Group items tagged

Blended learning can be a great way to make use of whatever technology tools you do have, rather than needing specific technology that you don’t have. Blended learning doesn’t require you to have a 1:1 classroom, a certain number of iPads, or particular software, though you can put any and all of those things to use as you choose. Thus, blended learning covers a lot of ground – and in the process it helps to make learning more engaging, effective, and efficient.

Careful planning and a strong understanding of blended learning will help make the transition much more smooth.  Enter: the handy infographic below. It takes a look at how to set up a blended learning environment, some of the features of a great blended learning program, and some other tidbits of information. Keep reading to learn more!

Content and apps are aligned with CCSS Standards aligned performance and assessment tasks Comprehensive learner profiles including student portfolios Consideration of learning level, student performance, and best learning modality Good reporting functionality

ust as advances in technology enabled the growth of science, the extremely rapid growth of technology we’re experiencing today is impacting our perspectives, tools, and priorities now. But beyond some mild clamor for a focus on “STEM,” there have been only minor changes in how we think of content–this is spite of extraordinary changes in how students connect, access data, and function on a daily basis.

What kind of changes might we expect in a perfect-but-still-classroom-and-content-based world? What might students learn in the future? Of course any response at all is pure speculation, but if we draw an arc from classical approaches to the Dewey approach to what might be next–factoring in technology change, social values, and criticisms of the current model–we may get a pretty decent answer. This assumes, of course a few things (all of which may be untrue): 1. We’ll still teach content 2. That content will be a mix of skills and knowledge 3. Said skills and knowledge will be thematically arranged into “content areas”

The Content Of The Future: 8 Content Areas For Tomorrow’s Students 1. Literacy Big Idea: Reading and writing in physical & digital spaces Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas included: Grammar, Word Parts, Greek & Latin Roots, The Writing Process, Fluency; all traditional content areas 2. Patterns Big Idea: How and why patterns emerge everywhere under careful study Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: Grammar, Literature, Math, Geometry, Music, Art, Social Studies, Astronomy 3. Systems Big Idea: The universe—and every single thing in it–is made of systems, and systems are made of parts. Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: Grammar, Law, Medicine, Science, Math, Music, Art, Social Studies, History, Anthropology, Engineering, Biology; all traditional content areas by definition (they’re systems, yes?) 4. Design Big Idea: Marrying creative and analytical thought Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: Literature, Creativity, Art, Music, Engineering, Geometry 5. Citizenship Big Idea: Responding to interdependence Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: Literature, Social Studies, History; Civics, Government, Theology 6. Data Big Idea: Recognizing & using information in traditional & non-traditional forms Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: Math, Geometry, Science, Engineering, Biology; 7. Research Big Idea: Identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing diverse ideas Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: English, Math, Science; Humanities 8. Philosophy Big Idea: The nuance of thought Examples of traditional ideas and academic content areas include: Ethics, Literature/Poetry, Art, Music; Humanities

5 Things to Share With Your Teachers About Educational Technology

Here is a list of the top 5 things you should share with your teachers in regards to educational technology:

3. Please ask questions.

The SAMR model provides a perfect lens for looking at the implementation of technology. After spending some time with the model and reflecting on the current raft of technologies – I have to say we have barely moved past the enhancement stage.

You’re all probably familiar with the Gartner hype cycle - “the graphic representation of the maturity, adoption and social application of specific technologies”. If I was to put EdTech on the graph somewhere right now in February 2013 it would be at the very pit of the “trough of disillusionment”. In the diagram above I’ve tried to to illustrate the my view of the current state by combining the SAMR and Hype Cycle. The technological solutions that we put our faith in have failed to meet expectations and have quickly become unfashionable. The LMS has dropped off the page despite it underwriting most institutions online presense and being the foundation of technological progress so far. While we can wallow in the downturn the fact is that the next phase – the Slope of Enlightenment – is just around the corner. The climate is right to move forward, beyond the hype and beyond simple enhancement. Its time for transformation.

The big issue with EdTech at the moment is the lack of real solutions. The vendors and the products they are peddling are carry overs and do little more that enhance and keep the status quo. They don’t move very far down the SAMR line, and they barely get close to the real transformation that is possible (and needed). The fact is that there is no solution on the market that can provide the technical transformation required in the education sector. And it’s a shared problem across sectors and industries – from news, to broadcast and publishing. So lets work this out together rather than paying someone else to silo off yet another years content.

In the global perspective, the Finnish education system seems to be a paradox. When much of the rest of the world is implementing more oversight of schools to assure teachers meet specific goals, lengthening the school day, toughening academic standards, and increasing homework, Finnish children continue to enjoy a relatively short school day, a broad curriculum, and a light homework load. In addition, Finnish children do not attend private tutoring sessions or spend any time preparing for standardized tests, as so many of their peers around the world must.

Perhaps the most surprising part of the Finnish educational philosophy is the central role of play in children’s lives, both in and out of school. Formal learning doesn’t start before the first grade when children are seven years old. Before that, children spend their time in play to develop a sense of independence and responsibility, and to learn about themselves and others. In the early years of elementary education, children furthermore learn to read and do math through various forms of play, music, and drama.  The old adage of “less is more” is carried out every day in Finnish schools, as I describe in “Finnish Lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland” (2011).

Finland’s success is a result of finding its own way of change rather than doing more of the same than others. This is particularly true in enhancing educational quality and equity.  Some foreign observers claim that Finnish educational success results from the country’s smallness, cultural homogeneity, and wealth. Those thinking this way often fail to distinguish the Finnish way from the global education reform movement (or GERM) that sees competition, standardization, frequent testing, and privatization as the most effective drivers of change.

Edtech Priorities for Educators: No Shiny Toys! In addition to the above issues, educators clearly stated that the purpose of edtech should never be to replace a teacher. Instead, edtech products should: Relieve administrative burdens; Increase the efficacy of teachers; Deepen the relation among students and teachers; Embed assessment directly into daily learning experience; Amplify the reach of effective teachers; Empower students to become creators; And ultimately, keep the humanity in education and create more equality of opportunities.

Here’s a combined list from all 18 groups: The best interests of students must always be first and foremost. Tools should fill a REAL need for teaching/learning (not solutions in search of a problem). Ask teachers and talk to administrators at every stage of the design process. Have open, balanced conversations among all stakeholders. The introduction of edtech should include ongoing targeted meaningful staff development that is preferably teacher led. Student data must be secure: edtech companies should be open and clear about their use of data and information. Education technology should continually be tested in classrooms. The larger community should be included in the selection and implementation of edtech. If solutions claim to be research-based, they need to be truly research based. We need to know more about what works based on real data. Access should be reasonable and appropriate for all stakeholders. Compensate teachers who are product developers for their works. Similarly, compensate educators for providing extensive feedback and help with product development. Structure the ways teachers can provide feedback and interact with new tools as forms for professional development. Research should include recommendations that address the socio-emotional implications of using technology products. Districts should provide thought leadership on their theory of learning to help drive appropriate product development that aligns with district priorities.

Everything should revolve around the learner.

dministrators’ lack of knowledge is not entirely their fault. Many of them didn’t grow up with computers. Other than basic management or data analysis technologies, many are not using digital tools or online systems on a regular basis. Few have received training from their employers or their university preparation programs on how to use, think about, or be a leader regarding digital technologies.

3 ways to get every student coding

nstead of starting with an elective for computer science, create a class that is required for all students. Better still, integrate it into the core curriculum for a math or science class, or maybe even art.

day it is integrated into a required class called CSTEM (the C stands for creativity, collaboration and computer science)