Ed Tech Theory Reflections

Taking the MAT610.F16 Educational Technology has been very important toward mu teaching, specifically regarding educational theory and its application to technology. The coursework I participated in focuses on the big four of learning theories: behaviorism, cognitive theory, constructivism and constructionism. Now I am able to identify various learning theories that may be considered in designing and interacting with educational technology as well as understand how learning varies at different developmental stages and ages in order to recognize the learning framework underlying educational media and software. Being able to apply these theories to my pedagogy has offered me a well-rounded perspective toward approaching my teaching techniques and how I develop my lesson planning and class activities. The skills and reflection practiced in this graduate course also assist me with how I integrate technology into my curriculum. Through tech integration measurement techniques, I can now recognize when my activities are not surpassing the substitution phase and need to reach more modification or redefinition levels. The theory learned in this course gave me a foundation which I could build my approach toward using ed tech theory in the classroom. Moreover, the theories studied in this course shaped my perspectives and beliefs toward learning theory and how those beliefs influence my teaching and my students' learning. For example, the ed tech course has empowered my social justice pedagogy by allowing me new ways to reach students. It has offered me more diverse ways of reaching students and making my teaching accessible to all. The ed tech course is also going to be a huge drive behind my capstone project, allowing me to identify and integrate different learning theories through different technologies which will help me to create relevance for my students and engagement. I also acquired the ability to select and implement appropriate assessment tools and strategies. Another big take-away is to be aware of my pedagogical beliefs and to not let my views hijack students' education. What's more, by applying elements of each of these learning theories, I am able to successfully reach a diverse and ever-changing student population by utilizing technology and its diversity to appeal to each student's unique and individual learning modalities.

Ed Tech Time Line

During my 37 years on this planet, technology has certainly advanced exponentially throughout my life time, and possibly, at the historical height of its explosive growth during my life time. Seems only about 15 or so years where smartphones did not exist, I learned and contributed my first blog in 2000 during my undergraduate coursework, we got our first computer lab and six computers for students to use in my 6th grade class and cell/car phones were a status symbol in the 80s. Even though I am a borderline Gen X and Y kid and grew up at the cusp technology growth, I avoided it often because of where grew up and not really needing it. I would not have considered my self a digital native at all.

Presently, the MAT-T has changed my life. Over time I had become a digital native by necessity and in the beginning of taking this masters degree, I was skeptical about people trying to use technology to try and replace teachers and formal education. However, after advancing through the course work, the Teaching w/Technology Masters has only amplified my teaching and made me a better teacher. It has been a terrific experience in that I can adopt and accept the technology and still teach they way I love to teach. The technology has only made my teaching and student learning better.

Finally, I am not sure what will happen in the future. How about this. . .we will be able to down load our consciousnesses to the cloud and live forever as virtual, online consciousnesses. We will never age or get die, we will forever wonder cyber space as immortals experiencing "life" at the instant we think about what we want.

Inspirations from Ed Tech Theory

Over the course of our Ed Tech Theory class, I have gained multitudes of inspiration which has bee a catalyst to the formulation of my future Capstone. I have gleaned a myriad of new insights into learning theory which I can now apply to my curriculum and my pedagogy. Here is a glimpse into the my project and the learning theory influences.

Apathy of our youth will continue to perpetuate the same ideologies and attitudes that allow social injustices to occur, unless the cycle of perception created by Eurocentric education and White Supremacist Consciousness is interrupted. It also means that socially unjust ideologies will continue to be perpetuated by our youth unless we can offer 21st century skills to build next-gen critical thinkers. Therefore, my recommendations and plan of action are to implement, through Capstone, a comprehensive curriculum that addresses the problematic phenomenon that I identified in my action research, which is the primary driving force that generates apathy and indifference in our students regarding social responsibility. Students are immersed in technology as a part and way of life. The curriculum must be delivered through 21st-century platforms and frameworks that encompass a holistic approach to educating and engaging our students, because traditional methods and one-dimensional practices attempting to engage students are not compatible with the way young students are learning today. Social relevance is key. Teaching to multiple modalities is essential. Personalizing learning and accommodating students from diverse backgrounds is critical. Proficiency-based and community-based learning initiatives are founded in today’s technological advances. Meeting core standards to align with federal and state mandates is required. My Capstone project will attempt to fold every single one of these aspects into one deliverable, online curriculum.

In order to accomplish this educational feat, I will employ a plethora of learning theories both from the traditional base, which I trained in for my MAT-SJ coursework, as well as educational technology learning theory that I am studying during my MAT-T coursework. I am attempting to bring the best of both worlds together through Capstone. I will employ the social justice pedagogy I mastered from my teaching for social justice practice while evolving and delivering the social justice pedagogy technology integration and ed tech theory and practices. Both of which I have applied to my praxis teaching in 7-12 public high school. The primary objective is to reach students at all levels and with all backgrounds, while providing equally accessible, educationally relevant and socially focused coursework which will not only assist students in meeting and exceeding proficiencies and standards, but also help students use their acquired skills learned from the curriculum to apply to real-world problems and everyday situational circumstances. This goal will require a balanced approach through numerous learning theories, namely the following:

Experiential Learning-Dewey
A key aspect in this curriculum is that it is going to target how students’ past experiences interact with present situations. The course is designed to challenge each student’s personal belief systems and perspectives and guide the student to uncover where these beliefs and perspectives originate. The purpose is directly tie the students’ experiences with others in order to promote empathy. Students will examine how their past experiences influence their future experiences. Therefore the teacher must take into account each student’s experience. Understanding each student is a crucial aspect of the curriculum so that the coursework offers flexible pathways and choice to help students engage. “Dewey argued that the one-way delivery style of authoritarian schooling does not provide a good model for life in democratic society. Instead, students need educational experiences which enable them to become valued, equal, and responsible members of society.” (Neill, J. (2005). John Dewey. Retrieved fromwww.wilderdom.com/experiential/ExperientialDewey.html, 2016)

Pedagogy of the Oppressed-Freire
I adopted Freire’s learning praxis because it is one that speaks about education being an active open dialogue between teacher and student and not a top-down approach, because he speaks to the fact that teaching and learning can not be shrouded in ambivalence and it speaks out against oppression. Dialogue suggest equality among teacher and student. Reflection is also a huge piece to this curriculum and Freire’s ideas about “conscientization” are huge factors as my course will emphasize reflection and action. Finally, his concept of “codification,” to build perspective through real situations and real people, is a stable of this course since we are working with problem-based and community based-learning skill sets. His most important contribution to the curriculum of the course I am designing is his critical pedagogy. To prompt students to look at literature, social events and education through a critical lens and continue to reflect on key questions, such as “who benefits and who is exploited?” A great quote from Freire that completes this idea is, “We have a strong tendency to affirm that what is different from us is inferior. We start from the belief that our way of being is not only good but better than that of others who are different from us. This is intolerance. It is the irresistible preference to reject differences. The dominant class, then, because it has the power to distinguish itself from the dominated class, first, rejects the differences between them but, second, does not pretend to be equal to those who are different; third, it does not intend that those who are different shall be equal. What it wants is to maintain the differences and keep its distance and to recognize and emphasize in practice the inferiority of those who are dominated.” (Freire, Paulo; Teachers as Cultural Workers - Letters to Those Who Dare Teach, Translated by Donoldo Macedo, Dale Koike, and Alexandre Oliveira, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1998. Retrieved from www.newfoundations.com, 2016)

Cognitive Learning Theory-Piaget
Emphasizing schemata in during curriculum design to effectively utilize its importance in helping learners make sense of the world around them and their learning through background knowledge, cultural and personal identity. Schemas are the basic building blocks of such cognitive models, and enable us to form a mental representation of the world. Piaget (1952) defined a schema as: ”a cohesive, repeatable action sequence possessing component actions that are tightly interconnected and governed by a core meaning” (McLeod, S. A. (2015). Jean Piaget. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html, 2016)

Behaviorism-Skinner
Behaviorist learning theory is applied strictly for its observational, objective and scientific method. Elements of behaviorist theory such as classical and operant conditioning will be important to measure student response and offer students immediate feedback while engaging in the course such as grading and other incentives used as rewards or punishers to motivate student engagement. “Behaviorism emphasize the role of environmental factors in influencing behavior, to the near exclusion of innate of inherited factors. This amounts essentially to a focus on learning.” (McLeod, S. A. (2016). Behaviorist Approach. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.html, 2016)

Constructivism-Bruner
Anticipating that students will construct knowledge and make meaning from their experience past and present while taking the course. The course will utilize technology so that students may engage in active techniques and real-world problem solving through construction of digital material to be applied to their learning. “To Bruner, important outcomes of learning include not just the concepts, categories, and problem-solving procedures invented previously by the culture, but also the ability to "invent" these things for oneself.Cognitive growth involves an interaction between basic human capabilities and "culturally invented technologies that serve as amplifiers of these capabilities." (McLeod, S. A. (2008). Bruner. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html, 2016)

Connectivism-Downes and Siemens
Will probably the most prominent implementation of course as the curriculum’s primary feature is the digital components to both engage and interact with students. Students will be making connections through the course with their lives and their community and online through networks and formations of their own personal learning environments. Also, Students will learn from situational circumstances (situational learning theory, Lave) and be assessed through authentic assessment which will drive the backward planning of each lesson to meet core objectives. There are also elements of Bruner’s Discovery Learning Theory enmeshed in connectivism. “Connectivism is a learning theory that explains how Internet technologies have created new opportunities for people to learn and share information across the World Wide Web and among themselves. A key feature of connectivism is that much learning can happen across peer networks that take place online. In connectivist learning, a teacher will guide students to information and answer key questions as needed, in order to support students learning and sharing on their own. Students are also encouraged to seek out information on their own online and express what they find. A connected community around this shared information often results.” (Lee, J. (2016). Downes and Siemens Retrieved from www.learningtheories.com, 2016)

Thanks to this Ed Tech Theory course, I have been able to put my vision into educational action!

Instructional Design Models

Recently, our class worked on creating single-slide presentations on multiple different Instructional Design Models, an overview of the model and an example of a tech tool that demonstrates that Instructional Design Model in action. It was such an enriching experience to read through over 20 different types of IDMs and learn about the different aspects of instruction that are available and how each model can be immediately applied to my current teaching practice. What's more, many of the tech tools presented by peers in my graduate cohort offer many new resources that I can explore and many that I can implement into my teaching right away.

It was also great to see a few of the Instructional Design Models that I already integrate into my praxis, such as Situated Learning Model. I involve my students in many role plays and real-life scenarios based in the community to learn about concepts we talk about in class such as the war on the homeless. I take students out into the community to talk about and see instances where society has actively tried to push homeless people out to the fringes. We work at food shelves and other drop-in centers to explore specific situations through community service. Another is the Problem-Base Learning Model. Right now, we are actually working on a final that involves activism to solve a social problem through education, advocacy and action. Another model I already employ is the Collaborative-Based Learning Model. We use different types of online software that allow students to work on live documents and evolve a piece of work together while working with each other inside and outside of the classroom.

Some particular IDMs, I find intriguing are the following:

Action Learning
A process that involves a small group working on real problems, taking action, and learning as individuals, as a team, and as an organization. It helps organizations develop creative, flexible and successful strategies to pressing problems www.wial.org/action-learning

ARCS Design Model
Instructional Design Models And Theories: Keller's ARCS Model Of Motivation. John Keller is the founder of the ARCS Model of Motivation, which is based upon the idea that there are four key elements in the learning process which can encourage and sustain learners'  https://elearningindustry.com/arcs-model-of-motivation

Discovery learning
A technique of inquiry-based learning and is considered a constructivist based approach to education. It is supported by the work of learning theorists and psychologists Jean Piaget, Jerome Bruner, and Seymour Papert. www.discoveryeducation.com/

There are many more as well; however, I would be writing for days. This is my short intro to of the many IDMs available for us to use. What a wonderful technical world.

Personal Learning Environment

I am impressed about how timely it is that we read this article by Wendy Drexler. However, it does illustrate some of the sentiments from a previous article we read on how behind education is when integrating and implementing technology. This article is timely for me as it describes Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) as our school is working on implementing Personal Learning Plans (PLPs) due to Act 77 in Vermont six years after this article was written. Firs, let's define what a networked learner is as written by Drexler, "Networked learning refers specifically to 'learning in which information communication technology is used to promote connections: between one learner and other learners, between learners and tutors and a learning community and its learning resources.'"(Australian Journal of Educational Technology, p. 370)

Ironically, this idea of the Networked Student that Drexler refers to and the PLE is very helpful in connecting the ideas and values in and similarities in the PLPs. Both ideas attempt to achieve the same goal, as Drexler writes, "Personal learning suggest learner autonomy and increased self regulation." (Australian Journal of Educational Technology, p. 369) What Drexler seems to realize that many may not, is that students customizing their learning, does not necessarily mean motivation and engagement. "They are required to take an active role in the learning process by making decisions." (Australian Journal of Educational Technology, p. 369) When thinking about PLPs and students getting to design their own pathway based on their interests, there exists a lot of wonder as to how the teacher fits into this equation. Drexler confirms the idea that it creates another challenge as we are suppose to balance the teaching with "Structure and learner autonomy in order to facilitate self-directed and personalized learning." (Australian Journal of Educational Technology, p. 370)

I can get behind the idea that we help students create their PLEs as well as  helping students navigate their network. Reading this article also allows me to reflect on my own network and personal learning environment. When I honestly, evaluate how much I use it and depend on my PLE, it helps me realize how important and exactly how crucial they can be for students. In fact, I doubt that most, students do have a well-developed PLE. Nonetheless, whether they are aware of it or not, I am sure they do have bits and pieces of a PLE.

Right now, students use many resources (for better or for worse) such as Spark Notes, to help them understand (or sometimes even cheat) reading texts. They often use sources like Easy Bib to create their works cited pages (rather than learn how to correctly make a works cited page). Students, no longer use dictionaries and most likely defer to an online dictionary for definitions and Wikipedia for answers (even though they may be not be verified). Although many of these cites are not considered desirable or reliable by teachers that students use them, they do help students learn and are the building blocks of a PLE. If teachers help students to structure, develop and responsibly use networks such as these, the resources can become very effective for both teacher and student.

 As an instructor, if I depend on a learning network to improve my teaching, I should help students engage a PLE to help their learning. More importantly, if schools and teachers can synchronize some of the apps and networks they leverage, there may be even more support for students if we are all using parts of the same network. Drexler points to this concept of teacher student collaboration when she writes, "Ultimately, the personal learning environments that are constructed by humans become available to others who wish to study the same topics. New learners, only connected via their computer or mobile device, may not have personal contact with the originator of the personal learning environment, but they learn from and contribute to the collection of resources." (Australian Journal of Educational Technology, p. 373)

Furthermore all of the connections to connectivism and contstructivism are beneficial. Students are learning at a three-fold rate. First, by constructing their own knowledge when building the PLE, by making connections with their environment  for each resource and by attempting to comprehend the subject matter delivered through curriculum to achieve objectives. Having to build our own PLEs in class this week also demonstrates to me in what way and how the teacher fits into the the networked students PLE and development of their PLE. We are are intricate resources in ourselves, with all the learning resources we use to help students design an efficient and adequate PLE. I will end with Drexler's sentiments which illustrate the important role teachers play when developing a PLE,  "A student's success depended upon his or her motivation but also greatly on the strategic guidance of the teacher. The teacher's ability to gauge students' understanding and progress were key to achieving a balance between student autonomy and teacher intervention."  As an instructor, if I depend on a learning network to improve my teaching, I should help students engage a PLE to help their learning. More importantly, if schools and teachers can synchronize some of the apps and networks they leverage, there may be even more support for students if we are all using parts of the same network. Drexler points to this concept of teacher student collaboration when she writes, "Ultimately, the personal learning environments that are constructed by humans become available to others who wish to study the same topics. New learners, only connected via their computer or mobile device, may not have personal contact with the originator of the personal learning environment, but they learn from and contribute to the collection of resources." (Australian Journal of Educational Technology, p. 382) 

Constructing Connectivism

I am thoroughly enjoying each study of learning theory. I feel like having reviewed many of the theories has been crucial in creating a holistic and balanced pedegogy of my own, as well as improving my teaching overall. Adding connectivism to the repertoire has been particularly interesting and satisfying as it has validated much of the teaching and digital skills I am implementing now.

At first, I was very concerned about the amount of time the teaching of technology and the time used by creating accounts and troubleshooting the technology was not a justifiable use of time when my primary job is to teach ELA Common Core Standards. For example, we spent an entire class period trying to get 8th graders logged into a free GoAnimate account, which set the final project back at least one day, along with all the restrictions of free trials, class space and the student's inefficiently utilizing the software until they build automaticity, the entire project is probably going to take a week longer than I had planned. Initially, this could look like a huge waste of classroom time-or is it? Like when the authors of Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, cite Vaill as saying, "learning must be a way of being-an ongoing set of attitudes and actions by individuals and groups that they employ to try to keep abreast of the surprising, novel, messy, obtrusive, recurring events. . ." The authors continue to explain that learning and work activities are no longer separate and that learning is a continual, life-long process. Thus, by me creating the activity, for students to create an animation, the set-backs and trouble shooting of technology are a skill set they will use again and again.

I now realize and believe in the concept that kids using technology to make connections and create their learning through the meaning of the world they are interacting with, merged with their background knowledge and with some guidance and instruction from a teacher will foster next generation, proficiency-based learning, that is not only sought after by the school system, but could be in the best interest of the children. Allowing them to get to the standard through their own connections has to be most effective. It may take more time and be "less" efficient, but learning could be more life-long and internalized. What are we striving for quality or quantity? A final quote to end this post best conceptualizes the age of digital learning theory in that

"Connectivism is the integration of principles explored by chaos, network and complexity and self-organization learning theories. Learning is a process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements-not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a data base), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing."

Constructivism Exercise

Today we created some shapes using Logo Interpreter. The activity and energy it took for me to figure out how to make a square design by inputting code was simple, yet challenging at the same time. I learned some in-depth insights as to how I think and construct reality based on the world around me. I was pulling in information from multiple sources such as the assignment requirements by our instructor, and the learning software and my own background knowledge with design programs. Even so, none of these sources were complete without actually putting the information and experiences into action and practice.

I noticed that the first thing I tried to do was just wing it, and figure out how to operate the software on my own. Of course, I had little success. I copied and pasted code into the field and the result came some pretty awesome looking designs, but I realized that I had not actually created anything or really learned anything. I did make an inference to copy the code into the design box. But all I had done is copy and paste some code. Below is the result.

This image looks very intricate with many colors and is an impressive piece of work. However, I know inside I did not create it. Nonetheless, I had to see how this design materialized from the code entered. Once I saw the pattern, I could begin to deduce which "phrases" of code made which designs, for example the part of the code that says, "repeat 144 times" is probably what created the numerous squares. From this point, I started to reverse engineer the code, by deleting portions of the code to see how the pattern changed. I could make correlations between what certain phrases of code were that create different shapes and colors. From that point, I had more of an idea of what the task required, but I also realized how little I knew about what was necessary to make a simple design. Therefore, I decided to actually look at the tutorial.

When I visited the tutorial, I acquired the final pieces of direction I needed to complete the assignment. However, that information was not the final piece of the puzzle. I still needed to put it into action and that required some trial and error. It took me a few tries to figure out how to make a simple square design. Typing in commands and missing the mark, then clearing the slate and trying again, until I fine tuned the practice. I noticed persistence was an important part of my learning. Many times I just wanted to find the right piece of code that would produce a square and copy that into the line. But wouldn't that in itself still be learning. It would be the same type of trial and error I had been through trying to actually design the square. In the end this is what I made.

When it was all said and done, I appreciated the process it took for me to learn how to create this design. It is simple, but it required me to make many connections from multiple different sources and experiences to build this design. The practice of putting knowledge and information into action was key as well. I can now see how too often I do not require my students to put the concepts we learn into action or practice and in order for learners to learn from and utilize the knowledge we discuss in class education must be interact with the world around them.