Toy design student sample collaboration

I collaborated with my student teacher, Julia Bemis, and our Early Childhood Education teacher Lelani Gordon.
My original collaboration colleague was John MacDonald, but this year due to time constraints and class schedule I implemented the unit in a semester physics class instead of an integrated academic/CTE engineering design class.

I was very thankful of the flexibility and enthusiasm of Lelani Gordon. She was extremely welcoming and supportive of the collaborative effort between my physics students and her early childhood high school and preschool students. Our high school students met twice. The first time the physics students interviewed Lelani's students to generate some criteria and constraints. On the second meeting, the preschoolers actually tested the toy designs and provided feedback to my physics students. Julia Bemis, my student teacher, helped implement the unit and evaluate the projects. This authentic design project would not have been a success without collaborative efforts of Lelani and Julia. Thank you guys!

My Brain...

Right Brain/ Left Brain Quiz The higher of these two numbers below indicates which side of your brain has dominance in your life. Realising your right brain/left brain tendancy will help you interact with and to understand others. Left Brain Dominance: (7) Right Brain Dominance: (13) Right Brain/ Left Brain Quiz

Stage 3 Collaboration

When John MacDonald and I sat down to discuss our integrated classwork we began by sharing our personal opinions, thoughts and visions. We sketched out different outlines and diagrams as we discussed to visually chart our brainstorming and how our ideas for the unit could dovetail. As previously mentioned in the other collaboration post we are both very open in our communication, transparent in our interaction and mutually respect each others teaching styles and passions. Working from such a foundation allows us to take risks together.

The Stage 3 template was more detailed than my colleague would generally expect when planning out instruction. He is more inclined to use a "lead sheet" approach to unit plans. After identifying the big ideas and interim tasks, he gives the students short bits of direct instruction between divergent exercises, projects and quizzes and then work on a final performance task.

John is an incredible collaborator. He spends many hours coordinating with outside experts and planning authentic experiences for his students in and outside of the laboratory. It is quite amazing to watch how he can inspire and engage students with the environment he creates.

The stage 3 template inherently included some aspects of John's technology standards because of the technological design standards from the Science MLRs. He recognized how many of the WHERETO facet experiences were similar to what he has used in his previous technology classes and that the sequence was reasonable. We did discuss leveraging the expertise of the art teachers who work in close proximity for the sketching portions of the facets. This additional potential collaboration could prove fruitful.

I know John and I will continue to discuss and implement the unit and I anticipate some more collaboration with Julia Bemis, a student teacher, and the art department next year.

Ch 12 TPACK In-Service Education

Judith B. Harris helped infuse content and pedagogy back into traditionally “technocentric” (Papert, 1987 as quoted by Harris, Mishra and Koehler in this publication) K-12 technology integrations and reforms with her thoughtful use of activity types. I admire any flexible framework that can assist me in planning learning experiences that are varied, effective, appropriate and useful. These flexible design scaffolds are very helpful as an in-service teacher that prefers an andragogical approach that recognizes me as a " goal-oriented, purposeful organism" (pg. 267). I can use the activity types in "authentic [teacher] tasks" in my classroom which maximizes the utility of technology integration when developing my own TPACK.

The discussions by Harris made me reflect upon our school technology integration efforts. I was able to identify "efficiency aids" (reporting, attendance and evaluation systems) and "extension devices" (drill and kill sites and software) and how they differ from more "transformative" (wikis, blogs, rich student authoring tools, and other communication technologies that are beginning to support inquiry, collaboration and reconfigure student-teacher and student-student relationships) which our faculty is beginning to explore.

Harris' definition of technology integration is clear and purposeful.

The pervasive and productive use of educational technologies for purposes of curriculum-based learning and teaching.

I will use this definition when supporting technology integration efforts in my classroom and school.

Ch 11 Guiding preservice teachers in TPACK

I learned more about the four dimensions of knowledge in this chapter : Declarative, Procedural, Schematic and Strategic. On page 224, the work of Shavelson, Ruiz-Primo, Li, and Ayalas (2003) with these four dimensions helped me to think more strategically when planning, organizing, critiquing and abstracting specific content, student needs and classroom situations within the TPCK framework.

I envision the creation of a math toolbox for Physics students. Math is an area where many students struggle in physics. Having a resource using the dimensions of knowledge as an organizing schema would be helpful for students to know how (procedural) to use what (declarative) math concepts when (strategic) and why (schematic) they are using them.

The discussion about preparing tomorrow's teachers to rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise and adapt reminded me of discussions in Daniel Pink's book A Whole New Mind that recognize the fostering and use of "right-brained" qualities like inventiveness, empathy, meaning in future.

And as a person who values good educational quotes, (get a daily one at http://www.lightafire.net/) I found this chapter's quotes excellent - real t-shirt material!

Ch 10 TPACK in Physical Education

The opportunity for valuable technology integration in physical education is extensive.

Luke Kelly's Chapter 10 points out several areas that technology integration could prove beneficial.

First, it can be motivating for students to use technology that gives them useful and timely feedback about a physical fitness component or skill. This could be a heart monitor to measure their cardiorespiratory endurance or a video of an expert performing a technique that they can compare to a video of themselves doing the same technique.

Individual monitors are expensive and may not be realistic for most large schools to invest in to have students individually measure their performance. I would anticipate smaller cheaper monitors that integrated with cell phones or Radio Frequency Identification tags (RFID) found currently in books, clothing and even used by organizers of large marathons to become useful in a gym class environment.

If the RFID tags or monitors powered by personal electronic devices could integrate with the schools wireless network it could assist a gym teacher in evaluating the performance, effort and fitness trends of many students over time. This data management assistance for teachers of physical education is another area Kelly mentioned as a valuable benefit of technology integration.

Some resources cited by Kelly:

http://pesoftware.com/: a provider of software, online courses and consulting services
http://www.pelinks4u.org/: a compilation of many resources for the PE teacher, not all links are up to date but there are many extensive lists.
http://pecentral.org/: A bit more cluttered with ads than the first two but I did find a link to a RFID lap counter system on the internal site search function.

There are many opportunities for technology to enhance physical education in high schools.

TPACK Ch 5 World Language

Marcela Van Olphen outlines how several educational theories of second language acquisition (SLA) that are driving change in how language is taught and learned in a more critical socio-constructivist approach. She weaves the application of theories with successful learning approaches and research on pupil cognition.

After first outlining the American Council of Teachers of Foreign Language (ACTFL),Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) and National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) standards she attempts to "advance the current understanding of the kinds of knowledge world language teachers need to have to integrate technology in thoughtful and meaningful ways."

I was particularly intrigued by the distinction between competence and performance that she shares from Chomsky (1965). He says competence refers to the knowledge of how linguistic system works or what one knows about a language. Performance refers to what someone can do with a language. This is an important distinction that can be generalized to any content area. In the sciences there is a strong focus on competence. Performance assessments are harder to implement than competence assessments. This could be one reason why there is less focus on performance assessments.

Olphen expands on many theories of SLA before highlighting the the impacts of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL). At the end of the discussion, she shares the main reason for unsound and incompetent technology integration per the "Technology Counts '99: Building the Digital Curriculum" report. The reason is shortage of training and that social and academic factors contributed to teacher insecurity about technology. In schools with scarce resources I find lack of professional trainers and lack of time at the beginning of the school year to front load technology training and time for teachers to plan the use of technology a hindrance.

So, in order for sound, meaningful technology integration Olphen proposes that teachers have an understanding of TPCK they can purposefully enhance SLA with technology. When a teacher understands TPCK, technology stops being an object or an ornament in a lesson plan. I agree with Olphen. As comfort levels regarding technology rise it becomes a flexible and powerful tool for the teacher and student to help increase student competence and performance.