GAME Plan Progress So Far

It has been about a month since the creation of my GAME plan, and so far, the plan is going well.  For the most part the plan has provided some definite benefits to my instruction, so I have no plans for major revisions of the plan, but there are a few areas that could be changed.

There were a few times when my GAME plan caused me a good deal of stress.  I had no idea how comfortable I had gotten doing things the same way, and this plan was definitely making me try new things.  One major point of contention for my students was the rotation of classes between traditional instruction and instruction incorporating technology.  As mentioned in a previous entry.  My school simply does not have the technology resources to allow me to use technology as much as my plan originally called for.  The solution was to rotate: one block would incorporate technology, the other wouldn’t.  With each lesson, the blocks would rotate.  This provided me with a base group to compare the results of incorporating technology with as well as keeping me from completely monopolizing the computer lab.  Although this seemed like a good solution, the students who were not incorporating technology into their learning were disappointed and often noticeably less engaged.

One future problem I am anticipating is using a new technology, or technology tool, each month.  In the short term, this seems quite achievable.  Looking down the road in the long term though, I have to wonder if I will be able to continue to find a new technology strategy each month.  I have discussed this with my vice principal, who is supporting and monitoring me on this GAME plan, and we have decided that for right now the plan will remain the same.  In the future though, the plan may need to be altered to use technology in a new way each month.  In this way, I could use Voicethread for example, which I have already used, as long as I am using it in a different way than I have before.  This change will allow for continuing to use strategies that prove to be especially effective instead of simply abandoning it because it has already been used.

One strategy I wanted to insure that I could continue to use was social networking.  Social networking has proven to be an effective means of gathering information, sharing information and ideas, and authentic publication of student work.  It has also proven to be an extremely effective strategy to raise student engagement.  I will continue to look for social networking tools and strategies that I have not used before but will also have the freedom to reuse strategies that have been effective.

1 + 1 = 1

One plus one equals one.  It surprised the heck out of me too.  Most of the time the answer is two, but in this case one problem plus another problem equaled one solution.  The problems were with my GAME plan.  Specifically the problems were with the logistics of achieving my goal (implementing at least one new technology tool or strategy to my teaching per month) and the evaluation of effectiveness of carrying out this goal.  In a weird way each problem turned out to be a solution to the other problem.

The first problem became apparent pretty quickly.  Because our school has about 550 students and only 65 computers, the computer lab and lap-top cart are in pretty high demand.  As soon as I made my goal, I began to wonder if I would upset other teachers by using our technology resources more than my share.  It didn’t take long to find out.  Last week we were out of school all week due to a snow storm, and our entire school’s technology resource schedule has been thrown into chaos as a result.  My vice principal and I sat down and looked at the demands for the technology resources we have and decided that it was not fair or realistic to think that I could schedule the computer lab or lap-top cart at least once a month for two blocks of students.  Something had to give.

The second problem had to do with the evaluation of the effectiveness of my plan.  I am teaching a new grade and new subject area, so I have nothing to compare current student results with.  How was I to know whether the use of technology had increased my students understanding of the information being taught?  Measurable results are part of the goal.  If I altered the established curriculum, I should be able to measure and show any improvements.  The fact that my school does not have the technology resources we would like actually provided a solution to this problem.

It may not be fair or realistic to expect that I could reserve our technology resources for two blocks of students per month, but after looking at the schedule, it is possible to reserve the resources for one block of students per month.  One block will receive the standard instruction while the other block will be participating in my GAME plan of including one new technology tool or strategy per month.  The blocks will alternate each month so both groups get equal time with new technology tools and strategies.  This plan has the added benefit of providing a base group for comparison.  Because both groups will be learning about the same information but will be taught in different ways, the new technology tools and strategies can be compared to the traditional instruction to measure its effectiveness. 

To be honest, I have never been a fan of the saying, “when life gives you lemons, make lemonade”.  In this case though, it fits.

The First Steps of the GAME Plan

In an effort to make change my GAME plan from a plan to a reality, I have already acquired an important resource.  That resource is my vice principal and her assistance and enthusiasm.   To be honest, she misses the classroom, so she is pretty excited about participating in the planning of this plan.  Unfortunately, the acquisition of the second resource, hardware, has momentarily stumped me.  Right now, our school is conducting school-wide MAPs (measure of academic progress) testing.  As students take this test on the computer, our one computer lab will be unavailable for the next three weeks.  As soon as this is done, the 8^th grade social studies classes will have the computer lab for a minimum of two weeks to finish up their classroom based assessments or CBAs which are a state-mandated assessment.  Since the computer lab is unavailable for the next month to a month and a half, it is not surprising that our one lap-top cart is in pretty high demand during this time period.  While having our computers booked to this extent is somewhat unusual, it is not at all unusual for there to only be limited availability.  Scheduling the computer lab around testing and other teacher’s projects is possibly going to be one of the biggest challenges of my GAME plan.  Quite simply, it will be difficult to incorporate technology into my lessons on a regular basis when there is such limited technology availability at my school.  It won’t be impossible, just challenging.

Other sources I will have to use are my colleagues.  I need ideas, lots and lots of ideas.  Simply trying to come up with technology strategies that I have never tried before and implementing at least one a month is somewhat intimidating.  Beyond that, the strategy has to fit with what I am teaching at that time.  I am new to my school’s seventh grade team and therefore, did not participate in the development of our current curriculum.  Everything is new to me, and although I have some leeway, I am expected to be teaching the same skills at approximately the same time as the other seventh grade teachers.  Because different technology strategies work better with different subject areas, the more ideas or strategies I have the better.  So, with this in mind, our next history chapter is on the Oregon Trail.  If anyone has ideas for incorporating technology with this subject area, I would love to hear about them.  As I said before; the more ideas the better.

My GAME plan

During a conversation that took place a couple of days ago, several of my students were stunned and amazed to learn that although I already had a job, and I really wasn’t required to keep taking college classes, I was still taking classes and continuing my education anyway.  I tried to explain that I didn’t plan to ever stop learning, but I think they thought I was simply feeding them a line that teachers have to use.  Of course the entire conversation started because during a break several of them saw me going over the ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education) NETS-T (National Education Teaching Standards- for Teachers) and asked what I was doing.  To be honest, what I was doing was trying to get a jump on my homework.  I needed to identify two indicators in the NETS-T that I felt I needed improvement in and set goals for achieving that improvement as part of my personal GAME plan.

            For those who are not familiar with the personal GAME plan, it is a kind of action plan for self directed learning created by Katherine Cennamo, John Ross, and Peggy Ertmer (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer 2009) which consists of setting a goal, action to meet that goal, monitoring the progress of meeting the goal, and evaluating whether or not the goal was achieved and extending the learning to new situations.  For my GAME plan, I wanted to achieve some growth in the second NETS-T standard, “Design and Develop Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments” and the fifth NETS-T standard, “Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership”.  Choosing the goal of developing and implementing more digital-age learning experiences into my classroom instruction was an easy one.  As Marc Prensky puts it, “compared to students’ technology-infused lives outside of school, the traditional classroom is a somber place” (Prensky, 2008).  My classroom has been too “traditional”.  Although I have been exposed to some great tools and strategies in my studies at Walden University, I find that I am forgetting some of them simply because I am not using them.  Like most people, I have a use it or lose it memory when it comes to new learning.  I would like to say that the entire reason I have not implemented the digital-age strategies I have learned is because we have very limited digital-age resources at my school.  Although it is true that we have very limited resources, it is also true that another reason that I haven’t used these strategies as much as I should is because of my personal comfort level, or lack thereof, with new technologies.  I integrate technology more than many of my colleagues at my school, but I could, and should, be doing more.

            In an effort to integrate technology more often and to meet my GAME plan goals, the action I will take will be to integrate lessons which involve technologies, or strategies that involve technology, that are new to me at least once every other month.  That might not sound like very often, but it must be kept in mind that I plan on integrating technology more often than once every other month; what is being discussed here is technologies that I have never used before.  For example, I have never designed, or had my students design, a web page.  This seems like a good place to start.  As far as monitoring my progress goes, I have a great partner in my former teaching partner and current vice principal.  She has been thrilled that I am pursuing strategies to integrate more technology in my classroom and has always been very supportive whenever I am trying to stretch myself and try new things.  She can also help with the evaluation of the effectiveness of these new strategies.  She has already agreed to observe me on the days when I am trying some of the new strategies.  This has added some unexpected benefits.  I am great at setting goals, but sometimes I am not so great at following through and achieving goals.  Although my vice principal will be very supportive in this endeavor, it is also now an official expectation that I will be inviting her to my classroom to observe the integration of new technology lessons into my instruction. 

            So far, I like my GAME plan.  The only intimidating part is insuring that I can find a new strategy for integrating technology and make sure it fits with what I am teaching every other month

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer,P. (2009).  Technology integration for meaningful classsroom use: A standards based approach.  Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved January 10, 2012 from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx

Prensky, M. (2008).  Turning on the lights.  Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40-45

Final Thoughts

When I originally attempted to put together my personal learning theory I compared teaching to training new deckhands on a fishing boat and highlighted some of the difficulties in training deckhands.  I said “Every year attempts are made to explain to the new crewmembers what their jobs are and how to do those jobs, and every year the same lesson is learned again: explaining the job means next to nothing.  When the crewmember actually does his job is when meaning and understanding is built.   After the crew member has experienced the job discussions will have some meaning and benefit, but until there is an experience, there is nothing to discuss.   People learn by relating knowledge to their own unique experiences, in other words, I follow the constructivist learning theory.”  While I still believe this, I now understand that if a learner doesn’t have an experience to relate new information to, it is extremely important that an instructor do more than simply provide lecture.   Paivio’s dual coding theory teaches us that a learner who is provided with both linguistic and nonlinguistic representation has a far greater chance of making a connection to new information and therefore understanding, and retaining, that information.  While I am still thoroughly a constructivist and believe there is no substitute for the learner creating his or her own learning experience, this is the next best thing.

            My immediate goal for my classroom is simply to make sure I don’t get too comfortable.  I need to constantly challenge myself to try new things because I have had a habit of finding a strategy or two that I like and simply sticking to those few that I am comfortable with.   One short year ago all I had my students use computers for was to do research and then type papers.   My studies at Walden University have helped a great deal because, quite simply, I didn’t have a choice.  I was forced to try new things, and I have loved it.  I have been pushed well beyond my comfort zone and I am extremely happy with the results.  My students have also enjoyed the changes.  Student engagement on our recent blog and VoiceThread assignments has been far higher than my traditional lesson plans.

            My long term goal is to quit complaining about my school’s lack of technology and see what I can do about it.  I can’t build a new computer lab for my school, but I can look for grants to increase the number of computers for my classroom.  In almost twelve years of teaching I have never written a grant.  In fact, I don’t even know the process.  It is time I changed that and see if I can do something about not having enough computers for my students other than just complaining about it.

Sources

Laureate Education Inc.  (2009). Program five. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and

Technology. [DVD]. Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories.  Baltimore: Author.

My Computer & I Have a Complicated Relationship.

This week’s assignment of creating a voice thread presentation about a problem or issue my school faces had me more than a little stressed out.  First, it’s conference week at the school I teach at, and as any teacher can tell you, conference week is a busy week with little to no time to spare.  Second, I didn’t do as good a job as I should have preparing and choosing a topic for this assignment.   Finally, I had a great deal of trouble getting photos to upload at the VoiceThread - Group conversations around images, documents, and videos site.

So here I am frantically trying to get this assignment done.  It is not due until tomorrow, but tomorrow I have conferences until eight o’clock in the evening, so I don’t see myself having a lot of time to work on it then.  The two biggest reasons for my stress though, are my own fault.  When I started planning for this project, the topic I was thinking about was one many teachers have trouble with: how does a teacher motivate the unmotivated student.  I ran ideas around in my head and began to sketch out a plan.  Everything seemed in order until it came time to start choosing images or documents to illustrate this problem on the voice thread presentation.   Then it suddenly hit me: what pictures or documents could I use?  Obviously, I am not going to post pictures of my unmotivated students.  Posting a report card didn’t seem like a good idea either, even if the name were blacked out.  Maybe I was tired, or maybe I’m just not very creative, but I really was having trouble choosing images and documents that could represent the problem of unmotivated students (fortunately, I don’t think that my problems stemmed from a lack of motivation, because that would simply have been far too ironic).  So, I switched topics to one I have discussed several times throughout my studies at Walden University.  I truly am excited about the strategies we are learning that incorporate technology into our classrooms.  The problem is, with fifty computers for over 500 students, my school simply doesn’t have enough computers to use these strategies nearly as much as I’d like.  This would be the new “problem” for my voice thread project.

Switching topics definitely raised my stress level.  I was now getting a later start than I had wanted, but I had already familiarized myself with VoiceThread when I was over at a colleague’s house, so I wasn’t too stressed yet.  Unfortunately, when I came home and tried to use VoiceThread on my own computer, I simply couldn’t get images or documents to upload to the site.  I knew I was doing it the same way as when I was over at my colleague’s house, so I was more than a little frustrated.  I watched the Laureate Education Inc. tutorial, and I watched the VoiceThread tutorial.  The instructions are not complicated, but I still couldn’t get anything to upload.  Finally I figured out the simple answer: my laptop hates me, and at this point, the feeling was mutual.  I racked my brain for hours today, trying to get images to upload.  Finally, I tried my old desk computer at school and amazingly, I was able to upload a document.  The obvious solution was to use my school computer.  Unfortunately, my school computer doesn’t hate me; it hates pictures.  I can write a novel in the time it takes to upload or download a picture on that computer.  I tried every troubleshooting option on the VoiceThread site but never found the answer to why my school computer could upload to the site, but my laptop could not.  Finally, I was so frustrated and angry that I had to walk away and take a break.  When I came back I was about to click on the web browser icon when I froze.  I took a long look at the icon.  The web browser icon on my laptop is the Mozilla Firefox icon.  The browser on my school computer is Microsoft’s Internet Explorer.  I much prefer Firefox, but if you are trying to use VoiceThread - Group conversations around images, documents, and videos on the Firefox browser, you will get frustrated, angry, and maybe even a little paranoid about your computer hating you, because it simply won’t work.  I hope that this post can keep others from having a similar experience, because there is nothing worse than having to apologize to your computer because you told it you hate it and called it bad names.

My computer has finally forgiven me and allowed me to complete my voice thread project.  It can be viewed at http://voicethread.com/share/1895008/.

Constructionist Learning Theory

 

After watching Michael Orey’s video about constructionist learning theory (Laureate Education Inc., 2009) and reading about generating and testing hypotheses in Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works (Pittler, Hubbell, Kuhn, and Malenoski, 2007), I was a bit apprehensive.   I understand and agree with constructionist theory: we learn best by connecting new information to an external artifact or experience, so it is best practice for the instructor to allow the learners to create this experience or artifact.  I also am a fan of the strategy of generating and testing hypotheses: at the middle school I work at we have shifted away from traditional test-based assessment to guiding inquiry-based instruction by posing questions where there is no one right answer and letting students develop and explore their own theories.  What was troubling me was that I was not seeing an immediate connection between the tools discussed in Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, spreadsheet software and data collection tools, and my Humanities classroom.  Fortunately, when I looked at the website WebQuest Design Patterns I immediately saw possibilities for my classroom.

In the video Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories (Laureate Education Inc., 2009) Michael Orey states that a key element of constructionist theory is that students are actively engaged in building or creating a product.  In other words, the students are creating the external artifact or experience that will enable them to connect and understand new material.   The web quests at WebQuest Design Patterns provide many opportunities to enact this strategy.  The one with which I immediately saw possibilities for my own classroom was the Civil War Museum project.  This project could be used to help students synthesize the new information they have learned at the end of our Civil War unit by having them design and create a museum exhibit for the Civil War.  The guiding question could be as simple as, “If you had to take all the information we have learned from the Civil War and group it into five categories, decide what would those categories be?”  These five categories will eventually be the five rooms or parts of their museum exhibit.  The project fits perfectly with constructionist theory because students have to take the new information they have learned and build or create something with it.  Without this building or creating phase of learning, the majority of the students will most likely retain the information long just long enough to answer some questions on a test, but not much longer than that.  Because students will have created something though, they now have an external experience to tie the new information to, and therefore will understand the information on a deeper level as well as retain it much longer.

Until this week, I had zero experience with web quests.  Obviously, I will need to research and explore their potential further before I will feel comfortable introducing them to my students.  Because of the way they support constructionist theory, I am looking forward to using them in my classroom.

References:

Laureate Education Inc.  (2009). Program five. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. [DVD]. Constructionist and Constructivist Learning Theories.  Baltimore: Author.

Pittler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenolki, K.(2007).  Using technology with classroominstruction that works.  Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

WebQuest Design Patterns. (2010).  Retrieved March 23, 2011,from http://webquest.sdsu.edu/designpatterns/all.htm.