Group items tagged

Researching What for Why? I enjoy research. I spend much of my time reading it. I also often find myself in sustained and vigorous conversations with colleagues from some of the leading research institutions from around the world...and it's time that I value very much. Indeed, the Foundation maintains a register of some of the leading research around 1-to-1 on our site....however, I am also sick and tried of the unrelenting practice of political leaders and educational policy makers who continually seek to justify inaction and limit the scope for innovation in the name of research. One only has to review the mountains of literature around the most effective ways to teach reading and the efficacy of small classes to conclude that too much educational research is based on loose assumptions, inappropriate methodologies, a blatant lack of rigor and ideological bias. Too often the funding base for educational research creates preconceptions about the outcomes, real or perceived, and the volume of research that swamps the education market seems to be more related to tenure or the attraction for doctoral topics, than a genuine need. It really is about time we took stock of the situation. For more than three decades we have seen an increasing stream of research that has targeted our use of technology in schools. What purpose has much of it served, other than to often significantly distract educators from continuing to develop innovative practice, and seek new ways to enga

How can we support innovative teachers taking risks, if every move is covered by a researcher measuring outcomes?

Why don't we start by working on the culture of our schools, and encourage those that are seeking to create a culture of innovation. Why don't we start thinking carefully about what it really means to support risk-taking in our schools; it seems the only risks people are interested in are about the evils of the net and beyond...how about we support our educational leaders who are creating new agendas for learning within their schools and seeking to genuinely leverage technology within an immersive environment to truly create worthwhile, authentic learning opportunities.

I am currently collaborating with two of our English teachers to co-design and co-teach research and content creation for digital research projects.   Susan Lester (10th Honors World American Literature/Composition) and I began our project about three weeks ago (read more in this blog post), and I’ll be working with John Bradford (11th Honors American Literature/Composition) as of Tuesday for the next month or so on his twist on the project (more details coming soon).  In both of our collaborative projects, we felt our students were not quite ready  in terms of skill sets or prior learning experiences to completely open up the possibilities for a digital research “paper” or project although students do have creative latitude in choosing and designing their multigenre elements that will be integrated into the wiki based “text”; students also have the option to integrate multimedia into each section of their wikified “papers”.

the three of us  felt torn in wanting to open up the options and not setting up students for utter frustration (to the point many would completely shut down) in terms of combining two advanced skill sets (new research skills and content are being introduced);

Artificial disciplinary boundaries were drawn, and research was put in silos that grew ever narrower. Therefore, you have scientists who study mice. You have scientists who study yeast. Institutional boundaries and funding incentives often discourage, rather than encourage people in different fields to collaborate. 

The interdisciplinary approach both to research and learning is starting to gain favor again because people are starting to recognize the dysfunction that is often apparent in large research institutions, but also because the small and nimble research labs are proving they have a method for speeding the pace and reducing the cost of discovery. 

These researchers attributed the poor implementation to lack of teacher knowledge and buy-in, concluding, "It is impossible to overstate the power of individual teachers in the success or failure of 1:1 computing" (p. 47).

Technology alone," he observed in Good to Great, "never holds the key to success." However, "when used right, technology is an essential driver in accelerating forward momentum" (p. 159).

blending technology with face-to-face teacher time generally produces better outcomes than face-to-face or online learning alone

Rather, what matters most is how students and teachers use technology to develop knowledge and skills. Successful technology integration for learning generally goes hand in hand with changes in teacher training, curricula, and assessment practices

Students playing an active role in their learning and receiving frequent, personalized feedback Students critically analyzing and actively creating media messages Teachers connecting classroom activities to the world outside the classroom

Students at Manor New Tech typically complete nearly 200 projects over the course of their high school experience, with each project lasting about two to four weeks.

"How can we use mathematics to design and use a Dobsonian telescope?"

he rubric often includes time lines and information on essential elements of successful final products (for example, if a report may be produced as a podcast rather than a paper, the rubric specifies minimum length for the podcast).

You market, and your students share, books using social networking tools like Shelfari, Good Reads, or LibraryThing.

Your students blog or tweet or network in some way about what they are reading

You review and promote books in your own blogs and wikis and other websites. (Also Reading2.0 and BookLeads Wiki for book promotion ideas)