EDU 709 Assignments Submitted
Through The Blackboard Platform:
Through The Blackboard Platform:
Week 01
Module One Overview:
Module One Overview:
March 04 - March 10, 2019
- Critique
- Graphic Organizer
- Reflection
- My Discussion Board Post
Module Section 1:2
A critique of an article:
| dennis_egan_critique_article_by__yong_zhao__week_01_module_one__march_10_2019.pdf |
Source(s):
Zhao, Yong, et al. “Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations.” Teachers College Record, vol. 104, no. 3, 2002, pp. 482 –515., doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170.
Zhao, Yong, et al. “Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations.” Teachers College Record, vol. 104, no. 3, 2002, pp. 482 –515., doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170.
Module Section 1:3
A graphic organizer defining Innovative Uses of Technology:
| dennis_egan_innovative_uses_of_technology_graphic_organizer_module_one_week_01_edu_709_march_10_2019.jpg |
Source(s):
Ormrod, Jeanne Ellis. Essentials of Educational Psychology Big Ideas to Guide Effective Teaching. Third ed., Pearson, 2012.
“The 8 Types of Intelligence by Howard Gardner (Multiple Theory).” Life Persona, www.lifepersona.com/the-8-types-of- intelligence-by-howard-gardner-multiple-theory. Accessed March 09, 2019
Zhao, Yong, et al. “Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations.” Teachers College Record, vol. 104, no. 3, 2002, pp. 482 –515., doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170.
Ormrod, Jeanne Ellis. Essentials of Educational Psychology Big Ideas to Guide Effective Teaching. Third ed., Pearson, 2012.
“The 8 Types of Intelligence by Howard Gardner (Multiple Theory).” Life Persona, www.lifepersona.com/the-8-types-of- intelligence-by-howard-gardner-multiple-theory. Accessed March 09, 2019
Zhao, Yong, et al. “Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations.” Teachers College Record, vol. 104, no. 3, 2002, pp. 482 –515., doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170.
Graphic organizer created with https://bubbl.us/ Click on the image below to visit resource:
Module Section 1:4
A personal reflection on Module One in regard to Innovative Uses of Technology:
| |||
Module Section 1:5
My Blackboard discussion board post:
March 08, 2019
One key factor that is important when integrating technology successfully into the classroom experience is that it accomplishes something that a lack of technology cannot accomplish. Case in point: an interactive white board (IWB) can be integrated into an ELA lesson by having students drag and match words into the correct columns as defined by certain criteria, such as verbs, nouns, adjectives and so on. This is an activity which meets the needs of diverse learners with multiple intelligences, doing so in connection with appropriate learning standards. Consequently, simply using paper and pencil, while helpful and necessary in the larger scheme of real-world learning, cannot provide the engaging learning experience that the aforementioned ELA activity can achieve on an IWB.
This is critical because a classroom teacher must know, not only how to integrate technology into a lesson (in terms of the functional/operational knowledge of hardware/software), but, much more importantly, why they are doing so in regard to how their learning activity will bridge the gap between the learning standards and student achievement. Moreover, the article, Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations, states: “The U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment (1995) notes: ‘There has been relatively little research on how and why American teachers use technology (p. 51)' (p. 483, para. 2).” Hence, if a teacher does not know why they are using technology within a particular academic context, then they are less likely to cultivate authentic learning experiences for students which result in achieving learning gains; I have learned this first hand as a classroom teacher.
For example, if this factor is not followed, it can easily lend to kids being off task because the experience is either boring, confusing, irrelevant or something else. I am not proud of the fact that when I was a classroom teacher (I now help Chinese students to learn English online as a part time teacher from home), I often used IWBs for nothing more than a glorified chalkboard; I would stand in front of the class an impart knowledge through the math problems I would solve for them with the digital Promethean pen. I am not proud of this but I think it makes my point clear: teachers must use technology with the confidence that they have researched best practices so that they can achieve a learning experience for their students that would otherwise not be experienced without the particular technology at hand.
Source(s):
Zhao, Yong, et al. “Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations.” Teachers College Record, vol. 104, no. 3, 2002, pp. 482 –515., doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170.
One key factor that is important when integrating technology successfully into the classroom experience is that it accomplishes something that a lack of technology cannot accomplish. Case in point: an interactive white board (IWB) can be integrated into an ELA lesson by having students drag and match words into the correct columns as defined by certain criteria, such as verbs, nouns, adjectives and so on. This is an activity which meets the needs of diverse learners with multiple intelligences, doing so in connection with appropriate learning standards. Consequently, simply using paper and pencil, while helpful and necessary in the larger scheme of real-world learning, cannot provide the engaging learning experience that the aforementioned ELA activity can achieve on an IWB.
This is critical because a classroom teacher must know, not only how to integrate technology into a lesson (in terms of the functional/operational knowledge of hardware/software), but, much more importantly, why they are doing so in regard to how their learning activity will bridge the gap between the learning standards and student achievement. Moreover, the article, Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations, states: “The U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment (1995) notes: ‘There has been relatively little research on how and why American teachers use technology (p. 51)' (p. 483, para. 2).” Hence, if a teacher does not know why they are using technology within a particular academic context, then they are less likely to cultivate authentic learning experiences for students which result in achieving learning gains; I have learned this first hand as a classroom teacher.
For example, if this factor is not followed, it can easily lend to kids being off task because the experience is either boring, confusing, irrelevant or something else. I am not proud of the fact that when I was a classroom teacher (I now help Chinese students to learn English online as a part time teacher from home), I often used IWBs for nothing more than a glorified chalkboard; I would stand in front of the class an impart knowledge through the math problems I would solve for them with the digital Promethean pen. I am not proud of this but I think it makes my point clear: teachers must use technology with the confidence that they have researched best practices so that they can achieve a learning experience for their students that would otherwise not be experienced without the particular technology at hand.
Source(s):
Zhao, Yong, et al. “Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovations.” Teachers College Record, vol. 104, no. 3, 2002, pp. 482 –515., doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170.
Under construction...
Company Established & Website First Created: 2009
This Page First Created: March 14, 2019
Last Modified: March 14, 2019
This Page First Created: March 14, 2019
Last Modified: March 14, 2019