Greetings,
You will need to go to my wiki page to view my other comments on this week's article. Once there just follow the directions from the front page, to the other page I have created. I have added links through comments, hoping that you can comment on that particular site. Thanks
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
O'Reilly article and use of a wiki
Week #3 Reflection
As with the RSS reader and the blog, I believe the wiki would be a really good tool. I think each of these things has their own place. I as a teacher would need to be much more comfortable using any of the three before I spring this on any class. These are all great communication tools, and much better than the e-mail or texting idea of communicating.
In my teaching I think the wiki could be used as a research tool for group projects. If you have 4-5 students per group and have assigned topics for them to work on together I think this would be a fantastic way to combine their research efforts. I like the way you can attach the links with your writing or just attach a link for someone else to review and give feedback. If you are going to monitor this work and each student has a wiki page then you can keep track of who has completed what. So many times 1 or 2 in the group do all of the work and the others that are a bit intimidated by the technology part of the project are left our or never really get involved in the project. I can also see using the wiki as an entire class discussion page as well. I would just need more time to use my own to come up with pertinent reasons for using this. If I were to use the wiki in class I really need to tie it to curriculum and GLEC’s, and I think Science would be the easiest class to do that. I am sure many teachers have some great ideas of how to use these in any other core area as well.
I used to be in the construction management field and I think the wiki would have been a great resource for communicating about project scheduling, tracking of materials, and researching new technologies in the construction field. It is a great way to pass on information to others that is at their finger tips, once they are on your wiki page. This really eliminates wasted time for others, so they don’t have to spend time researching things you may already have located for them. The only problem I see with a wiki in this setting is, so many of the people I worked with had limited computer access. I think we would have lost information. If I were able to get everyone on board using the wiki then you’ve got something concrete.
As stated earlier, I think the wiki is a great way to pass along research and communicate at the same time. It would be like having your computer hooked up with the person you have on the other end of your phone conversation, less a great deal of confusion and interruptions. I will enjoy working with them as long as I keep using them, that is usually the problem with technology based things and myself. However, if I like it and it works for me I will always come back to them.
As with the RSS reader and the blog, I believe the wiki would be a really good tool. I think each of these things has their own place. I as a teacher would need to be much more comfortable using any of the three before I spring this on any class. These are all great communication tools, and much better than the e-mail or texting idea of communicating.
In my teaching I think the wiki could be used as a research tool for group projects. If you have 4-5 students per group and have assigned topics for them to work on together I think this would be a fantastic way to combine their research efforts. I like the way you can attach the links with your writing or just attach a link for someone else to review and give feedback. If you are going to monitor this work and each student has a wiki page then you can keep track of who has completed what. So many times 1 or 2 in the group do all of the work and the others that are a bit intimidated by the technology part of the project are left our or never really get involved in the project. I can also see using the wiki as an entire class discussion page as well. I would just need more time to use my own to come up with pertinent reasons for using this. If I were to use the wiki in class I really need to tie it to curriculum and GLEC’s, and I think Science would be the easiest class to do that. I am sure many teachers have some great ideas of how to use these in any other core area as well.
I used to be in the construction management field and I think the wiki would have been a great resource for communicating about project scheduling, tracking of materials, and researching new technologies in the construction field. It is a great way to pass on information to others that is at their finger tips, once they are on your wiki page. This really eliminates wasted time for others, so they don’t have to spend time researching things you may already have located for them. The only problem I see with a wiki in this setting is, so many of the people I worked with had limited computer access. I think we would have lost information. If I were able to get everyone on board using the wiki then you’ve got something concrete.
As stated earlier, I think the wiki is a great way to pass along research and communicate at the same time. It would be like having your computer hooked up with the person you have on the other end of your phone conversation, less a great deal of confusion and interruptions. I will enjoy working with them as long as I keep using them, that is usually the problem with technology based things and myself. However, if I like it and it works for me I will always come back to them.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Week #2 Reflection Dale and Siegel
Week #2 Reflection
Scott Gardner
I hate to seem so easy going and say that I can agree with both articles again, but I see many similarities between both of these. Obviously they have different objectives that they are trying to explain, but to me they can be similar, in a way that they would like educators to have an open mind. If we as educators can realize that there are great discrepancies in the levels of our learners we can use many different sources to help our students reach academic goals. As the articles explain, there are many different ways we can help our students, as long as we understand what helps them realize or grasp the concept that is being presented.
One of my comments from last weeks’ articles was that, “Technology is really what we make of it in our teaching. Technology should be a tool to help students succeed.” Siegel has nearly the same quote early in his article when he states, “Perhaps the answer has less to do with the technologies themselves and more to do with how we use the technologies to achieve learning.” I completely agree with his ideas of online libraries being filled with boring, “I can’t wait for this to end” e-learning. I have been guilty of that in my classroom. I have found web-sites that I think would be a great asset in helping my students understand something, then after a couple of classes I am convinced that it was of little use to them at all. It really takes a great deal of researching and stumbling around numerous sites trying to find things of substance that would be of great use to me and the students.
I think both of these articles are tied into what we have been involved in with the first two weeks, which is very new to some of us. So far we have two new tools that could be used in the classroom to help with peer communicating. The blogs especially would be a great tool for students to communicate back and forth to help solve problems. The only real draw back I would see with the blogs is that you are sure students would be using this tool for the purpose you intended. If this just becomes a social tool without peer problem solving then I think you will have a great deal of wasted time. In this course alone we have 18-20 students and we only have to keep track of OUR classmates. Dr. Horvitz might have three sections and more reading and tracking then any of us would want in our daily work. The blog is a great tool in this instance and I’m sure it could be in many more, I would just have to do a great deal of communicating with peers that have used them in their work, before I attempted to use in my class.
So far for me I have enjoyed working with the blogs and the RSS reader, because it is new and I really enjoy reading the others opinions. I have already received help on questions that I have had, and have a few followers on my blog, which will be great for problem solving in this class.
I think the blogs and RSS reader touch on a couple of comparisons in Dale’s articles. If we didn’t have the first level (concrete firsthand experiences) we would not function in this class. I don’t mean the in the way he talks about the senses in this section, I am comparing this to our foundation of computer knowledge. If you didn’t have some first hand experiences with computers you wouldn’t be in this class. The section that I compare to the blog and RSS reader would be television and motion pictures. He talks about how the films can delete unimportant material and concentrate on selected key points. With our blog we find exactly what we want from a readers standpoint as well as with the RSS reader. We can just scan the titles and delete what is not important to us.
For me the computer imagination would be the blog. I feel more comfortable with the blogs we have so I read this more than the RSS. I think the blog is a perfect example for me of computer imagination because I seemed to get lost in the post others are making. So far in this experience I have found myself lost in reading others posts and information about themselves on their blogs. I do like the RSS because I have finally figured out how to connect to everyone’s blog and read from this thread. In time maybe the RSS reader will be more of a favorite.
Scott Gardner
I hate to seem so easy going and say that I can agree with both articles again, but I see many similarities between both of these. Obviously they have different objectives that they are trying to explain, but to me they can be similar, in a way that they would like educators to have an open mind. If we as educators can realize that there are great discrepancies in the levels of our learners we can use many different sources to help our students reach academic goals. As the articles explain, there are many different ways we can help our students, as long as we understand what helps them realize or grasp the concept that is being presented.
One of my comments from last weeks’ articles was that, “Technology is really what we make of it in our teaching. Technology should be a tool to help students succeed.” Siegel has nearly the same quote early in his article when he states, “Perhaps the answer has less to do with the technologies themselves and more to do with how we use the technologies to achieve learning.” I completely agree with his ideas of online libraries being filled with boring, “I can’t wait for this to end” e-learning. I have been guilty of that in my classroom. I have found web-sites that I think would be a great asset in helping my students understand something, then after a couple of classes I am convinced that it was of little use to them at all. It really takes a great deal of researching and stumbling around numerous sites trying to find things of substance that would be of great use to me and the students.
I think both of these articles are tied into what we have been involved in with the first two weeks, which is very new to some of us. So far we have two new tools that could be used in the classroom to help with peer communicating. The blogs especially would be a great tool for students to communicate back and forth to help solve problems. The only real draw back I would see with the blogs is that you are sure students would be using this tool for the purpose you intended. If this just becomes a social tool without peer problem solving then I think you will have a great deal of wasted time. In this course alone we have 18-20 students and we only have to keep track of OUR classmates. Dr. Horvitz might have three sections and more reading and tracking then any of us would want in our daily work. The blog is a great tool in this instance and I’m sure it could be in many more, I would just have to do a great deal of communicating with peers that have used them in their work, before I attempted to use in my class.
So far for me I have enjoyed working with the blogs and the RSS reader, because it is new and I really enjoy reading the others opinions. I have already received help on questions that I have had, and have a few followers on my blog, which will be great for problem solving in this class.
I think the blogs and RSS reader touch on a couple of comparisons in Dale’s articles. If we didn’t have the first level (concrete firsthand experiences) we would not function in this class. I don’t mean the in the way he talks about the senses in this section, I am comparing this to our foundation of computer knowledge. If you didn’t have some first hand experiences with computers you wouldn’t be in this class. The section that I compare to the blog and RSS reader would be television and motion pictures. He talks about how the films can delete unimportant material and concentrate on selected key points. With our blog we find exactly what we want from a readers standpoint as well as with the RSS reader. We can just scan the titles and delete what is not important to us.
For me the computer imagination would be the blog. I feel more comfortable with the blogs we have so I read this more than the RSS. I think the blog is a perfect example for me of computer imagination because I seemed to get lost in the post others are making. So far in this experience I have found myself lost in reading others posts and information about themselves on their blogs. I do like the RSS because I have finally figured out how to connect to everyone’s blog and read from this thread. In time maybe the RSS reader will be more of a favorite.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Week one reflection
Reading Reflection for week 1
Wow, Dr. Horvitz hits the nail on the head when he gives his opinion on what these two articles might offer us. While first reading the Reigeluth & Joseph essay I found myself agreeing with most of what they had to write. As I read the Postman essay, I reread a couple of the paragraphs to make sure I was getting his point, then too I found myself agreeing with much of what he had to write.
Personally I believe teaching and technology is exactly what you make of it. My experience in teaching so far have been that many teachers that have been in the classroom for many years are a bit intimidated by technology and refuse to incorporate much of it into their teaching styles. If the district you are working for does not have a mandate on what type of technology you are using in your classroom, then there really would be no reason for them to change as long as their students are mastering the GLEC’s (Grade Level Education Content Areas) or benchmarks set forth by the state and district. If teachers would use technology as an aide in attaining these goals they might find that some students really do achieve higher marks because of the assists or integration of technology.
In the Postman essay he gives a quote of a friend of his, stating that whatever problems a school cannot solve without a machine, they cannot solve this problem with them. I believe he is correct. If a teacher is trying to completely convert their lessons over to technology only, they would be completely missing the point of both essays. I believe technology to be only a tool to help students achieve the goals that have been set by the schools. You have a curriculum designed by the state and the district you work for and you must find the best tools to help your students become critical thinkers.
Both essays talk about students becoming critical thinkers. Postman states, “Schools are to help students think critically”, and Reigeluth & Joseph states “Each teacher should coach students to become better self-directed learners.” As I continue my education with Western Michigan I am being introduced to many different strategies in teaching. When I was completing my bachelors the terms, Inquiry based learning and GLEC’s were never mentioned. This may have been the instructors, but I believe it to be more of a shift in educating on Western’s end. I have always been and continue to be an inquiry based leaning type of teacher. I believe it helps all of the students in your classroom, no matter what level of comprehension they are at. While teaching Science I have students in learning communities all the time, and peers are usually great at getting points across in their groups. Technology has been a benefit for me, because of so many interactive things we can do in my classroom. Is it a must for me to have these things in my room to help students achieve the academic goals set? No, but is a very useful tool that benefits me as well as many of my students.
I guess I would like to say that in some ways I do agree with what Postman has to say about the actual benefits of technology. However, I really think the Reigeluth & Joseph essay is what I really lean towards when it comes to technology. I do disagree with how important they feel this really is. I think the importance of technology is truly in how you use it to benefit your students. You should be helping them become critical thinkers and technology is a very powerful tool, when used correctly, in helping them do this.
Wow, Dr. Horvitz hits the nail on the head when he gives his opinion on what these two articles might offer us. While first reading the Reigeluth & Joseph essay I found myself agreeing with most of what they had to write. As I read the Postman essay, I reread a couple of the paragraphs to make sure I was getting his point, then too I found myself agreeing with much of what he had to write.
Personally I believe teaching and technology is exactly what you make of it. My experience in teaching so far have been that many teachers that have been in the classroom for many years are a bit intimidated by technology and refuse to incorporate much of it into their teaching styles. If the district you are working for does not have a mandate on what type of technology you are using in your classroom, then there really would be no reason for them to change as long as their students are mastering the GLEC’s (Grade Level Education Content Areas) or benchmarks set forth by the state and district. If teachers would use technology as an aide in attaining these goals they might find that some students really do achieve higher marks because of the assists or integration of technology.
In the Postman essay he gives a quote of a friend of his, stating that whatever problems a school cannot solve without a machine, they cannot solve this problem with them. I believe he is correct. If a teacher is trying to completely convert their lessons over to technology only, they would be completely missing the point of both essays. I believe technology to be only a tool to help students achieve the goals that have been set by the schools. You have a curriculum designed by the state and the district you work for and you must find the best tools to help your students become critical thinkers.
Both essays talk about students becoming critical thinkers. Postman states, “Schools are to help students think critically”, and Reigeluth & Joseph states “Each teacher should coach students to become better self-directed learners.” As I continue my education with Western Michigan I am being introduced to many different strategies in teaching. When I was completing my bachelors the terms, Inquiry based learning and GLEC’s were never mentioned. This may have been the instructors, but I believe it to be more of a shift in educating on Western’s end. I have always been and continue to be an inquiry based leaning type of teacher. I believe it helps all of the students in your classroom, no matter what level of comprehension they are at. While teaching Science I have students in learning communities all the time, and peers are usually great at getting points across in their groups. Technology has been a benefit for me, because of so many interactive things we can do in my classroom. Is it a must for me to have these things in my room to help students achieve the academic goals set? No, but is a very useful tool that benefits me as well as many of my students.
I guess I would like to say that in some ways I do agree with what Postman has to say about the actual benefits of technology. However, I really think the Reigeluth & Joseph essay is what I really lean towards when it comes to technology. I do disagree with how important they feel this really is. I think the importance of technology is truly in how you use it to benefit your students. You should be helping them become critical thinkers and technology is a very powerful tool, when used correctly, in helping them do this.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Getting started
Well...this is new to me. I have never been involved with blogging, but I believe it will be very useful. Thanks for viewing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)