Week 3 thoughts

Once again, lots of food for thought in the articles for week 3.  I was drawn to the wording offered by Fullan for the criteria for integrating technology and pedagogy (which then made me remember last week's article that talked about "minding our language and buzz-words".) 
Irresistably engaging seems to be key for any type of teaching.  A quote that I used to use under my email signature (until we weren't allowed to have quotes added there), by Alfred Mercier, was "What we learn with pleasure, we never forget".  Although teachers aren't expected to "put on a show", presenting new learning in an engaging manner can make all of the difference for some students.
Elegantly efficient and ensuring that the addition of technology does not complicate our lives seems to be a given as well.  Keeping in mind, that there will be a learning curve while learning the technology.
Technologically ubiquitous - technology does seem to be "the norm" and is available to many of us (students and teachers) 24/7.
Steeped in real-life problem solving is a work in progress, from my perspective.  This is where the real learning happens.  I will be bringing this point back to my staff so we can think about ways that we can offer authentic and purposeful learning opportunities to our students, even at a young age.  I know it is doable, we just need to think outside the box of what we currently do. Problem-based learning seems to be a great way to get started on this.


I liked how Fullan referred to Hattie's work about the effect size of instructional practices.  If you haven't read any of his Visible Learning books, here is a link to at least see all of the practices that he rated https://visible-learning.org/hattie-ranking-influences-effect-sizes-learning-achievement/  I was happy to see that Jesse talked about the "low floor, high ceiling" tasks.  This has been a focus in my building this year for lesson planning and learning activities. 
When Jesse mentioned the Literacy with ICT framework, I remembered receiving a copy of the continuum in one of my first years of years of teaching in Manitoba, possibly when it had first come out.  There was a big push for a couple of years to refer to that document regularly, but to be honest, I haven't thought or heard about it in the last 7 years or more.
  
If you aren't able to read the entire Stratosphere book by Fullan, I found a link to a good review that summarizes the entire book https://mindsharelearning.ca/book-review-stratospher-by-michael-fullan/


The Learning First, Technology Second article seemed to reinforce many of the ideas we had previously read about.  The quote that resonated with me was, "Teaching with technology is about the learning first and the tool second".  I found the Triple E Framework to be interesting to read and I appreciated the table that connected the framework to the ISTE standards for students. 
Our division has jumped on the SAMR model bandwagon, and one of my favourite graphics to share with teachers provides detailed information on the types of apps, activities and action verbs that teachers can use as a guide.

I found a great article that made me think about what type of technology we should have in our classrooms to provide creative spaces that better support student learning and engagement in the 21st century  https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/8-high-tech-gadgets-that-are-making-classrooms-sma/  A couple of the quotes that spoke to me were, “Stuffing schools with high tech tools isn’t the answer to offering dynamic learning experiences,” and “new learning needs new environments.”  Flipped classrooms is one of the topics mentioned.

Week 2: So Now What?

I really enjoyed the content in this past week's readings because there were many of the points that I could easily relate to, and there were other points that gave me pause to think.

The Oblinger and Hawkins (2006) article was a very easy read.  When I asked myself the question that they posed, "Difference in what?", it made me think of the SAMR model, that was also referenced during the presentation.  When we look at way that teachers are using technology, it can show us the depth of the difference we are making.  When we are only using the Substitution and Augmentation levels of the model, we are enhancing the learning.  What we really need to strive for is the transformation of the learning, which corresponds to the higher levels in Bloom's taxonomy. 

To be honest, I found the Selwyn (2015) article much more challenging to process.  I did enjoy the questioning of the "buzz words" and "tag lines" because this language is so prevalent in our everyday discussions about technology.  I doubt I will change the terms I use right now, but I will give it some thought.


I very much enjoyed digging into the Zhao et al. (2016) article, which is why I choose to present that one.  The article justified my own thinking that computers or technology can never "replace" teachers.   When I reflected on how technology has changed since I began my teaching career, there are many areas where technology has been able to save me much time: booking parent/teacher conferences, report card writing, grade tracking, communication with families, attendance keeping, etc...  None of this has actually changed the "learning" for the student, but it does allow me more time to focus on my students and their learning. 


One of the takeaways from the article was when I read, "In an ecosystem, each organism has its own role to play" (pg. 13). I realized that I need to remember what my niche is, and to focus my efforts there and allow technology to take over in areas that would be considered in the niche of technology.

This report by Winthrop, Williams and McGivney (2016) https://www.brookings.edu/research/skills-in-the-digital-age-how-should-education-systems-evolve/  on Skills in the Digital Age discusses how the education system must evolve in order to transform education.  These authors would agree with Zhao et al. who stated that, despite all of the advances in technology, the impact on education has been extremely limited, "650 million—The number of children globally who have not reached key developmental and learning milestones".


So what do we do? We (as in each individual teacher) need to take a critical look at what we are doing, and why we are doing it.  What is it that our students need in order to grow and learn, and in what ways can we use technology to support them?  Let's take one step at a time and work up way up that SAMR ladder.

Thoughts from week 1

Here goes my real first blog post....

I found the article by Postman much easier to read and digest than the readings by Morris and Stommel.  One quote by Morris and Stommel did make me think a bit more deeply about how we demonstrate what we value at school.  "Educators and students alike have found themselves more and more flummoxed by a system that values assessment over engagement, learning management over discovery, content over community, outcomes over epiphanies."  This quote makes me think of the differences between EY, MY, HS and university experiences for students.  In my EY school, I must say that we do a great job of focusing on engagement, community and discovery.   In my son's Intro to Bio class last fall, his classes consisted of a video lesson that replayed every hour.  We must remember to keep the joy in the learning experiences of all students. 

I appreciated the thoughts shared in the article by Postman.  His ideas mainly resonated with me on a personal level, but it did make me think about how to better serve my students at school.

"Culture always pays a price for technology".  When I think of my two sons, currently aged 16 and 19, they had very different experiences growing up.  For my oldest son, Connor, he had very little technology available to him so he often had buddies over to hang out in the evenings or on the weekends.  My younger son bought his own smartphone at age 13.  At this point, he pretty much stopped hanging out “irl” with friends and all communication seemed to be done on Snapchat.   As for me, shopping trips to the mall with a girlfriend are far and few between now.  With online shopping, I can “save time” by orderng everything I need without getting off my couch.  Let's not even talk about SkipTheDishes...

The analogy of the red food colouring used to explain how technological change is ecological made me realize how true this is.  We cannot turn back the clocks to how things used to be and we must be mindful of the impact this change is having on us.  Students are going to have cellphones, and they are going to bring them to school.  We need to choose how to respond to this reality.  The experiment that took place in this article https://www.macleans.ca/society/technology/should-schools-welcome-cell-phones/ would be an interesting one for more schools to try.  I know that when I impose a temporary "family ban" on cellphone/technology (family nights, trips down south), my boys always comment on how much fun they had and are surprised that they "survived" without their phones, Netflix, etc...


I firmly believe in the statement, “technology is not part of God’s plan… and that its capacity for good or evil rests entirely on human awareness of what it does for us and to us.”  As educators, we must be able to put our personal views of technology aside and ensure that we teach our students the skills of digital citizenship and prepare them with the critical thinking skills needed for the 21^st century so that they can “use technology rather than be used by it”.   As I am currently in a K-4 school, I will need to put some thought into how to best sow the seeds in these young children.  It is nice to know that there are resources out there https://savvycyberkids.org/ to help get us started.