Hardware in the Classroom

Hardware available in my school includes: computers, monitors, mouse, keyboards, printers, CD/DVD RW drives, USB ports, USBs, scanners, image projector, digital camera, external hard drives, Interactive Whiteboards, Chromebooks, Tablets and the server hardware. Most hardware I use every day without any thought and I guess we all take them for granted. These tools help teachers and students access information and create, play, watch, learn, store and print. 

In the last 12 months our principal has focused on purchasing tablets for use in each classroom. He chose Tablets as they were cheaper than iPads and our technical support team recommended them.  The ratio is 1:3 in infants and 1:2 in primary classrooms.  Most teachers use the tablets in small group activities using the web, apps, camera etc. The teachers were given tablets 12 months before they were introduced into the classroom.  The teachers had the time to get used to the tablet before they tried using it with the students.  Teachers also had the ability to mark their roll on the tablets.  Some teachers embraced the tablets while other put them in a drawer or cupboard and did not use them at all.  When the classes were issued tablets the same teachers who embraced this technology suggested Apps to purchase for their classes and they used them to help their students learn every day. 

We had a Family Maths night at our school last year.  Each Stage used various tools to show the families what Maths looks like in the classroom today.  Our stage used the Interactive Whiteboard and tablets to play a Maths games and the parents loved it.  We also had some hands on activities using concrete material and the parents had the opportunity to ask questions of the teachers so they could feel comfortable about helping their child learn about Maths. Students love to use the Tablets.  They think they are just playing games and they are very comfortable using this type of technology.  Teachers have different reactions to the tablets depending on their own experiences. The teachers who embraced the introduction actively use the tablets with their students and plan learning experiences using appropriate apps and games.  Teachers who are not comfortable or unwilling to learn about the tablets tend to use the Tablets as a “Free time” activity for their fast finishing students.  

Using technology has made a huge difference to teaching and learning in my classroom. Personally I use the Interactive Whiteboard for most lessons.  It is visual and the children are able to be involved in the lessons as they often show their knowledge when using the board.  Tablets, computers and Chromebooks are available for the students to use in lessons.

Technology seems to be heading to smaller more capable devices, mostly with touch screen or hands free functions.  We are now able to buy smart watches that are compact and attached to our wrists, large multi-touch screen desks, Smart boards, robots, 3D printing and head mounted displays are already a reality in some classrooms. Fridges, benchtops and walls can now fitted with computers to make life easier.  The world is getting smaller with all this technology at our fingertips anywhere and anytime. The future of Educational Technology could only follow these trends. I predict we will see smaller technology that is easier to carry for students that is able to more functions quicker in the future. I also think white/smartboards will be replaced by touchscreen LCD screens capable of detecting multiple touch inputs from many students simultaneously.

Voogt, Knezek, Cox, Knezek, & Brummelhuis (2011) raised a few issues that I think could be researched more like: 

Can ICT provide situations where students can learn at their own pace, focus on problem solving and be involved in their assessments?
What other ways can we use infrastructure to address individual student needs?
Is technology making a difference and how can that be measured?
How can we change the teachers’ attitude and competencies using ICT?

Cox (2012) also raised a few issues that I think could be researched more like: 

Do children who use ICT at home have an advantage in the classroom?
Extensive teacher training was an issue in the 1980’s, why is it still an issue now?
Are surveys the most effective way to research? 
Should research methods change?

Cox, M.J. (2012), Formal to informal learning with IT: research challenges and issues for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00483. Located http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00483.x

Voogt J., Knezek G., Cox M.J., Knezek D.&ten Brummelhuis A. (2011) Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? Acall to action. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 15 November 2011, DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00453.x. Located http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00453.x

Technology, Pedagogy, And Content Knowledge (TPACK)

TPACK is a framework that I have not encountered before but often I find these visual representations easier to understand. After viewing the video by Punya Mishra and Matt Koehler at SITE 2008 in Las Vegas I was a little confused because I thought the framework was fairly straight forward but after reading the reading I now understand that the framework helps us to identify what we as teachers need to learn in order to use technology to get the best results. It is difficult to plot where I would be on the Framework but in some cases I would be close to the middle (TPACK) because I have been on this year level for a few years and I am familiar with the content and pedagogy related to this age group. Over the last few years I have been able to introduce various technologies to help cater for the differing learners we encounter but there is always room for improvement. However this will change dramatically when I change grades or when a new syllabus in introduced.
I think the TPACK framework might be useful to help me focus on an area that I need to develop greater skills.  With the new History Syllabus this year I will definitely need help in the content and technology area as this will be all new. I will need to learn the content(CK) first then I will have to investigate technologies(TK) that I can use to help keep my learners engaged and eager to want to learn more and I am teaching effectively.
Roblyer and Doering have altered the name of the framework to expand the "T" into "Tech" - they refer to it as "Tech-PACK" but I don’t think that Technology is necessarily a “critical” part of the framework. Sure technology drives change, achieves higher academic results and personalises learning (Smith & Throne, 2007) but as mentioned in the readings (Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009) technology also includes things like pencils and microscopes. We need to remember that content knowledge (CK), pedagogical knowledge (PK) and technological knowledge (TK) are all part of the complex combination of what teachers need to know and do. Shulman (1986) and Hughes (2000) stressed the importance of how all these components work together, rather than separately. While Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009) thing the heart of good teaching with technology are using content, pedagogy, and technology, plus the relationships among and between them.
Effects on the technological pedagogical content knowledge of early childhood teacher candidates using digital storytelling to teach mathematics“This study aimed to present early childhood teacher candidates' experiences preparing digital stories and to reveal the resulting changes, if any, in self-reported technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)”. http://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/03004279.2013.804852

Digital Natives, the Net-Gen, Screen-agers...

Marc Prensky wrote this paper in 2001 and he obviously had a good grasp on digital natives perhaps his own children were part of his study so I can understand why this article was so influential.  

I am not a digital native but I love to use technology and learn from my students and children.  My sons have taught me more about technology than any lesson, text book or course in passing comments and in the “How do you not know this mum?” moments.  I am definitely not a digital immigrant because I believe children can learn in a variety of ways and it should be fun.  

My students are definitely digital natives.  Five and six year old children are so comfortable using smart phones, iPads and tablets so when we use them in Kindergarten they are engaged and love to learn using games.  I have found that while they are comfortable using these items they are not as comfortable using computers and keyboards.  Keyboards are challenging to Kindergarten children as the letters are all uppercase and some children find it difficult to identify uppercase letters unless they are in the child’s name. It appears the children have less experience using computers and keyboards so we need a little more explicit teaching of the keys and skills on this type of technology. I think the variety of experiences of technology is just like any other subject.  Teachers need to know their students prior knowledge to plan and program for the needs of their students.   Like other subjects there will be a range of abilities and teachers need to be able to cater for all the learning needs at whatever level their students are at.

After reading this article I wondered about the differences in our brain.  The sentence “..students think and process information differently from their predecessors” really helped me understand the differences and the challenges I face in the classroom. It also makes me feel better as a mum when my children tell me that I just don’t get it. 

I can understand that some teachers have issues not being the “expert” when teaching technology but most of these teachers are digital immigrants and do not value learning from children. This issue has been discussed at school but until these teachers change their way of thinking or retire the issue will unfortunately remain.

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1108/10748120110424816

http://www.agent4change.net/resources/research/1088

Digital Literacy

I like Josie Fraser’s definition of digital literacy = digital tool knowledge + critical thinking + social engagement. Yoram (2004)defines Digital literacy survival skills in the digital era. Sue Thomas defines Digital Literacy as an important part of transliteracy: to read, write and interact across a range of platforms, tools and media.  The literature varies; some restrict the concept to the technical aspects of operating technologies, while others apply it in the context of cognitive and socio-emotional aspects of work in a digital environment. Digital Literacy it is more than teaching skills it needs new social practices for the skills and strategies to be used effectively. Its relevance to teaching and learning in the classroom is vast as new skills need to be practised for the students to maintain that skill. There are negative and positive attitudes to digital literacy including:
Limitations/Negative attitudes
Teacher skills/attitudes
Skills not taught explicitly to teachers and students
Insufficient hardware
Loss of past work if not backed up or saved correctly
Slow/unreliable internet access
Resourcing digital literacy support in an on-going and sustainable way

Positive/Effective attitudes
Children are familiar with technologies
Supports and helps develop traditional literacies
A life-long practice
Skills, competencies and critical reflection
Social engagement
Recognising and helping learners integrate their prior conceptions and practices
Teacher skills/attitudes/engagement
Children like to receive recognition for work completed and many apps, websites etc have instant rewards that the children respond well to.  This keeps them engaged in the task longer and they enjoy these “games”.
Individual scaffolding and support

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1108/10748120110424816

Technology Can Wait

What an interesting article.  When reading this I thought this was a drastic approach at first but some of the arguments do have merit.  

·         Studies do not clearly show better test scores or gains using computers

·         Extensive training for teachers to ensure physical activity and learning through creative, hands-on tasks

·         Inhibits creative thinking, movement, human interaction and attention spans

However data from studies can be manipulated depending on what side of the debate you are on.  Extensive training of the teachers I think is the most important message from this article.  Empowered well trained teachers would be confident to incorporate any approach and create a strong sense of mission in any school. What if we compared this school to a school that used the same techniques to incorporate technology?  That would be an interesting study. Teachers who are passionate about physical activity or creative teachers always incorporate their passion into their student’s lessons. Also teachers who genuinely cater for all their learners will have activities that allows their students to learn in physical,  creative and hands-on tasks.

This article states that technology is a distraction when the basic skills are crucial but also acknowledges that young people who are used to technology will not tune in without them so it is a fine line.

The parents play an interesting role in this article. They acknowledge great teachers with interesting lesson plans are more important than technology and they also plan to teach their children technology skills at home when they are ready. I agree great teachers are well prepared and make every lesson engaging and interesting for their students.  Some of these children would get better technology training from parents who work at Google, Apple etc but what about families with limited technology expertise? Surely these children would be disadvantaged by this no technology policy. Without explicit digital literacy skills I believe the majority of these children will be disadvantaged. Perhaps it is time to create a scope and sequence of technology skills that are planned and explicitly taught from Kindergarten to Year 12 and beyond.

When reading this article I thought the Waldorf school had a similar philosophy to Steiner Education Australia and a quick search showed that there are 40 Steiner/Waldorf schools in Australia. Like Waldorf schools, Steiner schools delay the formal integration of digital technologies until high school. An ‘unplugged’ experience in primary school is seen as crucial for children to develop an uncluttered self- image and the ability to develop rich communications skills.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html?_r=0
http://www.steinereducation.edu.au

The Role of Technology Use in the Classroom

We should use technology in the classroom to help engage the learners of today. The children in Primary schools today have never known a world without technology and most of them have been using technology from a very young age.  It surprises me the amount of children in prams who have their parent’s smart phone, a tablet or iPad playing games or watching YouTube clips while they are shopping or at sporting events. Children are comfortable using technology and don’t realise they are learning using these teaching tools.  Learning is therefore fun and entertaining and the children feel they are having fun just playing while learning.  Using technology is useful in most Key Learning Areas.  Introducing concepts using Interactive whiteboards, showing YouTube clips to whole class, children listening to modelled reading, learning maths concepts, visiting websites, using apps on tablets or iPads, the list goes on and on.  There are times however when technology is not the most effective learning method and should not be used for creative and hands on tasks.  When children measure, experiment, design, build or any other hands on activities that technology cannot give the same learning results. Sure there are many apps that can help children learn to measure but without hands on experience the children can only speculate on how much liquid could fit into a cup or if that jug does hold more liquid than that mug. Technologies are tools to be used in conjunction with hands on experiences to deepen the knowledge our students can gain during their lessons.  

Reflecting concepts, hopes, beliefs and attitudes.

There is no doubt that technology drives change, achieves higher academic results and personalises learning (Smith & Throne, 2007). Our students are also innately multitaskers surrounding themselves in multiple devices and sources of information (Livingston, 2009), so using technology in the classroom is catering to their needs and wants.

Paul Saettler (1990) said "Computer information systems are not just objective recording devices. They also reflect concepts, hopes, beliefs, attitudes" (p. 539). I believe our "concepts, hopes, beliefs, and attitudes" are reflected in our current approach to educational technology through various ways. Using of technology in schools helps our students become lifelong learners with the skills to make informed choices, perform all tasks needed now and in the future using the skills they have learned in an educational setting.  The concepts taught at school will give a solid foundation for our students in the future so when a new concept is encountered they will have the past experience to help them conquer new challenges. Students of today are confident users of technology and they are often seeing a future using technology in their careers. They focus on the technology and skills that they will need for that future which helps them plan ahead.  Unlike older generations our students believe anything is possible and technology is no different.  Children do not fear they will “break” technology by playing with it.  They confidently discover many features of technology that most adults were unaware of. Therefore Paul Saettler was right computer information systems are much more than recording devices. They do reflect concepts, hopes, beliefs, attitudes of all users.