Monday, November 26, 2007
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Journal # 10
Title: More Than Money Matters, Establishing Effective School-Corporate Partnerships
Author: Nancy Flynn
Learning & leading with Technology, Nov. 2007
This article describes potential problems when schools partner with business. There are fears and concerns of the influence that can be exerted over students and schools when schools are desperate for money and need resources. Business can have an overpowering effect on the student by exerting influences over the curriculum and learning materials adopted by the school.
The author warns that when financial needs dominate the reasons for entering into these partnerships, principles should consider all the implications. In a telephone interview with principles across the nation the author states that principles agree corporate partnerships are a necessity due to financial constraints and lack of school funding. The author identifies concern with the effect on students when school partnerships involve technology. To help school administrators think more critically about implications of school-corporate partnerships that involve technology the author created ten guidelines.
Vision – Principles need to have a clear vision as to what they expect to get from the partnership provided resources. Principles can’t just get resources for which they have no idea how they will be used.
Support for Technology - School technology departments need to be involved with tech resources to avoid waste and a mismatch of resources with school capabilities.
School Curriculum – Principles must be sure that the corporate resources actually fit into the design of the school’s curriculum.
Collaboration & Communication – make sure the school knows what it is giving-up to get the corporate resources. Time commitments from school employees to communicate and facilitate implementation and upkeep can be extensive.
Internal Capacity – Make sure you know the extent of the tech support the corporation intends to commit and make certain it matches the schools internal capacity to use the resources.
Commitment – Make sure the corporation is committed and not a fly-by night group that is gone with the wind.
Obligations – Make sure you know the extent of the obligation you are committing the school to. Know what exactly the school is responsible to accomplish.
Product Promotion – Corporations are masters at recruiting professionals to deliver presentations at public events, corporate affairs and seminars. These are usually a product promotion masquerading as a presentation. Teachers are professionals and should avoid product promotion for more than just ethical reasons.
Assessment – Make sure you pick your assessment markers before you partner and be sure to actually do the measurement. Hold the partner accountable.
Longevity – If it doesn’t work end it and don’t do it again. In the long-run you are wasting your time.
Author: Nancy Flynn
Learning & leading with Technology, Nov. 2007
This article describes potential problems when schools partner with business. There are fears and concerns of the influence that can be exerted over students and schools when schools are desperate for money and need resources. Business can have an overpowering effect on the student by exerting influences over the curriculum and learning materials adopted by the school.
The author warns that when financial needs dominate the reasons for entering into these partnerships, principles should consider all the implications. In a telephone interview with principles across the nation the author states that principles agree corporate partnerships are a necessity due to financial constraints and lack of school funding. The author identifies concern with the effect on students when school partnerships involve technology. To help school administrators think more critically about implications of school-corporate partnerships that involve technology the author created ten guidelines.
Vision – Principles need to have a clear vision as to what they expect to get from the partnership provided resources. Principles can’t just get resources for which they have no idea how they will be used.
Support for Technology - School technology departments need to be involved with tech resources to avoid waste and a mismatch of resources with school capabilities.
School Curriculum – Principles must be sure that the corporate resources actually fit into the design of the school’s curriculum.
Collaboration & Communication – make sure the school knows what it is giving-up to get the corporate resources. Time commitments from school employees to communicate and facilitate implementation and upkeep can be extensive.
Internal Capacity – Make sure you know the extent of the tech support the corporation intends to commit and make certain it matches the schools internal capacity to use the resources.
Commitment – Make sure the corporation is committed and not a fly-by night group that is gone with the wind.
Obligations – Make sure you know the extent of the obligation you are committing the school to. Know what exactly the school is responsible to accomplish.
Product Promotion – Corporations are masters at recruiting professionals to deliver presentations at public events, corporate affairs and seminars. These are usually a product promotion masquerading as a presentation. Teachers are professionals and should avoid product promotion for more than just ethical reasons.
Assessment – Make sure you pick your assessment markers before you partner and be sure to actually do the measurement. Hold the partner accountable.
Longevity – If it doesn’t work end it and don’t do it again. In the long-run you are wasting your time.
Journal #9
Classroom 2.0
Collaborative Idea Maps
Collaborative Idea Maps are a way for students to take notes and demonstrate knowledge of a particular subject by creating graphic organizers on their computers that can be posted to a community web arena. Idea Maps are used to create graphic representations of anything that can be dissected into a step-by-step format. For example, a student could demonstrate knowledge of a mathematic principle in an Idea Map by illustrating the steps of a function or procedure in graphic form. Also, a student could demonstrate knowledge of an historical sequence by mapping out the stages of an event. Or, the student could personalize the Idea Map by plotting out the steps he/she needs to take to complete a project and/or finish a course or semester.
To accomplish this, the student plots out the steps, or information, in graphic format and creates a picture. The graphic format is product dependent and there are many products available that offer Idea Map software. Whichever product is used, the resulting graphic (picture) is something that is self explanatory and easily followed by any number of readers. It presents as a neat way to look at a problem or process to instantly see how all the parts fit together.
To make the Idea Maps collaborative the student then places them on a web based arena that can be accessed by a teacher and/or other students. The web based arena is the part that is commercial. The arenas and particular software exists in many formats and designs and are generally purchased by the user. However, the threads at Web 2.0 seem to say that these can be made available for free to educators.
From reading the threads I have learned that the existence of web based Idea Maps can be a revolutionary way for students to synthesis their class or reading notes into a format that is a much more effective study tool. The ones I have looked at on the web seem to be an excellent study source from for exams or future use. As the saying goes, “a picture is worth a thousand words.” These picture representations seem like an excellent way for students to organize their lives and obligations. Here is an example of one that was on one of the threads: Idea Map Example
Collaborative Idea Maps
Collaborative Idea Maps are a way for students to take notes and demonstrate knowledge of a particular subject by creating graphic organizers on their computers that can be posted to a community web arena. Idea Maps are used to create graphic representations of anything that can be dissected into a step-by-step format. For example, a student could demonstrate knowledge of a mathematic principle in an Idea Map by illustrating the steps of a function or procedure in graphic form. Also, a student could demonstrate knowledge of an historical sequence by mapping out the stages of an event. Or, the student could personalize the Idea Map by plotting out the steps he/she needs to take to complete a project and/or finish a course or semester.
To accomplish this, the student plots out the steps, or information, in graphic format and creates a picture. The graphic format is product dependent and there are many products available that offer Idea Map software. Whichever product is used, the resulting graphic (picture) is something that is self explanatory and easily followed by any number of readers. It presents as a neat way to look at a problem or process to instantly see how all the parts fit together.
To make the Idea Maps collaborative the student then places them on a web based arena that can be accessed by a teacher and/or other students. The web based arena is the part that is commercial. The arenas and particular software exists in many formats and designs and are generally purchased by the user. However, the threads at Web 2.0 seem to say that these can be made available for free to educators.
From reading the threads I have learned that the existence of web based Idea Maps can be a revolutionary way for students to synthesis their class or reading notes into a format that is a much more effective study tool. The ones I have looked at on the web seem to be an excellent study source from for exams or future use. As the saying goes, “a picture is worth a thousand words.” These picture representations seem like an excellent way for students to organize their lives and obligations. Here is an example of one that was on one of the threads: Idea Map Example
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Journal#8
Title: Fitting the Pieces Together; Successful Technology Integration with Laptops
Author: Patricia Yost
Learning & Leading with Technology, Nov. 2007
This article reports on a strategy used to integrate technology in middle schools. I describes improvements in teacher performance through the use of technology. Examples include using video clips rather than showing an entire movie, creating interactive hyper-link-infused self paced presentation documents, using word processing software tools to develop better writers, and others. The teachers infused a progression of hardware devises starting with a couple of laptops and a camera and growing over a two and a half year period. The teachers are grouped into one, two and three year teachers. They start off small and then progress with hardware and ways to implement technology.
The article is heavily detailed in description of the implementation process and the effectiveness of the strategy. The method is determined to be successful and offered as a model to adopt. It seems logical that an implementation strategy that is closely monitored and slowly brought along would be successful.
Question #1 Is implementing technology into the classroom in a stepped tiered format desireable? Yes. If I were a teacher undergoing a barrage of technological changes in the classroom, I would rather have it done in this way. This way would limit my chance of failure and frustration because I could pace myself. Also, help would be available from those of a higher proficiency than me. Also, I could feel some satisfaction by being of assistance to those not as proficient as me. This method allows for a systems of mentors and ‘mentees.’’
Question #2 Does developing proficiency of word processing tools make better writers? I would have to say No. I know this is contrary with what the article states but I think the answer depends on what the evaluator uses to measure the ‘goodness’ of a writing. The article did not elaborate on the criteria they used to measure this improvement but I suspect the improvements were mostly technical. When I write using a word processor I am continually disturbed and distracted by the warnings, the red and green highlighting, the automatic indents and numbering. I know these can be turned off and that’s what I do but they, in their active form do not facilitate better writing for me.
Author: Patricia Yost
Learning & Leading with Technology, Nov. 2007
This article reports on a strategy used to integrate technology in middle schools. I describes improvements in teacher performance through the use of technology. Examples include using video clips rather than showing an entire movie, creating interactive hyper-link-infused self paced presentation documents, using word processing software tools to develop better writers, and others. The teachers infused a progression of hardware devises starting with a couple of laptops and a camera and growing over a two and a half year period. The teachers are grouped into one, two and three year teachers. They start off small and then progress with hardware and ways to implement technology.
The article is heavily detailed in description of the implementation process and the effectiveness of the strategy. The method is determined to be successful and offered as a model to adopt. It seems logical that an implementation strategy that is closely monitored and slowly brought along would be successful.
Question #1 Is implementing technology into the classroom in a stepped tiered format desireable? Yes. If I were a teacher undergoing a barrage of technological changes in the classroom, I would rather have it done in this way. This way would limit my chance of failure and frustration because I could pace myself. Also, help would be available from those of a higher proficiency than me. Also, I could feel some satisfaction by being of assistance to those not as proficient as me. This method allows for a systems of mentors and ‘mentees.’’
Question #2 Does developing proficiency of word processing tools make better writers? I would have to say No. I know this is contrary with what the article states but I think the answer depends on what the evaluator uses to measure the ‘goodness’ of a writing. The article did not elaborate on the criteria they used to measure this improvement but I suspect the improvements were mostly technical. When I write using a word processor I am continually disturbed and distracted by the warnings, the red and green highlighting, the automatic indents and numbering. I know these can be turned off and that’s what I do but they, in their active form do not facilitate better writing for me.
Journal #7
Title: Is Chatspeak Destroying English?
Authors: Linda Howard and Greg Monfils
Leading and Learning with Technology, Nov. 2007
This article is a presentation of two divergent views of the damage and/or value of chatspeak on school age children. The authors define chatspeak as the shorthand slang language that kids have developed and adopted with the emergence of electronic forms of communication. Linda Howard presents the anti chatspeak view by claiming that it ill prepares kids for writing proper educated English. She identifies the reality that kids need to be prepared to write in a form that is precise, accurate and able to be understood by other educated English speaking people and that encouraging chatspeak will compromise a students command of English. Greg Monfils defends student’s use of chatspeak claiming that the English language itself is an expanding entity that incorporates many exceptions and meaning into its body. He argues that teaching foreign languages in class does no harm to a student’s command of the English language and analogizes chatspeak to another language such as Spanish.
The article is limited to a dialoge of the authors’ fears, opinions, and experiences. There are suggestions as to the impact of chatspeak on students but there is little substance to back-up the claims made. The article is however, valuable for what it is, a exposition of the fact that chatspeak is a language modality that is growing in usage among students. The authors inform the reader that chatspeak is an evolving thing that teachers will have to face at some point. When this happens, the teacher can reflect on the information in the article to guide their decisions about how to proceed.
Question #1 Will I correct students who write to me in chatspeak? No. I think each generation has its own language/slang that allows them to express their youth and this allows communication in a more intimate style; one that the English of their parents is unable to convey. Chatspeak is the current form of slang. I would happily respond to chatspeak because it’s a form in which students can most comfortable communicate and accurately express themselves.
Question #2 Will I learn to write in chatspeak? No, unless. If it would be useful for my students then yes, I would do my best to struggle through it. However, I really don’t feel comfortable using these types of shorthand. I don’t even like deciphering acronyms much less chatspeak.
Authors: Linda Howard and Greg Monfils
Leading and Learning with Technology, Nov. 2007
This article is a presentation of two divergent views of the damage and/or value of chatspeak on school age children. The authors define chatspeak as the shorthand slang language that kids have developed and adopted with the emergence of electronic forms of communication. Linda Howard presents the anti chatspeak view by claiming that it ill prepares kids for writing proper educated English. She identifies the reality that kids need to be prepared to write in a form that is precise, accurate and able to be understood by other educated English speaking people and that encouraging chatspeak will compromise a students command of English. Greg Monfils defends student’s use of chatspeak claiming that the English language itself is an expanding entity that incorporates many exceptions and meaning into its body. He argues that teaching foreign languages in class does no harm to a student’s command of the English language and analogizes chatspeak to another language such as Spanish.
The article is limited to a dialoge of the authors’ fears, opinions, and experiences. There are suggestions as to the impact of chatspeak on students but there is little substance to back-up the claims made. The article is however, valuable for what it is, a exposition of the fact that chatspeak is a language modality that is growing in usage among students. The authors inform the reader that chatspeak is an evolving thing that teachers will have to face at some point. When this happens, the teacher can reflect on the information in the article to guide their decisions about how to proceed.
Question #1 Will I correct students who write to me in chatspeak? No. I think each generation has its own language/slang that allows them to express their youth and this allows communication in a more intimate style; one that the English of their parents is unable to convey. Chatspeak is the current form of slang. I would happily respond to chatspeak because it’s a form in which students can most comfortable communicate and accurately express themselves.
Question #2 Will I learn to write in chatspeak? No, unless. If it would be useful for my students then yes, I would do my best to struggle through it. However, I really don’t feel comfortable using these types of shorthand. I don’t even like deciphering acronyms much less chatspeak.
Journal #6
Title: The Threat of Security: Hindering Technology Integration in the Classroom.
Authors: LeAnne Robinson, Abbie Brown, and Tim Green.
Learning & Leading with Technology, November 2007
This article is about how perceived security threats are hampering the integration of technology in the classroom. It discusses a resulting problem when the concern over security overshadows technological integration. The authors make the claim that access is necessary for full integration. They do not deny and even agree that security is of prime importance for child safety and protection of computer and information systems, but they plead that this concern has reached a point where access is suffering. The greatest hurdle to integration was thought to be the presence of technology in the classroom but now ironically the mere presence of technology is not generating access. Fear of law suits lead to overkill and denial of access.
In analyzing the authors’ claims there seems to be the implication that a panicked concern for security is overblown if not misdirected; approaching a state of trowing the baby out with the bath water. They cite examples where tight restriction on e-mail use leads to communication failures and destructive limitations. They also describe the problem of network security log-off policies as unnecessary for student security and limiting efficient instruction in the classroom setting. The use of web filters are also described as a barrier to integration and the implication of overkill because it is pointed out that the actual number of potentially hazardous web sites is so low as to not justify the expense and concern for protection software. The whole article showcases the theme of mistrust. Teachers can’t be trusted to use e-mail or the internet and students can’t either. Big Brother is watching everyone in cyber form and everyone and anything can be labeled suspicious. It is ridiculous for teachers and students to be caught in the middle of two large opposing forces. One force is focused on telling the teacher that as far as technology goes, the sky’s the limit. They reassure teachers that the application of technology in the classroom is an endless cornucopia of potential and opportunity. The other force has an ever increasing list of restrictions on technological use in the classroom. Why should the classroom be the industrial battleground for such fundemental differences in opinion?
Question #1 Should teachers have unlimited access to e-mail for purposes of their classroom and their professional needs? Yes. Restrictions on e-mail are completely unnecessary for a professional. When a professional is employed they are paid for a service and there must be trust that they will use their time and energies appropriately. They aren’t paid for the time they spend in the ‘trenches’ they’re paid for their talent at delivering a quality service. If problems arise then they should be dealt with, but hogtieing an entire profession for fear that a small percentage will abuse resources is penny wise and pound foolish.
Question #2 Would these types of barriers prevent me from integrating technology in the classroom? Yes. Classroom time is too short, almost as short as the attention span of the average 5th grader. I don’t feel that my time would be best spent troubleshooting software glitches, password protectors, site key protectors, virus warnings, pop-up blockers, security log-offs, encryption software, copyright infringements, etc… Not to mention responding to Big Brother information system managers as to why I visited a particular web site or had my students use a choice of software with questionable license protection. I would rather limit my time to showing students the the components of the plug and the on switch and then let them figure everything else out for themselves. I would prefer to concentrate on teaching them why Tom Sawyer is an important contribution to American literature and maybe how to do basic math. They'll figure out the computer on their own anyway.
Authors: LeAnne Robinson, Abbie Brown, and Tim Green.
Learning & Leading with Technology, November 2007
This article is about how perceived security threats are hampering the integration of technology in the classroom. It discusses a resulting problem when the concern over security overshadows technological integration. The authors make the claim that access is necessary for full integration. They do not deny and even agree that security is of prime importance for child safety and protection of computer and information systems, but they plead that this concern has reached a point where access is suffering. The greatest hurdle to integration was thought to be the presence of technology in the classroom but now ironically the mere presence of technology is not generating access. Fear of law suits lead to overkill and denial of access.
In analyzing the authors’ claims there seems to be the implication that a panicked concern for security is overblown if not misdirected; approaching a state of trowing the baby out with the bath water. They cite examples where tight restriction on e-mail use leads to communication failures and destructive limitations. They also describe the problem of network security log-off policies as unnecessary for student security and limiting efficient instruction in the classroom setting. The use of web filters are also described as a barrier to integration and the implication of overkill because it is pointed out that the actual number of potentially hazardous web sites is so low as to not justify the expense and concern for protection software. The whole article showcases the theme of mistrust. Teachers can’t be trusted to use e-mail or the internet and students can’t either. Big Brother is watching everyone in cyber form and everyone and anything can be labeled suspicious. It is ridiculous for teachers and students to be caught in the middle of two large opposing forces. One force is focused on telling the teacher that as far as technology goes, the sky’s the limit. They reassure teachers that the application of technology in the classroom is an endless cornucopia of potential and opportunity. The other force has an ever increasing list of restrictions on technological use in the classroom. Why should the classroom be the industrial battleground for such fundemental differences in opinion?
Question #1 Should teachers have unlimited access to e-mail for purposes of their classroom and their professional needs? Yes. Restrictions on e-mail are completely unnecessary for a professional. When a professional is employed they are paid for a service and there must be trust that they will use their time and energies appropriately. They aren’t paid for the time they spend in the ‘trenches’ they’re paid for their talent at delivering a quality service. If problems arise then they should be dealt with, but hogtieing an entire profession for fear that a small percentage will abuse resources is penny wise and pound foolish.
Question #2 Would these types of barriers prevent me from integrating technology in the classroom? Yes. Classroom time is too short, almost as short as the attention span of the average 5th grader. I don’t feel that my time would be best spent troubleshooting software glitches, password protectors, site key protectors, virus warnings, pop-up blockers, security log-offs, encryption software, copyright infringements, etc… Not to mention responding to Big Brother information system managers as to why I visited a particular web site or had my students use a choice of software with questionable license protection. I would rather limit my time to showing students the the components of the plug and the on switch and then let them figure everything else out for themselves. I would prefer to concentrate on teaching them why Tom Sawyer is an important contribution to American literature and maybe how to do basic math. They'll figure out the computer on their own anyway.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Journal #5
Title: The New Gold Rush, Establishing Effective Online Strategies Author: Ferdi Serim
Learning & Leading with Technology, September 2007
This article discusses the current concerns surrounding the ever growing online learning industry. On the one hand the author remind us of online learning’s potential to deliver on the age-old promise of student centered education and in the case of online learning, student paced also. On the other hand, he warns of the glut of profiteers lying in wait hoping to clean-up, financially, in the push to attain the goal of student centered learning through this medium. With this in mind he warns educators of the pitfalls that can present in online learning. He shares a rubric which can be used to evaluate and categorize methods in an effort to predict a successful implementation.
The article is brief in its treatment of the subject but he does have some useful examples. The most valuable section of the article is the rubric. The fear the author brings to the text is intuitive and because of that it rings true. In his forewarning, he states the obvious but the often unspoken; how quick and cheap can we educate our students? He clearly communicates to us that online learning, as wonderful as it is, is no panacea for all the woes in education. He reiterates that it is a miraculous tool but not as an unrestrained application in a capitalist society.
Question #1
In an online course, is the teacher a teacher, or a facilitator? The article alludes to a potential for teachers to get lost in the maze of online education. After all, online learning is self-teaching. So if online courses are successful the student is engaging in self-taught education and the teacher therefore takes-on the role of facilitator. This is further shown by the goal and intent of online education. It is to provide a medium for students to teach themselves. Therefore, if the teacher were to interact as teacher, it logically follows that the online format was a failure. Therefore, in an online education format the teacher must be a facilitator.
Question #2
Does online learning really decrease the cost of education delivery to the student? I say no. After reading this article, it appears that a room full of students with one teacher and a teacher’s aide is too costly for our society. This model is costly in monetary terms and in the failure to achieve the expected results. Because of this we embark on more cost effective avenues such as online learning models. But what is the overall cost of going this course? The facility, the hardware, the software, the power, the endless software updates and revisions, the limitless supply of yearly security updates, the repairs, the viruses, the replacements, the technical experts, etc… However, looking at the cost of a decision without balancing it against the value it can bring is shortsighted. Therefore, I will keep an open mind but my inclination is still that it is not a cost effective approach to educating students.
Learning & Leading with Technology, September 2007
This article discusses the current concerns surrounding the ever growing online learning industry. On the one hand the author remind us of online learning’s potential to deliver on the age-old promise of student centered education and in the case of online learning, student paced also. On the other hand, he warns of the glut of profiteers lying in wait hoping to clean-up, financially, in the push to attain the goal of student centered learning through this medium. With this in mind he warns educators of the pitfalls that can present in online learning. He shares a rubric which can be used to evaluate and categorize methods in an effort to predict a successful implementation.
The article is brief in its treatment of the subject but he does have some useful examples. The most valuable section of the article is the rubric. The fear the author brings to the text is intuitive and because of that it rings true. In his forewarning, he states the obvious but the often unspoken; how quick and cheap can we educate our students? He clearly communicates to us that online learning, as wonderful as it is, is no panacea for all the woes in education. He reiterates that it is a miraculous tool but not as an unrestrained application in a capitalist society.
Question #1
In an online course, is the teacher a teacher, or a facilitator? The article alludes to a potential for teachers to get lost in the maze of online education. After all, online learning is self-teaching. So if online courses are successful the student is engaging in self-taught education and the teacher therefore takes-on the role of facilitator. This is further shown by the goal and intent of online education. It is to provide a medium for students to teach themselves. Therefore, if the teacher were to interact as teacher, it logically follows that the online format was a failure. Therefore, in an online education format the teacher must be a facilitator.
Question #2
Does online learning really decrease the cost of education delivery to the student? I say no. After reading this article, it appears that a room full of students with one teacher and a teacher’s aide is too costly for our society. This model is costly in monetary terms and in the failure to achieve the expected results. Because of this we embark on more cost effective avenues such as online learning models. But what is the overall cost of going this course? The facility, the hardware, the software, the power, the endless software updates and revisions, the limitless supply of yearly security updates, the repairs, the viruses, the replacements, the technical experts, etc… However, looking at the cost of a decision without balancing it against the value it can bring is shortsighted. Therefore, I will keep an open mind but my inclination is still that it is not a cost effective approach to educating students.
Journal #4
Title: Serious Gaming: ‘Learn Math or Die Trying’. Author: Linda Briggs
T-H-E Journal, September 2007 issue
This article is a case study on the math software product Dimenxian that is being used as an algebra learning tool in an eight grade class. The author writes enthusiastically about the success her students have when using the learning software. She describes her teaching experience as being historically problematic with middle schoolers when they reach the point where algebra is taught. The software Dimenxian is heralded as an active game where algebraic concepts are taught and practiced in a competitive format. The students can play the game as an individual or they can compete against peers. The author males claim that the software product has sparked student enthusiasm for algebra and this has lead to their greater success.
This article attempts to illustrate a product that can be useful in teaching algebra in middle school. However, the illustration itself seems to be superficial to the extreme. Because of this the article takes on the theme of an advertisement. There is no data presented to convince the reader that the product has been measured against specific criteria and found to be a success. The claims of success are general and unsupported which cause the article to lose credibility as a reliable source. The whole approach rings too closely to that of advertisement. It is detailed in the history of the product and the awards it has won and even on the newest offering from the developer. Therefore, I felt it was more akin to a commercial.
Question #1
Do gaming software products belong in the classroom? I think they do. Although this article is scant of any details that would convince the reader that their claims of success are a result of including math gaming in the classroom, the premise seems logical. If there is a way to excite middle schoolers about algebra and software games such as Dimenxian can increase the math comfort zone then why not include them in the curriculum? Learning comes from many sources and learning from games is usually a fun activity. Therefore, I think they have a place in the classroom.
Question #2
What is the cost probability of getting math gaming in a classroom? This case study was from a high achieving school district in Georgia. The students had updated computer systems in a computerized math lab. The district also had been accredited as a leader in technology on the classroom. The cost of the necessary infrastructure for many other districts would probably be prohibitive. If a school or a district was already technologically advanced the chances of getting math gaming would be better than for that of schools in poorer districts and still technologically lagging. This makes the probability of having math gaming in a broad array of schools minimal.
T-H-E Journal, September 2007 issue
This article is a case study on the math software product Dimenxian that is being used as an algebra learning tool in an eight grade class. The author writes enthusiastically about the success her students have when using the learning software. She describes her teaching experience as being historically problematic with middle schoolers when they reach the point where algebra is taught. The software Dimenxian is heralded as an active game where algebraic concepts are taught and practiced in a competitive format. The students can play the game as an individual or they can compete against peers. The author males claim that the software product has sparked student enthusiasm for algebra and this has lead to their greater success.
This article attempts to illustrate a product that can be useful in teaching algebra in middle school. However, the illustration itself seems to be superficial to the extreme. Because of this the article takes on the theme of an advertisement. There is no data presented to convince the reader that the product has been measured against specific criteria and found to be a success. The claims of success are general and unsupported which cause the article to lose credibility as a reliable source. The whole approach rings too closely to that of advertisement. It is detailed in the history of the product and the awards it has won and even on the newest offering from the developer. Therefore, I felt it was more akin to a commercial.
Question #1
Do gaming software products belong in the classroom? I think they do. Although this article is scant of any details that would convince the reader that their claims of success are a result of including math gaming in the classroom, the premise seems logical. If there is a way to excite middle schoolers about algebra and software games such as Dimenxian can increase the math comfort zone then why not include them in the curriculum? Learning comes from many sources and learning from games is usually a fun activity. Therefore, I think they have a place in the classroom.
Question #2
What is the cost probability of getting math gaming in a classroom? This case study was from a high achieving school district in Georgia. The students had updated computer systems in a computerized math lab. The district also had been accredited as a leader in technology on the classroom. The cost of the necessary infrastructure for many other districts would probably be prohibitive. If a school or a district was already technologically advanced the chances of getting math gaming would be better than for that of schools in poorer districts and still technologically lagging. This makes the probability of having math gaming in a broad array of schools minimal.
Journal #3
Title: A War of Words. Author: Jim Patterson.
T-H-E Journal, Sept 2007.
This article is an examination of the increased problem of student plagiarism since the advent of easy access to the Internet as an infinite source of text. The author cleanly describes the existence of a current riff between teachers and software developers.
Teachers seem to be opposed to software tools that are designed to simply scan a student work for similarities to other work in a large data base. This technique, they claim, is ineffective because it does nothing to prevent plagiarism; it only polices plagiarism after the fact. If a student work failed to pass software detection muster the student is presumed to have plagiarized. Students and teachers alike claim this approach is less than optimal because at the very least it is not a constructive aid to discouraging plagiarism. They also hint that it may be a violation of a student’s civil rights and/or intellectual property rights to assume guilt based on a determination by the detection software.
Software developers defend the use of anti plagiarism software by stating that its sole purpose is not as a policing tool. They claim it is best utilized when teachers warn students that their work will be subject to anti plagiarism software scrutiny once submitted. The developers liken this approach to that of an umpire on a field or a proctor overseeing a test. These are not utilized because everyone would cheat but to deter potential cheating.
The article also examines the teaching trend to adopt a more proactive, constructive approach to the problem. Here, the article first describes the use of a alternative type of software design that emphasizes preventing plagiarism before it takes root. These products are geared to teach students the proper way to research, take notes, paraphrase, and site sources while developing a research strategy. Also described is a more basic approach utilizing role-playing to illustrate the effects of plagiarism in hopes of deterence.
The author does a very good job showing all sides of the problem without bias or conclusion towards any one solution. He instructs on the current issues and leaves the question of the solution to each to ponder. He also clearly reminds us that we will have to find some method of our own to address this problem.
Question #1 Will I use plagiarism detection software? No I would not. This article persuaded me that it is ineffective. By the time a student has resorted to plagiarism, it is too late. A teacher’s better effort is to help students learn that plagiarism is unecessary. Good work habits and clear instructions will help keep students from straying.
Question #2 Is it fair to students to assume plagiarism based on software determination? No. It seems too destructive a method. It could easily result in accusing an innocent student. Granted the software can detect the similarity of the student’s text to that of thousands of others in a data base but what level of proof is that. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing, preponderance or what? Since its one piece of non scientific evidence it seems its level of proof would be of the lowest order. We’re not talking about DNA here. The randomness of how students write on a similar topic is unknown and therefore there is nothing to compare the software’s findings to. So why assume guilt?
T-H-E Journal, Sept 2007.
This article is an examination of the increased problem of student plagiarism since the advent of easy access to the Internet as an infinite source of text. The author cleanly describes the existence of a current riff between teachers and software developers.
Teachers seem to be opposed to software tools that are designed to simply scan a student work for similarities to other work in a large data base. This technique, they claim, is ineffective because it does nothing to prevent plagiarism; it only polices plagiarism after the fact. If a student work failed to pass software detection muster the student is presumed to have plagiarized. Students and teachers alike claim this approach is less than optimal because at the very least it is not a constructive aid to discouraging plagiarism. They also hint that it may be a violation of a student’s civil rights and/or intellectual property rights to assume guilt based on a determination by the detection software.
Software developers defend the use of anti plagiarism software by stating that its sole purpose is not as a policing tool. They claim it is best utilized when teachers warn students that their work will be subject to anti plagiarism software scrutiny once submitted. The developers liken this approach to that of an umpire on a field or a proctor overseeing a test. These are not utilized because everyone would cheat but to deter potential cheating.
The article also examines the teaching trend to adopt a more proactive, constructive approach to the problem. Here, the article first describes the use of a alternative type of software design that emphasizes preventing plagiarism before it takes root. These products are geared to teach students the proper way to research, take notes, paraphrase, and site sources while developing a research strategy. Also described is a more basic approach utilizing role-playing to illustrate the effects of plagiarism in hopes of deterence.
The author does a very good job showing all sides of the problem without bias or conclusion towards any one solution. He instructs on the current issues and leaves the question of the solution to each to ponder. He also clearly reminds us that we will have to find some method of our own to address this problem.
Question #1 Will I use plagiarism detection software? No I would not. This article persuaded me that it is ineffective. By the time a student has resorted to plagiarism, it is too late. A teacher’s better effort is to help students learn that plagiarism is unecessary. Good work habits and clear instructions will help keep students from straying.
Question #2 Is it fair to students to assume plagiarism based on software determination? No. It seems too destructive a method. It could easily result in accusing an innocent student. Granted the software can detect the similarity of the student’s text to that of thousands of others in a data base but what level of proof is that. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing, preponderance or what? Since its one piece of non scientific evidence it seems its level of proof would be of the lowest order. We’re not talking about DNA here. The randomness of how students write on a similar topic is unknown and therefore there is nothing to compare the software’s findings to. So why assume guilt?
Journal #2
Title: “Turning Lurkers into Learners”, Authors: Jason Kelly and Karen Greenhaus
Published in Learning & Leading with Technology: August, 2007
In this article the authors discuss key elements necessary for student learning in online learning environments. For various reasons they forewarn that when teachers adopt these learning formats there is a potential for some students to ‘lurk’ in the shadows of the discussion medium. This can cause the student to participate less than desired and compromise the learning process. After all, not all learners will thrive in an online discussion format. Therefore, they suggest a method to address this potential to minimize its potential.
The first method is for the teacher to develop a ‘hook’ at the start of the on-line discussion. A hook is a conversation starter that is designed to facilitate the student’s comfort in joining in the discussion. The authors state a hook is essential when first introducing online discussion in order to ‘spark’ the student’s interest and to make responding easy to accomplish without much initial knowledge.
Next, after hooking the students the authors suggest a method to sustain the student’s interest and participation. They call this ‘reeling them in.’ In describing the necessity for this method the authors forewarn of the potential for student’s interest to wane as the school term progresses. To sustain interest and keep the students ‘reeled in’ the authors suggest adopting a sampling of methods such as role-playing exercises, and/or debate style forums. These, they proclaim, will foster continued student interest and associated learning.
Also mentioned is the associated requirement of the National Education Technology Standards, (NETS) for students and how this medium helps meet the standard. The authors casually remind the reader that these online discussion tools can serve as a mechanism for incorporating technology in the learning environment. This helps remind the teacher and the reader why these formats are necessary and how they function to meet the standard.
Analysis of the article seems to focus on the author’s methods as a way to ensure that students are participating in online discussions in a way that fosters learning. They warn of the potential for students to ‘lurk’ in these environments and suggest techniques for teachers to adopt to forestall this potential. Their message is clear and easily put in very simple terms. Whether teachers will view these methods as helpful or not remains questionable. However, the author’s are clear that there is a technology standard that must be met. They correlate their methods with the standards and offer specific examples.
Question #1
Would I use online discussion sites in my classroom? I think it would be difficult to maintain student interest throughout the semester but I think I would try it. I think it is a nice way of blending student’s computer time with class time. Also, if students want to discuss and chat online they may as well do it in an environment where the teacher can participate. Also, in lower grades this can be used as an indoctrination tool to help students foster safe and solid electronic writing skills.
Question #2
Who teaches the students how to use the software in online discussion groups? I realized when reading this article that in order to have online discussion groups someone has to teach students how to use the software. My suspicion is this job falls to the teacher. It seems a bit unfair that the teacher has to not only incorporate technology in the classroom by creating a spectacular online lesson plan but then must also field all the problems associated with teaching use of all the types of software necessary to accomplish this to the 30 or so students in the class. I can’t see how this type of teaching format can be successful without the teacher being proficient in the use of the software and teaching it to the students but it seems like a heavy burden for the teacher.
Published in Learning & Leading with Technology: August, 2007
In this article the authors discuss key elements necessary for student learning in online learning environments. For various reasons they forewarn that when teachers adopt these learning formats there is a potential for some students to ‘lurk’ in the shadows of the discussion medium. This can cause the student to participate less than desired and compromise the learning process. After all, not all learners will thrive in an online discussion format. Therefore, they suggest a method to address this potential to minimize its potential.
The first method is for the teacher to develop a ‘hook’ at the start of the on-line discussion. A hook is a conversation starter that is designed to facilitate the student’s comfort in joining in the discussion. The authors state a hook is essential when first introducing online discussion in order to ‘spark’ the student’s interest and to make responding easy to accomplish without much initial knowledge.
Next, after hooking the students the authors suggest a method to sustain the student’s interest and participation. They call this ‘reeling them in.’ In describing the necessity for this method the authors forewarn of the potential for student’s interest to wane as the school term progresses. To sustain interest and keep the students ‘reeled in’ the authors suggest adopting a sampling of methods such as role-playing exercises, and/or debate style forums. These, they proclaim, will foster continued student interest and associated learning.
Also mentioned is the associated requirement of the National Education Technology Standards, (NETS) for students and how this medium helps meet the standard. The authors casually remind the reader that these online discussion tools can serve as a mechanism for incorporating technology in the learning environment. This helps remind the teacher and the reader why these formats are necessary and how they function to meet the standard.
Analysis of the article seems to focus on the author’s methods as a way to ensure that students are participating in online discussions in a way that fosters learning. They warn of the potential for students to ‘lurk’ in these environments and suggest techniques for teachers to adopt to forestall this potential. Their message is clear and easily put in very simple terms. Whether teachers will view these methods as helpful or not remains questionable. However, the author’s are clear that there is a technology standard that must be met. They correlate their methods with the standards and offer specific examples.
Question #1
Would I use online discussion sites in my classroom? I think it would be difficult to maintain student interest throughout the semester but I think I would try it. I think it is a nice way of blending student’s computer time with class time. Also, if students want to discuss and chat online they may as well do it in an environment where the teacher can participate. Also, in lower grades this can be used as an indoctrination tool to help students foster safe and solid electronic writing skills.
Question #2
Who teaches the students how to use the software in online discussion groups? I realized when reading this article that in order to have online discussion groups someone has to teach students how to use the software. My suspicion is this job falls to the teacher. It seems a bit unfair that the teacher has to not only incorporate technology in the classroom by creating a spectacular online lesson plan but then must also field all the problems associated with teaching use of all the types of software necessary to accomplish this to the 30 or so students in the class. I can’t see how this type of teaching format can be successful without the teacher being proficient in the use of the software and teaching it to the students but it seems like a heavy burden for the teacher.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Journal #1
Title: "Power of the Mashup" Authors: Susie Boss and Jane Krauss
Published in Learning and Leading with Technology, Aug., 2007.
In this article the authors report on how two teachers are using technology in their classroom. One teacher is in southern California and the other is in rural Australia.
The teacher in California teaches a high school Literature class. He routinely assigns Voltaire’s 18th century novel Candide. In an effort to foster student interest in the work and to entrench their desire for knowledge of great literature he is using Google Earth and the Internet as an application to the assignment. The novel is an epic adventure where the main character, Candide, travels throughout Europe and South America. In this class students use Google Earth to visualize computerized images of the many different geographical locations Candide traveled to. The teacher believes that this application of technology to the reading assignment has helped students gain a more substantial interest in the reading assignment because they are able to identify with the places written about. The teacher believes the application has bolstered his students’ interest in the assignment.
The Australian teacher teaches History. At his school students are prohibited from using or possessing MP3 players. This hard and fast rule has caused some tension among the students. In an effort to find some common ground, the teacher created a plan where the students could use their MP3 players to record information they were studying at differing local historical sites. The teacher reported that the plan worked well and that he observed greater performance by the students especially aural learners.
These examples illustrate how technology can be used to aid learning in the classroom. The article’s message firmly advocates adding technological elements to the curriculum and seems to suggest these as successful examples. However, the article is more an illustration of two isolated events than it is proof that this ‘mashing-up’ of learning and technology was a worthwhile endeavor. Although the article describes positive subjective assessment of the two experiences it is too shallow an inquiry to truly establish either as a success. This leaves the reader skeptical and suspicious as to the articles credibility.
1. Can computerized satellite imagery foster development of imagination? Reading literature is arguably an exercise in which students have the ever-vanishing opportunity to develop their imagination by reading a great literary work. Readers create visual images in their brain based on the author’s skill and expertise in writing prose. In Candide, readers use their imagination to travel the 18th century world with Voltaire’s fiction. The writing in Candide is rich in description and detail and it leaves me pondering the value of a satellite image as a reference. It is, after all, a work of fiction and I do not think satellite photos do much to inspire the students to appreciate the enduring quality of Candide. However, this teacher states that it did help encourage students to read the novel and that is of some value. How well inspired the students were by the writing itself is remains an unanswered question.
2. Are these applications a use of technology for technology sake? My answer is yes. In both cases the use of technology was unnecessary. Using Google Earth was cute and a nice diversion but it was irrelevant. Voltaire wrote of these places 250 years ago and he traveled to very few of them. Because 20th century imagery has little to do with geographical locations created in the imagination of an 18th century writer the exercise seems indulgent. Actual knowledge of the locales Candide traveled to is an exercise in memorizing facts and this focus is misplaced as applied to the beauty of reading literature. Literature is not a science.
Also, the use of the MP3 player in the History class invites all kinds of distractions such as memory capacity, battery strength, possible theft, loss of saved data, etc… Although both of these experiments may have made the learning exercises more fun for the students, it seems to have little actual value as an application of technology for better learning.
Published in Learning and Leading with Technology, Aug., 2007.
In this article the authors report on how two teachers are using technology in their classroom. One teacher is in southern California and the other is in rural Australia.
The teacher in California teaches a high school Literature class. He routinely assigns Voltaire’s 18th century novel Candide. In an effort to foster student interest in the work and to entrench their desire for knowledge of great literature he is using Google Earth and the Internet as an application to the assignment. The novel is an epic adventure where the main character, Candide, travels throughout Europe and South America. In this class students use Google Earth to visualize computerized images of the many different geographical locations Candide traveled to. The teacher believes that this application of technology to the reading assignment has helped students gain a more substantial interest in the reading assignment because they are able to identify with the places written about. The teacher believes the application has bolstered his students’ interest in the assignment.
The Australian teacher teaches History. At his school students are prohibited from using or possessing MP3 players. This hard and fast rule has caused some tension among the students. In an effort to find some common ground, the teacher created a plan where the students could use their MP3 players to record information they were studying at differing local historical sites. The teacher reported that the plan worked well and that he observed greater performance by the students especially aural learners.
These examples illustrate how technology can be used to aid learning in the classroom. The article’s message firmly advocates adding technological elements to the curriculum and seems to suggest these as successful examples. However, the article is more an illustration of two isolated events than it is proof that this ‘mashing-up’ of learning and technology was a worthwhile endeavor. Although the article describes positive subjective assessment of the two experiences it is too shallow an inquiry to truly establish either as a success. This leaves the reader skeptical and suspicious as to the articles credibility.
1. Can computerized satellite imagery foster development of imagination? Reading literature is arguably an exercise in which students have the ever-vanishing opportunity to develop their imagination by reading a great literary work. Readers create visual images in their brain based on the author’s skill and expertise in writing prose. In Candide, readers use their imagination to travel the 18th century world with Voltaire’s fiction. The writing in Candide is rich in description and detail and it leaves me pondering the value of a satellite image as a reference. It is, after all, a work of fiction and I do not think satellite photos do much to inspire the students to appreciate the enduring quality of Candide. However, this teacher states that it did help encourage students to read the novel and that is of some value. How well inspired the students were by the writing itself is remains an unanswered question.
2. Are these applications a use of technology for technology sake? My answer is yes. In both cases the use of technology was unnecessary. Using Google Earth was cute and a nice diversion but it was irrelevant. Voltaire wrote of these places 250 years ago and he traveled to very few of them. Because 20th century imagery has little to do with geographical locations created in the imagination of an 18th century writer the exercise seems indulgent. Actual knowledge of the locales Candide traveled to is an exercise in memorizing facts and this focus is misplaced as applied to the beauty of reading literature. Literature is not a science.
Also, the use of the MP3 player in the History class invites all kinds of distractions such as memory capacity, battery strength, possible theft, loss of saved data, etc… Although both of these experiments may have made the learning exercises more fun for the students, it seems to have little actual value as an application of technology for better learning.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
EDUC 422 Introductory Letter
Hi,
May name is Ray Eller. I am from Phoenix and San Diego. From K-6 I went to Murphy Elementary in Phoenix and for 7-12 I went to Southwest Junior and Senior High in Imperial Beach, (San Diego).
The first computer I bought cost $3500.00. It was an Apple Power Book 520c with a modem, a WebCrawler, and a 33 mghtz processor. That was in 1992 and since then I have bought and used only PCs. I switched to PCs mainly because of the compatibility and availability of software. I have developed no great love for Windows but I like that Windows is everywhere. I use the computer everyday for e-mail, news and information. I have used PowerPoint and Excel but have no occasion to rely on them everyday. I don’t really depend on computer technology in the form of a personal computer. If my computer were to blow-up (after this class) I really wouldn’t care and it would diminish the quality of my life very little and I would probably not buy another.
I have read the CSUSM COE Mission statement. I first read it when taking EDUC 350 and EDUC 364. The Statement’s mention of social justice had the greatest affect on me. I was unaware that social, cultural, and economic differences had such a direct impact on student achievement. Now that I know the impact these differences can have I can make sure to address them when teaching in hopes that it will make a positive difference. The Statement’s focus on social justice and the necessity of teachers to be educated and aware of this did sway me towards applying to CSUSM because it seems so obvious after understanding the implications.
May name is Ray Eller. I am from Phoenix and San Diego. From K-6 I went to Murphy Elementary in Phoenix and for 7-12 I went to Southwest Junior and Senior High in Imperial Beach, (San Diego).
The first computer I bought cost $3500.00. It was an Apple Power Book 520c with a modem, a WebCrawler, and a 33 mghtz processor. That was in 1992 and since then I have bought and used only PCs. I switched to PCs mainly because of the compatibility and availability of software. I have developed no great love for Windows but I like that Windows is everywhere. I use the computer everyday for e-mail, news and information. I have used PowerPoint and Excel but have no occasion to rely on them everyday. I don’t really depend on computer technology in the form of a personal computer. If my computer were to blow-up (after this class) I really wouldn’t care and it would diminish the quality of my life very little and I would probably not buy another.
I have read the CSUSM COE Mission statement. I first read it when taking EDUC 350 and EDUC 364. The Statement’s mention of social justice had the greatest affect on me. I was unaware that social, cultural, and economic differences had such a direct impact on student achievement. Now that I know the impact these differences can have I can make sure to address them when teaching in hopes that it will make a positive difference. The Statement’s focus on social justice and the necessity of teachers to be educated and aware of this did sway me towards applying to CSUSM because it seems so obvious after understanding the implications.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)