy and paste the address into your browser. Thanks
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
According to Dr. Orey in our DVD, social learning theories “actively engage students in constructing artifacts and conversing with others” (Laureate, 2009). An instructional strategy that encompasses the social learning theory is that of cooperative learning. Based on our class text, Using Technology with classroom instruction that works, cooperative learning “focuses on having students interact with each other in groups in ways that enhance their learning” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007).
Social learning theories incorporate Vgostsky’s Zone of Proximal Development. Based on the three areas, what the child knows, what the child is able to learn at the time, and the highest level, what the child is unable to learn at this time, we can see that the cooperative learning takes place during the highest zone of proximal development. Meaning, the student needs “more knowledgeable others” (Laureate, 2009). The learner is being actively engaged with a parent, teacher, peer, or even a computer, to gain the knowledge that is normally unattainable by them.
Our class text lists some collaborative learning tools that correlate to the cooperative learning strategy. It first talks about Multimedia, for instance, videos. Here the students are required to work as teams to complete an activity. If this video project was done individually, then the students would not be able to feed off of one another for ideas. So, by working as a group, they are able to access each others ideas and put them into one big idea.
Another collaborative tool is web resources. Here students are able to collaborate with more than just their classmates. With the help of the web, students are able to gather more information quicker than they could before, they can collaborate with other students in their school or even students that are outside of their state or country, the web has opened up the limitations that used to exist with researching. Within the web, students are able to access online gaming where they are able to interact with other students simultaneously through some type of gaming interface. The best part of this type of tool is that the students are able to play against each other as opposed to playing against a machine.
The tools that students are able to access today have opened doors allowing students to explore beyond their desks. The idea of social learning theories is played out every day in every classroom. Teachers have their students work collaboratively to get more out of the project that has been assigned. Cooperative learning is a large part of education, and the reason for this is to allow our students to get ready for what is waiting for them when they are out in the workforce. Companies today are looking for people who are people persons, people who can get along with others, people who share their ideas for the advancement of a larger goal. If we don’t start this type of learning at a young age, then this type of desirable trait will be difficult to obtain. As an educator, I have learned more from teaching my students then I ever did when I was the one learning.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Social learning theories incorporate Vgostsky’s Zone of Proximal Development. Based on the three areas, what the child knows, what the child is able to learn at the time, and the highest level, what the child is unable to learn at this time, we can see that the cooperative learning takes place during the highest zone of proximal development. Meaning, the student needs “more knowledgeable others” (Laureate, 2009). The learner is being actively engaged with a parent, teacher, peer, or even a computer, to gain the knowledge that is normally unattainable by them.
Our class text lists some collaborative learning tools that correlate to the cooperative learning strategy. It first talks about Multimedia, for instance, videos. Here the students are required to work as teams to complete an activity. If this video project was done individually, then the students would not be able to feed off of one another for ideas. So, by working as a group, they are able to access each others ideas and put them into one big idea.
Another collaborative tool is web resources. Here students are able to collaborate with more than just their classmates. With the help of the web, students are able to gather more information quicker than they could before, they can collaborate with other students in their school or even students that are outside of their state or country, the web has opened up the limitations that used to exist with researching. Within the web, students are able to access online gaming where they are able to interact with other students simultaneously through some type of gaming interface. The best part of this type of tool is that the students are able to play against each other as opposed to playing against a machine.
The tools that students are able to access today have opened doors allowing students to explore beyond their desks. The idea of social learning theories is played out every day in every classroom. Teachers have their students work collaboratively to get more out of the project that has been assigned. Cooperative learning is a large part of education, and the reason for this is to allow our students to get ready for what is waiting for them when they are out in the workforce. Companies today are looking for people who are people persons, people who can get along with others, people who share their ideas for the advancement of a larger goal. If we don’t start this type of learning at a young age, then this type of desirable trait will be difficult to obtain. As an educator, I have learned more from teaching my students then I ever did when I was the one learning.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Constructivism in Practice
In our resource, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, the authors talked about the instructional strategy that embeds technology: “Generating and Testing Hypotheses.” Our blog assignment is to answer the questions, how does this strategy relate to the constructivist / constructionism learning theories, and then to look back at the learning tools that we explored and how they correlate to the instructional strategy and constructivist / constructionism learning theories.
As stated in our course text, generating and testing hypotheses, we usually think of science class, but when students utilize this strategy in other classes, they are, “engaging in complex mental processes, applying content knowledge like facts and vocabulary, and enhancing their overall understanding of the content” (Pitler et al, 2007). In order to know if this instructional strategy correlates with the constructivism / constructionism theories, we have to understand what these theories are.
In our DVD, Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Dr. Orey explains Constructivism as “a theory of knowledge stating that each individual actively constructs his/her own meaning. And constructionism as “a theory of learning that states people learn best when they build an external artifact of something they can share” ( Laureate Ed, 2009). Based on the definitions of constructivism/constructionism, the strategy generating, and testing hypotheses definetly correlates with the principles of those learning theories.
When students are asked to create hypotheses, they are making a guess at what they think might happen. In order to prove their hypothesis incorrect or correct, the students must be able to collect data and analyze it. This does not necessarily have to take place in a science class. For instance in my seventh grade Industrial Technology class, my students go through a unit in Structural Engineering. A part of the unit is to predict which bridge will be the most efficient. In order for my students to figure this problem out, they must first collect their data, which includes the weight of the bridge and how much weight the bridge held. My students put all of the their information into Excel and create a spreadsheet that will help them calculate efficiency and do a comparison with all of the bridges in the class. As for gathering data, each bridge is put onto the structural tester, which is connected to a program running on the computer. The data being gathered is how much weight the bridge is holding every second until it breaks. Another nice feature with this program is the graph that is created for each break. My students use the graphs to determine which bridges held the most weight for the longest amount of time. As part of their grade, the student will create a report that either confirms or debunks their hypothesis.
I do not use Excel as extensively as a math or science teacher would, but my students are still getting exposure to that type of technology so that they can become comfortable with it.
As for the instructional strategy correlating with the learning theories, I feel that when the students are stating their hypotheses, you have the constructivism theory in play, and when they start gathering their data, inputting it into Excel and creating spreadsheets, and then you have the constructionism theory in play. Both being closely related and always being done at the same time.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory,instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
As stated in our course text, generating and testing hypotheses, we usually think of science class, but when students utilize this strategy in other classes, they are, “engaging in complex mental processes, applying content knowledge like facts and vocabulary, and enhancing their overall understanding of the content” (Pitler et al, 2007). In order to know if this instructional strategy correlates with the constructivism / constructionism theories, we have to understand what these theories are.
In our DVD, Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Dr. Orey explains Constructivism as “a theory of knowledge stating that each individual actively constructs his/her own meaning. And constructionism as “a theory of learning that states people learn best when they build an external artifact of something they can share” ( Laureate Ed, 2009). Based on the definitions of constructivism/constructionism, the strategy generating, and testing hypotheses definetly correlates with the principles of those learning theories.
When students are asked to create hypotheses, they are making a guess at what they think might happen. In order to prove their hypothesis incorrect or correct, the students must be able to collect data and analyze it. This does not necessarily have to take place in a science class. For instance in my seventh grade Industrial Technology class, my students go through a unit in Structural Engineering. A part of the unit is to predict which bridge will be the most efficient. In order for my students to figure this problem out, they must first collect their data, which includes the weight of the bridge and how much weight the bridge held. My students put all of the their information into Excel and create a spreadsheet that will help them calculate efficiency and do a comparison with all of the bridges in the class. As for gathering data, each bridge is put onto the structural tester, which is connected to a program running on the computer. The data being gathered is how much weight the bridge is holding every second until it breaks. Another nice feature with this program is the graph that is created for each break. My students use the graphs to determine which bridges held the most weight for the longest amount of time. As part of their grade, the student will create a report that either confirms or debunks their hypothesis.
I do not use Excel as extensively as a math or science teacher would, but my students are still getting exposure to that type of technology so that they can become comfortable with it.
As for the instructional strategy correlating with the learning theories, I feel that when the students are stating their hypotheses, you have the constructivism theory in play, and when they start gathering their data, inputting it into Excel and creating spreadsheets, and then you have the constructionism theory in play. Both being closely related and always being done at the same time.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory,instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Cognitivism in Practice
Dr Orey explains (2009), that the cognitive learning theories relate back to Information processing. As teachers, we are trying to get information into our students using different processes. The short term / working memory is limited to 7 pieces of information + or – 2 pieces at a time, so there is a limit to how much a learner can handle at one time. To place information into long-term memory requires elaboration, here we want our students to make, as many connections to that information as possible, doing so will put the information into long-term memory. An important theory in Informational processing is Paivio’s Dual Coding hypothesis. This theory is a “phenomena” where people can remember images much better than if it were in plain text. By putting the two together, you have more ways to make the connection to recall the information (Laureate, 2009). By using technology and the tools that it provides, like concept maps, advance organizers, and note taking strategies, teaches are able to help their students teach themselves how to retain information better.
“The instructional strategy, cues, questions, and advance organizers focuses on enhancing students’ ability to retrieve, use, and organize information about a topic” (Pitler, et al, 2007). Cues are used to give the students an idea of what is about to learn, questions do the same thing as cues accept they help trigger prior knowledge that the students have. Concept mapping tools are great graphic organizers to support the dual coding hypothesis. For example, when students create a concept map, by using both graphics and text together, the student has a better chance pulling the information from their long-term memory. In a traditional woodworking class, I do not use a lot of technology, but based on what I have learned to date; I would like my students to take a Virtual Field trip to a Sawmill. During this field trip, I would like them to create a concept map around the given essential question. This information will then be used to create a brochure on what they learned about the process of how a tree becomes a piece of lumber that you buy at Home Depot or Lowes.
“The instructional strategy, summarizing and note taking, focuses on enhancing students’ ability to synthesize information and distill it into a concise new form” (Pitler, et al, 2007). Dual coding can be utilized in note taking when the student incorporates different formats and puts them together. By combining the different types of notes, the students have a higher percentage of recalling the information, because the information was viewed in multiple ways. To do this by hand would be time consuming, students creating double column notes by hand has not been looked upon with happy faces. If the students have a laptop at their disposal, creating notes that utilize dual coding would not take very long, and the notes would be there own.
As a woodworking teacher in a non technology classroom, I have found that using technology takes away from my students creating hands on projects. But before they can get to that stage of the class, they need to learn the very beginning. I feel that by introducing the above techniques when we explore a Virtual Field trip, my students will better appreciate the process of how our would came to be.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
EDUC-6711I-7 Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology
Assignment:
What are your thoughts on how the instructional strategies described in the resources you explored this week correlate with the principles of behaviorist learning theory.
Post:
In our reading this week our text talked about two different types of Instructional strategies; reinforcing effort, and homework and practice. As I look back at the rest of our resources, the behaviorist learning theory is best described by Lever-Duffy & McDonald as, “the learner acquires behaviors, skills, and knowledge in response to the rewards, punishments, or withheld responses associated with them” (2008). Correlating reinforcing effort with the behaviorist learning theory is quite simple. In the text, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that works, teachers create a type of Effort rubric so that each student can keep track of their own effort in different categories. At the end of the week, the students have a test, and then they compare their “effort” grade to their “test” grade. What they have found is that the more effort they put into their note taking, paying attention, participation, homework and so forth, the better they did on their test. So in a round about way, students are rewarding themselves for putting more effort into the work that is assigned. Sounds like behaviorism to me.
Homework and Practice relate back to skill and drill techniques which fall under behaviorist thinking. Homework is used for review and application of what the students have learned from the day. If done incorrectly, homework can seem like punishment, meaning, our students are doing homework for hours and hours every night. Is this good practice? No, this can work as a punishment, which is part of the behaviorist theory. Homework should be given not only as “busy” work, but as work that counts. Students need to see what they get right and wrong. You can not correct a behavior if you do not take the time to check it. If the student does that behavior long enough because it has not been checked, then when they get it wrong on a test, how are they to know they did it wrong. As stated in our online text, “Because it is easy for errors to slip in when students are practicing, teachers should give feedback as quickly as possible-ideally, early in the practice sessions, before students internalize erroneous processes and knowledge” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007, p.188).
Behaviorist learning is evident in both of the strategies; Reinforcing effort and homework and practice. When done correctly they can reward the necessary behavior and when done incorrectly, the result is negative. “The entire rational of behavior modification is that most behavior is learned. If behaviors can be learned, then they can also be unlearned or relearned” (Orey, 2001).
Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education,
Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1: Theoretical Foundations
Orey, M. (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology.
Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Chapter 8: Reinforcing Effort
Chapter 10: Homework and Practice
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with
classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
What are your thoughts on how the instructional strategies described in the resources you explored this week correlate with the principles of behaviorist learning theory.
Post:
In our reading this week our text talked about two different types of Instructional strategies; reinforcing effort, and homework and practice. As I look back at the rest of our resources, the behaviorist learning theory is best described by Lever-Duffy & McDonald as, “the learner acquires behaviors, skills, and knowledge in response to the rewards, punishments, or withheld responses associated with them” (2008). Correlating reinforcing effort with the behaviorist learning theory is quite simple. In the text, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that works, teachers create a type of Effort rubric so that each student can keep track of their own effort in different categories. At the end of the week, the students have a test, and then they compare their “effort” grade to their “test” grade. What they have found is that the more effort they put into their note taking, paying attention, participation, homework and so forth, the better they did on their test. So in a round about way, students are rewarding themselves for putting more effort into the work that is assigned. Sounds like behaviorism to me.
Homework and Practice relate back to skill and drill techniques which fall under behaviorist thinking. Homework is used for review and application of what the students have learned from the day. If done incorrectly, homework can seem like punishment, meaning, our students are doing homework for hours and hours every night. Is this good practice? No, this can work as a punishment, which is part of the behaviorist theory. Homework should be given not only as “busy” work, but as work that counts. Students need to see what they get right and wrong. You can not correct a behavior if you do not take the time to check it. If the student does that behavior long enough because it has not been checked, then when they get it wrong on a test, how are they to know they did it wrong. As stated in our online text, “Because it is easy for errors to slip in when students are practicing, teachers should give feedback as quickly as possible-ideally, early in the practice sessions, before students internalize erroneous processes and knowledge” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski, 2007, p.188).
Behaviorist learning is evident in both of the strategies; Reinforcing effort and homework and practice. When done correctly they can reward the necessary behavior and when done incorrectly, the result is negative. “The entire rational of behavior modification is that most behavior is learned. If behaviors can be learned, then they can also be unlearned or relearned” (Orey, 2001).
Lever-Duffy, J. & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical Foundations (Laureate Education,
Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Chapter 1: Theoretical Foundations
Orey, M. (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology.
Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/
Chapter 8: Reinforcing Effort
Chapter 10: Homework and Practice
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with
classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
