I enjoyed reading these articles because they emphasize how this is not just a technology course, but an educational technology course. Teachers should not be technocentric, putting the focus on technology before student learning. And, it seems that putting student learning first does to not significantly decrease the amount of technology used in the course. When, I teach, I hope that I always first consider what my educational goals are and then find technology that best suits those goals. I appreciate that Dr. Hofer and Dr. Harris have provided a long list of ways that technology can be used to support certain learning activities in the Social Studies classroom. One of my favorite ideas is the historical diary blogpost.
We have not directly discussed the AT approach concepts in my Methods course. However, many of the instructional models we have learned involve the knowledge building and convergent and divergent ways of expression, so it is great to see how technology can further those learning goals.
The Activity Types approach to instructional planning certainly makes a great deal of sense to me. The three key ideas seem intuitive; yet it is easy to imagine being sidetracked occasionally. I think teachers probably need to be reminded that decisions about curriculum goals, student learning needs, and activity types need to be made before decisions are made about incorporating technology.
I have no doubt that these articles will be very valuable reference tools for me as a teacher. Having a taxonomy specifically created for my content area with example technologies included is very helpful. Linking Bloom’s Taxonomy to specifics by content, as you have done, takes teachers many steps closer to effective instructional planning and technology integration. I don’t have any questions or concerns at this point…..I will let you know if anything comes up as we work through our Activity Types Planning Guides.
The first article was a bit edu-speak for me. My eyes started to gloss over a bit, and I had to focus to pay attention while I read. However, I felt it was worthwhile when I did. The eight corresponding continua were a lot at once initially, but I can see how they would be helpful.
The taxonomies seem particularly helpful. I've been reading for another class about focusing on what your plans will make students actually think about (e.g. motorcycles may be a connection to physics, but they'll probably be thinking about sweet bikes, not physics). Looking for activities based on your planned outcomes seems like a good way to avoid choosing items for their entertainment value.
I agree with Hannah--I liked how the articles emphasized education, not just technology. I think we'd probably all get pretty frustrated if the course just focused on how to integrate technology into our classes in a meaningless kind of way or a technology for technology's sake kind of way.
In the English article, one of the parallels to our methods class was the focus on "viewing." We talked about how there are different "language arts"--speaking, listening, reading, and writing--AND viewing. In our instant gratification kind of society, viewing skills are pretty important! I actually want to incorporate this into my student teaching. I plan to show two different versions of The Great Gatsby and having the students compare and contrast the versions and the scene in the book itself.
I think how the first article focuses on “Learning Goals.” Using the backwards design really makes sense when trying to integrate technology into a lesson. The teacher should always think of what they want their students to learn first. They than can start getting creative on how they want to deliver the message or engage the students in an activity. This is where technology should enter the lesson.
I recently taught a lesson for my English Methods class. I organized the lesson by focusing on my topic first. They I found examples of how to make the topic interesting and memorable. Without even thinking much about it, I began to make a Powerpoint that included converted YouTube clips and edited videos. The students loved the visual and audio aspect of my lesson, and it also made the topic much more memorable.
Integrating technology into the English Language Arts is so easy. Like Emily said, Dr. Moore has been stressing to us that a text doesn’t always have to be a book. Students can receive information through a visual, audio, or kinesthetic inspiration.
I found the LAT charts very beneficial. Sure, some of the ideas were pretty basic, but a lot of the suggestions for technology supported learning were new to me. I will definitely print out this chart and use it as a reference.
I enjoyed reading these articles because they emphasize how this is not just a technology course, but an educational technology course. Teachers should not be technocentric, putting the focus on technology before student learning. And, it seems that putting student learning first does to not significantly decrease the amount of technology used in the course. When, I teach, I hope that I always first consider what my educational goals are and then find technology that best suits those goals. I appreciate that Dr. Hofer and Dr. Harris have provided a long list of ways that technology can be used to support certain learning activities in the Social Studies classroom. One of my favorite ideas is the historical diary blogpost.
ReplyDeleteWe have not directly discussed the AT approach concepts in my Methods course. However, many of the instructional models we have learned involve the knowledge building and convergent and divergent ways of expression, so it is great to see how technology can further those learning goals.
The Activity Types approach to instructional planning certainly makes a great deal of sense to me. The three key ideas seem intuitive; yet it is easy to imagine being sidetracked occasionally. I think teachers probably need to be reminded that decisions about curriculum goals, student learning needs, and activity types need to be made before decisions are made about incorporating technology.
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt that these articles will be very valuable reference tools for me as a teacher. Having a taxonomy specifically created for my content area with example technologies included is very helpful. Linking Bloom’s Taxonomy to specifics by content, as you have done, takes teachers many steps closer to effective instructional planning and technology integration. I don’t have any questions or concerns at this point…..I will let you know if anything comes up as we work through our Activity Types Planning Guides.
The first article was a bit edu-speak for me. My eyes started to gloss over a bit, and I had to focus to pay attention while I read. However, I felt it was worthwhile when I did. The eight corresponding continua were a lot at once initially, but I can see how they would be helpful.
ReplyDeleteThe taxonomies seem particularly helpful. I've been reading for another class about focusing on what your plans will make students actually think about (e.g. motorcycles may be a connection to physics, but they'll probably be thinking about sweet bikes, not physics). Looking for activities based on your planned outcomes seems like a good way to avoid choosing items for their entertainment value.
I agree with Hannah--I liked how the articles emphasized education, not just technology. I think we'd probably all get pretty frustrated if the course just focused on how to integrate technology into our classes in a meaningless kind of way or a technology for technology's sake kind of way.
ReplyDeleteIn the English article, one of the parallels to our methods class was the focus on "viewing." We talked about how there are different "language arts"--speaking, listening, reading, and writing--AND viewing. In our instant gratification kind of society, viewing skills are pretty important! I actually want to incorporate this into my student teaching. I plan to show two different versions of The Great Gatsby and having the students compare and contrast the versions and the scene in the book itself.
I think how the first article focuses on “Learning Goals.” Using the backwards design really makes sense when trying to integrate technology into a lesson. The teacher should always think of what they want their students to learn first. They than can start getting creative on how they want to deliver the message or engage the students in an activity. This is where technology should enter the lesson.
ReplyDeleteI recently taught a lesson for my English Methods class. I organized the lesson by focusing on my topic first. They I found examples of how to make the topic interesting and memorable. Without even thinking much about it, I began to make a Powerpoint that included converted YouTube clips and edited videos. The students loved the visual and audio aspect of my lesson, and it also made the topic much more memorable.
Integrating technology into the English Language Arts is so easy. Like Emily said, Dr. Moore has been stressing to us that a text doesn’t always have to be a book. Students can receive information through a visual, audio, or kinesthetic inspiration.
I found the LAT charts very beneficial. Sure, some of the ideas were pretty basic, but a lot of the suggestions for technology supported learning were new to me. I will definitely print out this chart and use it as a reference.