Assessment task 2 Analysis of digital technologies

Analysis of digital technologies:

This reflection entitled ‘Analysis of digital technologies’ is an assessment piece to analyse four digital technologies; Wiki’s, Podcasts, PowerPoint and Google Earth. The use of digital technologies in an education setting, including formal and informal settings is an important aspect of learning and teaching. Accordingly, the acquisition of the skills, tools and literacies related to digital technologies is integral for the learning manager and the student alike. The Queensland College of Teachers (2006, p. 9) require teachers to ‘know and understand’ “teaching and learning strategies that incorporate the purposeful use of ICT by teacher and student to promote deeper and more focused engagement with the content”. Furthermore, inauthentic and or insufficient use of digital technologies can reduce “student interest and teacher enthusiasm” (Hiliton, G., & Hilton, A., 2010, p. 243). Subsequently, as Ralph Olliges (2009, p. 14) advocates, the training of “pre-service teachers to effectively use technology” can diminish the risk of inauthentic and or insufficient use. So as a result, of engaging in the learning activities from week three to five I will critically Analyse and reflect upon the four digital technologies to demonstrate how I would use them to enhance, support and transform student learning.

Wikis:

Wikis are fluid and flexible digital learning spaces. The flexible and fluid natures of wikis make it an ideal learning space for students to write, compose and collaborate in their own work. It also allows students to add edit and collaborate on other students’ wikis. This feature clearly defines wikis as an excellent open and freely expressive space for ”facilitating online authoring” (Brown, 2010, p. 225). Thus, students have “a sense of empowerment” to facilitate a reciprocal learning and teaching “environment” with “each new reader”/student becoming a “writer”, collaborator, and teacher in “sharing their knowledge” (Olliges, 2009, pp. 14-15) with others. The advantages of wikis is that they can facilitate “Joint Construction of Texts”, therefore creating opportunities for students to

•   “actively participate in constructing meaningful text.
•   share power and responsibility in composing text.
•   explore how text is constructed.
•   experience demonstrations of written conventions.
•   talk, write and read about topics of interest.” (Swan, 2009, p. 47).

With this in mind, when I engage in constructing my own wiki I based it upon the notion of it facilitating a learning environment that looks at visual literacies.  It is therefore, in my opinion that wikis are a valuable and accessible digital technology for facilitating different learning experiences.

Podcast what are they and what are the benefits?:

To put is simply podcasts are flexible audio and visual digital resources. The content pertaining to podcasts “include audio, video and image materials” (Hew, 2009, p. 333) that may be constructed adapted and published with a particular audience in mind. In this way, podcasting is able to facilitate different learning styles, learning and teaching experiences for both the authors and audience. Consequently, it is pertinent to suggest that all students can engage in, and create in online environments (Prensky, 2005, p. 62) like podcasts. Subsequently they can, contribute towards meaningful learning experiences. So when it came to designing and constructing my podcast entitled Wordsworth a use of digital technology and poetry, I selected a learning context, “Understanding Poetry” within the English KLA to demonstrate how video, audio and text can be combined to give an interpretive reading. As a result, of designing and constructing this simple podcast I became aware of its potential use by students who can publish their ideas and thoughts through a versatile and flexible technology.

            Having established this, a critical question may be asked; as to what are the benefits that podcasts have for students, and those who use and view them? When it comes to learning managers who embed podcasts within their learning experience, will most certainly design and construct a few of their own; however, they will also notice a huge volume of content already available for them to use. In this way students can benefit from cross-curriculum and/or curriculum specific content that is relevant and has real life applications for the students, that promotes inclusivity and accommodates different learning styles and learning needs of all students (Queensland, Department of Education, 2005, pp. 20-21). Now when we consider the students use of podcasts through a constructivist perspective (Westwood, 2004, p. 22) we truly appreciate the significance of this digital resource; when students plan, design, download, construct, write and publish their knowledge. Furthermore, as Westwood indicates this moves the focus away from “teacher-directed” mode of learning to one that is “student centred, active learning” (Westwood, 2004, p. 22), thus providing stimulating eLearning experiences for the individual, and other students, peers and/or student cohort by scaffolding their podcasts in such a manner to engage and create authentic discussion.

Yet having said all this, there is a risk that inadequate use and abuse of this technology can lead to student disengagement. I am now referring to podcasts that reside within the constraints of dare I say it ‘chalk and talk’. This perhaps is the downside of podcasts. Therefore, it should not be a pedagogy surrogate for direct teaching, and/or baby-sitting. The severity becomes apparent when we understand that ICT’s are “liberating, productive, and creative resources to support the curriculum… students” (Ljungdahl, 2010, p. 415) and the learning manager to construct new knowledge. So, I have found that podcasting does present some risks or pitfalls for the learning manager, however it is undeniably valuable, in facilitating learning and teaching.

PowerPoint: A student eLearning space.

As I had mentioned in a previous blog post PowerPoint is an eLearning space and/or presentation tool that has been utilized for some time now; some may argue it is an over-utilized tool. However, it is when students use the technology that the benefits and outcomes are similar to wikis and podcasts; but mostly podcasts. PowerPoint is said to be worthy for “classroom use” as it is not limited in its application” (Hiliton, G., & Hilton, A., 2010, p. 335) furthermore as Westwood (2006, p. 33) indicates, students “learn from their own active and creative processing of information using a range of authentic resources”. Another key feature with PowerPoint is that students may use it to facilitate assessment or the presentation of assessment pieces. The versatility of this technology is that students not only can use it for “self-directed learning” but also for “self-assessment” by constructing ePortfolios of their work to demonstrate their active progress (Wyatt-Smith, C.M., Cumming, J.J., Elkins, J., & Colbert, P., 2010, p. 335). Likewise learning managers can use ePortfolios as a mode of review and/or reflecting on the learning journey and progress of her/his students. Yet when it came to my construction of a PowerPoint I first saw it as a mere presentation tool to illustrate its use within a direct learning context of considering picture books as a vehicle to demonstrate the importance of cover analyses. By doing this exercise in an all be it a limited way, I became overtly aware of the potential students have when they use this digital technology to facilitate their own learning journey. Thus, I now view PowerPoint as a versatile and limitless resource for classroom use.

Google Earth: An informative website.

Google Earth is a reference website that has a vast array of geographical information for students to access, perhaps, somewhat like a three dimensional atlas or encyclopaedia. The benefits of this technology are that students may gain access (Ljungdahl, 2010, p. 406) to and/or travel to places and spaces that they may otherwise be restricted; due to their own location or isolation. Consequently, students are empowered by this resource to discover, analyse, and interpret different geographical regions. Most certainly, I would agree that the greatest strength of this resource is its ability for global connectivity. When accessing websites of this nature it is easy to assess its abundant capabilities; yet, “using it successfully in the classroom”, summons captious discernment (Ljungdahl, 2010, p. 404) thus, caution must prevail. By this, I mean Google Earth is not a stand-alone eLearning space that allows students to contribute to or collaborate on, in the same manner as the previous technologies. Nevertheless, this technology can be authentically embedded in a learning experience related to a KLA, where by students can gather contextual information to enhance a reading of narratives, political cartoons, maps and any other text that is being viewed or read. Therefore, I believe the capabilities of this technology be fully utilized and explored across all curriculums.

Summation: A reflective analysis of my learning journey with these digital technologies.

In my participation and subsequent review and analysis of these four digital technologies, it is pertinent for me to consider the varying types of literacies needed for successful engagement. It is in my view that regardless of the mode and/or type of digital technology students and the learning manager need to have literacies that match the individual eLearning spaces to allow access and active engagement. Therefore, it is wise to consider Luke and Freebody’s (2009, as cited in Bull, G., & Anstey, M., 2010, p. 1) definition of literacy in the light of digital technologies,

Literacy is the flexible and sustainable mastery of repertoire of practices with the texts of traditional and new communications technologies via spoken, print and multimedia.

Therefore, when embedding these technologies in a learning experience the learning manager should consider not only teaching the students how to use them, but go one-step further, evaluate and assess the level of literacy proficiency needed, then teach any new literacy required. It was not until I actively engaged in learning how to use these four digital technologies and others for developing my pedagogical repertoire to facilitate authentic learning, that I became acutely aware of the different literacies required. In reflecting upon these four digital literacies, I have learnt how to use them to facilitate authentic learning experiences for the students, including self-directed learning. Initially I had embarked on this learning journey with an agenda towards facilitating the content specific knowledge that I have in English and Modern History. However, I have learnt much more than this, I have learnt a valuable lesson; for the curriculum to be authentic and relevant, I need to provide opportunities for students to learn through active engagement with digital technologies. Therefore, it is in my view that these four digital technologies are fluid and flexible eLearning spaces for students and learning managers to engage in.

Bibliography

Bull, G., & Anstey, M. (2010). Evolving pedagogies: Reading and writing in a multimodal world. Carlton, South Victoria: Curriculum Press.

Brown, R. (2010). Collaborative learning. In.D. Pendergast, & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. (2nd ed., pp. 223-237). Crows Nest, N.S.w.: Allen & Unwin.

Hew, K. (2009). Use of audio podcasts in K-12 and higher education: A review of research topics and methodologies. Education technology research & development. , 57 (3), 333-357.

Hiliton, G., & Hilton, A. (2010). Higher order thinking. In D. Pendergast, & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. (2nd ed., pp. 238-253). Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin.

Ljungdahl, L. (2010). Multiliteracies and technology. In G. Winch, R. R. Johnston, P. March, L. Ljungdahl, & M. Holiday (Eds.), Literacy: Reading writing and childrens literature. (4th ed., pp. 399-422). South Melboourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

Olliges, R. (2009). Wikis, screencasts, podcasts, oh my!Effective use of wikis, screencasts, & podcasts in education settings. Journal of Philosophy & History of Education, 14-19 Retrieved from http://ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=64529879&site=ehost-live

Prensky, M. (2005, September/October). "Engage me or enrage me": What today's learners demand. Retrieved march 7, 2011, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0553.pdf

Queensland College of Teachers. (2006). Professional standards for Queensland teachers.

Queensland, Department of Education. (2005). Professional standards for teachers:Guidelines for professional practice. Department of Education Training and the Arts.

Swan, C. (2009). Teaching strategies for literacy in the early years. Norwood, South Australia: Australian Literacy Educators' Association Ltd.

Westwood, P. (2004). Learning and learning difficulties: A handbook for teachers. Camberwell, Victoria: Acer Press.

Westwood, P. (2006). Teaching and learning difficulties: Cross-curricular perspectives. Camberwell, Victoria: Acer Press.

Wyatt-Smith, C.M., Cumming, J.J., Elkins, J., & Colbert, P. (2010). Assessment. In D. Pendergast, & N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. (2nd ed., pp. 319-344). Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin.

Week five activities digital technologies grops 3 and 4

Week 5 activities:

PowerPoint:

PowerPoint is a useful learning tool that has been utilised for some time now. Yet it may be, considered as another mode of presenting a lesson; if this is the only use for PowerPoint, it is rather limited to chalk and talk. However, in my experience in this week’s activity I had constructed a PowerPoint from using Microsoft Word outline, and then transferred it over to PowerPoint. This exercise demonstrated that students could use this resource to create and donate their deep knowledge on a particular topic to a broader audience. When students publish their work in this way it also helps to consolidate their knowledge, including encouraging them to extend their knowledge, beyond a surface level. When I assessed PowerPoint using a PMI analysis I discovered that potentially the learning manager could over use it; thus, risking passive disengagement from the learning experience. However, there is a positive outcome when the students use this tool.

Plus	Minus	Interesting
·         Provide opportunities for students to create and donate their deep knowledge on a particular topic. ·         An opportunity for students to publish their work. ·         Can be used to provide evidence of learning. ·         Can form a students eLearning portfolio.	·         Learning managers can overuse this resource to present lessons (chalk and talk) ·         PowerPoint is not entirely flexible enough for collaborative learning.	·         Slides can be hyper-linked to other slides. ·         Can be constructed through word outline view. ·         Can be used to construct narratives through a particular point of view,  and hyper-linked at different points to offer an alternative reading or point of view to a narrative or text. ·         Provides an alternative to publish student work online.

So, this P.M.I chart demonstrates that PowerPoint can facilitate deep learning, but falls short in providing a flexible mode for collaborative learning; a stark contrast to wiki’s.

My other techno tool that I investigated this week was Google Earth. I specifically looked at this tool through the lens of a year eight or nine English class; as a tool to provide contextual information to texts. The text that I had in mind is Parvana, by Deborah Ellis (2002). By using Google Earth the students can view the geographical layout of Afghanistan to understand the context of place and space to which this text is located in. I also applied a critical analysis tool (SWOT analysis) to understand the effectiveness of this tool for students,

Strengths ·         An avenue for students to travel to another country ·         Provides 3D imagery ·         Provides global connectivity ·         Can provide extra creative influence to a reading of a text like Deborah Ellis’ Parvana	Weakness ·         It is not a stand alone learning experience thus, it needs to be embedded in a learning experience. ·         The level of create and donate is limiting. ·
Opportunities ·         To investigate geographical layouts, landforms, sea beds etc. ·         To provide extra or enhanced contextual information to a text; like Deborah Ellis’ Parvana. ·         For access to visual imagery and visual texts: facilitating deep learning. ·	Threats ·         Can distort or restrict a students own construction of a place and or space; restricting the readers creative ability.

Two key features that I want to draw your attention to is that this is not a stand-alone learning tool. Therefore, it is best to embed Google Earth in other classroom learning experiences. Secondly, it does enhance the students’ ability to investigate contextual information provided in the text of a narrative; to the point of influencing a particular reading of a text, or to facilitate an alternative reading of that text. 

Bibliography

Ellis, D. (2002). Parvana. Canada: Allen & Unwin.

Week four: Reflecting upon podcasts and digital movies

 This week My blog reflection focuses upon digital tools for education,

The activities that I engaged in this week focused upon podcasting and digital movie (movie maker) as pedagogical tools for facilitating, designing learning experiences.

Podcasting I found was interesting as it allowed a different way to facilitate learning either by the learning manager or by other persons; however, what I had noticed is that when podcasts were used by learning managers, it still resembled and/or facilitated direct teaching methods. Therefore, I would like to suggest that the learning manager use this resource sparingly. Yet having said this, I believe that podcasts can be useful for students to construct, display and donate (publish) their assignments, group activities, science projects, oral presentations, and alike to other students via the mode of podcasting.

My observation on digital movie is much the same. Consequently as a learning manager, I recognise that understanding how to use these tools in the classroom, to present content, is only a small aspect to digital technologies. It is therefore in my opinion that as a learning manager, I place these tools in the hands of the students, in the same way we teach and help students to use pencils and/or pens to construct, demonstrate, and publish their learning experiences. Hence, what I have observed is that digital pedagogies do have the potential to reach a larger audience, by connecting students from other geographical regions; breaking down the barriers of remoteness.

In regards to remoteness I would like to draw your attention to an article I read by Sara Hawke Remoteness still influencing education outcomes online resource. 

in this blog I have included a link to my first podcast. As the title suggests this is my first podcast: so it is my attempt at learning how to use this resource. In doing so I have realised the wonderful potential. Therefore I have included another podcast that uses digital video to demonstrate how video can be used to facilitate digital interpretation of Poetry Entitled: Wordsworth a use of digital technology and poetry. I believe that students can also use this technology to present and publish their work.

Bibliography:

Hawke, S. (2011). Remoteness still influencing education outcomes. ABC News. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/3178071.htm?site=news

Assessment Task 1-Learning design brief

The Assessment,

This reflection entitled The Assessment is an integral part of my learning experience. It demonstrates the level of understanding that I have constructed through experience and reflection; consistent with a constructivist learning theory (Westwood, 2004, p. 22). Therefore, this reflection is a synthesised summation of what I know; about learning styles, learning theories, learning design frameworks, and eLearning spaces.

Learning styles:

Know your learner, is a critical aspect for a learning manager to design authentic learning experience. Wyatt-Smith, Cumming, Elkins, & Colbert (20, p. 227) suggest, “Getting to know students as people is important”; I might add, knowing the students learning styles is equally important. The work of Felder and Soloman (n.d.) have identified four learning style axes pertaining to two binaries each, 1:Active and Reflective learners, 2:Sensing and Intuitive learners, 3:Visual and Verbal learners, and 4:Sequential and Global learners. It is therefore, in the best interest of the learning manager to have a grasp on these different learning styles.  So much so, that she/he designs learning experiences that accommodate the different learning styles of say a traditional classroom of 25 students. I think that I may struggle with this at first, however when I break down the learning experience plan into small sections, like the introductory phase of a lesson, I can see how it is possible. For example, I could refer to a graphic organiser like a learning map that outlines the lesson; either on the whiteboard or as a handout. This provides sequential steps to follow and a global outcome; it also meets the needs of visual and verbal, active and reflective, and sensing and intuitive learners. In reflection, I would agree whole-heartedly with getting to know your learners as people; people do learn differently at different rates and through a range of learning styles. Therefore, I would recommend designing learning experiences that considers the learner first, by adopting a learner-centred approach to teaching.

Learning Theories:

Understanding learning theories transpires to how I can engage my learners in authentic learning experiences. In the first week of my course I had the privilege to view and grapple with four key learning theories Behaviourism, Cognitivism, Constructivism and Connectivism to formulate perhaps, a coherent understanding of how learners learn.

Gredler (2001 as cited in Westwood, 2004, p. 17) comments on learning theories as having characteristic that “provide a mechanism for understanding the implications of events related to learning in both formal and informal settings”. Therefore, learning theories set out to try to explain how a learner learns. In response to this Peter Westwood (2004, p. 17) suggests no single theory is comprehensive or is definitive in answering the question of “What is learning?”. In light of Westwood’s analysis, I have conceded that I should adopt an eclectic approach to implementing the four learning theories. This is because I believe strongly that whilst I may have a class of twenty-four learners, I am designing learning experiences that cater for the diverse needs and learning styles of the twenty-four individual learners. Yet having said this I do favour the constructivist approach, simply because of its cyclical manner where by the learning manager is in a position of facilitator, who helps facilitate the learners construction of new knowledge and experiences, that can be reflected upon by the learner to create new knowledge; and so the cycle goes on.  Therefore, as I have indicated previously on learning styles, I believe a learner centred approach be applied to implementing learning theories.

Learning Design Frameworks:

I look at learning design frameworks as a pedagogical framework through which content is taught. In this, I have synthesised three key learning frameworks; “Engagement Theory” (Kearsley, & Shneiderman, 1999) “Productive Pedagogies” (Curriculum Implementation Unit, 2002) and Blooms’ Taxonomy (Rodin Education Consultancy, 2007) to form my own learning design framework. This framework therefore, stimulates a range of pedagogies that may be used in designing authentic learning experiences. It also accommodates Digital Pedagogies learning through the facilitated mode of ICT's or “eLearning” (Department of Education Training and the Arts, 2008).I believe that by creating authentic learning experiences that engage learners, can inspire a level of personal agency over their learning experience. This synthesised framework is by no means, a comprehensive learning design framework; nor is static. I believe as I develop as a teacher (learning manager), so to will my learning design framework.

eLearning spaces:

Over the past three weeks, I have participated in and constructed eLearning spaces such as blogs, wiki’s and web pages. The blog has been my ejournal on my progress and understanding of learning theories, learning styles and learning design frameworks. It in my opinion, that it is a quintessential reflective tool, that is consistent with standard 10 of the Profession Standards for Queensland Teachers (graduate level)  to "Commit to reflective practice and ongoing professional renewal"(Queensland College of Teachers, 2009). When it came to constructing a wiki and web page, I located them within a specific learning context so that I may reflect upon their construction as an eLearning space, with the content within the space having a direct application that may be applied to all KLA’s. Therefore, the content that I chose to insert into the wiki and the web page is within the learning context of Visual Literacies: understanding and interpreting visual literacies as a text. In reflection I have noticed that these three different eLearning spaces are autonomous, yet do display limitations when they are used individually. Yet, when I linked these learning experiences together, they formed a multilayered scaffold that presented a more comprehensive learning experience. Therefore,  I am of the opinion that the use of these three eLearning spaces are an essential element in facilitating authentic learning; that is only limited by the learning managers creativity and imagination.

Personal Reflection:

This course that I am enrolled in EDED20491 ICT’s for learning design is facilitated through a flexible mode of learning. Be that as it may, it does require a high level of engagement, engagement in collaborative learning. Raymond Brown (2010, p. 224) suggests, collaborative learning signifies learners who contribute, to “helping others to contribute to the group’s effort by sharing ideas, justifying and explaining ideas, working to understand others’ ideas and building on each others’ ideas and representations.”. Therefore, I have a concern over my level of participation in group activities and learning experiences. This is due to, and is not exclusively my own domain as other learners, I believe in this course have, or will have experienced, family and social commitments that are dare I say it nonnegotiable. This has led me to consider my learners; to which I agree with Wyatt-Smith, Cumming, Elkins, & Colbert (20, p. 227) when they suggest, that we consider our learners as “people ”.  Thus, I have come to the stark reality that learning does not happen in a sterile vacuum. With this in mind, I would like to recommend to myself that I consider the learner, when I design learning activities; by providing a structure for the learner/s to complete or attempt to complete learning activities in class time, to work alongside (collaboratively in the true sense) to help the learner/s complete their learning tasks. This may be through tailoring the learning task or the expected outcome of the task to suit the diverse needs of the individual learner. In conclusion, initially I had thought that this course would equip me to be a teacher, yet, I have found that it has done much more. Over the past three weeks, I have been privileged to learn and understand how to be a learning manager from a learner’s perspective or viewpoint. This has cemented the ideology and philosophy of a learning centred approach as quintessential to best teacher practice; including knowing the learner, learning-styles, learning theories, and learning design frameworks.

Bibliography

Brown, R. (2010) Collaborative learning. In D. Pendergast. & N. Bahr (Eds) Teaching middle years: Rethinkingcurriculum, pedagogy and assessment (2nd ed. pp. 223-23). Crows Nest NSW: Allen and Unwin.

Curriculum implementation  Unit. (2002) Productive Pedagogies; Classroom reflection manual. Department of Education Training and the Arts. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/public_media/reports/curriculum-framework/productive-pedagogies/ 

Department of Education Training and the Arts. (2008) eLearning for smart classrooms.   In.Smart Classrooms Bytes.Queensland Government. Retrieved from http://education.qld.gov.au/smartclassrooms/pdf/scbyte-elearning.pdf

Felder, R. M., & Soloman, B, A. (n.d.). Learning styles and strategies. Retrieved from

 http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/styles.htm

Kearsley, G. & Ben Shneiderman. (1999) Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm

Queensland College of Teachers (QCOT). (2009). Professional standards for Queensland teachers (graduate level): Aguide for use with preservice teachers. Retrieved from http://www.qct.edu.au/

Rodin Education Consultancy (2007). Thinking Skills Framework. Retrieved from 

http://www.itcpublications.com.au/itc-shop

Westwood, P. (2004). Learning and learning difficulties: A handbook for teachers. Camberwell, Victoria: Acer Press.

Wyatt-Smith, C.M., Cumming, J.J., Elkins, J., & Colbert, P. (2010). Assessment. In D. Pendergast. & N. Bahr (Eds)Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (2nd ed. pp. 319-44). Crows Nest NSW:

         Allen and Unwin.

+