Photo Sharing
I think that photo sharing could have some value for teachers and students. One example for its use could be for students to share some interesting facts about themselves, through pictures, at the start of the school year. Students without the necessary technology could have the option of bringing in actual photos of themselves, or drawing pictures on a poster board that represent their lives. But students with internet access could create an album through photo sharing to introduce themselves to the class. There could be certain requirements, topics, and classifications of pictures within the project.
There would definitely have to be a decent amount of front-loading and discussion about the expectations and kinds of photos that are appropriate and not for school. Inappropriate photo sharing is a concern that I have about students using this type of service. I would also be concerned that students may connect with the wrong types of people on-line and make their photos available to them. Front-loading about spelling, grammar, and text-language within captions or written picture descriptions is another issue that I would want to address. The benefits of students being able to use a photo sharing service are them becoming familiar with the various types of modern technology in an appropriate setting, being able to express themselves through pictures in a way that speaks to their affect (proven to be a beneficial way to help students internalize information), and using less or no paper.
Trends and Issues—Ch. 2
Although I think the lesson planning process that the author describes is a little rigid (even though they mention a few times that it is not), it is very similar to the way that I design my lesson plans. I do not always use the exact order of steps in the same way that the author outlines as Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation or use the same terms to describe steps in the planning process. I generally take the standards from the state’s curriculum standards, or district curriculum (which is derived from the state standards). This is similar to the analysis process in chapter two. I then think about what I want students to learn specifically and try to think of it in student friendly terms (to break the goal down). Within my lesson planning, I try to think of a way to assess my students’ background knowledge of the lesson/unit/topic. Sometimes I will have already done this and will build the lesson’s activities and application from that. I try to think of ways to make the lessons fun, engaging, and interactive for my students throughout it’s duration. This sometimes involves using technology in some form.
The text does not go into great detail about the implementation, which is what I generally focus on most in lesson planning. I endeavor to grab the students’ interest and set a rationale, introduce the topic in a way that pulls on students’ background knowledge, model, let students reiterate and practice with a partner or group, give the students individual practice and application time. I also review and repeat ideas frequently, and use visual aids and kinesthetic application before finally assessing, whether formative or summative. As I already stated, my process is not rigid or set in stone, and thus does not always pan out in this way, but depending on what specific objective I am teaching, I go through this kind of thinking process while planning.
One thing that the authors mention that I think is very beneficial is the “team effort” aspect of planning. In most cases that I know of, teachers develop and plan lessons on their own. It is not mandated to develop lessons as a team. I think it would be beneficial to be able to at least have the option of conversing and collaborating with colleagues throughout the lesson creating and planning process.
Something that stood out was the authors mentioning the characteristics of instructional design being mostly used within the factory or business setting and that the intent is to implement them into the school systems. They admit that it is easier to implement many of their characteristics for training programs than for school based learning in stating, “While it is usually easier to identify performance setting for training programs than for school-based learning, instructional designers should strive to identify authentic performance measures for either setting. I do think about students applying the content I am teaching them to the real world.
Much of the author’s instructional design process is very similar, and in some cases, identical to what I do and know of other teachers to do within their lesson planning. I do think that the author’s approach is more rigid, however and that some of the characteristics do not clearly or smoothly translate to the school setting. There is much validity within the process the author outlines, but I do not think that it is the only sure way to improve the learning process.
Reiser, Robert A. Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall, 2007. Print.
I didn't find the method rigid at all. It allows for revision, evaluation, revision and more evaluation of whatever step you are on. Oh Yea and more revision. I always have someone else look at what ever it is I am working on to proof it for me or just give feed back. I may or not use there suggestions but quite often I revise in some way or another. It is always enjoyable to read what others have worked on, even when I don't agree with them. Thanks for the paper.
ReplyDeleteI think photo sharing could be very beneficial, but have concerns about setting up accounts. All the ones I used required your name, e-mail, and birthdate. I do agree that not all students will have the technology at home, but I think most of the schools will not have them in the classroom, or perhaps a computer lab or media area. If not most of this technology can be purchased on e-bay or other similiar sites. I bought 2 scanners and software for the Learning Resource Center to allow students to add pictures to their projects and only paid $35 each including shipping. The digital cameras I purchased are Kodak Easy Share ones and were on sale for $69 each from Office Max. They came with soft ware and memory cards.
ReplyDeleteI agree that you have to set rules and establish guidelines, especially going over social rules for postings and respecting rights and feelings of others.
Margie
I think that the reason that Educational Technology is in many ways easier to implement in corporate settings or non-school settings is the simple nature of schools. Businesses are more flexible by nature in changing the thinking, preconceived notions and policies because their focus is on profits. Businesses are also looking and paying for the hottest and best talent they can find. So they change the ways in which they train and evaluate their workers so that they can see and produce greater results than before. And managers or people in charge of implementing those same schemes are either compliant or removed.
ReplyDeleteWhereas a schools create barriers to change because of their aging work force ideas of "why change what works", "don't reinvent the wheel", etc. Also people who go into teaching have a perception of what teaching is, since they have had to endure it for the 16 years or so. So when they become teachers in many ways they start with what they know. It is difficult to change the culture of education to use newer methods, and technologies to perhaps make it something radically different than what we know of today because it is such an established institution. Because of that the Corporate world in many ways will always outstrip a schools ability to "change with the times" because it not only has the resources to change (the people, money, and knowledge) but the need because of its ever increasing struggle against its competitors that won't back down. Schools lack the same kind of motivation, money and resources that the corporate world has in order to create such radical culture shaping change.
I agree that their system for planning is close but not quite the same. I am in the same boat you are most of my planning is around the GLCES and it is more about implemetation then anything else. However, they did talk about assessment and being data collection as a means for detriming results, I think that is close to the same thing that you were talking about when you talk about pre-testing.
ReplyDeleteI had the same idea for a photo sharing assignment. I think it would be great way to learn about your new kids, it would also be a great assignment to do maybe after spring break.