Ramblings

We are testing a Makerbot Replicator2 3D printer. The design tech teacher, Garth and myself have a whole bunch of grade 9′s that are in both his tech course and my science class. They have shown quite an interest in the machine and we plan on putting that interest to work while we are testing it.

So far we have had many successful prints, but have also run into some difficulties. Every so often we get a heating error and have to reboot the machine. We have also had to reinstall the software when a “service error” occurs. Printing objects that have a solid base have worked very well so far. On the other hand, printing objects that have overhanging pieces have not worked wonderfully yet. I think we need to practice those prints.

Garth has put in a ton of effort working with new design software, trouble shooting when the machine acts up and generally testing it continuously. One conversation we had was about how to predict how long a print job will take, so we can schedule prints from various departments. Perhaps calculating the volume of a variety of prints (Archimedes principle) and the time would enable us (or the grade 9 math class) to create a function predicting print time. It does depend on the amount of detail as well though… Any ideas?

I was most surprised by the fact that it doesn’t print solid right through the object. It lays down a grid and then fills in the base and top and sides (all outside edges) completely, but not the inside.

The following post is for my #educ5105 course and was co-written with the amazing Amy Blizzard (@blizz04). It has been cross-posted on her blog, which can be found at http://dramology.wordpress.com/ . I have taken a few courses with Amy now and worked with her on a few projects. Throughout these courses we have had the opportunity to have a few discussions around classroom teaching and I have learned that she is doing some amazing things in her drama classroom! Check out her blog!

Examining Professional Development Through Ely’s Eyes and the TPACK Framework

Gunn and Hollingsworth’s (2013) article, The Implementation and Assessment of a Shared 21st Century Learning Vision:  A District Approach, examines an educational district in Alberta and their shift to alter their teaching to better meet the needs of 21st Century students.  If we broke down the district’s situation by way of Ely’s eight conditions of change, then the board’s desire to implement change started because of number one, dissatisfaction with the status quo (Williams).  No longer was the traditional teaching methodology meeting the needs of the learners.  There was a need for more technological inclusion in classrooms, differentiated instruction, and new forms of assessment in order to teach a relevant 21st Century skill set to modern learners.  As Gunn and Hollingsworth (2013) stated, “Rapid technological changes have increased information availability and have radically improved communication.  The traditional methods of instructing students are no longer effective” (p. 202).

In order for these changes to be implemented, it was obvious to the district powers that the adopters, or teachers, must have sufficient knowledge and skill set to execute the change, thus meeting Ely’s second condition.  Ely’s third condition of change, availability of resources, wasn’t discussed in this article, but based on the questionnaire given to staff and included in the article, computers and internet are available for use, however specific technologies or how shared these resources are was not detailed.  Time, number four on Ely’s list, was adequately given to the adopters.  The article details a 3-year plan to allow for adequate time and training to alleviate anxiety and resistance among the teachers as they move away from traditional teaching approaches (Gunn & Hollingsworth, p. 203).  Within that 3-year structure, a minimum of 8 full professional development days was designated.  At the end of each year, adopters were asked to reflect on their process, how far they’ve come with their integration and how they are feeling, coping etc.  The first two years, time was set-aside during professional development for that necessary reflection.

No specific reward or incentive was given directly, which is number five on Ely’s list.  However, as this was a district-wide goal, the incentive appears to be that everyone was tackling this change head on therefore; an incentive to keep up was created.  For many, the incentive was also to better their practice, making it more relevant.  The teachers reported “significant growth in perceptions and adoptions of software tools, pedagogies, communications methods and usages” which reads as reward to me (Gunn & Hollingsworth, p. 214).  The adoptees were active participants in the process primarily through survey feedback and discussion.  Therefore, Ely’s sixth condition of participation was checked off along with number seven, commitment as leaders in the change process had to buy into it.  Gunn and Hollingsworth (2013) discussed how the district incorporated both macro-level facilitation leadership (supplying the money and training) and micro-level leadership (the teachers themselves) (p. 213).  There was mutual support between the two leadership levels, which allowed all adopters to feel invested.

There was strong leadership throughout the process, for example people at all levels within the district formed an advisory committee and they offered encouragement to other adoptees.  As Gunn and Hollingsworth (2013) state, “any school district willing to undergo such a project must be willing to commit time and monies exclusively designated for the upgrading of information and communications technologies.  They must be willing to provide significant systematic support for pedagogical change” (p. 215).  This district did just that, providing strong leadership from the beginning, meeting Ely’s eighth condition.  According to Gunn and Hollingsworth (2013), the changes that this district was working towards were fairly successful thus far, but of course work on teaching to the 21st Century learner is ongoing.

In fact, it was found that the 2008 district white paper referred to in Gunn and Hollingworth’s (2013) article (p. 205) was revised in June 2012 to update  their vision. It was refreshed by the same advisory committee referred to in the article (p. 205). The project continues to focus on both pedagogical and technological knowledge.

The Lethbridge SD #51 openly shared their application for the educational research grant, which funded the research project reported on in this article (Barry, 2008). If all professional development was conducted as outlined in this application, evidence of two of the three components of the TPACK framework were directly targeted through professional development, while the third component was at least partially and indirectly addressed.

The TPACK framework is used to explain how a teachers technological knowledge, content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge all intersect to enable the effective implementation of educational technology (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). By simply addressing the necessity for three distinct, yet integrating areas of knowledge, it fails to address the motivation required for adoption of technology. The dotted line circle around the framework implies the importance of context. The model of professional development used by Lethbridge SD #51 appears to have taken this necessity for context into consideration.

Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org

The professional development plan outlined 8 full days for a team of central (school district) administrators, school administrators and school lead teachers throughout two-years that focused on pedagogical knowledge (Barry, 2008). This ensured that each school had trained administrators and lead teachers available to support school-based professional development while also ensuring the push for a common vision among central board and school-based staff was upheld. A second layer to their professional development strategy included school-based and centrally hosted workshops around effective use of specific technologies (Barry, 2008). This combination of strategies appears to directly support both the pedagogical knowledge and technical knowledge required by teachers to effectively integrate educational technologies according to the TPACK framework.

Indirectly, the school-based professional development and professional learning teams are referred to throughout the grant application, but not directly supported through this specific research project. This eludes to some support to both the content knowledge and the need for working within appropriate contexts for individual schools. If school-based learning teams are designed around subject areas or grade-based teams, then the development and ongoing support for content knowledge will be present. In addition, the provision of flexibility for schools to run some school-based professional development as they saw fit, while perhaps making extracting reliable data more difficult for the researchers (p.214), allowed for individual school contexts to be acknowledged and supported.

Through the eyes of the TPACK framework, this professional development plan likely supported the development of both pedagogical and technological knowledge fairly well and consistently across the district. The specifics on how the content knowledge was developed or sustained and how individual school, subject area or grade level contexts were supported is still unknown.

In conclusion, while neither of these frameworks (Ely’s Conditions of Change or TPACK) can explain the entire situation or success documented by researchers, they can provide us with a lens to critically examine the change. It appears as though the strengths of the integration of technology in this case included; time, strong leadership, strong vision and a focus on both pedagogical and technological knowledge development.

Sources:

Barry, L. (2008, December). Building Educational Technology Leadership Capacity – Implementing and Assessing a Shared Technology Vision Among District Schools. Retrieved on March 29, 2013 from http://lethsdweb.lethsd.ab.ca/OurDistrict/Documents/Tech_Docs/Ed_Tech_Proposal.pdf

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. Retrieved on March 29, 2013 from http://itpresentations.cmswiki.wikispaces.net/file/view/What+Is+Technological+Pedagogical+Content+Knowledge%3F.pdf

Lethbridge SD #51. Technology Vision White Paper. (2012, June). Retrieved on March 29, 2013 from http://lethsdweb.lethsd.ab.ca/OurDistrict/Documents/Tech_Docs/2012%20Tech%20Vision%20White%20April.pdf

Williams, M. (n.d.). Ely. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/site/elysconditionsofchange/history

I may have access to a 3D Printer for a bit. I’d like to design some “design problems” that line-up with our curriculum in my Grade 12 Workplace (SNC4E) science class. Here is an overview of 3D Printing.

Our units of study in Grade 12 Science include:

• Disease Prevention
• Workplace Safety
• Chemical Reactions
• Electricity
• Nutrition

Looking through the curriculum, here are some problems that I have thought of that will hopefully lead students to cover many of the curriculum expectations while designing a product or product improvement;

• People often avoid wearing protective gear when it comes to preventing the spread of disease. For example, rarely do people wear face masks. See how this caused some problems here. How could the design of face masks improve the chances that people will actually wear them, slowing the spread of disease? 
• People often forget or avoid wearing their safety goggles in the workplace. How could the design of safety goggles improve the chances that people will actually wear them?
• Packing your own lunch can improve the chances that you will maintain a healthy diet. Zipper baggies and other disposable materials can create a problem for the environment. What type of food containers might make it more likely that high school students would actually pack something healthy from home to take to school?
• Many workplaces have high noise levels that can cause hearing problems after long-term exposure. Yet, many workers do not wear noise protection. How could the design of ear protection improve the chances that people will wear them, or how could the design make them more effective at blocking out noise?
• Often chemicals are purchased in bulk to save money. Storage and use of these large containers can be hazardous. What type of container might be safer to store a specific type of chemical in for everyday use?
• Electrical extension cords often become frayed and dangerous, yet many people continue to use them. How could the design of a new electrical extension cord, or an adapter prevent this dangerous situation?

Do you have any other ideas? Have you used a 3D Printer in your school?

This post is for my #EDUC5105 course.  Continue reading →

If I had my way, I’d rarely do lessons in class. We’d do labs and inquiries, and research and fun things that keep me engaged. Yet…it’s not all about me. I know how important consolidation is. We can do all the great learning activities in the world, but eventually students need to consolidate all that fun new knowledge.

I’ve come to the conclusion that for the combination of my specific students (after spending a few weeks getting to know my grade 9s as learners), my strengths/weaknesses and the nature of our content, that we need to have choice in how we consolidate. Many of my students have they told me that they learn best by writing things out. Fair enough. That is a valid learning technique. Other students have said that they HATE taking notes and that they never refer back to them. Some students say that they can learn from taking notes, but tend to lose them and never refer back to them later on.

In our class, for chemistry, we decided to do short, consolidation pieces every so often to make sure that we are all on the same page. Yesterday we did a consolidation piece (about half an hour) about the structure of the atom and an introduction to the periodic table of elements (the one thing that every student said that they wanted to demystify).

Some students have chosen to write their notes on paper and keep a physical notebook. Other students have chosen to keep all of their notes in Evernote. They type on their phones or laptops. When I questioned one guy about how he was going to do the diagrams (in that way a teachers questions when they think that they already know the answer and assume the student will do as I assume and grab a piece of paper), he showed me that he ALREADY had found similar diagrams online and copied and pasted them into Evernote. Wow. Ok. Great. I just checked this students evernote now (we have shared folders) and he has gone above and beyond what we did in class. He found more detailed diagrams. He found an extension piece of content (about how molecules act in the different states of matter). I’m thoroughly impressed. If he was using pen and paper instead of his phone, it never would have happened.

One other student used her wacom tablet and turned our lesson into a piece of art (that I of course, stole and posted on our class blog for others to use). Many of the students wrote their notes on paper and then took a picture of it to put into their evernote folder.

Its all about what works for them. I told them that they are responsible for proving to me at any time that they have an organizational system to be able to quickly, on a dime, pull up the information they need to know about WHMIS, Lab Safety, Online Safety and the structure of an atom. It makes me giddy with excitement to see them taking the initiative to choose what works best for them. Those skills will take them well beyond the content we will cover in grade 9 science that well may end up insignificant in their daily adult lives (but of course, I will never tell them this).

Have you had students who found an alternative method of organizing course materials or summaries for future reference? Maybe one that I could share with my students?

We’ve spent some time looking at a couple different frameworks supporting the implementation of technology into education in #educ5105. In my mind, each framework has merit, but they are not all encompassing. Change is personal and what drives it and what is needed to support it will be different for each person. I do believe that having an understanding of a variety of frameworks is helpful to help understand reluctance to change and to help plan for situations in which you are expecting people to change. For example, in professional development. However, I do think it is naive and hazardous to only focus on one model with the assumption it will provide all the answers.

Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org

As an example, I could use the TPaCK model to help explain what I needed as a teacher to change my grade 10 science biology unit into a case study learning activity. I certainly required a knowledge of the content. I needed to have an understanding of the human body and cell specialization in order to create appropriate case studies and to anticipate the pathways of learning that students would take. I also needed a strong understanding of the possible technologies students may use to support this. What tools could they use to collaborate on their research? What tools to create digital archives of their learning to share with classmates? Lastly, I needed a strong knowledge of pedagogy to create the framework of learning to ensure all learners were engaged, met at their current level of understanding and able to move forward.

What the framework is missing however, is WHY did I change? What motivated me to use the technology to change how I addressed the unit? Why did I not choose to do a lesson about cell specialization? Just because I have the knowledge in these three areas does not mean that I will always implement the technology. On the flip side, as long as the personal and motivation aspect is being looked at I most certainly do need to have those three areas of knowledge to make it happen.

Image Credit: http://www.maggiehosmcgrane.com/2010/03/samr-model.html

The SAMR model would classify how I used that technology to change the teaching and learning in my classroom. I fully agree with the premise that we need to use technology as a catalyst for change in education. These tools can be transformative instead of simply allowing us to continue to teach the same way with technology infused. For example, the sheer act of using a SMART Board or interactive white board, does not transform my teaching. If the board is still at the front of the room and the teacher is the one with their hands on it, the learning activity is still the same from the students point of view. However, the same tool could be used transormatively. I have seen SMART Boards being used to change how learning happens in a classroom.

The framework of SAMR rings true with me on many levels, however, I worry about those times any framework or model is taken too far. It is necessary for us to be cognizant of the differences on how technology is used. When we start thinking that every situation will fit neatly into this little graphic, there is a problem. And, yet again, the question of WHY needs to be addressed. Why do I need to transform my classroom? What proof is there that learning will improve if I transform?

Take a look at this poster created to classify a variety of iPad apps into the levels of the SAMR model. This is incredibly problematic for me. It is not the tool that transforms the learning, but how it is used. For example, iMovie could be used by the teacher to create a video version of the lesson and played for students in class. Is that anywhere near as transformative as students creating video representations of their own knowledge? When models or frameworks are taken as gospel instead of as intended (a framework) I begin to worry.

Please visit this link to see Greg Swansons’ post, original file and comments to his post. http://appsineducation.blogspot.ca/2012/11/samr-model-apps-poster.html

I normally hate the space unit in grade 9 science. I mean, HATE. In my personal life i have no interest in astronomy, even though many a canoe trippers have tried to engage me. I know very little beyond the curriculum requirements of grade 9 science, which makes me feel a bit uncomfortable. In the past it has been used as a way to put scientific notation into action. The last time I taught it, years ago, I had a few color overhead slides with neat images and a few websites and magazine articles to help engage.

This time however, I have Chris Hadfield and the Canadian Space Agency. We have a bubble detector in our classroom that is the same as @Cmdr_Hadfield has on the ISS, being used to measure radiation. We are sharing our results with people all over Canada and beyond. We have access to photos each day that show us what the Earth looks like from the ISS that are being tweeted out in real-time, not released years later. We have videos showing us how they wash their hands in space. We caught a live stream of Chris Hadfield talking from space with William Shatner, and tweeted with people from all over Canada about what we were watching. My students self-imposed homework was to learn about William Shatner and why those tweets between him, @Cmdr_Hadfield, Buzz Aldrin and Nimoy were funny (if they were not already Star Trek watchers). They have taken an inquisitive stance to learning neat facts about space travel and the International Space Station. Brainstorming a list of pros and cons of space exploration left them with more questions than facts.

We have been archiving tweets from the CSA, Chris Hadfield, NASA, etc. Students are actually looking at them on their own time and reading, following links, etc. Students are asking me questions that I have no idea how to answer. One googled the size of the space station and then with a small group, likened each dimension to something familiar to them.

I used the media as an engagement factor during the first week of grade 9 science and expected to quickly move on and still resort to the space unit as the last thing we do in science (knowing that time would be short and it would be rushed – it always is). What has happened, is that through student inquiry and passion, tweeted links and resources we have found a way to make space exploration the over-arching theme for the whole course.

Our research project with Chris Hadfield and other schools has us measuring neutron radiation. What is a neutron? Is a neutron always dangerous? A student with a vague understanding of the atom asked me “aren’t there neutrons everywhere?, why is the radiation detector not picking up those?”. And, so we go into chemistry next monday while doing a research project with the ISS and studying neutron radiation data.

Then, as I’m procrastinating and trying to avoid round three of digging myself out from under all this wonderful snow, I get a tweet “check out this video”. Its a video about space exploration and how our view of the earth has changed. It talked about viewing the world as one big ecosystem when looking down on it. And, with a flash a light bulb went off in my head. We can use space to lead us right into the ecosystems unit as well.

Now, I just need to find the perfect connection to get us into the electricity unit and we’ll be set. We’ll start by looking at energy consumption and balance in the thrust portion of take-off and then solar energy and the ISS.

This unit, which I have always secretly feared, has quickly taken over my grade 9 science course. The students passion and inquisitiveness has inspired me to feed that passion. They will each take a part of our space curriculum that speaks to them and share what they learn with the rest of the class. I am excited to see what they create and share.  I am forever indebted to the Canadian Space Agency for making education and public engagement a priority this year. They have greatly impacted my ability to teach a topic normally so far out of my comfort zone. They’ve also given purpose and a context for me to really focus on digital citizenship with my students this semester.

The hazards of insisting students do what works for them in terms of choosing their own tools became a reality for me today. The network went down and so I asked them to draw the WHMIS symbols into their notes while I quickly formulated Plan B. On cue, half the class takes out their iPods or phones, take a picture of the symbols into evernote and say “done!”. Well then… I can’t argue with that. I would have done the exact same thing. So, instead, its time to quiz your elbow partner on what the symbols mean… Have a group discussion on how they are different from household product symbols. I just need five minutes to put plan B for today into action…  :)

I am incredibly lucky and have landed myself the opportunity to teach Grade 11 and 12 Biology in Fiji this summer. I am setting up the framework for the programs and would love some input from anyone willing to help me plan.

Here is what I have so far:

• each course will have an online component through Moodle. This will be the “understanding basic concepts” component of the course. This part will basically be lesson content (all in written and video to support most learners) and then a few very straight-forward assignments
  • I will create videos for each lesson so that I can share my passion for the topic, but I will also link to good graphical animations and interactive modules that are already out there.
  • This material will simply cover the bare minimum, the basic “need-to-knows”
  • This material will be available for students way before we leave for Fiji (during which time I will be available via adobe connect or email to help if needed). If I had my way, they’d all get this part out of the way before we left, but that is asking way too much of students likely already in a semester full of courses.
• In Fiji, we will do all the communication, critical thinking, applying of concepts and inquiry. This will be the “meat” of the course and will include;
  • labs at the University of South Pacific (fruit flies, helping with marine biology research, DNA analysis, etc.)
  • field trips (homeostasis in coastal regions, rainforest for diversity, fisheries for population dynamics, nurseries for plant units, remote villages for population studies, ocean-side resorts for dolphin studies, the local medical school for human biology and homeostasis labs, etc.)
  • interviews with local experts
  • research of local case studies (Fiji-specific flora, fauna, restoration initiatives, evolution studies, diversity studies, etc.)

So, with the learning opportunities starting to come together, I started to ponder how on earth to assess all this. I don’t want to be tied to a classroom in Fiji. So, doing a series of field trips and activities following by tests and strict written reports aren’t going to work.

My current plan is as follows:

• assess the online learning assignments as a small component of their course work
• have each student set up a blog
  • for each overall expectation I will provide a few blog prompt options and students can blog about what we’ve learned through various learning opportunities (labs, field trips, research, interviews, etc.). Students will choose which ones to complete and we will conference 1:1 (likely on buses) to ensure they are meeting all the expectations. There will be enough structure for these that the expectations are hit, but be flexible enough to allow students to direct their own learning a bit while in Fiji.
  • students will be encouraged to use media created on-the-go (images, video, audio) along with the written word on their blogs.
  • we will hold “blogger cafe’s” throughout the trip (on the road, in residence, in the airport)
  • we will try to comment on each others postings as much as possible
  • we may invite guest bloggers from Fiji to join us
  • we may write blogs individually, in pairs or in small groups (and cross-post to each students blog)
  • some blogs may take the form of an essay, some may be a narrative, others poetry. We will discuss choosing appropriate forms for purpose.
• as a final assessment we will do two things
  • write summary reflections on our blogs that wrap up our blogs as a learning portfolio
  • co-create an e-book as a class about “Biology in Fiji”. Students will choose topics that are Fiji-specific and write chapters about these (could be specific flora, fauna, initiatives, issues, etc.). Students will draw on their knowledge of the biology and experiences in Fiji to write these. Again, these could include media components integrated into the e-book as well. My thought is that this will not only help me assess their understanding of concepts and ability to apply their knowledge but also provide students with a great “take-home” from the trip.

So, within that overall framework, I have some work to do in gathering some knowledge of Fiji-specific examples and case studies. I’m very lucky and the company organizing this trip have someone at the University of South Pacific who will be organizing the trips and labs with me. He will set the itinerary and schedule labs. He is currently going around to USP departments and staff to find good learning activities for us that fit within the curriculum.

My questions to anyone willing to help me are;

What would you include?

Do you know of any resources? Case-studies, examples in Fiji?

How can I fine-tune the assessment?

Would you, as a parent, be happy with this balance between “prepping for university” and getting the most out of being in Fiji (experiential)? Remembering that you are paying an arm and a leg for the trip.

Thanks for any input!