Voice Thread Assignment

This week I learned about social learning and tools that support this theory (see previous blog post for more information).  One technological tool is a Voice Thread.  I created a Voice Thread about the explorer Hernando Cortes.  After my students learn about how he conquered the Aztec Empire, they will work in partners to create a new ending to Cortes' story.  They will show a peaceful way that Cortes could have gotten the Aztec gold and land without violence.  After creating a solution, they will create a Voice Thread recording their story and using images they either find or make.  Let me know what you think!  In the past I have always had students write a new ending yet I think they will enjoy this much more!


Link to my Voice Thread: http://voicethread.com/share/2150883/

Social Learning Theories

This week I learned about social constructivism which is simply a theory of how students engage in a construction of knowledge that they create through interactions with others and their environment (Kim, 2001).  The information I read focused specifically on cooperative learning as an important instructional strategy of social learning.  In addition, I learned about the theory of connectivism which shifts the idea of how students learn socially due to technology-enhanced environments.

The central idea of cooperative learning (CL) is students working together in a way that enhances their learning (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  I always thought that as long I had students placed into groups I was implementing CL, but I was far off.  Palmer, Peters, & Streetman (2003) explained that in CL students are working collaboratively to achieve a goal that they could not attain by themselves, and that although the group is assessed, individual students are also held accountable for their work.  My favorite form of CL is the jigsaw method.  This requires each student to learn the material and then teach it to a small group.  Dr. Michael Orey mentions how teaching others gives the learner a deeper understanding of the material and how the jigsaw method focuses on individual responsibility even though students are in groups (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009b).

In the book, Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, it discusses a few tools teachers can use to support cooperative learning in the classroom through technology.  I enjoyed learning about the website www.epals.com.  This tool encourages students to collaborate with students from around the world via e-mail.  I could see myself using this in the classroom to have my students learn about other cultures and to work on their communication skills.  I am curious how this will work with third graders who do not currently have their own e-mail accounts.  I am hoping that the program provides them with one. 

Another tool the book mentioned was WebQuests.  I have always thought of WebQuests as an individual activity supporting the constructionist theory; however, Pitler et al. (2007) mentions that students in the classroom or from far away can work together on the tasks.  I spent time viewing www.webquest.org and found some already created WebQuests that I can begin using immediately in my classroom.  This tool still requires that each student contribute, but it promotes social interaction and makes students active participants in learning the material (Palmer et al., 2003). 

A third tool I want to mention that I feel supports cooperative learning is a VoiceThread (see www.voicethread.com for more information).  There are many ways to employ this tool into the classroom, but I liked the idea that Kevin Jarrett suggested on letting students record a story with uploaded images instead of writing one (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009c).  Students will be more involved and other students will be more interested in viewing and hearing the story than if it was just read aloud.  After viewing the VoiceThread, students can post comments about the story.  What a great way to collaborate!

George Siemens has coined the term connectivism as a new type of social learning theory.  He explains that because of technology-rich environments and the abundant of information available learning has changed (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009a).  Siemens explains that students can now network online and through these connections they can gather information and share ideas while at the same time choosing what information available is important to learn (Davis, Edmunds, & Kelly-Bateman, 2008).  I have not seen this much with my students as they are too young to be involved in social networking sites.  However, I do observe how easily they get involved in virtual games where they can chat with others, how they enjoyed participating in our class wiki last year, and how we can find anything they ask about within seconds online.  I feel connectivism is still in its infancy, but I do understand Siemens’ thoughts about how the learners’ environment has changed so that perhaps the way we teach should as well. 

I support social learning in the classroom.  I definitely plan to integrate, correctly, cooperative learning into to my classroom.  I also look forward to trying Voice Threads with my students and using WebQuests a bit more.  I will attempt at setting up virtual penpals through www.epals.com or a similar site, but I am not sure how well that will work with my students.  Yet no matter what specifically works for me or doesn’t, I believe all teachers should do better about incorporating social learning into their classroom.

References

Davis, C, Edmunds, E, & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2008). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from 

http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Kim, B. (2001). Social Constructivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 9:  Connectivism as a learning theory [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 8:  Social learning theories [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 10:  Spotlight on technology: VoiceThread [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Palmer, G., Peters, R., & Streetman, R. (2003). Cooperative learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

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

Constructionism in the Classroom

Constructivism is a theory of knowledge while constructionism is a theory of learning based upon the idea that the best learning takes place when students construct their own knowledge (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009).  This week I read about the instructional strategy Generating and Testing Hypotheses in the book Using Technology with Classroom Instruction That Works.  This strategy correlates with the constructionist learning theory and should be used in the classroom.  In addition, I read about project-based and problem-based learning tools and learned how these connect to constructionism.

Generating and testing hypotheses allow students to make predictions, apply their knowledge, and develop a strong understanding of the material as they modify their thinking based upon experiments (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  Technology aids students in generating and testing hypotheses as it shifts the time from collecting data into interpreting it (Pitler et al., 2007).  For example, the formulas in Excel spreadsheets allow students to spend more time analyzing data then figuring it out.  I wish teachers used this when I was younger.  This technology provides the learner with more time to look at data in different ways and in various graphs and charts so they can make better conclusions.  I believe this helps students stay more engaged and active in their construction of new knowledge (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009).

Problem-based learning tools support the theory of constructionism.  Problem-based learning challenges students to problem solve in authentic settings using higher-order thinking skills and it requires teachers to give students control over what they learn and just provide support (Glazer, 2001).  WebQuests are an element of problem-based learning I have used in the past and I find my students enjoy.  Scholastic’s Thanksgiving WebQuest tends to be their favorite (http://www.scholastic.com/scholastic_thanksgiving/feast/webquest.htm) even though this one is not set-up in a traditional format.  This inquiry-based tool encourages students, while online, to learn information about a topic to make a decision or respond to an issue (Glazer, 2001).  WebQuests tend to follow similar formats and it is easy for my students to navigate.  My students construct their own knowledge about a topic to arrive to a conclusion by the end of the WebQuest.

Project-based learning tools support the theory of constructionism as well.  Project-based learning is an approach that requires learners to engage in a long-term project while collaborating with others in complex activities (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001).  I will admit I do not use this type of learning very often in my classroom.  I find it difficult with third graders to work on projects without a lot of direction from me.  However, teachers who support the constructionist theory will want to include PBL in the classroom.  PBL is a very learner-centered activity that requires students to participate in inquiry, communicate their ideas, and reflect on their own learning (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001).  PBL has been shown to increase problem-solving abilities and motivation for learning (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001).  Isn’t this what every teacher wants to have in their classroom? 

As seen from the information provided above, all these instructional strategies support the constructionist view of learning.  Generating and testing hypotheses, project-based learning, and problem-based learning are relevant to today’s students.  They should be used in the classroom to give students opportunities to be actively engaged in creating artifacts, making predictions, and solving problems.  All of these activities let students take charge of their own learning and build up their knowledge both components of constructionism.

References

Glazer, E. (2001). Problem Based Instruction. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

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 from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 7:  Constructionist and constructivist learning theories [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

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

Cognitive Learning in the Classroom

This week I read about two instructional strategies in the book Using Technology with Classroom Instruction That Works.  One strategy related to Summarizing and Note Taking and the other was about Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers.  Both of these strategies correlate with the cognitive learning theory and should be used in the classroom.  In addition, I learned about Virtual Field Trips and how beneficial these can be for students.

The first strategy discussed in this book was Summarizing and Note Taking.  Cognitivists support the idea that information enters the brain, enters working memory, and if properly stored can be used later on (Lever-Duffy & McDonald, 2008).  Students should take notes in an organized manner, focusing on just the main ideas helping them to better process information to create a summary (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  One way to summarize is through the use of a cognitive tool known as concept mapping.  Pitler, et al. (2007) tells us that graphic representation for note taking has shown to increase student achievement.  Concept mapping aligns with cognitive learning as it replicates our network model of memory and it supports dual-coding where information is stored as text and images (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009a).  In addition, concept mapping embeds technology as students can use programs such as the software IHMC CampTools or online sites like www.spiderscribe.net to create their concept maps.  These maps require the learner to show they understand the relationship between topics in the map, how these topics connect to the focus question, and it helps identify the knowledge a learner has gained after instruction (Novak & Cañas, 2008).  The book discussed additional cognitive tools students could use to take notes and summarize, but teachers have to use resources available to them and remember that “the tools should help manage the work, not increase it” (Robertson, Elliot, & Robertson, 2008, p. 9).

The other instructional strategy discussed in Using Technology with Classroom Instruction That Works was Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers.  Cues are a reminder about what students are about to learn and questioning helps activate a student’s prior knowledge (Pitler et al., 2007).  Both of these devices are trying to help students make connections between what they already know and see how this new knowledge will fit in.  This is where advance organizers become an effective cognitive tool in the classroom.  Advance organizers assist students in classifying this new information with the old and to focus their learning on what is important (Pitler et al., 2007).  This tool is only beneficial if teachers plan their instruction around what students already know, so they can help students see the relationship between old concepts and begin linking them together with new ones (Smith, 1999).  The book also mentioned using multimedia resources as advanced organizers because they can provide students with a mental mode for understanding new information (Pitler et al., 2007).  In the classroom, I often use www.unitedstreaming.com to show various videos on a wide-range of topics.  My students are more engaged and make better connections with the material.  Cues, questions, and advance organizers are essential in today’s classroom.

This week I also learned about Virtual Field Trips.  These are a great way to take students places where they cannot physically go (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009b).  Dr. Michael Orey stated that integrating multiple senses improve learning (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009a).  Virtual field trips let students, see, hear, and read about another place, getting to experience it almost first-hand.  I have never used these before, but I hope to include virtual field trips in the classroom in the future.  What a great way to integrate technology and support the cognitive learning theory.

As seen from the information provided above, both instructional strategies discussed support the cognitive view of learning.  Summarizing and note taking, especially with concept mapping, help students organize information better so they work it into long-term memory.  Cues, questions, and advance organizers help to activate students’ prior knowledge so they can make better connections with new material.  Finally, virtual field trips integrate multiple senses as students get to see and hear about a place without ever leaving the classroom.  Cognitive learning definitely has a place in our school system today.

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 5: Cognitive learning theories [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 6: Spotlight on technology: Virtual field trips [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Lever-Duffy, J., & McDonald, J. (2008). Theoretical foundations (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008. Retrieved from: http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf

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

Robertson, B., Elliot, L., & Robinson, D. (2007). Cognitive tools. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Smith, M.K. (1999). The cognitive orientation to learning. In The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/biblio/learning-cognitive.htm

Connecting Behaviorism with Technology

This week I read about two instructional strategies in the book Using Technology with Classroom Instruction That Works.  One strategy related to Homework and Practice and the other about Reinforcing Effort.  Both of these strategies correlate with the behaviorist learning theory and also embed technology.

One strategy focused on in this book was Homework and Practice.  The book mentioned that “multiple exposures to material help students deepen their understanding of content and become proficient with skills” (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p. 188).  Since students need about twenty-four practice sessions to achieve 80% accuracy with a particular skill, it only seems logical to ensure we give them the opportunity to practice in several ways (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001).  Repetition is definitely central to this, but it is important that students see the content in a variety of contexts (Smith, 1999).  Technology is a powerful tool that makes this more possible than ever before.  Students no longer just have to take home drill-and-practice worksheets every day.  Students have access to online games, computer software, typing tutorials, and other multimedia programs.  Our students not only get to learn from these resources, but with the technology available students can now learn alongside multimedia (Pitler et al., 2007).  Children can research online, create slide shows, navigate Web Quests, and more.  A great website I use in the classroom is www.brainpop.com.  It has short videos that teach about specific topics and then students take an interactive quiz afterwards to test for comprehension.  Often we take the quiz as a class and I call students up for individual questions.  My students enjoy answering a question correctly in front of their peers, an intrinsic motivator that keeps them wanting to practice (Standridge, 2002).  Smith (1999) tells us that behaviorists believe that what one learns is shaped by the elements in their environment.  When students have access to technology at school and at home, they can become more active in the learning process which is one of the four principles of behaviorist learning (Smith, 1999).  This website and many other technological tools keeps students interested in practicing and make students want to do the homework the teacher assigns.  It is up to the teacher to learn about new resources that are available and to try to make them accessible to students.  Homework and practice are important and if implemented properly will benefit students greatly.

The other instructional strategy discussed in the text was Reinforcing Effort.  Parkay & Hass (2000) mentioned that a desired outcome needs to be rewarded for learning to take place in the classroom which is exactly what positive reinforcement entails.  However, a teacher cannot and should not always reward a student with tangible items, but instead should rely on other types of reinforcement.  The book Using Technology with Classroom Instruction That Works discussed teachers helping students see the connection between effort and achievement to change their attitude about learning and to do this by primarily showing them data (Pitler et al.).  My students use a website called www.ixl.com in which they complete math problems tied to standard-based performance objectives.  This web resource provides students with immediate feedback and contains various graphs containing data about student’s progress.  This data allows students to monitor their growth in specific skills in regards to time and accuracy.  In addition, this site gives students virtual rewards and PDF certificates.  I have seen how excited my third graders get when they win a prize and how proud they are when their certificate is posted on our class website.  This type of reinforcement is free and holds students accountable for their own successes (Pitler et al.).  When used appropriately reinforcement is a great benefit for the students and teacher.

As seen from the information provided above, both instructional strategies support the behaviorist view of learning and also embeds technology.  Reinforcing effort encourages and motivates students to continue to put forth work in the classroom.  Giving students homework and practice helps them develop and master skills.  Including technology for both of the strategies, keeps students engaged and wanting to learn.  What else could a teacher ask for?

References

Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., & Pollock, J.E. (2001).  Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement.  Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Parkay, F.W. & Hass, G. (2000). Curriculum planning: A contemporary approach (7th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

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

Smith, M.K. (1999). The behaviourist orientation to learning. In The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/biblio/learning-behavourist.htm

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