ESC515

I chose to study a Masters in Knowledge Networks and Digital Innovation largely because I felt that I needed a focus to encourage me to integrate technology creatively into my practice. Schools are intense, busy places where ingrained practice is common and can be very hard to change, even for those of us working towards improved integration. Time pressures can easily push us backwards and progression forward can seem very challenging and it can be hard to convince reluctant colleagues that integration of technology is a good thing, particularly if they feel that things are working well without it. Educators need to see the benefits, or relative advantage of using technology in order to invest time and effort into change (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, p. 67).

Implementing a pedagogical shift and innovative use of technology in schools is a slow process. As Bigum notes, use of technology is often a substitute for existing practice, with little innovation (2012). We respond rather than lead and embrace change. Schools are often insulated from the real world and as such it can be difficult to investigate and incorporate the skills students will need for their future. As indicated by Roblyer and Doering, an increased understanding of the benefits and limitations of technology use in schools is desperately needed to support today’s learners prepare for an increasingly digital world of work (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, 20). In order to progress, it is critical that we move on from fears about technology, teach our students responsible use and allow our students flexibility to engage with technology (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, p. 23). Twining, Raffaghelli, Albion and Knezek recommend a mindset shift; educators must consider that teaching is no longer effective without technology (2013).

Roblyer and Doering discuss concerns about the costs that many schools have undertaken with the existing one-one model. BYOD appears to be a more viable cost saving option for future educational technology hardware, however schools need to invest time and infrastructure to ensure that an appropriate range of devices are enabled and provisions for students with learning or financial needs are catered for (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, pp. 27-28). The school where I will work this year requires students to supply an iPad. Although limiting in some respects, this model is a cost effective option in regards to infrastructure and may be easier for teachers to integrate technology consistently. I am looking forward to evaluating this model in action this year.

These shifts in thinking cannot come about without a planned whole school program to implement and support the integration of technology (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, p. 33). This must also incorporate structures to support teachers’ professional learning and on the job reinforcement of new skills and pedagogy (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, p. 78), through formal professional learning, mentoring, team teaching and knowledge sharing (Roblyer & Doering, 2014, p. 402). Critically important also is that learning through experimentation and failure is embraced in order to move forward. Personally, I have chosen to work in my new college environment as college leadership already work with this paradigm; learning through failure is encouraged for staff and students; technology is embraced for its wealth of possibilities and investment has been made for infrastructure and professional learning to lead educational change.

References

Bigum, C. (2012). Transformative approaches to new technologies and student diversity in futures oriented classrooms. In L. Rowan, & C. Bigum, Schools and Computers: Tales of a Digital Romance. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/lib/csuau/docDetail.action?docID=10524693

Roblyer, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2014). Integrating educational technology into teaching: international edition, 6th edition. Harlow: Pearson.

Twining, P, Raffaghelli, J. Albion, P. & Knezek, D. (2013, August 5). Moving education into the digital age: the contribution of teachers’ professional development. Journal of Computer Assisted LearningVolume 29, Issue 5. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12031/pdf

Out of those listed by Roblyer and Doering, the three problems that in my experience have caused most concern regarding internet use for adolescent students are:

Potential problem #1: Accessing sites with inappropriate materials

This problem has many facets: access can be accidental or deliberate and smartphones that are not using school networks mean that many, maybe even most high school students have the internet in their hand and can access undesired content at anytime.

In regards to classroom access, as recommended in the module notes it is better to provide students with relevant sites to access rather than sending them to openly research online. Additionally, systems that block access to potential dangers are helpful in limiting undesired access; however as noted in the module notes, the inadvertent outcome of network blocks is often that useful, appropriate sites are blocked and I have experienced this many times in teaching art and design. My school tried a system last year to provide teachers the opportunity to open a site for a period of time so that the IT staff were not constantly bombarded with requests. In theory it was a great idea, however in practice, the software required the teacher to enable access for the class, the students to individually request approval for access and the teacher to confirm each student’s access independently. With students needing access at various times throughout a lesson, this option was a time management disaster and was quickly scrapped!

Potential problem #2: Safety and privacy issues for students

Young people are often naive, trusting and easily persuaded and this puts them at great potential risk. As articulated by child psychologist Andrew Fuller, the underdeveloped frontal lobe inhibits informed decision making and therefore spontaneous online behaviour for adolescents can be highly problematic.

Students (and parents) need explicit teaching about safe use of the internet, digital citizenship, cyber safety and managing their digital reputation. As Fuller suggests, young people also benefit from education about decision making:

“Slowing adolescent minds down so that they don’t have to do the first thing that comes into their heads requires kind coaching in reflective rather than impulsive decision making.”

Potential problem #5: Copyright and plagiarism issues

Young people live busy lives with many added commitments on top of their schoolwork and therefore attempts to submit plagiarised work are frequent. My college provides information about plagiarism in every unit outline, a printed booklet is provided and accessible on the college website and teachers speak regularly to inform students of the consequences. Sites such as Turnitin are very helpful for both students and teachers to identify plagiarism. A preventative option is to ensure that tasks involve rich requirements rather than just a research report. Comparison, analysis and application of concepts in task requirements helps to prevent the likelihood of plagiarised content in written work. In practical work, requiring documentation of the process of work as well as evidence of idea development and inspiration is also helpful.

For each of these issues the important safeguard is education and from many different sources. There are excellent resources online, police visits can be helpful, drama acts such as Brainstorm cover content around internet safety and identity. At the risk of overload I think it is better to invest in a range of options to assist in education to limit the issues of internet use for young people.

References

Andrew Fuller 2014. Adolescent Learning – Fact sheet. Retreived from http://andrewfuller.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/adolescentlearning.pdf

Roblyer, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2014). Integrating educational technology into teaching: international edition, 6th edition. Harlow: Pearson.

Whilst reading Simmons & Hawkins (2009) chapter, “Planning to teach an ICT lesson”, I became aware of my own streamlining (or perhaps corners cut) in developing lessons for my students. Even with best laid plans for my upcoming classes, I can guarantee that I will not develop lesson plans with the detail demonstrated in this chapter (pages 101-104). As a teacher practising roles in schools requiring work far beyond classroom teaching, the constraints on my time make it impossible for me to develop lessons with detail of this depth. Additionally I question the efficiency and need for this detail and depth, particularly for experienced teachers.

In “The Game Changer”, Dr Jason Fox talks about goal setting that can limit creative potential and I would apply this concept to lesson planning also. Carefully planned experiences can be limiting, lacking in creative potential and not versatile enough to allow flexibility when the unexpected occurs, when student interest takes us on a tangent or when it is evident that something just isn’t working. In regards to technology and lesson planning there is much to consider about what could go wrong and contingency plans are an important aspect of lesson/unit programming. A plan for a sequence of lessons or unit of work with scope for extension or flexibility where required may be a more efficient planning device than a carefully constructed plan for each lesson. 

The specifics of intention and the language incorporated in Simmons and Hawkins guide is very helpful in planning meaningful learning activities. They recommend that teachers ask the following:

• What do we want to achieve? – Develop aims for learning
• What will students learn? – Learning objectives
• How will i know what they have learned? – Learning outcomes

In regards to developing aims for lessons or units of work, it is vitally important to always consider the Roblyer and Doering question, “What specific needs do my students and I have that (any given resources) can help meet”. 

Simmons and Hawkings recommend that focus is on the desired learning and not built around the activities. This focus retains emphasis on meaningful use of lesson time to engage students. The importance of developing clear objectives and outcomes that enable students to have clarity about what is required of them is also articulated by the authors. I like the idea of “WALT (We are learning today) and WILF (What I’m Looking For)” which could enable a brief overview of desired lesson objectives and outcomes that is not too tied down in detail.

References

Fox, J. The Game Changer. 2014. Milton QLD. John Wiley and Sons.

Roblyer, M. D., & Doering, A. H. (2014). Integrating educational technology into teaching: international edition, 6th edition. Harlow: Pearson.

Simmons, C., & Hawkins, C. (2009). Planning to teach an ICT lesson. In Teaching ICT (pp. 54-105). London ; Sage Publications Ltd. Retrieved from http://primo.unilinc.edu.au/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=CSU&docId=aleph002991955

It is with considerable trepidation that I find myself on the brink of teaching Year 9 IT at my new school. This is leading me to launch out of my comfortable Art and Design zone for Assignment Two and into this daunting arena. As this is the first Year 9 cohort (it is a new school), there is no existing curriculum and no one else to seek guidance from on campus.

• Design the user experience of a digital system, evaluating alternative designs against criteria including functionality, accessibility, usability, and aesthetics (ACTDIP039)

• Create interactive solutions for sharing ideas and information online, taking into account social contexts and legal responsibilities (ACTDIP043)

I am planning to develop some beginner lessons in game design using an IPad application, Gabu Studio. My new school has incorporated a program of Self Directed Learning with two days devoted each week to this program. I see in this model considerable opportunity for cross curriculum perspectives and so my idea for this unit of work is to develop games that relate to content in another curriculum area of the student’s choice.

References

Australian Curriculum – Technologies/Digital Technologies http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/technologies/digital-technologies/curriculum/f-10?layout=1

The school where I have most recently worked has had a laptop program for staff and students (from years 9-12) for the past five years. This was a major investment that was very popular in the community for the first few years, where we were quite early to take up the introduction of one-to-one. For the past two years it has been evident that the machines have been past their best years and as the school moved towards evaluating and moving on, repair or replacement of components like power cables etc became problematic.

In regards to networked equipment, most classrooms have a hardwired PC, projector and screen and some have an interactive whiteboard (although not any that I have taught in). Capacity to mirror devices has not yet been possible and getting some teacher-owned devices onto the network has not been possible.

Use of technology over the time of the laptop program has been far from optimal. Many teachers are reluctant to really invest in innovative, engaging use of technology and many students are happy to appear engaged with a device with very little real learning occurring. Students have used their devices most often for word processing, internet research, social media around network blocks and gaming with very little other constructive use. As stated in my previous blog post this is a school with compliant students, so it is not always obvious when students are not engaged in learning as desired.

The driving force behind innovation in this school comes from some of the college leaders as well as a small group of staff who are early adopters. There are many staff who remain skeptical that technology can really enhance learning and who are fearful of the extra learning required from them to stay near the top of what they perceive they may need to know. It is not the safe teaching option to test out new possibilities and risk appearing to lack competence with an apparently tech savvy class of Year 9s, and many staff lack the confidence to try, fail and reevaluate.

Recently a company was employed to conduct a needs analysis where all community stakeholders were given opportunity for input and extensive recommendations were provided. This has led to a move for staff supplied devices to a choice of a tablet or small laptop. Student devices will be re-evaluated in the upcoming year and as BYOD was one of the recommendations, it is likely this college will move in that direction; although considerable work is required to set up the necessary infrastructure.

As technology needs and possibilities are changing so rapidly it is very hard for schools to maintain the infrastructure required (both in regards to financial costs and human resourcing) to evolve at the pace that we might want them to.

The bottom line is the question, “will it make a difference to teaching and learning?” At this point in my most recent school, some aspects of technology use have improved systems and efficiency, particularly in an administrative sense; however the actual use of technology for teaching and learning still needs considerable evaluation and consideration.

TPACK is a new but logical concept for me. My experience in over twenty years of teaching has led me to realise that pedagogy and content knowledge are an essential combination and that in today’s digital society, adding technology into our curriculum where appropriate, is necessary to create real and engaging learning opportunities.

I started my first teaching job well-trained with knowledge and appropriate pedagogy for the teaching of Art and found myself with a line of Year 8 Maths. My first reaction was, “Year 8 Maths – easy”. I was confident with the subject matter but did not realise that I completely lacked the pedagogical skills required to help my students learn. On the flip side, I am about to start a job at a new progressive school, where risk taking with technology is encouraged and where I will also be teaching well outside of my content knowledge comfort zone. Although this will be a massive challenge whilst I try and get on top of content and the technology possibilities, I think I have now developed the pedagogical skills and confidence to manage this scenario better than I might once have. I am not afraid to say, “I don’t know, let’s find out” or “that didn’t work, what did we learn? How can we do it differently?”

Adding technology into Shulman’s PCK model is essential to keep learning opportunities vibrant and provide scope for development of skills that will assist students to function in the workplace, but the dilemma for teachers today is what to use and how to integrate technology to optimise learning. Koehler and Mishra discuss the requirement for a thoughtful and playful approach to the use of technology in education. An open-minded approach to integrating technology is necessary to prevent a sense of overload with the possibilities. Playing, experimenting and practicing use of technology with students could be the best way to creatively solve the wicked problem that the vastness of technology creates.

In regards to where my teaching proficiency fits into the T-PACK diagram, it depends on what I am teaching and what the dynamic of my students requires.

Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org

I have been teaching Graphic Design for the past few years and in this subject, it would not now be possible to work without technology and prepare students for the real design world. I think this has enabled me to sit in the centre of the diagram for my teaching of this subject. My teaching of Art as my original discipline, has probably remained more traditional due to familiarity and may take more for me to shift the paradigm to integrate technology more. When I teach other subjects that I am less familiar with or where students are challenging, I think I look for more opportunities to incorporate all three aspects creatively, in order to ensure that what I am doing is engaging for my students.

My most recent employment has been in a beautiful girls’ school where student conduct is consistently compliant. At times it is not obvious that teaching and learning can be improved with the integration of technology in this environment. For this reason, I have found my colleagues have not always seen the benefits of integrating technology beyond word-processing, PowerPoint and internet research.  On the whole, I think teachers need considerable training, and as Koehler, Mishra and Yahya note, regular teacher training opportunities (seminars etc) may not support deep development of the knowledge required to integrate technology with content and pedagogy. More creative options are required and may include opportunities for peer learning, Professional Learning Communities and team teaching to develop skills in integrating technology effectively. A further options that includes a playful approach is that advocated by Karen Work Richardson, where teachers play a game to creatively invent ways in integrate the three knowledge forms. See the article, T-PACK Game On.

I am looking forward to my move to a school where I will be challenged to manage student behaviour and creatively solve the wicked problem of how best to assist my students to engage in learning. The combination of a different student dynamic and a school that is actively seeking creative ways of teaching using technology will support my development of all aspects of my T-PACK integration.

References

Koehler, M.J. & Mishra, P. What Is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge? accessed from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article1.cfm

Koehler, M. T-PACK. Retreived from http://www.tpack.org

Koehler, M. Mishra, P. & Yahya, K. Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education. Volume 49, Issue 3, November 2007, Pages 740–762

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2008, March). Thinking creatively: Teachers as designers of technology, pedagogy and content (tpack). Keynote address at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE), Las Vegas, NV, March 3-7.

Work Richardson, K. T-PACK Game On. Learning & Leading with Technology. 37.8 (June-July 2010): p34.