Reflective Synopsis
Technology in the classroom always seems to be viewed with a sense
of both fear and wonder. Due to the ever
changing nature of technology it is no surprise that some teachers are hesitant
to change their ways to accommodate technology.
The current Australian curriculum no longer views ICT (Information
Communication Technologies) use an optional extra with educators now being
expected to include ICTs wherever it is
appropriate (ACARA, 2012). Not only does the curriculum expect it but students who are constantly exposed to technology expect to be engaged by this same technology in the classroom (Prensky, 2005). As such, the time for
arguing whether or not to include ICTs in the classroom has passed and we now
need to consider how best to utilise the vast array of technology available to
us. Over the course of my E-learning journey I have had the opportunity to
experiment with all sorts of ICTs I had not experienced or considered
preciously and some of these will be featured later on in this synopsis. Before looking at specific technologies this
synopsis will first consider the vital legal, safe and ethical considerations related
to any use of technology and the educational theory behind the use of ICTs as
well as the importance of frameworks such as TPACK.
The internet has provided students and educators with a wealth of
information at their fingertips but it also brings with it a slew of ethical
and legal quandaries as well as new child safety issues unique to the field of
information technology. Ethical issues online can be grouped under privacy,
property and usage descriptors and place students in a position of needing to be
aware of copyright restrictions and fair usage of intellectual property which
must be explicitly taught in tandem with computer skills (Johnson, 1999). Safety
issues arise in the form of exposure to inappropriate content (violent,
sexually explicit, hateful, etc.), potential for misuse of personal information
students may supply online and in the physical peril related to online stranger
danger with the potential for meeting people, especially those claiming to be
other than what they are increases infinitely by access to the internet (Fasso,
2012). Interaction with ICTs provides new ways for old problems to occur and
this is true of the previously mentioned issues but most worryingly ICTs have
led to the advent of cyber bullying which has the potential to destroy young
lives through campaigns of threats, slander and abuse via social media, phones
and various other technologies. The
department of education and training supplies guidelines for navigating the new
risks that technology brings into the classroom and these can be viewed here. In order for students to operate safely,
legally and ethically online teachers must be aware of the dangers students
face, be acquainted with legal rights and responsibilities and also model the
appropriate behaviour at all times, meaning that teachers must be vigilant in
the fair use of property, attribution of authors, provision of personal
information and how they conduct themselves online.
A major component of this e-learning course has been to gain an
understanding into how ICTs fit in with existing learning theories. Constructivism has been identified as the
learning theory best supported by the use of ICTs because they facilitate the
construction of knowledge and therefore more complex learning (Fasso,
2012). In a constructivist model of
education each learner creates knowledge and unique interpretations of external
ideas and experiences (Snowman, et. al., 2009). We have experienced this most noticeably
in online activities such as the Wiki mobile phone debate. This activity asked students to contribute
their opinions, thoughts and knowledge about whether mobile phones should be
used in classrooms. By engaging in this
discussion using a Wikispace students were able see other peoples perspectives
and use them to inform their own opinion and broaden their understanding of the
topic. Constructivist learning by its nature is collaborative and should lead
to outcomes that are not controlled or predictable (Jonassen in Mergel,
1998) and this activity achieved these outcomes as I think a lot of
people were really surprised about where the discussion took them and how their
own ideas could be challenged.
Another important lesson learnt through this activity was the
importance of scaffolding in order to stimulate higher order thinking. Blooms Taxonomy outlines different levels of
thinking skills and the types of activities people participate in can stimulate
low level learning such as data recall or trigger higher order skills like
analysing, evaluating and creating (Clark, D., 2010). In order to facilitate higher order thinking
in the Wiki discussion the De Bono’s Six Hats thinking tool was employed as a
scaffold. See my blog entry on this discussion for an explanation of De Bono's hats. By scaffolding the conversation with this
thinking tool the contributions were not just random thoughts but focussed and
considered answers informed by the whole group’s contributions. Weekly
activities were also scaffolded, in my case, using a PMI (Plus, Minus,
Interesting) chart. I found that using a
PMI to evaluate each technology helped order my thinking and allowed me to make
considered, analytical judgements rather than simply stating how I felt about a
particular technology. Proper scaffolding whether it takes the form of six
hats, a PMI or a SWOT analysis is paramount in ensuring the success of learning
activities, especially those incorporating ICTs. It has been clear from reading other blog
entries and my own experiences that if ICTs are not carefully employed and
thought out they will be more likely to lead to distraction than learning.
In
addition to learning theories, decisions on learning design regarding ICTs are
also supported by the TPACK (Technological Pedagogical and Content
Knowledge) framework. In 1986 Shulman
introduced the phrase ‘pedagogical content knowledge’ (Intime, 2001) proposing
that beyond having content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge as isolated
areas there needed to be blending of the two domains in order to teach effectively
(Mishra & Koehler,2006). TPACK
extends on this thinking by introducing technology as a third domain. The TPACK framework allows teachers to
consider the relationship between teaching and technology and thus transforms “the conceptualization and the practice
of teacher education, teacher training, and teachers’ professional development” (Mishra & Koehler,2006) in order to support
implementation of ICTs. With this is mind I will now
reflect on four of the technologies I have explored over the course of my
e-learning journey in terms of their effectiveness as teaching tools.
ICT
Tool 1 - Wikispaces
Wikispaces
provide online storage spaces known as Wikis in which users can upload content
which can be revised, edited or replaced by any user. A range of file types are supported on Wikis
(audio, video, images) but they are commonly heavily text based. Wikis support constructivist learning approaches
with all users being able to add and revise data and collaborate to form ideas. I have personally used wiki spaces for a
range of purposes including using them as an online information hub for group
work, participating in the mobile phone debate (as mentioned earlier) and also
for creating a companion site for a unit on building solar boats (featured here
4r-solarboatchallenge.wikispaces.com/home). As a teaching tool the versatility
of Wikis makes them ideal for a whole range of different activities. I have listed some ways a Wiki could be
utilised in class along with a PMI in my Week 3 blog post.
ICT Tool 2 - Podomatic (pod
casting)
A
podcast allows users to record and upload audio files that can be stored online
and accessed by other users. Sites like Podomatic
provide a search function for people to search for other users’ podcasts as
well. I chose podcasts as my ICT tool
for this group because they provide a highly accessible and incredibly easy to
use tool for students to make audio recordings.
From a connectivist standpoint podcasts are a great learning tool because it is easy to search
for information on a wide range of topics and access it anywhere although, as I
have mentioned in my blog posting on podcasts it would not be wise to allow students to randomly search for podcasts because
of the unknown content. This is where
scaffolding once again is so important when implementing any ICT. In addition to accessing other peoples’
podcasts it is the ability for students to record their own which really
interests me. Oral presentation is a
daunting task for a lot of students (and adults!) and podcasts allow students
to easily record orals without even having to show their face as they would on a video recording which means
there is less of a privacy issue with uploading podcasts online comparatively. You can listen to my podcast discussing my
PMI on Podomatic in my blog post here.
ICT Tool 3 - Glogster
Glogster
is a site which allows users to create digital posters and scrapbook style
displays which can include images, videos and audio files. I chose Glogster for my focus for this group
of tools because despite Prezi and Power Point both being excellent
technologies I felt that Glogster provides the most creative, accessible and versatile
tool for students where as Prezi and Power Point are often more of a teacher
tool. Although Glogsters are not a
collaborative tool like a Wiki they still lend themselves to constructivist
learning by providing authentic, real world tasks (Jonassen in Mergel,
1998) such as creating a poster
to address real environmental or social issues and have them actually exist
online and be publicly viewable . In my blog
I have included a PMI on Glogster and I have also embedded a Glog that I
created as a digital task card to scaffold independent science learning.
ICT Tool 4 – Bubbl.us (Concept
Mapping)
The
final ICT tool I have chosen to investigate is Bubbl.us which is used for
making concept maps sometimes called mind maps.
Concept mapping is based in cognitivist theory and works on the premise
that the mind works on imagination and association (Buzan, T., 2007). A concept map looks similar to a brainstorm
on paper/screen but differs considerably in that it shows how ideas are
connected and gives insight into the process that the creator of the map has
travelled to get to their ideas. I chose
Bubbl.us over the alternative mind map tool suggested largely because of its ease
of use and attractive appearance which would make it more appealing to students. In terms of usefulness in the classroom the
benefits of using concept maps have been experienced already using hand drawn
maps but the online version gives you all the benefits of a concept map
(coherent thought process, visual representation of ideas, insight into
students minds) with the added benefits of being able to be accessed online and
revisited and edited as students develop new ideas and correct thinking. This can even lead to collaborative learning and
reflective practice as students can compare and comment on each other’s ideas
and help evaluate and refine their own thinking practices. For a full PMI and example of a bubbl.us
concept map visit my blog posting here.
Final Thoughts
In experiencing
a range of new technologies over the last few weeks I have come to appreciate
just what can be possible with ICTs in the classroom. With consideration to learning theories and
TPACK I believe that all classrooms can benefit from the use of technology but
it has to be used thoughtfully and carefully.
ICTs are powerful tools that must always be handled with care. If teachers are vigilant in the ethical, safe
and legal practices and intelligent about how they scaffold learning
experiences it really is possible to achieve the harmonious blend of
technology, pedagogy and curriculum that will yield amazing results from
students.
References
Australian
Curriculum, Assessment Reporting Authority (2012). Information and communication technology capability. Retrieved 16
August, 2012, from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/GeneralCapabilities/Information-and-Communication-Technology-capability/Introduction/Introduction
Buzan, T.
(2007). Maximise the power of your brain. Retrieved August 16, 2012,
from http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/mod/page/view.php?id=12563
Clark, D.
(2010). Blooms taxonomy of learning
domains. Retrieved 17August, 2012, from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/bloom.html#cognitive
Fasso, W. (2012). The
TPACK framework. Retrieved 15 August, 2012, from CQUniversity e-courses, FAHE11001
Managing E-Learning, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/mod/page/view.php?id=12575
Fasso, W. (2012). Working
legally, safely and ethically online: the issues. Retrieved 15 August,
2012, from CQUniversity e-courses,
FAHE11001 Managing E-Learning, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/mod/page/view.php?id=12573
Fasso, W. (2012). A
brief overview of learning theory. Retrieved 15 August, 2012, from CQUniversity e-courses, FAHE11001
Managing E-Learning, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/mod/page/view.php?id=12563
Intime
(2001). Teachers in-depth content knowledge.
Retrieved 15 August, 2012, from http://www.intime.uni.edu/model/teacher/teac2summary.html
Johnson,
D. (1999). Handout for teaching students right from wrong in the digital age.
Retrieved from http://www.janinelim.com/bc/4thur/ethics.pdf
Mergel,
B. (1998). Learning theories of
instructional design. Retrieved 16 August, 2012, from http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm#The%20Basics%20of%20Behaviorism
Mishra,
P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological
Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Retrieved
15 August, 2012, from http://site.aace.org/pubs/sigs/sig-Mishra-Koehler-TCR.pdf
Prensky,
M. (2005). "Engage me or enrage me": what today's learners demand.
Retrieved 16 August, 2012, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0553.pdf
Snowman,
J., Dobozy, E., Scevak, J., Bryer, F., Barlett, B., and Biehler. (2009). Psychology applied to teaching (1st
ed.). Milton, QLD: John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd.
