I was really pleased to be assigned Blendspace as the site I would present to others, because it was really easy to be enthused about the opportunities that this site presents. Both EndNote and Google Drive are useful sites for organizing online life for both students and teachers in that both allow you to store documents, organize your documents into folders, upload research, share with students and colleagues, etc. Whereas these two sites function as places to organize your documents and research, Blendspace acts as a forum where digital content is made accessible and easily organized for lesson planning.
The site is super user friendly. When you first enter the site, the front page makes a claim that lessons can be created in under 5 minutes. I did not understand how this was possible, but then when you go in to create a lesson, the site provides several easy drag-and-drop templates. You simply search for digital content, videos, images, audio, etc. from a variety of sites provided on the right side of the page (youtube, google, gooru, opened, educreations, etc.) and drag your desired content to a box to the left. You may then add text, or a quiz to the resource provided. The site also provides a user friendly pop up for creating a quiz, which includes a video tutorial. The string of digital content is combined into a lesson that teachers may share with the community on the site, but more importantly, that they may share with their students. A code is provided so that students may enter the page, view your lesson, and make comments and take quizzes on the information. Additionally, you may keep track of who is viewing your lesson as a way of assessing participants from your classes.
In presenting the site to my fellow students, some questions were asked that I didn't necessarily know the answer to, and required me to take a second look. For instance, we discovered that Blendspace also has a bookmarking tool that you can add to your search bar called "Blendspace It!" So then, if you find a resource outside of Blendspace that you would like to put into a lesson plan, you simply click the bookmark tool while you are on the site and it is placed in Blendspace for you. Additionally, I discovered that, although you are not able to follow individual teachers on the site, if you like a lesson using a heart icon the right side of the screen, that lesson is added to your homepage. Although I wouldn't become reliant on Blendspace for the majority of my lessons, I think that it is certainly a useful tool for differentiating instruction and providing digital content in a way that is easily accessible to all parties involved.
I also like that Blendspace does much of the work of filtering out digital content that would not be appropriate for the classroom context. When I typed in Shakespeare on the youtube tab, I was not immediately bombarded with content that was not educational, like video clips from Shakespeare in Love or something of the like. Most of the content seemed relevant, which saves so much time because, let's be real--how much time do you spend sorting through muck to find something you can actually use? Too much. Nobody has time for that.
Sunday, July 27, 2014
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Scratch Fever!
One of our tasks for this week was to play a video game, and make a case for whether or not games are useful resources for teachers, or more generally, if students learn anything from playing games. We've all heard that children who play violent video games are generally more violent. Children who play video games in general waste hours on hours playing mindless games, rather than being productive individuals. Now, I'm not arguing that some do spend countless hours playing video games, and I do not necessarily condone it excessively, especially when it comes to the point that a student's social skills are lacking because they interact with others primarily via video games (my brother is a perfect example) and online. However, I do certainly think that there are merits to video games, and that integrating video games into the classroom can be a useful way to differentiate instruction and engage students.
I played the game Scratch, which is an animation creation game. You start out doing a tutorial where your first character is a cat. You learn that you can make the cat do certain things by dragging a motion, under a motion tab, to the blank script area. You then learn that you can add a sound, you can change the scene, you can change your character, you can make your character change colors by adding an event like "when the down arrow is pressed, the character's color will change," and you can repeat the sequence. The tutorial teaches you that if you have your cat take 10 steps forward, 10 steps back, add a drum beat before, in between and after the steps, and drag a repeat sign around the whole thing, the cat will dance. There are so many ways to combine these motions, sounds, events, etc. into the script to make an animation. The task is to decide how you want your animation to look, and then to create the perfect combination to accomplish your goal. I was hooked, and played the game much longer than I intended to. I was trying to make a dinosaur character dance, while changing color, and to the strumming of a guitar. I had a really hard time getting the sequence right so that the guitar would be playing while the dinosaur was dancing.
In my endeavor with Scratch, I could see many of the ideas presented in Gee's "Good Video Games and Good Learning" playing out. For instance, Gee states, "Players are producers, not just consumers; they are “writers” not just “readers”. Even at the simplest level, players co-design games by the actions they take and the decisions they make." This is true for sequential video games, which is what I think Gee is directly speaking to here, but with Scratch the player is most definitely the producer and a writer rather than simply a reader. The game provides the framework, but the player makes all of the decisions as to how the animation will play out. Gee then makes a suggestion that, beyond gaming, in classrooms students like to have autonomy, such as having a hand in writing their own curriculum, creating and establishing classroom norms, and generally having their opinions be heard and valued. The suggestion here is that, we know that many students enjoy video games, so what is it about video games that engages students? One point Gee is making is that having control/autonomy is important to a video game, and so why not make a classroom more like a video game?
Additionally, gaming provides a safe domain for students to take risks and fail. The Scratch game for me was a trial-and-error process, and I had to problem solve to reach my goal. I believe that if students are provided with a domain in which learning through trial-and-error, or learning from failure, is welcomed and encouraged, then the disposition that "it's okay to fail, just try again," will translate into their daily lives as well. If students are provided with a safe classroom environment that encourages risk-taking, they will be less likely to back down after failure. I think that integrating good video games into the classroom can be an excellent resource for teachers, but even if some teachers are hesitant, not using video games directly, but learning from them and developing an understanding of how students like to think and learn is also very useful.
I played the game Scratch, which is an animation creation game. You start out doing a tutorial where your first character is a cat. You learn that you can make the cat do certain things by dragging a motion, under a motion tab, to the blank script area. You then learn that you can add a sound, you can change the scene, you can change your character, you can make your character change colors by adding an event like "when the down arrow is pressed, the character's color will change," and you can repeat the sequence. The tutorial teaches you that if you have your cat take 10 steps forward, 10 steps back, add a drum beat before, in between and after the steps, and drag a repeat sign around the whole thing, the cat will dance. There are so many ways to combine these motions, sounds, events, etc. into the script to make an animation. The task is to decide how you want your animation to look, and then to create the perfect combination to accomplish your goal. I was hooked, and played the game much longer than I intended to. I was trying to make a dinosaur character dance, while changing color, and to the strumming of a guitar. I had a really hard time getting the sequence right so that the guitar would be playing while the dinosaur was dancing.
In my endeavor with Scratch, I could see many of the ideas presented in Gee's "Good Video Games and Good Learning" playing out. For instance, Gee states, "Players are producers, not just consumers; they are “writers” not just “readers”. Even at the simplest level, players co-design games by the actions they take and the decisions they make." This is true for sequential video games, which is what I think Gee is directly speaking to here, but with Scratch the player is most definitely the producer and a writer rather than simply a reader. The game provides the framework, but the player makes all of the decisions as to how the animation will play out. Gee then makes a suggestion that, beyond gaming, in classrooms students like to have autonomy, such as having a hand in writing their own curriculum, creating and establishing classroom norms, and generally having their opinions be heard and valued. The suggestion here is that, we know that many students enjoy video games, so what is it about video games that engages students? One point Gee is making is that having control/autonomy is important to a video game, and so why not make a classroom more like a video game?
Additionally, gaming provides a safe domain for students to take risks and fail. The Scratch game for me was a trial-and-error process, and I had to problem solve to reach my goal. I believe that if students are provided with a domain in which learning through trial-and-error, or learning from failure, is welcomed and encouraged, then the disposition that "it's okay to fail, just try again," will translate into their daily lives as well. If students are provided with a safe classroom environment that encourages risk-taking, they will be less likely to back down after failure. I think that integrating good video games into the classroom can be an excellent resource for teachers, but even if some teachers are hesitant, not using video games directly, but learning from them and developing an understanding of how students like to think and learn is also very useful.
Sunday, July 20, 2014
Common Core Assessment
As I was saying last time, I'm not comfortable with using standardized tests as a method of evaluating a teacher, but I'm also most certainly not comfortable with using them to evaluate student ability or intelligence. Doing well on the ACT, although perhaps a good predictor of how well you take tests and perhaps a good predictor of your academic skill-set, is not a necessarily a good predictor of how well you will do in college. Being smart and unmotivated is not a good recipe for doing well in college, and standardized tests do not assess your academic dispositions. Additionally, especially as a future English teacher, it seems almost criminal to teach students to the test.
In class we worked with the Smarter Balanced Practice Test, which is modeled after a computer-based test, and accessible by grade level. I chose to work with English at the eighth grade level. Not only was the content particularly difficult, it was also visually disconcerting, and the questions did not test how well students could read and comprehend the passage. The passage was dauntingly long. I know many adults (including myself) who would not have the patience to read through the whole passage, especially for a timed test, and especially for a computer-based tests when you feel like your eyes are bleeding the longer you stare at the screen.
Also, the layout of the test was not pleasant. On the left half of the screen you have the passage, and on the right are the questions which are differentiated in that there are multiple choice, short answer, read the passage and answer the question, etc. It is disconcerting to the eye to have passages on both sides of the screen. It is disconcerting to the mind to have 3-5 different types of questions to answer as well, and especially ones that include passages from the text in which you find the answer. What then, is the incentive to read the passage at all? If I am teaching my students how to pass this test, the message seems to be "do not read anything in depth." Read the questions and locate the answers in the text. The right answers are the goal, not necessarily comprehending the passage. Whereas in my classroom, I would like them to learn how to close-read passages, comprehend using critical thinking strategies, and to actively work with the text to construct meaning. The two are contradicting. How can you do both? And are both necessarily productive for the student?
I also discovered that many students go into test-taking already impeded by outside pressures. In class we performed an activity in which we were asked to respond to an essay question, some could use only their index fingers to type, some only one finger, some could not use spell check and then some had no restrictions. If a student goes into a test believing that they will not do well based on past negative experiences, then it is very likely that they will not be confident taking the test. If a student is hungry, has a headache, had a fight with their mom, or simply does not care about the test, they are restricted in how well they will do on that given day. The likelihood that for every student, the atmosphere and mindset for a standardized test will be just right is an impossibility really. All in all, it seems like the testing system as it is does a disservice to teachers, but most importantly it does a huge disservice to students. Students should be at the center.
In class we worked with the Smarter Balanced Practice Test, which is modeled after a computer-based test, and accessible by grade level. I chose to work with English at the eighth grade level. Not only was the content particularly difficult, it was also visually disconcerting, and the questions did not test how well students could read and comprehend the passage. The passage was dauntingly long. I know many adults (including myself) who would not have the patience to read through the whole passage, especially for a timed test, and especially for a computer-based tests when you feel like your eyes are bleeding the longer you stare at the screen.
Also, the layout of the test was not pleasant. On the left half of the screen you have the passage, and on the right are the questions which are differentiated in that there are multiple choice, short answer, read the passage and answer the question, etc. It is disconcerting to the eye to have passages on both sides of the screen. It is disconcerting to the mind to have 3-5 different types of questions to answer as well, and especially ones that include passages from the text in which you find the answer. What then, is the incentive to read the passage at all? If I am teaching my students how to pass this test, the message seems to be "do not read anything in depth." Read the questions and locate the answers in the text. The right answers are the goal, not necessarily comprehending the passage. Whereas in my classroom, I would like them to learn how to close-read passages, comprehend using critical thinking strategies, and to actively work with the text to construct meaning. The two are contradicting. How can you do both? And are both necessarily productive for the student?
I also discovered that many students go into test-taking already impeded by outside pressures. In class we performed an activity in which we were asked to respond to an essay question, some could use only their index fingers to type, some only one finger, some could not use spell check and then some had no restrictions. If a student goes into a test believing that they will not do well based on past negative experiences, then it is very likely that they will not be confident taking the test. If a student is hungry, has a headache, had a fight with their mom, or simply does not care about the test, they are restricted in how well they will do on that given day. The likelihood that for every student, the atmosphere and mindset for a standardized test will be just right is an impossibility really. All in all, it seems like the testing system as it is does a disservice to teachers, but most importantly it does a huge disservice to students. Students should be at the center.
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
John Dewey knows where it's at!
Over the past few days, at least for me, the prevailing concern has been the idea that both students and teachers are subject to evaluation based on standardized tests. A House Bill passed in 2011, and extended upon in the legislation this year, has indicated that student test scores will account for 40% of a teacher's evaluation as effective or ineffective, and additionally that there were loud voices saying that it should account for 100%. Curriculums are designed to meet state standards, to ensure that students are achieving on standardized tests, and additionally to prepare students for college and future jobs. How often do you hear someone say that the purpose of secondary school is to prepare students for college? The sort of one-size-fits-all curriculum that is developed to meet state standards is not effective for all students, and often especially for students who come from generally low-performing districts and districts that lack resources.
John Dewey offers a very different view of what the purpose of school and education is for students. In "My Pedagogic Creed" under the heading "What School Is," Dewey states that he believes school to be primarily a social institution. Everything that I have been learning and reading about teaching students like social justice, social emotional competency, self-care, teaching the whole child, etc. points to the social aspect of education being more important or at least as important as teaching content. Having the ability to interact and collaborate with others is an essential skill both for college and the workforce, and not something that can be quantitatively tested.
Additionally Dewey says, " I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living. I believe that the school must represent present life - life as real and vital to the child as that which he carries on in the home, in the neighborhood, or on the play-ground." Education does not serve the sole purpose of preparing students for a future that oftentimes is not currently relevant to them. I remember I used to say to my mom, "It seems like middle school is useless. It's like I am biding my time until high school when grades actually matter." In my mind school itself was an assessment, and if these grades were grades that no college or employer would ever look at, what was my incentive to do well? To learn? Nah. Then in high school I would say, "It seems like high school is useless. It's like I'm biding my time to get to college when my life actually starts." All in all, I think that my experience, especially my middle school experience, would have been different with the presence of a truly effective teacher who made me and the other students feel like we were valuable and validated our opinions. Or even, a teacher who simply differentiated instruction. Relate the content you are teaching students to daily life, make it explicit, and make it real. Literacy is a part of everyday life, so make it relevant!
In the final segment of his pedagogy Dewey touches on how school can be a part of social progress. His final statements are teacher-oriented, in which he says that teachers are not solely responsible for training individuals but for the formation of a proper social life, and also he states "I believe that every teacher should realize the dignity of his calling; that he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of proper social order and the securing of the right social growth." I like the idea of teaching as a calling, and also the acknowledgment that becoming a teacher is a step toward social progress and reform, and finally that the teaching profession is a dignified profession. Not everyone can teach. It takes methods, skills, pedagogy and years of application and experience. It is dignified.
John Dewey offers a very different view of what the purpose of school and education is for students. In "My Pedagogic Creed" under the heading "What School Is," Dewey states that he believes school to be primarily a social institution. Everything that I have been learning and reading about teaching students like social justice, social emotional competency, self-care, teaching the whole child, etc. points to the social aspect of education being more important or at least as important as teaching content. Having the ability to interact and collaborate with others is an essential skill both for college and the workforce, and not something that can be quantitatively tested.
Additionally Dewey says, " I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living. I believe that the school must represent present life - life as real and vital to the child as that which he carries on in the home, in the neighborhood, or on the play-ground." Education does not serve the sole purpose of preparing students for a future that oftentimes is not currently relevant to them. I remember I used to say to my mom, "It seems like middle school is useless. It's like I am biding my time until high school when grades actually matter." In my mind school itself was an assessment, and if these grades were grades that no college or employer would ever look at, what was my incentive to do well? To learn? Nah. Then in high school I would say, "It seems like high school is useless. It's like I'm biding my time to get to college when my life actually starts." All in all, I think that my experience, especially my middle school experience, would have been different with the presence of a truly effective teacher who made me and the other students feel like we were valuable and validated our opinions. Or even, a teacher who simply differentiated instruction. Relate the content you are teaching students to daily life, make it explicit, and make it real. Literacy is a part of everyday life, so make it relevant!
In the final segment of his pedagogy Dewey touches on how school can be a part of social progress. His final statements are teacher-oriented, in which he says that teachers are not solely responsible for training individuals but for the formation of a proper social life, and also he states "I believe that every teacher should realize the dignity of his calling; that he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of proper social order and the securing of the right social growth." I like the idea of teaching as a calling, and also the acknowledgment that becoming a teacher is a step toward social progress and reform, and finally that the teaching profession is a dignified profession. Not everyone can teach. It takes methods, skills, pedagogy and years of application and experience. It is dignified.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)