0:00 - 1:02: Logistics of the Session and Feedback on Previous Assignments
- Feedback on assignments and logistical updates are accessible.
- Feedback on the presentation task was given, highlighting the significance of word choice and presence.
- Feedback on the active learning assignment was given; students did a good job integrating active learning, so additional remarks were not necessary.
1:02–4:50: Demo and Prediction Discussion (Relating to Active Learning)
- The use of demos was suggested in the comments section of the active learning assignment.
- An optional reading for the active learning session (Class 5 or 6) is the Crouch and Mazour paper from Eric Mazour's Harvard group.
- Demos are criticized for being active for the teacher but not always for the students.
- Crouch and Mazour's research on first-year mechanics shows that even students who only watched a demonstration answered questions incorrectly.
- Expert blind spot: Experts believe that concepts demonstrated will be easily understood by students.
- The study's conclusion was that students' performance on the post-demo quiz was greatly enhanced when they were required to make and discuss predictions before seeing the demo.
- It could be a waste of time to show demos without any prior predictions.
- This idea aligns with George Pia's theory that one should ask for predictions before responding.
4:50 to 9:58: Creating Prompts at Various Bloom's Taxonomy Levels
- Comments regarding the task of developing prompts at different Bloom's Taxonomy levels.
- Overall evaluation: Students performed admirably.
- Feedback from students: The assignment was very helpful in helping teachers decide the right level of prompts.
- Feedback from students: Asking challenging questions challenges the teacher.
- The instructor is aware that questions from real life can incorporate several levels.
- The potential to grade using this method, such as allocating points according to the question's cognitive level.
- Caution from the instructor: Students should be made aware of the logic if grading in this manner to prevent misdirected effort.
- A student's recommendation is to include formulas in questions to help students focus on more than just memorization.
- The instructor concurs, saying that searching for information is common in real life.
9:58–11:00: Overview of Instruction Using Educational Technology
- Goals of the session: Describe best practices and potential pitfalls while identifying the right technologies for learning objectives.
- Home Depot analogy: Instead of asking, "What tool do you want?" a good employee asks, "What are you working on?"
- Basic Idea: Choose the technology that advances the desired learning outcomes first.
Defining Educational Technologies from 11:00 to 23:54
- Students are asked to define terms based on what they have read.
- Student recommendations for qualities: A tool that facilitates communication, improves learning, uses an electronic device, and builds a community.
- Observation of the instructor: When technology is used properly, these are largely positive characteristics.
- The student's cynical perspective: If students fail to see the purpose, they may become disinterested.
- Comment from the instructor: Not all features are necessary for a technology.
- Debated: Does it need to be electronic? There are many similarities between educational technologies and a blackboard.
- In conclusion, educational technology has no single definition.
- Student comment: Technology can be distracting if not properly moderated.
- The instructor concurs: Associated with efficiency; may result in ineffective use.
- Comment from a student: Students can use online resources to stay at home, which could help them learn independently.
- Instructor response: This suggests repositories of online content.
- Comment from a student: Using clickers to track attendance may deter students from learning.
- Talk about using clickers to track attendance: Students discovered that attendance was "crappy" in one class.
- Rachel's experience as a student: The professor was ill-prepared to use the technology.
- Some technology has a low bar for basic use, while others take a lot of instructor time.
- Formal definition based on reading: "Technological procedures and materials developed for education and/or performance enhancement".
- Technology may be supplementary or essential.
Reiteration of the Fundamental Idea
Always begin with the intended learning outcomes - 23:54 - 31:45: Frameworks for Classifying and Choosing Educational Technology
Classification by the Instructor
The classification made by the instructor includes:
- Use of clickers, projections, and simulations in the classroom.
- Participation outside of the classroom (e.g., wikis, enrichment, and collaboration tools).
- Delivery of content outside of the classroom.
- Technology-based student assignments (e.g., website development, audio recording, online problems).
- Evaluation and feedback (e.g., online tests for summative assessments, clickers for formative assessments).
- Administration of the course (LMS acts as a grade book).
Handout Framework Introduction
The Backwards EdTech Tool Flowchart and the Sections Framework:
- Backwards EdTech Tool Flowchart: Begins with the question, "What do you want students to do?" and suggests tech tools using guiding questions. It aids in thinking backwards from the task to the technology and relates to the levels of Bloom's Taxonomy.
- Sections Framework: Employs the S-E-C-T-I-O-N-S criteria (student characteristics, cost, ease of use, teaching and learning, interaction, organization, novelty, and speed) to encourage thoughtful technology selection.
The SAMR Model
The SAMR Model is a well-known model for comprehending why a technology is used:
- S - Substitution: Technology takes the place of another tool without altering its functionality (e.g., an online syllabus in place of a paper one).
- A - Augmentation: Technology offers a useful enhancement over the alternative (e.g., online homework submission).
- M - Modification: Technology makes it possible to radically rethink tasks (e.g., embedding multimedia, email).
- R - Redefinition: Technology makes it possible to create completely new tasks that were previously unthinkable (e.g., hypertext navigation).
Bloom's Taxonomy and Technology
The work of Kathy Schrock links Bloom's Taxonomy levels to particular apps/tools that can support activities at those levels (remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create). It's critical to understand which levels a tool supports.
Technological Demonstrations and Resource List
31:45–33:25
- AWW (A Web Whiteboard), a free web application for collaborative drawing, is demonstrated.
- Students drawing graphs in thermodynamics class is one possible use case; it minimizes disruptions in the classroom and permits anonymous participation.
- AWW SAMR analysis: Not redefinition, but probably augmentation or modification.
- A list of educational technologies compiled from readings and experience is displayed, including Backchannel, Today's Meet, and Socrat.
In-Class Exercise: Applying Ideas to a Selected Technology
33:25–36:50
The task assigned: Consider a learning objective, a previously unexplored technology to help achieve it, explain the decision, situate it within the SAMR model, and discuss its application and possible challenges.
- Answers will be entered into a Google Doc that is shared.
- An obstacle was found: The Google Doc was difficult for some students to access or edit (app problems, server recognition). Access may present a risk.
Lightning Round Activity (Sharing and Troubleshooting)
36:50–40:35
Activity description: As partners provide guidance, students share their concerns, learning objective, and preferred technology in pairs. Each pair has two minutes.
- Activity starts.
- Highlighted is an example of an obstacle: A student selected software that costs $12,000 a year, highlighting the substantial financial barrier.
- During the activity, the instructor records hearing a variety of concepts, applications, and challenges.
- After the noisy activity, there will be a planned period of silence to allow for processing.
Linking Learning Theories to Educational Technology
40:35–42:45
This section discusses how technology use relates to the learning theories previously covered: constructivism, behaviourism, and cognitivism.
Activity Overview
The Jigsaw method is the activity used in this session.
Phase 1: Homogeneous Groups
Groups were assigned one theory to:
- Explore behaviourism, constructivism, or cognitivism
- Identify a technology that aligns with that theory
- Determine a relevant learning objective
Student Insights
Students shared their thoughts on cognitivism, focusing on how information is perceived and interpreted.
Phase 2: Heterogeneous Groups
New groups were formed to:
- Share findings from Phase 1
- Include one expert from each theory
Demonstration
The Jigsaw active learning method was demonstrated by the instructor.
Constructivist Example
An example of a constructivist approach is setting up computer stations with internet access for students to select subjects and engage in active learning.
Session Conclusion
The session is over, but the activity will be completed in the upcoming class.
Post-Session Assignment
A post-session assignment is mentioned for further exploration.
