Group items tagged

Fortunately, in a classroom where students already use technology, it’s a simple matter to incorporate a digital citizenship component into any lesson — all while meeting both the ISTE Standards and the Common Core. For example, teachers have the opportunity to address digital citizenship whenever students: 1. Create digital presentations

Anytime students create content to share online, teachers can supplement the lesson with an age-appropriate discussion about copyright and fair use. Mendoza suggests going beyond simply showing students how to properly cite ideas and images. “Flip the tables on them. When they’re creating and sharing their work with the world online, ask them: How do you want other people to use your work? Would you want other people to make a profit off it, share it or alter it? That’s when it really hits home,” she said.

2. Study historical figures or literary characters Prompt students to think about how they present themselves online — and what it means to leave a digital footprint — by creating fake social media profiles for the characters they’re studying in history or English classes. “If Lincoln had a Twitter feed, what would he tweet? Get students to think about how these characters might present themselves online,” Mendoza said. “Reframe social media to look at how the characters might have exemplified themselves in a digital world and how it might have impacted them.” Add another dimension to this activity by using characters that have two very distinct sides to their personalities, such as Jekyll and Hyde. “It helps them think about how sometimes people present themselves online in a whole different way than they really are in person and why we might share things about ourselves that might not really be in line with who we are in person.”

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.

Briefly, Education 1.0, 2.0. and 3.0 is explained as: Education 1.0 can be likened to Web 1.0 where there is a one-way dissemination of knowledge from teacher to student.  It is a type of essentialist, behaviorist education based on the three Rs – receiving by listening to the teacher; responding by taking notes, studying text, and doing worksheets; and regurgitating by taking standardized tests which in reality is all students taking the same test. Learners are seen as receptacles of that knowledge and as receptacles, they have no unique characteristics.  All are viewed as the same.  It is a standardized/one-size-fits-all education. Similar to Web 2.0, Education 2.0 includes more interaction between the teacher and student; student to student; and student to content/expert.  Education 2.0, like Web 2.0, permits interactivity between the content and users, and between users themselves.  Education 2.0 has progressive roots where the human element is important to learning.  The teacher-to-student and student-to-student relationships are considered as part of the learning process.  It focuses on the three Cs – communicating, contributing, and collaborating. Education 3.0 is based on the belief that content is freely and readily available as is characteristic of Web 3.0. It is self-directed, interest-based learning where problem-solving, innovation and creativity drive education. Education 3.0 is also about the three Cs but a different set – connectors, creators, constructivists.  These are qualitatively different than the three Cs of Education 2.0.  Now they are nouns which translates into the art of being a self-directed learner rather than doing learning as facilitated by the educator. Education 3.0: Altering Round Peg in Round Hole Education

It's time to put the "person" in "personalization" and stop the conversations going in directions that take us off course.

It's not about technology. It's not about the test or improving test scores. It's really not about school. It's all about the learner, how they learn best and that what they learn is meaningful and for a purpose.

Teachers and learners can work together to develop learning goals and design activities that are authentic and relevant for the learner so they are engaged in learning. Learning has to have a context that learners can grasp and understand.

In web 1.0, users are viewed as mere receivers and consumers of content. Knowledge is centralized and expert-based and hence the use of taxonomies and directories to organize and store it. In the same vein, education 1.0 is also based on a notion of one way communication where teachers are the sages on the stage and students are pails to be filled with facts to be regurgitated and spewed back in standardized tests.

In web 2.0 things are a bit different. Users are empowered with tools that permit them more  interaction and participation in knowledge building. Web tools such as blogs, wikis, and social media websites have decentralized knowledge and enhanced collaboration and communication. Web 2.0 foregrounded concepts of collective intelligence, distributed-expertise, and wisdom of the mob. Similarly, in education 2.0 learning is student-centred and involves continuous interaction between learners and their teachers and also with the content being studied. Collaborative approaches to instruction such as PBL, game based learning, flipped learning have been adopted as  teaching modes.

education3.0 is based on the belief that content is freely and readily available as is characteristic of web 3.0. It is self-directed, interest-based learning, where problem-solving, innovation and creativity drive education. Education 3.0 is also about the three Cs: connectors, creators, and constructivists.

Education as it should be – passion-based. The Other 21st Century Skills with 19 comments Many have attempted to identify the skills important for a learner today in this era of the 21st century (I know it is an overused phrase).  I have an affinity towards the skills identified by Tony Wagner: Critical thinking and problem-solving Collaboration across networks and leading by influence Agility and adaptability Initiative and entrepreneurialism Effective oral and written communication Accessing and analyzing information Curiosity and imagination   http://www.tonywagner.com/7-survival-skills Today I viewed a slideshow created by Gallup entitled, The Economics of Human Development: The Path to Winning Again in Education. Here are some slides from this presentation. This

presentation sparked my thinking about what other skills and attributes would serve the learners (of all ages) in this era of learning.  Some other ones that I believe important based on what I hear at conferences, read via blogs and other social networks include: Grit Resilience Hope and Optimism Vision Self-Regulation Empathy and Global Stewardship

Self-regulation is a complex process involving numerous motivational, affective, cognitive, physiological and behavioral factors that individuals proactively direct and manage in order to attain self-set goals (Zeidner, Boekaerts, & Pintrich, 2000). It is a broad construct incorporating behaviors and strategies utilized by individuals across their lifespan to modulate or control their own emotional and behavioral responses. Students who self-regulate believe that they are responsible for their own learning and are more adept at dictating what, where, and how their learning occurs (Bandura, 2006). These students often persist longer through academic tasks and display higher levels of motivation and achievement (Schunk & Ertmer, 2000; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001)

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

As teachers we understandably believe that it is the ‘teaching’ that causes learning. But this is too egocentric a formulation. As I said in my previous post, the learner’s attempts to learn causes all learning.

From this viewpoint, the teacher is merely one resource for learning, no different from a book, a peer, an experience, or an experimental result.

It is the learner who decides to try to learn (or not) from what happens.