Constructivism in Practice (APP4)

Project-based Learning and Learning by Design approaches excite me because of the positive impact they have on learning: collaboration, high motivation, learner-centered environment, etc. (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001). My students and I have enjoyed these opportunities as they occurred throughout the school year.

However, these types of lessons/projects cause me tension. I'm not sure if it's because I have to give up 'power' (the transition from instructor to facilitator) or the unknown of allowing my students freedom. Han & Bhattacharya (2001) concur that "instructors should also encourage learners to find answers independently from resources rather than simply 'feeding' them information." The benefits outweigh the challenges, but as with anything new, those are difficult to overcome.

The following reasons should be the encouragement I need:
* Increased motivation
* Increased problem-solving ability
* Improved media research skills
* Increased collaboration
* Increase resource management skills
(Han & Bhattacharya, 2001).

I hope that with this course and the resources I have read so far, I will take on the new challenge of planning more constructivist lessons. This week use your comments to offer advice or tips to get me going! THANKS!

As if I need more encouragement, I found this visual (I live for dual-coding!)




Han, S., and Bhattacharya, K. (2001). Constructionism, Learning by Design, and Project Based Learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved May 27, 2009, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt.

Cognitivism in Practice (APP3)

This week's introduction said it best: "Cognitive theory views learning as the process of organizing new information into existing understandings." We can help our students "develop an awareness of how they think in order to improve understanding. Technology provides us with new ways to incorporate cognitive strategies into instruction and learning."

This week's instructional strategies "Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers" and "Summarizing and Note taking" work particularly well in light of the cognitive learning theory. Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers have specific tasks when we want to "enhance students' ability" (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn,& Malenoski,2007).


CUES: "Reminders or hints"
This allows for students to have their network connections ready to go. Cues spark student memory. Dr. Wolfe defines memory as "the ability to reactivate a connection" (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009). Teachers can use the Internet to facilitate cues by easy access to visuals (pictures, videos, etc.).

QUESTIONS: "trigger students' memories"; "access prior knowledge"
Developing an essential question not only sparks a memory, but it also provides a focus for the learning. This focus is a way to organize student thinking.

Cues and Questions pave the way for Advance Organizers. Once you can get your students wheels turning through cues and questions, they are ready to organize their prior knowledge. This is where MOST of the technology tools come into play.


Here are just five ways you can use technology and ADVANCE ORGANIZERS.

1. POWERPOINT supports dual-coding (images AND text). Since the information is stored in at least two ways, it is more likely to make a stronger connection in the brain.

2. EXCEL spreadsheets allow for students to manage vast amounts of data/numbers easily.

3. CONCEPT MAPPING replicates the brain's network model for long-term memory. Also, it is possible to convert into an outline.

4. VIRTUAL FIELD TRIPS gives students the "opportunity to compare information with other primary sources" (Laureate Education, Inc. 2009b). It also allows the brain to create an episodic memory. As you "go" on these trips, use a concept map to guide your students' thinking.

5. MULTIMEDIA has a two-fold purpose for students: "activate prior knowledge and develop a mental model to help them understand new knowledge" (Pitler, et al., 2007, p. 82).

With so many ways to reactivate, build, bridge, and implant connections of learning in our students' brains, teachers should have no trouble "teaching MORE in LESS time because we are teaching it better!" (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009a).



REFERENCES:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009a). Program One. Understanding the Brain [Motion Picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009b). Program Six. Spotlight on Technology: Virtual Field Trips [Motion Picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Behaviorism in Practice

It's that time of year - State Standardized Assessments! I used much of my review time over the last week and a half to include behaviorist strategies and technology.

My school purchased Interwrite's Personal Response System (PRS) "clickers". They are similar to a remote control and the PRS program allows for multiple-choice questions to be inserted. Once the students type in their response, I get immediate feedback of their understanding - a bar graph pops up! It shows how many students chose the correct and incorrect answer. It is a great tool for informal assessment, reviews, etc. as well as keeping my students engaged in the lesson or activity. After some trouble with behavior, I included an extra incentive: for every 5 questions correct, they would receive ONE Skittle. This is behaviorism at work! Standridge (2002) defined positive reinforcement as "something is added to increase desired behavior". By offering a skittle reward, I encouraged my students to show their best work to prove their knowledge.

The drill and practice of behaviorism can also be accomplished through technology. Even with songs, poems, tricks, etc., there is no substitute for automaticity of math facts. One way I use technology to encourage fact recall speed is my SMARTboard and "Hit the Button". During Team Time (a 45 minute block of targeted math instruction), my students challenge each other to see how many problems they can 'hit' in one minute. Their scored definitely increased each time. Not only were they challenging each other, but I could also see the internal motivation from improving their score. I would like to incorporate graphing their results into next year's challenge! The graph would be a great way to "reinforce effort" (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski, 2007). Were my students taking extra time to master the facts? If so, their efforts would be visible on their graphs.

I agree with Dr. Orey that technology should rarely be used for remediation (Laureate Education, 2009). Instead it should be used as guided or independent practice for a developing skill, in which the technology can help lead the student to mastery. This applies to a program my district subscribes to Larson's Math, which Dr. Orey would classify as Programmed Instruction or an online tutorial. Students have their own account that tracks their progress for the major math skills: +, -, *, / whole numbers, decimals, fractions, geometry, etc. Students complete levels and they are able to print certificates. Sometimes I assign Larson's as an early finishers' assignment, but it is also great to take my whole class to the computer lab for independent practice. I can use this time to tutor small groups or individuals struggling with certain skills.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts! Jenelle

Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Program Four. Behaviorist Learning Theory [Motion Picture]. Bridging learning theory, instruction, and technology. Baltimore: Author.

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Standridge, M.. (2002). Behaviorism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved May 13, 2009, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/