RIP3 Reflection

RIP3 Reflection

                Throughout the course of the semester I have tried new things in my classroom. Technologically-geared activities that otherwise I would probably not have attempted since. After teaching for four years – I know that I have certainly do not have everything figured out, but I have become much more comfortable in my material as well as in my teaching style. If I had not had this class, I would have remained in that comfortable area – that is not a good thing. This is the reason teachers take classes – not to gain another step in the pay scale, but to keep learning and keep techniques fresh for their students. So, in short, this class has been great for introducing new techniques. I have learned that not every technology-based activity has to be difficult or elaborate. It simply has to be something that is better done using technology. Nothing has to be forced. That is something I learned from this course that I appreciate. I have created so many more tech artifacts than I thought I would: I’ve created a twitter account (that I now check regularly), I’ve created a YouTube channel account and created a flipped-classroom video to place on that account, I’ve created a blog (obviously), I’ve created numerous lessons based on readings from class, I’ve created a Nearpod account and given two lessons with that program. I have explored many other blogs, Web sites, apps to aid in my teaching. Speaking of apps, I have downloaded 5 new teaching apps to my personal device for later use.

                This semester’s growth and learning was incredibly meaningful and important. I have always known that I need to adapt for my students. I have always changed lessons and activities and adapted from 1^st hour to 7^th hour if classes need different things. With all of that adapting, I had not expanded into the realm of technology as far as I know I should have. I had myself tricked into believing that English was different. English shouldn’t be a flipped classroom because it, in a lot of ways, already is. English is about literature and writing – those things don’t lend themselves to technology. English is a humanity and technology takes away a piece of that humanity. I was telling myself a ton of lies like that. Not like I was announcing this to people or making it part of my teaching philosophy, nor was I sharing that with my kids. These were just a few things I told myself to almost justify why I wasn’t using technology the way I knew I probably should have been. Now, I see that English can be a humanity and still utilize technology. Students can connect to others via writing blogs and through technology actually have a much better chance of having their voices heard/read than ever before. I know now that I can absolutely incorporate a flipped-classroom style of teaching for a few lessons. I also know that English is an absolutely perfect time to incorporate technology to teach a concept or incorporate formative checks. I have learned that my students need to experiment with technology. I learned that it is my obligation to teach students to be flexible and open to using technology. I need to show them that is okay to try something and fail – that it is okay to be creative and branch out even if it means going back to the drawing board. Those are the most important take-aways a teacher can have. I used to think that the most important part of my job was to make them good writers and readers – and that is important – but now I also see that they have to be 21^st Century learners and I have to give them skills for functioning in a world that is constantly changing due, mostly, to technological advances.

                This class and what I’ve learned this semester reminds me of when I was first learning the art and the craft of teaching. When I was first learning what it meant to be a teacher, it seemed foreign in some ways. I knew I was learning valuable information, but I just didn’t know how it all connected back then. I didn’t know how it was supposed to look or sound or feel. That’s how I felt about using technology in the classroom prior to this course. I knew the basics. I knew how to use a few things. But overall, I didn’t know how it would look in practice. When I first was learning about how to be a teacher, it clicked when I was able to practice the craft. I tried things, and I failed miserably. Then I tried different things – still failed, but got better and better. I came alive in the front of a class in a way that I never thought I would while I was learning how to be a teacher. Similarly, with technology in the class, I have tried and failed and tried again. However, in the process of doing so, I have made the material more alive for the students. Plus, it’s always good for students to see me as human and see how not everything works out for me. In some ways, I felt like a new teacher trying out different technology-based lessons. I had the nervous-excited feeling of first-day teaching. I had the thrill of a lesson gone right (when it happened). It has been fun. I also know that if I’m not comfortable, that means I’m not lazy or complacent.

                I now know how easy it is to find information about a new classroom tool. Where I was intimidated before about knowing how to use something new – I now see the simplicity in going to a Web site or Googling a new tool to use. So many sites and apps are user-friendly. Also, I know that the sites that aren’t user-friendly or don’t meet my needs do not have to be forced – there are so many other options available. I know now that it is not a big deal to have a Twitter account or a YouTube account. I know that I can easily create those things for my students’ needs and my needs without making a big production of it. I know that there are so many free options for educators that I don’t need to worry about that complexity either. I know that simple lessons can be made fun with tiny additions of interactive technology. Take Nearpod for example, I gave the same lesson I usually give with the addition of three sections where students can use their phone to interact with the lesson. This made the world of difference to my students, and in turn, to me as well. I know that I can better reach students by engaging them in this way and I don’t have to rack my brain attempting something completely elaborate or worry about behaviors when students are all engaged.

                I will absolutely continue to use technology-based lessons sprinkled into my curriculum. I will use Nearpod again without a doubt as well as Polleverywhere.com. Both are very low maintenance and low commitment, but it makes a difference to students. I will also be attempting to use Google Lit to map out Odysseus’ journey during our unit over the Odyssey. I also want to use Cahoot as a formative assessment tool. I will consider using blogging or story-makers to get my students’ writing outside of the classroom. I know that there are other hurdles with that – parent permission and privacy, but it is something I am definitely more willing to try now. When I find the right time, I would like to attempt flipped-classroom lessons every now and again. I know now how simple it is to create, but I don’t want to have students do this unless it’s completely beneficial. I will now seek out opportunities to use technology instead of wait for someone to push me to do it. I am excited to try new things now instead of being cautious about these opportunities. 

December Class Post

Incorporating Gamification Into the Classroom

I definitely like the idea of gamification for material in the classroom. Students need to get up and move around – they need to feel the spirit of competition. I truly believe that students learn more while they are experimenting and playing with information. They also tend to perform better when a team is relying on the individual to contribute to a team success. It’s fun to see my students engaged and active – I see a different side of them as competition brings about a different type of kid. I know every teacher feels extreme joy when students leave a class asking if we’re going to do that again soon. As the years go on, I've incorporated more and more game-playing into the classroom; however, I have not done so much integration with game playing and technology.

While I know that I can begin incorporating more game-play into my classroom through technology, I also know that it would be very difficult for me to change my grading style to reflect the gain of badges versus grades. I’m torn. I keep asking myself: how can I get students to look beyond the grade and want to improve and learn from what they’ve done? Most of the time, my students simply look at the grade and recycle the paper and/or test. I’ve had revisions due in the past, but that is from my request, not through the students’ want or recognition for something to change in their own writing or performance. Now, this badges program idea has provided a way for students to have fun with the writing process and created a way for teachers to have a fun “grading” system. But still – I’m hesitant. I’m not sure my administrators would go for it; I’m not sure how parents would react; I’m uncertain as to how loyal  I could remain to a badges program. Is anyone else having doubt about this or am I too stuck in my ways? I often wonder if I need to open up more to ideas such as this – seemingly radical, but ultimately helpful for my students.

After reading further about Mascle’s classroom in Students respect the badge, I did become instantly jealous of the atmosphere her badges have created in their classroom. The super-hero badges are such a unique idea. “Wolverine – sharp and incisive (writing).” “Spiderman – great at making connections.” Those are so clever and they totally relate to the good writing skills students should be using to make their writing, or blog in this case, clear.  I’m sure the students feel complete ownership over the classroom since they were able to assign badges to whomever they saw fit. This sounds like an amazing class.

I do have to wonder though: Mascle reports that grading goes well and she hardly has students reject the grades given according to their classmates’ readings. I wonder how smoothly that would go in my own classroom. Students are so driven by grades and so very many are pushed by their parents to get the highest marks no matter what. I can see students reporting that they didn’t receive certain badges from other students because they were being bullied or their writing was misinterpreted by other students – which both cases could be true. Does this make me pessimistic? It feels a little pessimistic.

How would you incorporate this in your own classroom? I have been toying around with the use of a “low-tech” gamification badges to aid students in their writing. This is introduced in Mascle’s blog Why gamification. Give students little stamps or stickers as they earn badges for things they’ve done well in their writing? After they collect all of their badges, they receive their grade? A reward? I’m not sure.

Would you attempt the class blog? I have a colleague that tried a small version of blogging (she had students post opinions about a chapter to her Web site). She reported that it went well, but it wouldn’t be something she was able to do all of the time. Many students had trouble getting to a computer. I think a class blog sounds like an amazing way to give students a “real” world writing experience – but I’m held back by that same hesitancy I mentioned in the beginning. Will it work? Will I remain true to the technology? Will students be able to gain access to the Internet?

I know I have to do what is best for my students whether that makes me uncomfortable or not. Someone please give me a big push off the edge! 

November Reading Response - Technology Integrated Media

            Snow Fall would be an amazing story if it had been written in a traditional fashion. From a narrative point-of-view, the story is captivating due to the content as well as well-written due to the changing voices and variety of description, the foreshadowing and suspense. The author did an excellent job of obtaining all perspectives and weaving them in such a way that the reader cares about what happens to these people, and can “see” the terrain of the mountain and feel the extreme loss, panic, pain of the skiers and their families. On top of all of that, the story was well-organized. This type of story, with the varying voices, background stories, locations, and events could easily become muddled and disorganized, but the “chapters”, smooth transitions and clear movement of the story made this an excellent piece. Rebecca Greenfield’s review on The Wire, summed up the technological integration perfectly: “What's striking is how smoothly the illustrated tale transitions into even more full-bleed-style graphics that are as gorgeous as they are useful.” 

           Now, recognizing that this is not a story written in a traditional fashion, this piece is taken to an even higher level of excellence in reading experience. The reader has experienced the avalanche with these people after they have read/watch/interacted with this story.

           This work with integrating technology – video, images, historical information – does not seem forced. Many examples of technology-integrated journalism seem like they include integrated features for the sake of including technology, not because it truly enhances the reading experience. “The integration of multimedia in Snow Fall was purposeful. As New York Times Graphics Director Steve Duenes explained in an interview with Poynter Online, they were looking to find ways to create a seamless experience, ‘…So it didn’t feel like you were taking a detour, but the multimedia was part of the one narrative flow’” (Rue The Snow Fall Effect). 

           The review of Snow Fall on Storify was interesting – in keeping with the theme of technological integration, the review was presented through tweets that the crew and critics had sent out. This seemed effective to an extent. Definitely gained some information about the story with this format, but overall it seemed unnecessary and gimmicky as a follow-up to the article. This review made me recall a topic we discussed on the first day of class – the use of technology when it was a benefit, not just for the sake of using technology. 

           I was surprised by the some of the reviews that Snow Fall received – the backlash seemed like more than I had expected after I was done reading the piece. I understand that from a business point-of-view, the article breadth and depth cannot be repeated on a daily basis, but the reviewers that implied the technological integration was distracting were far off from what I had experienced. I was also very surprised by the reviews of Shark and Minnow. I thought the moving videos beneath the text in that story were much more distracting and made for more difficult reading there. What did you think? Who did it better? 

            My lingering question after reading through these interactive stories and their reviews is this: what will happen to traditional reading? I know Derek Thompson of The Atlantic doesn’t foresee this type of labor-intensive journalism becoming the norm, but there are many “less-involved” examples of this interactive media out there. I’m not trying to put on granny glasses and point a crooked, angry finger at the next generations of readers, but I’m just curious – how will this type of interactive, multi-media reading effect our up and coming readers that are born with this being the norm? Will it be easy for them to sit and read a classic novel when they are the ones coming up with images in their heads? Or, more positively, will this spark curiosity in readers to go and find information on the time period and part of the world to which their novels are referring? 

            Also I’m torn on this topic: I like the idea of stories and writing being more accessible to audiences – meaning, in this case, people who aren’t the best readers are aided by the pictures and the videos. But, I’m also not sure that is a great goal for readers. I know we’ve already moved toward the quick “snip-its” of information for today’s reader who only spends a few minutes looking at each Web-based article before moving on to the next. This reader is found in the classroom too, having trouble concentrating on a novel or a longer educational article for long periods of time. Is it ignorant and futile to want to hang on to the reader that can concentrate on text for longer than 10 minutes? Perhaps that is not a useful skill any longer. Perhaps in the real world, this is not something that is advantageous and I’m holding onto a lost skill/art. What do you think?

Reading Response for October 18, 2014

In the reading How Teachers Learn and Develop, the authors state that “The problem of knowing something but failing to have it guide one’s actions is ubiquitous. Many years ago, Alfred Whitehead (1929) warned about the dangers of inert knowledge. This involves knowledge that is available to people in the sense that they can talk about it when explicitly asked to do so…However, the knowledge is inert in the sense that it does not guide one’s thinking and actions in new settings” (Hammerness et. al, p. 372).   

This has been completely true in my experience. I understood the concepts in all of my theory and literature classes. I could write great papers, and ace exams, but getting into the classroom was a completely different experience. I acted on impulse and did not stop to think about the theory that supported my action or the state standard that was included in each seemingly off-topic talk (where students actually learn more than I could hope). 

As Whitehead is mentioned in the article again, he suggests that most pre-teacher knowledge “remains inert”. This is very true of some of my knowledge. My content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge I do very much use over and over again. However, knowledge about the developmental stages of children, and learning school law has remained inert. Is there a better way to prepare pre-service teachers for their own classroom? Of that, I am not sure, but I do know that it took several years’ experience to feel like I knew as much as a teacher should know and had forgotten all of the unnecessary information I didn’t require. 

Shifting gears…to Twitter

In Twitter is a Snark Valve, Mark Sample states that one of the most common uses of Twitter among his students is criticizing and snark. Instead of being angry, he is interested and sounds mostly pleased: “It’s involved, it’s witty, and most importantly, it takes an oppositional stance — a welcome reprieve from the majority of student writing, which avoids taking any stance at all.”

Sample states that although students use this as a way to voice negative opinions about material, at the very least it is working “to demonstrate that the student is in fact earnestly engaged with the material.”

Sample also finds this useful for getting things done in class. “By having a systematic, constrained outlet for the snipe and snark and sarcasm that smart twenty-year-olds might otherwise direct towards more civil discourse, or unleash outside of the classroom, or worse, bottle up, the Twitter snark valve frees up both class and the class blog for more “serious” dialog. And I’m putting “serious” in scare quotes because I believe even sardonic comments provide insight — insight into the topic under discussion, but also insight into how it’s being received by students.”

I feel a little torn about this. I see what Sample is getting after. He is seeing this as successful because his students are not robots – they are demonstrating that they have a voice and an opinion. However, students should know that there are real-world consequences for posting snarky remarks about professors, institutions, bosses, work environments, etc. Not everyone will be impressed that they have an opinion about their surroundings.

It’s wonderful to speak out about situations that are displeasing and deserve attention and it’s amazing to have a tool to allow a global conversation, but for situations like class, job, etc. there doesn’t seem to be a reason to allow the snarky tweeting to continue. Furthermore, Sample states that his students were completely aware that he was part of the Twitter followers and would be participating in the conversation. For his students to not care who read their “snarky” remarks shows a way more interesting phenomenon in my opinion. For the majority, students would most likely not directly share their gripes with their professor to his face, but they are completely fine posting it to a site where he will read their comments. They are only brave and opinionated when they are not directly facing the object of their contention. Those people are not agents of change – they are whining. Am I interpreting this correctly or have I completely gone on the defensive? Would you allow students to write snarky remarks about your classroom/teaching/educational material? If I’m way off the mark here, someone please bring me back to reality.

I do admit that this would give the teacher/professor a time to reflect on their teaching and material. In the article Reflections on Teaching with Social Media, the section about using Zotero interested me partly because I would be very interested in playing with this technological tool myself to see if this would be useful in my classroom. I was also intrigued by this section because the author admits that many students did not utilize the tool to complete their assignments. He has an honest evaluation of the technology used in his classroom. Self-reflection is a gigantic part of being a good teacher. Reflection of your own practices is great, but then also giving students a chance to reflect on your practices. Completely terrifying to make yourself vulnerable but totally useful to creating a better lesson, unit, and classroom.

Mark Sample’s Framework for Teaching with Twitter, his overview of Twitter-use in this later blog post seems to be more in line with what I would like to use Twitter for in my own classroom. “Or try Twitter as a platform for reflective thinking, asking students at the end of class to sum up the most valuable lesson of the day.” I have used Twitter sheets in the past where they are summing up their opinions or reflections to the lesson modeling a Twitter post without actually posting it to the Web. They simply turn in their sheets to me as an exit slip. I like this activity for the very reason that Sample includes: “In my experience, having only 140 characters to do so will actually make it much more likely the students give a concise and focused reflection, rather than some canned response they think you want to hear.” I like using the paper method for “Twitter Posts” because then I’m not forcing my students to use their Twitter for school and I’m not in danger of seeing things on their feed that I really don’t want to see. I also don’t have to deal with families that do not want their student on Twitter. Would you use the real-deal Twitter in your classroom? Would that create a more authentic experience and would it be worth the potential road blocks?

September Article Review - Technology, Fair Use, and Plagiarism

This month’s reading about Fair Use, plagiarism, and technology had me pondering one point – teacher responsibility and flexibility. As teachers, we are not only expected to stay current with our knowledge of all things in our subject area, but we are also expected to stay on top of current trends in pedagogy and technology. I am grateful for the Koehler and Mishra article that tied all three of those areas together. Somewhere deep down, I think I knew that all of the areas (pedagogy, technology, and content knowledge) all went hand-in-hand, but the article made it click. It just makes sense that all three of those ideas would have to work together – teachers are constantly taking ideas and asking ourselves: how would it best serve our children? How would that life lesson look in the classroom? And how can I incorporate some parallel learning that would get students involved in the process, since that’s how students think and learn now? According to the article “NCTE Definition of 21^st Century Literacies” students of the 21^st century need to know how to work with multiple media and think laterally and process multiple media. Students also need to be aware of the extreme ethical responsibilities that accompany an expanding amount of power to influence through the Web.  

There is also the underlying agreement that we are to keep up with our students and not only be able to relate to them, but also to be in tune with how they think, process, and ultimately learn. That’s a lot to keep track of, and this may seem like martyrizing the profession – but really, this is what we signed up for. We assumed this great responsibility when we decided to stand in front of young folks and attempt to teach them how to function in our ever-changing world. Students, parents, and communities trust us to be at the top of our game at all times. We promised to never stop learning and growing so that our students would always receive the best training in becoming a citizen and a life-long learner. 

It comes down to this – with new technology emerging fast than we can incorporate it in our classrooms, we have to be adaptable. Prensky’s article “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” was incredibly interesting. His article discusses interactions that I see every day at our school: teachers who have become anywhere between indifferent or angry that students have seemingly no desire to sit and read a book or listen to lectures. Prensky discusses how students need fast-paced, interactive lesson-designs, but an older generation of teachers are attempting to make them focus on what they view as strengths. I hear this conversation replayed over and over again during staff meetings and during lunch breaks – teachers lamenting over the lost art of reading, writing, socializing in the good ol’ slow-paced days. I’ve often thought of this as problematic thinking, of going backwards – why force our students to learn in the past when they will not be using those skills in their future? 

Prensky’s article has pushed my troubled thoughts to the forefront of my mind now. He claims, “…the single biggest problem facing education today is that our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language” (Prensky, 2001, p. 2). I can see two roads to this statement – one is that maybe this exchange from tech-savvy kids and socially-savvy adults could work as a great learning relationship for both parties. If each can see the value in the other, this could be a great environment. However, if either party is stringent and stubborn in their ways, this could be a very toxic learning relationship – especially if the stubborn party is the teacher. We should be the ones modeling the wonder and the want to learn about the digital environment – if teachers are out-right refusing because it’s new and strange and they’re uncomfortable, we are not only telling our students that they’re communication and world of social constructions are not valuable, but also that being stubborn and set in one’s ways is valuable. Isn’t part of our job to demonstrate the value of education, change, and being a life-long learner? 

This article has caused me to look at how I’m teaching my students. I immediately think of teaching grammar – the drill and kill of grammar will not work. It hasn’t worked for some time. One solution was to teach grammar solely through writing, but I was finding my students unable to grasp everything – the rules, the exceptions, the reason behind it all – so I went back to directly teaching grammar skills. This time however, I use games and interactive, quick lessons to drive information home that should have been memorized years ago. Competition, quick bits of information, use of cell phones, and real-world application has aided in making these fundamental rules stick. They are going to be judged by their writing and communication skills in their future careers – our students need to be able to learn in such a way that works for them to be successful. 

I’m walking away with this lesson from the article: teachers need to stop being critical of the way that our students’ brains have been hard-wired. It’s done – there’s no changing it – so we may as well get on board and start teaching in a way that our students will grasp and in which our students will flourish.Students and their futures are our responsibility. We are not shaping them to function in a world that no longer exists. We are shaping them for a world that may not yet exist. Teachers have to show students what an adaptable, responsible, life-long learner looks like.

 Koehler, M.J. & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1) 60-70. Retrieved from https://tldeunomaha.files.wordpress.com/
NCTE. (2014). NCTE definition 21st century literacies. NCTE Position Statement. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition
Prensky, Marc. (2001). Digital immigrants, digital natives. On The Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing

**Can't get my works cited entries to have a hanging indent to work on the blog!