Final Project Reflection

Setting up learning projects is like taking multiple diversions off the main path of a long hike up to a high mountain. At each signpost, you're compelled to stop and proceed down another (sometimes more challenging) path, then back to the main path. At any particular juncture, you might come across a captivating scene, which leads to further diversion. You might stop to take a photo, to better remember the scene. You might hear exotic birds or see strange plants or insects—and again another preoccupation ensues. You finally pull yourself away from the sight and make it back onto the main path. Along the way, and usually at a time when you find yourself scrambling up a slippery slope, you might come F2F with a fascinating person that you have to stop and talk to. Time slips away and the sky darkens, but you're not where you're supposed to be yet. You hurry along—only to find yet another signpost—a critical one as you're told to expect during the expedition. You proceed along one last side path—you recognize the value of this stop—you wouldn't feel fulfilled without having had this experience. You hurry back. You see the top as it starts to rain. You're tired, but driven to finish. You lift your foot up onto the final boulder ahead. The sky clears. The horizon offers the most spectacular view you have yet to see. Satisfaction ensues...

I might have got carried away with the trek analogy, but I do feel a need to divert and capture all the details to ensure that the project might work. I have learned that no matter the amount of planning and thinking that might go into a project, you have to be willing to abandon something, modify something, add something. You have have the students with you at every step and listen to their voices—their suggestions, their criticisms. You have to be willing to take risks, if you expect the students to. When working with English Language Learners (ELLs), you're tasked with two sets of outcomes: one the content, and two, the language. Have a look at the K-12 ESL Standards we've set out for ourselves as K-12 ESL teachers! How one captures the most salient outcomes for any particular task and really be able to measure growth is certainly one of the diversions to follow that hopefully leads to somewhere—i.e., the development of the second language (L2) proficiency. How to manipulate the tasks and the content within them to be authentic and meaningful is fundamental to any project? To ensure that students remain motivated and can employ learning strategies so that they forget that L2 learning is difficult as the 'adult' learners they are in high school? This hopefully happens when students are using technologies that have become commonplace to them and in which they feel comfortable already. It's amazing that now kids can talk with real experts via social networking and the myriad sites out there that would allow young people into a professional domain.

Presentation can also take on a new meaning. Presentations can be made public and posted on sites for others to peruse—like that of VoiceThread. This public product requires excellence be sought. Pride is associated with the product as it is public. Motivation again plays a role, and motivation is the key to good L2 success for ELLs.

Apart from all of this, all of the good things we educators want are at play in an online project such as this: the 'Six Facets of Understanding' that Wiggins and McTighe set out in Understanding by Design takes on with an applied meaning. Who could argue with 'self-knowledge,' certainly the highest of all learning and understanding. Let's hope that this Speak Project does offer students what it aims to do in terms of attaining a deeper understanding of collaboration and action, that ELLs are further developing their language discourse and proficiency, and let's further hope that this long trek up this mountain ends up with the same clear sky and fantastic views hoped for. But, if their are setbacks, falls along the way, the risk-taking has a value of its own, and I'm usually willing to go for it regardless.

Edutopia?

I love language. This is a perfect word that describes what techies believe and describe as that perfect world where we as educators can finally learn to connect with our students and keep them endlessly motivated to learn. First off, I'd like to say that we have to remember that we're still human, no matter how far we go with technology and that the nature of being human is to be motivated to learn. So, fundamentally, we have the capability, and that no matter what seems to be apparent boredom in our classrooms, the desire to learn is still there. What we teachers seem be doing and what we're afraid might become more of an SOP is that students will become even less enchanted than they sometimes are in the classroom if we stay frozen in the 'Doing old things in old ways' or even 'Doing old things in new ways,' and instead the claims are that we need to move to 'Doing new things in new ways,' as described in 'Shaping Tech in the Classroom,' by Marc Prensky. I do agree with Prensky when he brings to mind the difficulty with teachers adapting to change—we 'digital immigrants,' but to consider a counterpoint, the younger educators—'the digital natives' are bringing the immigrants along. This process has consistently happened in the past and is safe to generalize to the future regarding technology reform.

We're listening to Dean Shareski, from Saskatchewan, Canada. He believes we (the ones in this type of course) are the ones who are making the change. I agree, but young people do have the drive and energy by nature, so let's consider that it's not just us, but it's us and them together. It's more like the critical mass factor—if we collectively believe we need a reform to match up with the new paradigm we seem to entering—more like beyond Web 2.0.

Implications are huge for all educators. How does all of this look and play out in the daily lesson? We seem to be heading to 1-1 starting in grade 6 here at ISB as Jeff has explained in his 'Next Phase...' post. But after looking at a more seamless integration of the digital world with our own physiologies—'Gesture-based Computing (2-3 years down the road) as described in the 2010 Horizon Report, are we sure we're heading in the right direction with purchasing more hardware? Are we sure we want to work on integrating what the kids claim they want: emailing and instant messaging 24-7? Are we swinging the pendulum too far to the left to try and keep up with it all--or where are we on the pendulum swing? At what point or is there a point where we can reach and balance and achieve 'edutopia'? It seems like educators today just need to be willing to take major tech leaps and have the kids go along with us. And as the 'Living and Learning with New Media: Summary of Findings from the Digital Youth Project' concludes, we're the need seems to be to move away from the adult as the authority (which is fine with me) to: "The most successful examples we have seen of youth media programs are those based on kids’ own passionate interests and allowing plenty of unstructured time for kids to tinker and explore without being dominated by direct instruction." So are we prepared to move to this new education paradigm with aims of preparing students for the world beyond the work world? I definitely have more questions than answers here!

Project Sketch

My ESL students (Gr. 9-11 'advanced' proficiency level) are reading Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson. We've just started reading, but I see possibilities for setting up a PLN as described in this week's reading in Chap. 4 of 'Reinventing Project-Based Learning.' The focus of the story is the need for kids who experience trauma to be able to speak out and express themselves to someone they can trust. My students, who represent quite a variety of different cultural backgrounds, could use their blogs to first explore who they might trust (as this value varies from culture to culture) and who to go to for their own problems/issues—both within their own families, among their friends—f2f or online from their social networks, before branching out to other professionals at school or within the community. (Have a look at my ESL classes that have just set up their blogs. The 'What if?' post sets up for the reader the what the main character, Melinda, goes through in her experience.)

At the next level of involvement, would be a f2f meeting with their counselors (this could be set up in groups according to the counselor who is assigned to a particular part of the alphabet in the high school), to interview and get ideas on how young people can communicate about a trauma in their own lives (or that of a friend's), what community members are available in or outside the school. They'd be required to ask their counselors to send them a list contacts via email.

Next would be communicating with a professional in the community—asking for advice/ information on how to best deal with emotional trauma/problems, information on when to go outside their immediate comfort zone to ask for help as well as where to find professionals of different languages to communicate with. In class, we'd practice the text type for this type of writing and post these first on the blog for practice—they'd have a look as to what others are writing and I could look them over and give feedback before officially posting. Next, once communications start coming in, we'd gather the data and set up a database on google.docs, whereby the data could be entered as it comes in—a dynamic database—and one which might actually be used by the students who may be looking for contacts themselves.

For presentation of the data, in groups, using the data collected students could present a 'How to Manage Issues/Problems,' or we could generate some other possible topics, given the type of data that we have to work with. These presentations could be set up on Voicethread. ESLs do need practice and opportunity for rehearsal of their voices and Voicethread has worked well for this in the past. We also set up an ESL Ning last year, so another possibility is to reactivate the Ning and post all the work and presentations there.

This whole process isn't necessarily 'geeking out' whereby there's 'peer-based reciprocity,' rather it's more the 'qualities' discussed in Chap. 4 that include: constructing meaning, realistic, crossing disciplines, inquiring from experts, structuring learning so students learn from one another, reaching out to others and it would especially involve 'risk-taking' as ESLs are still grappling with both spoken and written proficiency. And, an added bonus for me is that I'm learning about the community (and how to better manage all of this) along with the students.

One last follow-up would be to invite Laurie Anderson, Speak author, to the Ning, with the possibility of further recognition for their efforts, if she were to 'publish' any of their presentations on her website.

I see this project involving a minimum of 15 classes. Rubrics would be used to evaluate each part of the project, including the writings and presentations. Past rubrics for online work could be revised and used as needed.

Regarding the NETS-T standards, this project addresses the following two standards specifically:
1. Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity: (b.) engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources, and
3. Model Digital-Age Work and Learning: (b.) collaborate with students, peers, parents, and community members using digital tools and resources to support student success and innovation.

My thoughts (changing)?

What has struck me as most interesting among the various readings we've encountered has been the theory of 'connectivism.' (I know if a red line appears under a word in a spell check where the word IS spelled correctly, that we've now added a new word to the language. We'll see if it's here to stay...) In, 'A Learning Theory for the Digital Age,' December 12, 2004, by George Siemens, preceding the argument that the new theory (and paradigm?) of connectivism, were the learning theories put forth by behaviorists, cognitivists and construtionists. A convincing set of explanations (including chaos theory and even the butterfly effect) and examples then followed that support why we as educators need to now ensure that our students (and ourselves as well) are exposed to situations whereby we can recognize the patterns that exist 'out there'—that knowledge does not reside solely in that internal realm as believed by constructivists and that we need to rely on others' knowledge as well as knowledge that resides in organizations and non-human entities. (But what of 'belief' being a necessary part of knowledge?) I'm willing to go with this for the sake of being open-minded, but given that my job is to teach students to be 'healthy skeptics,' I need to practice what I preach. Yes, it makes sense to recognize patterns to develop understanding (but as I read this, understanding is not as necessary as the gathering of knowledge from as many places as possible.) But let's acknowledge at this point that we do not have machines that have awareness and can believe, at least not yet as we know, and that given we're not machines, if we talk of 'knowledge' many would argue that knowledge does require an ability to believe as part of its core definition. 'Can a Machine Know?' by ISB alumnus, Paul Heath, has more to say on this.

So, yes, working with Web 2.0 technologies as evidenced in the examples from 'hanging out' to 'messing around' does support learning via connectivism. What bothers me is that we're led to believe that we have finally arrived at the 'truth' behind learning. Here's an underlying assumption stated in the article: "Realizing that complete knowledge cannot exist in the mind of one person requires a different approach to creating an overview of the situation." But have we come to 'realize' this? Have we arrived at understanding the human potential to be able to make this bold claim and then act on it? Is it possible that since young people are so caught up with messing around and to some who transcend and find their careers via messing around that we're convinced that this is it? That we've finally arrived at how knowledge is attained by humans? I'd say we need to temper our passions a bit and realize that we're dealing with human science studies and that generalizations made from these are highly tentative at best. Perhaps we are on the verge of a new learning paradigm. Perhaps we are finally able to step outside our existing learning paradigms and gain perspective and understanding about learning, especially given our new understandings in the realm of quantum mechanics and neuroscience, but as with all such paradigm shifts, we have to realize that it's not a matter of abandoning existing theories, it's a matter of transcending and including learning theories. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Let's acknowledge that the hallmark of science is that nothing is 'proven' and that current understandings only lead to newer understandings. There are still some valid approaches to learning that have proven themselves worthy. (And the 'celebration' of 2nd-hand knowledge—knowledge by authority) has been around since Plato!) Not everyone will move from messing around to geeking out. And, we do have to consider that there's still a majority of underprivileged young people who do not have access to the luxuries required to even 'hang out.'

On a less philosophical note, I always liked Bloom's Taxonomy in the past and the new version with the tech skills assigned is especially interesting. (Although I wonder why 'synthesis' has been 'synthesized'/ eliminated!) ('Bloom's Taxonomy Blooms Digitally') I have my students blogging right now about their recent exposure to new concepts we've been discussing in class, and I admit that they're both evaluating & creating as they go along (and synthesizing). I'd like to think that the time they spend blogging encompasses the higher order thinking skills we're after. (It feels that way as I write this blog as well!) So I'm glad to see 'Tech & Learning' values the new taxonomy and validates the hours we spend setting up and writing these as worthwhile thinking (and learning). So, yes I am acknowledging that learning is taking place via a form of 'connectivism'—after all I did say I was open-minded. And, I've always been one to look for something new to bring to learning.

What I hope to get out of the course

I'd like to be able to become more 'fluent' with the 'Web 2.0' technologies out there that both fit 'my style' as well as my needs. And, I am qualifying this somewhat b/c given everything that's 'out there,' I have to be able to manage what works or what I can imagine might work for me in my situation later on. And, I am willing to take risks, because often with the first exposure in this environment, it's just me playing around with something without an audience. The challenge comes in when you finally decide to try whatever it is out in the classroom. Then a disclaimer at the start of class is in order just in case all fails... (Here's one I came across today, however, that's got instant application: tag galaxy. Fun, quick, useful!)

Otherwise, although it sounds cliche, I'd like to be able to use the technologies to keep students motivated to learn. From the readings this week, it's apparent that we have to do something to keep up with how quickly young people nowadays can process multiple bits of information. Actually, we teachers have become pretty good at it, too. But the implications for delivering content is what I'd be keen to look more into. I can tell when students are intrigued by new content—something they've not contemplated or come across before, but we're no longer the only trusted authority for knowledge. So I'd like to be able to manage the other 'authorities.' I'd like to be able to keep my f2f with my students no matter what, but use the technologies judiciously to enhance the interactions. So far I've played around with forums/ blogs/ wikis, etc. but learning how to use which one when is what I'd like to become more comfortable with. How can be build these new uses into the curriculum so that they are mainstays? Blogging, for example. Is this here to stay and if so, what are the implications for teaching writing?


I'd like to have us explore ways to have students be involved with selecting technologies that they feel would support their learning. What about the use of cell phones in the classroom, for example? Since we don't have 1-1 computer use yet, what are other ways to effectively engage kids without computers necessarily—using their prized possessions?

One last thing comes to mind, here—time. The learning curve is great for some of these, I've learned. Time management ideas, like RSS, are what I'd be interested in learning more about. I'm certain hearing from others how they go about managing all the demands will be helpful. And, managing time for students also applies...

What I hope to get out of this course? How to handle the future of learning!

TESOL Web 2 Intro

Hi—I’m Donna from Nonthaburi, Thailand, HS teacher (ToK & ESL) at Inter’l School Bangkok. I’m in my 19th year there already! Came to this workshop today to hone in some of my newly-found skills on Web 2.0. In fact, presenting a demo on Thursday on using a Ning for HS ELL students.

Web 2.0 seems to be a generic term for new capabilities on the web, like social networking—Facebook, Ning, Wiki and interactive programs like Second Life. New options for word processing documents like sharing on Google Docs, RSS feeds whereby you select to create nd participate in various blogs, etc., using camera, storing/ using photos, VDO in new ways.

Advantages: new angles at old ideas—like developing reading/ writing skills for students. Better/ faster communications, both social and academic.

Disadvantages: One big one is time. Time seems to disappear when in front of the box. You’re engaged, but sometimes at the expense of f2f interactions with real people!

Qs—how to be an efficient user. Shortcuts to take to accomplish things.

This course; PLNs; Clarence et al

• Your thoughts on Personal Learning Networks
  
• Finding information online: How do we address truth and bias in the classroom?

What I hope to get out of this course:
I need to be pushed into implementing 'connectivity' where I think it's going to fit best. And, part of this is determining when, where and what I want to implement. So, what I hope to find out is the 'when,' 'where' and 'what.' I'm never keen being a beginner at something, so the other goal is becoming 'fluent' to some extent with some of the basics like blogs, wikis and RSS feeds.

PLNs+ Clarence
I see a huge pendulum swing happening here. We educators by nature endlessly seek the 'best yet' approach for SL (student learning). Now we're coming to understand the extent to which young people interact in the virtual world, beyond game playing and other self-interest activities online (although, philosophically, everything we do is out of self-interest). It's intuitive that those fluent with IT tools within PLNs can find anything they want on the Internet, they just have to have some kind guide (maybe the teacher!) to give them a few guideposts along the way, e.g. iGoogle, Delicious, so they can expedite the process. We're the ones who seem to be charged with finding these tools and of course figuring out how to use them ourselves first. But once we 'give it to 'em' then they (HS students that is) are generally willing to take the necessary risks. Some personalities are more reticent, but given their peers' (which we don't want to refer to as 'peer pressure') interest, they do become involved.

Clarence is willing to take the risks to get himself & his students fluent. Of course, we know we have to be willing to do this, too. To let things be messy and be willing to make mistakes, or not to have things go according to plan. I do not subscribe to the 'student centered' approach, however. A couple of years ago, a friend recommended a book entitled: The Courage to Teach by Parker Palmer. There Parker describes the 'subject-centered' approach, whereby all are involved in the learning once the subjec to explore is put center stage. By virtue of doing this, we collectively interact with the subject as well as with one another involved. I have adopted this approach in my teaching and have discovered a way to give up the control I was used to. I was willing to admit that we're all 'researchers' here and that we all have to listen to one another in order to get to the 'truth.'

Thanks, Clarence, for the wealth of info/ links you shared in your talk!

Back to 'truth' and 'bias.' It's interesting that all of the readings we've had for the course so far have been biased toward undertaking PLNs for the sake of not losing students to boredom or leaving them behind in this age of info if we maintain a strictly traditional approach with textbooks and stand and deliver. Connotative words like 'enrage' suggest that an an emotional level, some of our students might be seething when they want into such traditional classrooms. Back to the pendulum swing here. Let's not go overboard and throw out the baby with the bathwater. I happen to like hard copies and books for certain purposes, despite environmental issues. Sorry, Kerry. I happen to like talking to students f2f in my class and having them do the same. We are lucky to be in this international setting and have students that are very gloabally aware, little ethnocentrism is evident. We can use these resources. I want to keep these as long as I'm a teacher.

Having said this, I do value what can be done on PLNs. I've already worked with colleagues (Andrew Cohen and Karen Rosenbaum) to successfully implement a Ning for our ESL classes last semester. We witnessed the increased motivation, excitement and risk-taking that accompanies this type of PLN, and of course the important by-product we were after was improved proficiency in speaking and writing. Given that the assignments we posted were leveled and comprehensible, the amount of input they were exposed to and that they wanted to do automatically increased their proficiency, accoring to research in the field. But the limitations have to be acknowledged: problems with the network, difficulties with getting elaboration in speaking (again the need for f2f) and those personalities that just didn't like it.

So, back to 'truth' and 'bias.' Exposure to mulitple sources seems to be the only way to break this down. That and having people develop their critical thinking abilities to scutinize everything they're exposed to. We can teach these skills, and we can encourage students AND ourselves to move outside the 'bubble' of confirmation bias that we naturally find ourselves. Somehow we need to assure ourselves that we must be right about our own beliefs.

I'm using something called the 3s Guide to Evaluating Knowledge Claims and will attach it. I'm using it right now, but I love the bit where students have to ask themselves about their own beliefs, biases and attitudes regarding the topic—this is the self-referral I'm after that I believe will develop the critical thinking they will continue to need in this rapidly changing word.