At the beginning of this Master’s course, I was asked to describe my personal theory on how students learn. My theory had three primary components: learning styles, activating prior knowledge, and social interaction. Although I still support these three methods, I have modified my personal theory of learning. I have developed a better understanding of how to use social learning in the classroom and I have also integrated a few other elements into my learning theory. All of these methods have encouraged me to adjust my instructional practices and set goals for better integration of technology into my classroom.
Social learning has always been a part of my personal learning theory, but I have developed a better understanding of why and how to use it in the classroom. 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. This information reconfirmed to me why I support CL, but also has inspired me to do better in how I am implementing this method into my classroom.
Two additional elements I have now added to my theory of learning are reinforcing effort and artifact construction. Parkay & Hass (2000) mentioned that behaviorists believe a desired outcome needs to be rewarded for learning to take place in the classroom. Positive reinforcement is a powerful instructional strategy that I should use more often with my third graders. In the book Using Technology with Classroom Instruction That Works, it discussed teachers helping students see the connection between effort and achievement to change their attitude and to do this by primarily showing them data (Pitler et al., 2007). One easy way I can let students see data is through the use of Promethean responders. These devices immediately let my students know if they got an answer correct and I can use the Promethean software to make graphs displaying class progress and accuracy. The second element I have added to my learning theory, one supported by constructionists, involves students creating external artifacts to demonstrate their learning. I like the idea of my students being more engaged and active in their learning as they create something to share with others (Han & Bhattacharya, 2001). I already have thought of many ways I can use technology to support this theory, such as having students create their own PowerPoints, wiki pages, and VoiceThreads.
Voice Threads are one technological tool I want to begin using immediately with my students. I can easily create VoiceThreads to present material to my students in a visual and auditory style. I have already created one about the explorer Hernando Cortes and I want to try to make one for each person in my Explorers unit. In addition, I would love to put this tool into my students’ hand and have them create their own VoiceThreads. Each year my students research an animal in the ocean biome and create a PowerPoint to present. I could easily have them make a VoiceThread using images from online and then record their presentations. I liked the idea that Kevin Jarrett suggested on letting students record a story with uploaded images instead of writing one (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009b). Often my students complain about writing and they are too young to type well, so I think they would really enjoy recording a story. There are many other applications for VoiceThreads in the classroom that I hope to discover over time.
Another technological tool I want to try use in my classroom immediately is concept mapping software, such as Kidspiration or IHMC CampTools. Concept 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). I used a concept map recently in the classroom for a Master’s assignment on cognitive learning. I believe my students benefited from filling in a concept map because they are very visual learners and this way they organized the content they were learning in a way that can help them better recall it later. Utilizing concept mapping software makes it easier as the user can color code the map, add images, and easily move around concepts. I can see myself and my students using concept mapping software more often in the near future to help in organizing information and for assessment purposes where students fill in missing elements.
Although those are two technological tools that I plan to implement immediately, I have two long-term goals for my classroom as well. The first goal I have is to integrate virtual field trips into my classroom. These are an effective tool to let students see and travel to places they otherwise could not go (Laureate Education, 2009a). Students can read, see, and hear about a place we are learning about, deepening their understanding of the material. I recently traveled to Rome, Athens, and Pompeii, all of which I teach about to my students. How exciting it would be if I put all my photographs into VoiceThreads or onto a website and make a virtual field trip for each place. I could record comments telling my students what they are seeing and have links to other sites with additional information. This would take time to organize, so I would begin with just one and see how it turns out. I can view other virtual field trips to get an idea of how to organize mine. When I actually use one with students I would ask them what they liked and what needs improving. I am hoping to make at least three virtual field trips to use this school year for my Government and Ancient Civilizations units.
Another long-term goal I have for my classroom is to make it more learner-centered. This is not something I cannot change overnight, but I need to gradually make a shift from teacher-centered to student-centered lessons. One way I can accomplish this is to remember the difference between instructional tools and learning tools (Laureate Education, Inc., 2009c). I need to make sure I put technology into my students’ hand instead of always being the one using it. Often I just present a PowerPoint and lecture while it is on the screen. However, there are various ways I can make students more active participants in the lessons. I can have them come up to the SmartBoard more often and I can let them share the artifacts they have created. Furthermore, we can spend more time on the computers where students can contribute to our class wiki, play online games, create items in Microsoft Publisher, and complete WebQuests. I know it will not be easy for me to completely give up my lecture-style, but I am going to try to have more student-centered lessons during the rest of my teaching career.
This class has shown me new technological tools I can use in the classroom. It has also helped me modify my personal learning theory. I look forward to using the new methods and tools I learned about in my classroom this year and in the years to come. However, I will always be open to learning about new resources available to me because I realize that the learners’ environment is changing so the way we teach should as well.
References
Han, S., & 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 6: Spotlight on technology: Virtual field trips [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.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Program number 13: Technology: Instructional tool vs. learning tool [DVD]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. Baltimore, MD: Author.
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
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.
