Group items tagged

This article outlines 3 trademarks of excellent teaching. This article seems relevant following our discussions today re: technology supplementing - not replacing - good teaching.

We just missed it, but right now we're in the midst of MobiMOOC, a MOOC organized by educators to teach other educators about mobile learning. Kind of a neat concept, I think! But one of the keys is how good is the instruction in helping educators integrate in mobile learning with good pedagogy instead of just showcasing mobile technologies...probably one of the common dangers with these types of initiatives.

artificial intelligence and the personalization of instruction

I wholeheartedly believe in the last sentence of the article - "By using technology in the service of education, we can change the world in our lifetime".

A great article -- mentions Khan in forefront again -- I think the more we speak to how to maintain high standards of design and pedagogy for blended classes, the better

Article from July 2011 that is an example of how to transistion to a BYOD school.

I like it that "the district has focused on making sure that technical staff understand the educational goals of the initiative and that educators understand the technical challenges to enabling it". I my previous experience in non-educational settings, whenever the user community and the technology community were aligned and focused on solving a 'business' problem it was likely to lead to a successful conclusion.

Technology in the classroom --> only works with parental participation. This is an angle that has not been covered much in our class. But, my experience tells me it is more important than whether technology helps pedagogy.

Article raises good points about the need for change in pedagogy if using mobile devices in classrooms

A good overview of the two different pedagogies behind MOOCs.

Another type of online learning platform: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/27/ut-austin-psychology-professors-prepare-worlds-first-synchronous-massive-online

"Motivation is weak because more students don't like school, don't work hard and don't do well." Also see Tom Friedman in the NYTimes referring to this article and concluding that "right now the Hindus and Confucians have more Protestant ethics than we do, and as long as that is the case we'll be No. 11!"

Curious what math teachers in our class think about this. Anyone worked with these methods?

I was talking with Arene about this. He has taught math in middle school and high school in Singapore. When I asked if teaching this in the US would be effective he had some interesting points. You should talk with him to get an accurate account, but one of the questions he raised in our conversation was the following: Does this pedagogy that works in the cultural context of Singapore transfer to the United States?

This report highlights key issues to facilitate understanding of how a systemic approach to technology-based school innovations can contribute to quality education for all while promoting a more equal and effective education system. It focuses on the novel concept of systemic innovation, as well as presenting the emerging opportunities to generate innovations that stem from Web 2.0 and the important investments and efforts that have gone into the development and promotion of digital resources. It also shows alternative ways to monitor, assess and scale up technology-based innovations. Some country cases, as well as fresh and alternative research frameworks, are presented.

A pilot project in Ontario, brining iPad into the classroom. It is an interesting article to see how they are exploring with the idea.

Thanks for sharing this article. Looks like they have given some serious thought into integrating technology into the classroom than just say "let us throw some iPads in and see how it works". I like this quote - "Collaboration is part of our pedagogy - kids helping other kids, kids interacting and learning together," says McLellan. "That's not new, but the iPad facilitates it."

MassCue article about the effectiveness of Student Response Systems by a tech consultant / researcher for vendor Turning Response Systems (who sells the clickers that HGSE uses). I'm interested in comparing these systems with the FREE adhoc web-based system offered by Socrative.com, co-founded by HGSE TIE grad Ben Berté.

James- very interesting article about Student Response Systems. The clickers are a great tool to facilitate student participation in a teacher-centered classroom, and many of us have seen the Turning Point clickers in action. And they really do help with engaging everyone in the audience. Remember that diversity seminar during orientation week? The rich discussion that ensued in a crowd of 650 was really made possible because of the opening survey questions, the clicker interactivity, and the discussions that sprung up at each individual table which then mushroomed out to the rest of the crowd. I never thought a diversity seminar could be that engaging, and the clickers were definitely a key part of that. My only criticism of the article is that it seems to be pushing hardware capabilities over sound pedagogy, which is always a danger in learning about emerging technologies. Question though: is Socrative not entirely free? it seems like a great tool with many interactive capabilities, ideal for many classroom settings and activities.

Steve I agree the article did have a strong sense of hardware pushing. It was written by a research on the the vendor's payroll. I've changed "free" to FREE; I intended the quotes to be for emphasis, not skepticism. Socrative is indeed free.

Isabel, Chris M., Stephen B., and I are at MassCUE today watching Yong Zhao's keynote.  You can find a copy of his presentation here at this website.

I saw Zhao speak yesterday at the MassCUE conference (with James, Chris McEnroe and Isabel Schwartzman). His message was provocative: the United States did not do well on the TIMSS test, but the US has never done well on this type of testing even way back to the 1950s. Therefore, Zhao thinks that these tests are not good indicators of educational quality, but that the things that the US does right are fostering creativity, building in tolerance and forgiveness into the educational system, and stressing problem-solving and collaborative learning.

This relates to part of the discussion in class today. I've seen him speak about the irony that Chinese schools, which are outperforming US schools on PISA and TIMMS, are actually trying to model their systems more on US pedagogy. See his latest book or look for him on TED.