DimDim example via Screencast

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Feb 222012
 

I was checking out some math, physics and standards based grading educational blogs when I came across a screencast of a teacher who used DimDim. Check out the screencast here and see how it went. More info from the lesson is found here.

I found the DimDim to be a bit slow paced, but maybe that’s just the nature of the beast when trying to broadcast live video. Dan, the teacher, also lamented that he found formative assessment very difficult. He really had no idea what students were “getting it” and which ones weren’t. He later found out that some students felt very rushed and wished they had more time. These are things the teacher would pick up on instantly in the classroom, if it was face to face.

Teacher Portfolios

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Apr 182011
 

Today, two references to Teacher Portfolios came to my attention.  The first was a link to a post on EET that I got via physicstweet.  The second was a link to a UBC Event on Teacher Portfolios.  I’ll have to keep these links in mind as I build my own ePortfolio.  Without giving it much thought, it seems that integrating a teacher portfolio into the ePortfolio would be a good idea.

5 Misconceptions with Newtons 1st and 2nd Laws

 MET Studies, Science  No Responses »
Mar 202011
 

As part of a research proposal I am putting together for my ETEC 500 course, over the past week or so I have read a lot of papers that deal with the topic of conceptual change in science students.  Although not all articles showed the same causal effect of addressing common misconceptions of students, the evidence from these papers makes it very compelling for teachers to implement some type of conceptual change model.  For those that have studied learning theories, this shouldn’t be very surprising. I believe it was Piaget that first put together some basic theories on developmental and cognitive change.  From this, other ideas such as schemas, assimilation, accommodation and discrepant events helped form conceptual change models.

Right then, enough of the uber-boring stuff. I read on Frank Noschese’s blog Action-Reaction some of the work done by Derek Muller.  I downloaded one of the Muller’s research papers and came across something that physics teachers would find useful. Granted, many (most?) physics teachers are probably aware of this but you never.  Muller had researched misconceptions around Newton’s First and Second Laws, and these are the most common ones (Muller, 2008):

  • believing an unbalanced force is required to keep an object moving with constant velocity;
  • confusing velocity and acceleration;
  • confusing position and velocity;
  • confusing momentum with force; and
  • believing that an increasing force is required to achieve constant acceleration.

Reading through Muller’s research, he gives a very compelling case for implementing for why all physics teachers should somehow discuss each of these misconceptions in class.

Muller, D., Bewes, J., Sharma, M., & Reimann, P. (2007). Saying the wrong thing: improving learning with multimedia by including misconceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 144-155. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00248.x 

Peer Instruction in a Wider Context

 MET Studies, Science  No Responses »
Mar 182011
 

One thing that I’ve been thinking about lately is how peer instruction or other attempts to get away from pseudoteaching can be applied to junior science classes.  For example, yesterday I started a Grade 8 science unit on Water.  I really like this unit because it has a lot of relevance for the kids and a good number of opportunities for both lab inquiries and outdoor experiential trips.  However, I can’t help think that the actual learning of the topics is firmly grounded in reading and scientific literacy.  Labs aside, the teaching methods I have used include:

  • me talking to the kids (teacher centered)
  • me giving notes to the kids (teacher centered)
  • have the kids read, talk, and do worksheets (pseudo-student centered)
  • have the kids read and do projects (student centered)

I don’t mind the “me talking” as an introduction to a topic.  I try to ask cunning questions (so cunning, you could pin a tail on it and call it a weasel) to actually stimulate dialogue but this can be pretty tough.  The students quite often are not used to pushing the limits of what they are thinking about.  If the students have a mindset of “repeat what I’ve been told that I’ve learned,” then their answers to open-ended questions can be very basic and short.  Once a culture of inquiry and wondering is instilled, these opening dialogues would be more fruitful.

I also don’t mind the “me giving notes” part. The reason for this is linked to scientific literacy.  The kids can mostly read the textbook (or whatever content provider they have) and even parse the material to answer worksheets. However, I think there can be a huge gulf between repeating knowledge and actual comprehension.  Therefore I use “notes” as a way to present graphic organizers to the students.  My “notes” will be graphic in nature, showing pictures and arrows which hopefully show some type of order or connection between topics and keywords.  Often I will use specific tools such as 20 word GIST summaries, Venn Diagrams and Frayer Models.  Once the students get used to these tools, the need for me to give “notes” diminishes.

The reason that I say that the “kids read, talk and do worksheets” is pseudo-student centered is because in this stage they are at the mercy of the content provider (usually a textbook).  The students don’t really get a chance to choose how they get their information, and I think their analysis and evaluation of the material greatly depends on their level of critical thinking.  All of this can be tied together nicely with an appropriate project, which finally gives the students more of a say in how their learning will progress.

As I stated at the start, I don’t know how something like peer instruction happens in this type of context.  What I think would really fill in the gaps would be appropriate formative assessment and assessment for learning.  By using intelligent assessment instruments and practices, we should be able to see where efforts should be focused and individualized for better understandings and success.  So while I struggle with better instruction techniques, I hope that by using assessment for learning and targeting scientific literacy, that my students will be given a fighting chance to learn and hopefully even enjoy science class!

Polleverywhere

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Feb 222011
 

I think one of the best ways to incorporate mobile technology in the classroom right now is through Polleverywhere. This service offers online polling where the students can participate in several different ways, including:

  • sms text messaging – via the web using their web widget
  • mobile device by visiting poll4.com
  • twitter
  • a smartphone interface

Polleverywhere is clearly growing, as the 3rd option that I mentioned above is a new development. I just tried it for the first time using an iPhone and it worked very well. It was easier to use than the sms. There are a couple of big advantages of Polleverywhere when compared to some other technologies. First, it can be used with a regular cell phone and sms service. Most students in school have a cell and sms plan, which makes accessibility very good. If a student doesn’t have a cell, there is also the option to use a computer and web widget. The other big reason why I like Polleverywhere is because there is some sound pedagogy behind it: it can be used for formative assessment. Polleverywhere is a type of Automated Response System (ARS) and these are seen as having a positive student engagement response, along with the assessment aspect (Kay & Knaack, 2009).

Kay, R., & Knaack, L. (2009). Exploring the Use of Audience Response Systems in Secondary School Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 382-392.

Course Site

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Feb 222011
 

Building a Moodle course site was just the type of activity and motivation I’ve been looking for, for many different reasons. First of all, I’ve been interested in Moodle since around February of 2010. I went as far as installing a Moodle site on my hosted domain and tried playing with it. Other than creating a couple of course titles and inserting a forum activity, I did not get very far. However, the ETEC 565A Moodle site project did a good job in getting me into “learner mode.”

Another big reason for this project being a success for me is that it not only got me to answer the “how” of Moodle, but also the “why” or “what.” While creating my course site, I was also constantly thinking of the pedagogy behind what I was doing. Well, I suppose almost any preparation work for an educational task is bound to have pedagogy involved, but I think it is fair to say that I was reasonably well focused on this aspect. Chickering and Ehrmann’s (1996) Seven Principles played a part in this, as did the course’s case studies, along with Wesch’s (2007) reflections.

The course site went through three distinct phases during its development. The first phase was made up of a lot of content creation and creating the general UI look that I wanted to use. I spent a lot of time during this phase as I became aware of the Moodle paradigm. Like a lot of software, once the paradigm and workflow is identified and made familiar, using the software becomes reasonably easy and comfortable. Moodle is nice because only a modest amount of time is required to understand its workflow. Although it is cumbersome at times, it never gets terribly complex. Much of my time at this point was also spent honing my few html and css skills. By the end of this first phase I had developed a reasonable idea of the amount of time required to build a simple LMS course site, which is a very good bit of knowledge to be aware of.

The second phase that I went through was getting a deeper understanding of how the features of Moodle can be best utilized. Much of this was done for the Quiz assignment for ETEC 565A. With assessment being such a large part of education and learning, this phase was very significant in learning to get the most out of Moodle.

The last phase of the course site development included the last of my module content creation and tweaking of the UI. I also took this opportunity to expand on how I can use Moodle. One of my ideas was to create or use some SCORM content. The idea for this is partially due to me finding the SCORM packages from Absorb Advanced Physics. I didn’t use any of his packages, but I recognize the power of them and how they can be effectively used in an LMS. I found the Udutu website which offer free SCORM compliant course authoring, and I used it to create some SCORM activities for my course site. This primarily served as a learning experience for me, as these packages don’t offer much that Moodle can’t do itself. However, Udutu does have some nice graphical assessment templates. However, I think Moodle 2.0 has recently caught up to this in some ways.

Another opportunity for learning arose during the last phase of developing the course site. I had decided to do a pro/con debate as an activity and I stumbled upon several web2.0 tools that offer a free debating forum with a tailored format specifically made for debating. I decided to use one of these websites, www.createdebate.com. This gave me a reasonable amount of stress though. The day before the course site project was due, the createdebate website stopped loading. I had an outage at my house for most of the day. This was quite surprising given that the createdebate website is well-established. It is not some fly-by-night startup, hoping to quickly cash in on the web2.0 gravy train. Even more surprising is that I finally got in touch with their tech support people and they said they didn’t have any server problems. Regardless, I decided to stick with using their debate website as a part of one of my activities.

One last task was left for me to deal with, which was the testing and trouble-shooting of the course site. I think I’ve gone through the whole site a few times as both a student and as a teacher, and most (all?) of the big bugs have been ironed out. I know that testing is a major feat in itself, and also makes me wonder how a person or team would go about testing a complete LMS that is about to go live.

Chickering, A.W. & Ehrmann, S.C. (1996).  Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 49(2), 3-6

Wesch, M. (2007). A Vision of Students Today (& What Teachers Must Do) | Britannica Blog. Retrieved December 1, 2010, from http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/10/a-vision-of-students-today-what-teachers-must-do/

pingback test

Flight Path

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Feb 222011
 

In the fall of 2008, after working as a mechanical engineer for 15 years, I decided to try out a new career in teaching. I put together my program applications and by spring of 2009 I was accepted into the PDP at Simon Fraser University’s Faculty of Education. After a 12-month whirlwind program, I finally received my B.Ed in August of this year.

In the spring of 2010 I anticipated that I would have temporary work in the coming winter. This, coupled with my new-found interest in learning about education, I decided to apply to the MET program at UBC. I am a keen user of technology and want to learn how to use IT wisely in the classroom, so the MET program seemed like a good fit for me. Secondary math and physics are my principal teaching subjects, and as anticipated these credentials helped me get a job with the Surrey School District as a Teacher-On-Call starting in September 2010.

Up to now I have had limited exposure to technology that would be useful in a secondary school setting. I have been running a WordPress blog for several years, I put together an environmental math website using Drupal, and have experimented with using Moodle. As well, during my practicum I had students do a unit presentation using Prezi, along with the other typical computer related technologies used in the classroom.

I really have come into ETEC 565A, and the MET program in general, without preconceptions on what I will be learning. After covering some of the theoretical frameworks that educators can apply to digital technology and teaching, I am starting to develop some clearer ideas on what I can perhaps achieve in ETEC 565A. As I try to construct my own framework for learning, I would like to focus this within the context of 4 of ISTE’s NETS standards. I would like to learn how to inspire creative and innovative thinking, along with engaging students with collaborative tools that promote reflection. I also think it is very important that I improve my ability to develop enriched learning environments that speak to a student’s individuality. Finally, I want to be able to have a variety of formative assessment tools at my disposal to aid in both assessment and learning.

As for my own personal framework, I will try to work inside something I call the EPIC model (a stripped down medley of the Seven Principles (Chickering & Gamson, 1987) and SECTIONS (Bates & Poole, 2003).

E Ease of use and reliability: I especially do not want students to get caught up in technological difficulties that take away from learning.
P Prompt feedback between the student and teacher: by being prompt, the students can be empowered to work at an appropriate pace and level.
I Interactivity: as with the NETS, I think it is critical that engaging and interactive aspects are present in the technologies.
C Collaboration and communication: learning is very much a social activity, and promoting collaboration and cooperation is a significant aspect of constructivist teaching techniques.

Considering the above, there are some specific tools that I hope to learn more about. I would like to improve the way that I put together a Moodle site, by making it efficient and visually interesting if possible. As a side note, I’ve beta tested quite a bit of software over the years, and it is clear that visual presentation makes a huge impact on the user, regardless of the interface or mechanics. Clear, pleasing visuals help with initial engagement. Secondly, I am very interested in learning about formative assessment tools that can be added to something like a LMS. Ideally I would very much like to learn about “clicker” polling type devices as I believe these can be a very powerful formative assessment tool (Gauci, Dantas, Williams, & Kemm, 2009), but I’m not sure if this can be investigated during ETEC 565A. In terms of “I” in EPIC, I am open to whatever tools I come across during ETEC 565A. I look forward to learning about these tools by collaborative work with my peers. Finally, I also hope to learn about software and extensions that can help link various technologies, like Moodle, with mobile devices such the Blackberry, Android phone and iPhone. This could become a very advantageous aspect of the “P” in EPIC.

Works Cited

Bates, A., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. New York: Jossey-Bass, An Imprint of Wiley.

Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. AAHE Bulletin, 3-7.

Gauci, S., Dantas, A., Williams, D., & Kemm, R. (2009). Promoting Student-Centered Active Learning in Lectures with a Personal Response System. Advances in Physiology Education, 33(1), 60-71.

LMS Proposal

 MET Studies  1 Response »
Feb 222011
 

As part of my development plan to engage and enhance student learning in the math and sciences, I would like to implement an online Learning Management System (LMS) to integrate with the subjects that I am teaching. The purpose of using an LMS is to achieve three primary goals. First, I would like to increase the frequency of on-topic course discussions, both student to student and student to teacher. Secondly, I plan on delivering lessons integrated with multimedia, and third, I will be incorporating some engaging Assessment for Learning techniques through the use of the LMS. This project will not only deliver strong pedagogy but it can be done with very modest requirements from the school district in terms of financial and employee resources.

I based my choice on using an LMS by applying the standards put forward by the International Society for Technology in Education (NETS for teachers, 2008). It is my intention to facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity while developing digital-age learning experiences and assessment, and the tools needed to achieve this are best delivered through an LMS. For example, discussion forums help foster dialogue and a healthy learning community, and are very important given how today’s students trend to online socializing (Boling & Beatty, 2010). Further enrichment in terms of collaboration and dialogue are managed through synchronous voice and text chat within the LMS, and this would be a significant benefit for SD36 because of the number of ESL students in the district (Chan, 1997), (Hampel & Hauck, 2004). In terms of assessment, as educators such as Black (2004) and the BC Ministry of Education (2006) push towards more Learning For Assessment, I plan to implement real-time formative assessment through the use of an Automated Response System (ARS) (Kay & Knaack, 2009). Finally, the content and communication tools in the LMS will empower the students to be more responsible for their learning: an LMS enhances the communication path between the student and teacher such that goals, assignments and assessments are transparent and always accessible (Perkins & Pfaffman, 2006).

A project such as this requires a well thought-out rationale for the choice of an LMS. One study has shown that approximately 24% of schools admit to obtaining the wrong LMS for their institution (Panettieri, 2007). With this in mind, I have applied Bates and Poole’s (2003) SECTIONS framework to ensure that the most appropriate LMS is chosen. The clear winner in this regard is the open-source solution named Moodle. Having installed and set up Moodle Servers in the past, I have first-hand experience with its capabilities and why it is the best choice. I’ve found Moodle to be very student centered and able to accomplish the goals outlined above. Moodle itself is easy to use: I was first exposed to Moodle through my PDP training at SFU as a student, and I never heard of people having difficulties using it. Using two personal demo installations of Moodle, I’ve already tested the primary functions I’m interested in using for teaching and I am confident in being able to deliver the required functionality. This testing includes integration with an ARS (Poll Everywhere), audio chat tools (Nanogong), and Moodle’s included real-time synchronous chat, student/teacher discussion boards, and lessons prepared with an integrated multimedia experience. I believe that Moodle represents a new and novel solution for students to use, while my experience with using Moodle has shown that it has a fast and flexible installation and configuration process.

From an organizational standpoint, other teachers in School District 36 have begun to use Moodle. Similarly, in the VSB there is a grassroots Moodle community growing (http://school.vsbeducation.ca/moodle/). I believe that as an organization, it is very likely that SD36 will see Moodle as a future choice for LMS. In fact, SD36 may wish to use my proposed implementation as a pilot project that they can monitor for future evaluations.

Issues of great interest to SD36 are the cost and resources required for implementation and deployment. One of the great aspects about Moodle is that the software is open-source and free. There are no costs in purchasing or licensing the LMS software itself. However, there are some costs associated with the infrastructure required to run Moodle, similar to any other LMS software. As well, there are some costs associated with supplementary software modules that I would like implement. These modules pertain to the student centered pedagogy mentioned above, and are not specific to Moodle (the same costs would be incurred with other LMS). All costs and resources are shown in the table below. Although Moodle is highly scalable for full organizational implementation, at this time it is recommended to install on a 3rd party webhosting service provider in order to reduce investment costs and resources. Today’s webhosting companies not only provide an enormous amount of webspace at a reasonable cost, they also typically provide fast 24 hour service and support. I have also included pricing in the case that the district wishes to bring Moodle in-house at a future date. Support for Moodle itself is entirely handled through an online volunteer community. Yearly costs for the webhosting option are $534, whereas it would be $4135 for in-house (plus a $11,100 initial investment).


References

Bates, A. W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective teaching with technology in higher education: Foundations for success Jossey-Bass, An Imprint of Wiley.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 8.

Boling, E. C., & Beatty, J. (2010). Cognitive apprenticeship in computer-mediated feedback: Creating a classroom environment to increase feedback and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 47-65.

British Columbia, Ministry of Education. (2006). Physics 11 and 12: Integrated resource package. Victoria B.C.: Ministry of Education.

Chan, M. (1997). No talking, please, just chatting: Collaborative writing with computers

Hampel, R., & Hauck, M. (2004). Towards an effective use of audio conferencing in distance language courses. Language Learning & Technology, 8(1), 66-82.

ISTE | NETS for teachers 2008 Retrieved 10/6/2010, 2010, from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-teachers/nets-for-teachers-2008.aspx

Kay, R., & Knaack, L. (2009). Exploring the use of audience response systems in secondary school science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 382-392.

Panettieri, J. (2007, August). Addition by subtraction. University Business Magazine

Perkins, M., & Pfaffman, J. (2006). Using a course management system to improve classroom communication. Science Teacher, 73(7), 33-37.

E-learning Toolkit: Synchronous Communication Tools

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Feb 222011
 

I think one of the most important features in an LMS is to help enable communication. Learning is a social and cultural experience, and many people learn best through interaction with other people. I think it is relatively rare that a student optimally self-learns through books or other static media. This applies more to younger students than older or mature students. With this in mind, I was quite interested to learn about synchronous and asynchronous communication abilities for LMS.

Much of the information in the Synchronous Toolkit is well known to students and educators. Tools like iChat, Skype, MSN are used routinely by people. However, it was interesting to learn about all the different SCT that are available as modules in Moodle. The Toolkit highlighted 6 different tools, of which three are free. As well, Moodle has its own built-in chat module.

I find it a bit difficult to find out the real capabilities of these different tools because it really requires some practice with other people. Perhaps I will be able to convince a classmate to work through some of them together. I’ve used Wimba Classroom a bit, and I can see it being a really useful tool. I’ve also explored DimDim and it looks promising.

One thing that is a bit daunting is the plethora of choices available. When deciding to choose a technology for group discussion/interaction, there are many routes a person can take. So far I have found myself defaulting to “lower tech solutions,” such as a simple chat module (chat in WebCT/Vista). The knowledge in knowing that every user can be set up and using the chat with one click of the mouse is reassuring. However, I believe that with a small investment of time, other tools can be more beneficial over the medium to long term.

Theoretical Framework for Learning

 MET Studies  No Responses »
Feb 222011
 

Reading through the different frameworks we’ve looked at so far, I find that the seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education speaks to me the strongest. There’s no doubt that the SECTIONS framework from Bates and Poole also resonates, but some of the elements are more focused on institutional and managerial aspects. These are exactly the kinds of issues I dealt with as a mechanical engineer and operations manager, and less so in my present circumstances as a secondary school classroom teacher.

With the Seven Principles, I really appreciate the attention given to encouraging contact between students and faculty (teachers). I immediately recognize the asynchronous communication that Chickering and Erhrman describe in the teaching that I have done. For example, it was somewhat common for me to speak with a student during class time and agree that some type of help would be beneficial prior to an upcoming assignment. However, despite that I believe I created an open, safe and approachable relationship with my students, it was very rare that a timely and constructive dialogue would occur between me and my students outside of class hours. However, by effectively implementing a forum/chat/email system (or similar), I would hope that after-class communications could become very beneficial and a drastic improvement upon the current face-to-face encounters which are quite limited.

Closely tied to the above is the principle of giving prompt feedback. Tools like the Blackberry epitomize the importance and usefulness of being prompt in responding to peers, bosses and subordinates in the workplace, and I think this analogy carries straight over to education. From my own studies, I know that I really appreciate timely feedback to questions that I have. There are a few key benefits to being prompt. First, it gives each person the highest likelihood of dealing with questions and answers in an efficient manner. Secondly, being prompt is the best way to ensure that queries are discussed while the thoughts are fresh in one’s mind.

By using a system and framework that allows for strong student / teacher contact in a prompt manner, the students will be encouraged and empowered to be proactive in their learning.

 Older Entries