Jump to content

Trends and Innovations for K-12 Ed Tech Leaders/Part II

Add links
From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
A Wikibookian has nominated this page for cleanup.
You can help make it better. Please review any relevant discussion.
A Wikibookian has nominated this page for cleanup.
You can help make it better. Please review any relevant discussion.

Introduction

[edit | edit source]

The Wikibook is titled Trends and Innovations for K-12 Ed Tech Leaders Part II, as a continuation of the above linked wikibook titled Trends and Innovations for K-12 Ed Tech Leaders. Both wikibooks are under review and all chapters will be reorganized by topic relevance and educational settings. This wikibook now has a mixture of topics from both K-12 and higher education. In this transition period (Spring 2018), please use this page and post your chapters here.

For your convenience, the original introduction is pasted below: The Wikibook is titled Trends and Innovations for K-12 Ed Tech Leaders. Technology changes so fast that it is difficult for anyone who cares about education to keep up with the important changes, trends, and innovations. The book focuses on trends and innovations that are important for K-12 educational technology leaders. Under the guidance of the course instructor, doctoral students have been working on this wikibook as one of the final course projects.

  • I. Description of Trend
  • II. Rationale: Why do you think the chosen trends and/or innovations are important for educational technology leaders?
  • III. Implementation in K-12 settings (cases or major initiatives, successful stories, lessons learned…) or in Higher Education settings
  • IV. Issues: What are the key issues around the identified trends and/or innovations? (already existing or potential drawbacks)
  • V. Related Research: What research evidence have you found regarding the trends and/or innovations you are focusing on. (bulleted lists of research studies done on the trend)
  • VI. Recommended resources (blogs, webpages, twitter hashtags, infographics)

Please check out the policies and guidelines for Wikibooks, especially lines about copyrights. Make sure the content you post on this page does not involve any copyright violation, and even if it is your own content, make sure it is something that you can and are willing to share through an OER format.

Spring 2018 Chapter Topics

[edit | edit source]

HA1 Chapters 1-12

  • jcrills48--Virtual Academies
  • Debo9009--Online Schooling
  • sjcriv1423--Integrating Computer Science into the Curriculum
  • Susannefae--Flipped Classroom for Foreign Language Learning
  • Sweetmis31--Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) as Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
  • xman1x1--Modern History of Women in STEM OR Prototype Classrooms Modeled on the Workplace??
  • dentondoom--Active Learning Classrooms
  • Chefamanda71--Using Technology in Professional Development from the Return on Investment Perspective
  • Altbrown – Robotics in the Classroom
  • adrkashner: Personal Learning Networks
  • KW--Knieves1; Digital Citizenship
  • mhorningjr: Blended Learning in K-12 Education

Sample Chapter 1

[edit | edit source]

This is a sample chapter I am posting for the purpose of sharing the format and how your chapter looks like after it is posted. I also wanted to share that not all chapters posted on the Book I page are perfect so please do not be limited by what you see in the existing chapters and feel free to develop what you would like to have by the six required section headings posted under Introduction. Another suggestion is you may want to start posting now and experience how editing the page can be done anytime and by anyone. All edits should show up under the Edit History tab, unless what you have edited is only a minor edit and if that is the case, remember to check "This is a minor edit."

"...games are very effective learning tools." [1]

Online Schooling

[edit | edit source]

Online Schooling Trend

[edit | edit source]

Online education has been a growing educational platform since the 1990’s in what Glatthorn, Boschee, and Whitehead (2016) referred to as the Technological Construction era. Online schooling goes by many different names. Some examples are virtual education, e-learning, distance learning, and cyber school. Implementing technology in the traditional classroom was important in the 21st-century (Glatthorn et al. 2016). There were many issues occurring in the traditional classrooms that parents were concerned with which caused growth in the online school movement. Some reasons for choosing online education are to avoid bullying, school shootings, physical distance, flexibility, and disabilities (Ilgaz & Gulbahar, 2017; Glatthorn et al. 2016). There were 15 independent cyber charter schools in Pennsylvania according to the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) and many school districts have created online options for students living in their districts (PDE, 2017). There are many online platforms available for meeting places for leaders and participators to collaborate live from their own individual locations. Blackboard Collaborate will be used as an example for this chapter.

Rationale

[edit | edit source]

The growth of distance learning speaks to why educational leaders must start paying more attention to online learning. Funding of programs and training are important factors for leaders to consider. The growth of virtual public charter schools mentioned above uses tax money to operate just like the traditional brick and mortar public schools. Therefore, it is important for educational leaders to ensure the best options for schooling is made available to each student. Ultimately student growth and doing what is best for each student is the priority regardless of the school setting. Teachers and leaders need to learn the technology platforms and ins and outs of online learning so they can help students reach their fullest potential. Leaders in technology have many reasons to find a user friendly online classroom that meets their needs to instruct students. Most online platforms can be used at any age level and allow for both collaboration and independent work. Learning and applying the basic features are not difficult for leaders to use and learn. Typically the leader is known as the moderator and can effectively teach content of any subject matter. The moderator can facilitate discussion easily.

Implementation

[edit | edit source]

Blackboard Collaborate Example Having a virtual classroom where students and teachers can meet and discuss course content is needed for online schooling. As stated above, more and more schools are using the virtual platform for courses from elementary school to higher education. There are many virtual platforms to meet and collaborate with classmates and teachers. Blackboard Collaborate is an online classroom where teachers can present class content and interact with students. Students can raise their hand, move and draw material on the white board, answer questions with poling tools, type in the chat box, talk on a microphone and use a webcam. Teachers can give and take away any tools, share documents and content with participants, create private or small group breakout rooms, set timers, publish or share poling responses and record sessions. The educational leader can also share websites live, create a PowerPoint of subject matter to teach and record for self reflection or for viewers who may have missed the session. Blackboard allows for the moderator to assess learning in many different ways. The leader can assess both private or small group breakout rooms for mastery. The moderator can use private or public poling tools as well. The facilitator can asses learning by hearing answers on the microphone, seeing them typed in a public or private chat box, and watch students work live on the board. There is also a quiz feature that can be used to have participators complete to show mastery of content. Participants have different modes of sharing their thoughts and ideas and participating in class discussion. This benefits the leader and participants for many reasons. By writing directly on the board, typing in the chat box or talking on the microphone learning can be shared and mastery of content can be shown. This variety also allows for participants who may be having technical difficulties to still participate and engage in the lesson and discussion. Blackboard Collaborate allows for many opportunities for engagement and learning.

Issues

[edit | edit source]

There are certain aspects to distance learning that are drawbacks compared to being face to face with students. First of all, younger students can't learn everything on line. There are skills like holding a pencil and writing on paper that are beneficial for students to do face to face. Although there are technology tools like the Bamboo pen that make writing as authentic as possible, it is still not exactly the same as actually holding the pencil and paper. Another example is teaching students how to hold a book and turn the pages. If you haven't taught younger learners before this may not be something you have ever thought of. But it is an important skill that students have to be taught. You could model these skills online but the child needs to practice actually doing it. The older the students are the less drawbacks there are for online learners if they have learned the needed foundational skills. Online education often requires independence. It is important for the learner and teacher to acknowledge this. Time management is another important skill needed for online schooling. While online learning is a wonderful opportunity to learn these skills, if they are not possessed the distance learner may not be successful. It is especially important for online learners to have self-discipline and a drive to succeed.

[edit | edit source]

There are many platforms for holding live online sessions. Many online teaching tools are free and many are costly. It is important to practice with the features since many different platforms offer different features. Be sure to check the hardware needed to run the online classroom as well.

[edit | edit source]

References

[edit | edit source]
  • Cavanagh, S. (2014). Online schooling. Education Week, 33(24), 5. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1509435302
  • Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B. M., & Boschee, B. F. (2016). Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation. Thousand Oaks: Sage
  • Ilgaz, H. & Gulbahar, Y. (2017, July 20-22). Why do learners choose online learning: The learners’ voices. International Association for Development of the Information Society, pp.1-7. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED579379.pdf
  • Lisa, H. W., Barbour, M. K., & Menchaca, M. P. (2014). The nature of online charter schools: Evolution and emerging concerns. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 379-389. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/User/Documents/doctorate/WILKES/ED%20643%20Tech/online%20schooling%20concerns_Hasler.pdf
  • Pennsylvania Department of Education (2017). Charter Schools. Retrieved from http://www.education.pa.gov/K-12/Charter%20Schools/Pages/default.aspx#tab-1

K-12 Blended Learning Models

[edit | edit source]

Defining Blended Learning as a Trend in K-12 Education

[edit | edit source]

As Horning (2014) notes, “blended learning combines the very best of traditional classroom teaching and ‘blends it’ with online learning opportunities for students” (p. 2). Online learning experiences can personalize learning for each student providing the learner with some control over time, place, and/or pace (Horning, 2014). When defining blended learning, Horn and Greenberg (2014) include the distinction that blended learning is a formal education program with students learning, at least in part, through online learning with some element of student control over place, path, and/or pace. In noting what constituted a high-quality blended learning programs, Horn and Greenberg (2014) believe the program must include the following four characteristics: personalized, mastery-based, high expectations, student ownership. There are several models of blended learning as well as sub-models within models. Some of these models, such as Station Rotation, can be incorporated by a single teacher within the existing structure of the traditional school. Other models, such as the Flex model, requires the entire schools to be completely restructured and looks very little like the structures and schedules which dominate most schools today. Each of these models will be further defined and explored while offering some exemplars demonstrating the implementation of these models. For an excellent brief overview of what is blended learning, please watch the following video (2:33) from the Clayton Christensen Institute (n.d.): https://player.vimeo.com/video/89546618

Rationale for K-12 Blended Learning Models

[edit | edit source]

Technologies have transformed the world around us; from financial transactions to shopping and staying connected with friends are activities that are vastly different from a decade ago (Horning, 2014). Much of our world has evolved and changed. However, in spite of great efforts of educational leaders, our school systems remain much the same as they were twenty years ago (Horning, 2014). Certainly, chalkboards have been replaced with interactive white boards and students have access to the internet’s seemingly limitless information (Horning, 2014). Nevertheless, this technology-rich environment is simply a layer over an antiquated system (Horning, 2014). Today’s schools are still based predominately on the 19th-century factory model in a one-size-fits-none approach to educating each student (Horn & Greenberg, 2014; Horning, 2014). Blended learning is a promising instructional approach and the key to empowering educators in reimaging teaching, learning, and our school structures by offering new 21st-century models in education (Horning, 2014).

The Successful Implementation of Four K-12 Blended Learning Models

[edit | edit source]

There are four primary models of blended learning in the K-12 environment today. Each of these models will be defined as well as provide an exemplar of the models’ implementation within a K-12 schools.

The Station Rotation Model

[edit | edit source]

As defined by The Blended Universe (n.d.), the Station Rotation Model enables students to rotate through stations with a fixed school schedule. To be considered a blended learning station rotation model, at least one of the stations must be an online learning station (The Blended Universe, n.d.). The other stations might include activities such as small-group or full-call instruction, group projects, individual tutoring, or paper-based assignments and activities (Horn & Greenberg, 2014). In the Station Rotation Model, students will rotate through all of the learning stations (Horn & Greenberg, 2014). Since elementary school teachers have used learning centers or stations in traditional instructional approaches, the Station Rotation Model is commonly found at the elementary or primary academic levels (The Blended Universe, n.d.). An exemplar model of this blended learning model is KIPP LA which has the Station Rotation Model at the core of the school’s instructional approach. The Kahn Academy (2014) provides an excellent overview in the following video, Redesigning the school day at KIPP LA using a Station Rotation bonita: https://www.youtube.com/embed/-aGB3pjC7r4

The Flex Model

[edit | edit source]

The Flex Model provides students with a high degree of control over their schedules and their individual learning (The Blended Universe, n.d.). Students move on flexible or fluid schedules among various learning activities according to their personal learning needs (The Blended Universe, n.d.). At the core of instruction, is online learning as students work through the course curriculum and content (The Blended Universe, n.d.). At times, the online learning might even direct students to offline learning experiences (Horn & Greenberg, 2014). Teachers are the guide on the side as a facilitator of learning providing support and instruction on an as-needed basis (The Blended Universe, n.d.). These activities can include small-group instruction, group projects, and/or individual tutoring (Horn & Greenberg, 2014). Some implementations Flex models have substantial face-to-face support for students which others have minimal (Horn & Greenberg, 2014). An exemplar school which has implemented this blended learning model is the Summit Public Schools as documented by Khan Academy (2014): https://www.youtube.com/embed/EQKqIPi9Ubw

The A La Carte Model

[edit | edit source]

Similar to the Station Rotation model, the A La Carte model can be implemented within the structures of a traditional school structure and schedule. A La Carte enables students to take an online course with a qualified teacher in addition to other scheduled face-to-face courses within the school (The Blended Universe, n.d.). This blended learning model provides an excellent opportunity for diversifying a students’ course offerings, especially electives and Advance Placement courses, within a high school program (The Blended Universe, n.d.). According to Nguyen (2015), this model was formerly referred to as a self-blend model in that it does not provide a whole-school experience. Rather, the model provides online learning at home and at school in addition to offline learning in more traditional classrooms settings (Nguyen, 2015). The exemplar school implementing this blended learning model is the Quakertown Community School District (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2013): https://www.youtube.com/embed/adqwaFlEDQ4

The Enriched Virtual Model

[edit | edit source]

The final blended learning model for review is the Enriched Virtual model. This model provides an alternative to a full-time online school experience by allowing the students to complete the majority of the coursework online outside the school, such as in the home environment. Unlike the A La Carte and other models, the Enriched Virtual model does not require daily attendance within the school building week (The Blended Universe, n.d.). Some programs in the Enriched Virtual model may only require sporadic attendance for students like twice a week (The Blended Universe, n.d.). Once exemplar school to highlight using the Enriched Virtual blended model of learning is the Ivy Academy which is part of the Downingtown Area School District: https://www.youtube.com/embed/E3jwM7qmVqs

Issues and Challenges

[edit | edit source]

In our age of unprecedented access to information, blended learning offers revolutionary instructional approaches in reimagining public education with new models of teaching and learning in 21st-century schools. With formal education program and personalized instruction giving students control over the time, place, and/or pace of learning. Blended learning, complete with all the various models, is fundamentally in direct contrast to today’s predominate model of schools where students have very little choice in a one-size-fits none educational approach (Horn & Greenberg, 2014). In the 19th century factory model, student move through the system based on age over ability or mastery of skills and concepts. However, Blended learning offers the opportunity for a more personalized instructional approach in education to ensure the level of instruction meets the needs of the individual students. Additionally, blended learning models offers differentiated learning experiences including group work, individualized instruction, and online learning which all provide experiences and skills necessary for students to be college and career ready (Horning, 2014).

Although the higher education programs incorporate online learning, the majority of high school graduates in New York State will experience this learning modality for the first time in their first year of higher education (Horning, 2014). Through its advocacy and research, the International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL) is the leading organization supporting K-12 blended and online learning initiatives. In a recent report, iNACOL compiled notable online learning statistics nationwide, as well as key online policy trends and state funding models for online learning (Watson, Murin, Vashaw, Gemin, & Rapp, 2011). With great disappointment, New York State is not mentioned in the report as a clear indicator the State lags behind the rest of the country in offering online learning opportunities for K-12 students. Online learning is not an educational trend but a national movement in education (Horning, 2014). In 2013, at least 24 states and Washington DC have fully blended schools providing online learning opportunities for students (Watson, et al., 2011). By the end of 2013, four states have online learning as a high school graduation requirement, while at least two other states are working to have similar policies in place in 2014 (Watson, et al., 2011).

Students cannot truly be college and career ready if they do not experience any online learning opportunities before graduation (Horning, 2014). As educational leaders, there is a clear urgency to ensure all students have blended learning opportunities whiling ensuring they are colleague and career ready upon high school graduation (Horning, 2014). In blended learning, students also are provided the experiences of time management, individual control over learning, and an opportunity to pursue learning interests. All educational leaders must keep pushing the conversations until all students in public education have opportunities to experience blended learning models redefining schools in the 21st century.

[edit | edit source]

Alliance for Excellent Education. (2013). Digital learning day 2013: Quakertown community school district. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adqwaFlEDQ4&feature=youtu.be

Blended Learning Universe (n.d.). Blended learning models. Retrieved from https://www.blendedlearning.org/models/

Burk, K. (2015). Downingtown ivy academy survey of blended students. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3jwM7qmVqs&feature=youtu.be

Clayton Christensen Institute (n.d.). What is blended learning. Retrieved from https://www.christenseninstitute.org/blended-learning/

Horn, M., & Greenberg, B. (2014). The case for blended learning. Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/ssf-cci/sscc-intro-blended-learning/sscc-overview-blended-learning/v/sscc-blended-thecase

Horn, M., & Greenberg, B. (2014). The station rotation model. Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/ssf-cci/sscc-intro-blended-learning/sscc-blended-learning-models/v/sscc-blended-station

Horn, M., & Greenberg, B. (2014). The flex model. Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/ssf-cci/sscc-intro-blended-learning/sscc-blended-learning-models/v/sscc-blended-flex

Horning, M. (2014). Preparing New York State educators for online learning – through online learning. The Councilgram, 3(6), 1–3.

International Association for K-12 Online Learning. (2013). Fast facts about online learning. Retrieved from https://www.inacol.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/fun-facts-about-online-learning.pdf

Khan Academy. (2014). Redesigning the school day at KIPP LA using a station rotation model bonita. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aGB3pjC7r4&feature=youtu.be

Khan Academy. (2014). Redesigning the school day at Summit Public Schools using a flex model bonita. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQKqIPi9Ubw&feature=youtu.be

Nguyen., V. (2015). A la carte model. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuXd0L0DZC8&feature=youtu.be

Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2011). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning: An annual review of policy and practice. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535912.pdf

[edit | edit source]

Blended Learning Universe – https://www.blendedlearning.org

Clayton Christensen Institute – https://www.christenseninstitute.org

iNACOL – https://www.inacol.org

Kahn Academy Blended Learning Series – https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/ssf-cci/sscc-intro-blended-learning/sscc-overview-blended-learning/v/sscc-blended-thecase

The Learning Accelerator – https://learningaccelerator.org or – https://learningaccelerator.orgccelerator.org

Active Learning Classroom

[edit | edit source]

What is Active Learning Classroom?

[edit | edit source]

Active Learning Classroom (ALC) is a “student-centered, technology-rich learning environment” typically consisting of tables interfaced for technology, a projection and display system, and wall-mounted erasable writing surfaces (University of Minnesota, n.d.). ALC have been designed to “maximize active, collaborative learning and multimodal teaching, in contrast with traditional lecture-style classrooms” (Yale University, n.d.). ALC is effectively synonymous with a “flexible”, “smart”, “maker-space”, “prototype”, or “sandbox” classroom. ALC is ideal for project-based learning (PBL) activities.

Why is Active Learning Classroom a trend?

[edit | edit source]

ALCs are purposefully designed to encourage active learning among students. Active learning had no singular definition until Bonwell and Eison (1991) proposed that it "involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing" (p. 19). Active learning made thinking visible for teachers and students (Medina, 2017). The idea of active learning has become so noteworthy that the Obama Administration recognized October 25, 2016 as Active Learning Day with an emphasis on STEM education.

ALCs have been considered a trend in higher education because a need for course and classroom redesign resulted from traditional lecturing giving way to learning through collaboration and coaching (Kim, 2018). ALCs have been shown to produce less positional discrimination for students than traditional classroom layouts that tend to motivate only high achieving students to succeed (Park and Choi, 2014). A metanalysis of undergraduate STEM education showed that active learning was more effective at increasing student performance than traditional lecturing (Freeman, Eddy, McDonough, Smith, Okoroafor, Jordt, and Wenderoth, 2013).

If collaboration and information sharing proliferate across all levels of education and adoption of PBL increases, it should be anticipated that ALC will become more common in the K-12 setting. Therefore K-12 can look to higher education for guidance on best practices for ALC. Technology trends such as 1:1 computing, BYOD, e-books, and online course management systems continue to be introduced and adopted in K-12 making the technology component of ALC more available to students. Presently there are an increasing number of K-12 schools engaged in reconfiguring classroom layouts to be consistent with ALC.

Implementation of Active Learning Classroom in the K-12 Setting

[edit | edit source]

ALC generically model the layout and function of a present-day startup company. University of Minnesota was an early innovator of the ALC in United States higher education. Some institutions incorporate aesthetic and individualistic elements into the design of ALC (for example, UC Berkeley or Mosaic Initiative at Indiana University). Institutions in other countries are also adopting ALC including McGill University (Canada) and Istituto Istruzione Superiore Luca Pacioli Crema (Italy).

Components of a typical ALC

[edit | edit source]
  • Technology
    • Visual and audio projection system including large, centralized display screen(s), multiple smaller displays screens, cameras, microphones, and technology control panels
    • Computers
    • Tablets
    • Cell phones
    • Tools needed to accomplish specific learning objectives (VR, robotics, software, simulators, etc.)
    • Wireless or wired information technology network
    • Numerous accessible electrical outlets
  • Configurable, comfortable furniture and storage solutions
  • Areas for vertical and horizontal non-digital collaboration such as fixed or mobile whiteboards and tables or obstruction-free floorspace

K-12 Examples

[edit | edit source]

In K-12 the consistency in ALC design is mostly to create a learning space that promotes flexibility, collaboration, and discovery. The inclusion of technology in K-12 ALC is highly dependent on educational needs and resources. Some examples of K-12 ALC are:

Key issues with Active Learning Classroom

[edit | edit source]

Careful implementation of ALC considers all aspects of concept, planning, design, construction, use, and maintenance:

  • Risk of regression to passivity: ALC can be created by constructing a new classroom or renovating an existing classroom; the quality and performance of the product is dependent on the available resources and how the ALC is used by the teacher and students
  • Obsolescence and Economics: Technology must remain current and of sufficient quantity
  • Holistic in nature: Incidental, unintended, and unforeseen impacts to the physical classroom space can be caused when upgrades are necessary which may add to life-cycle costs; for example, wireless and mobile devices are easier and less disruptive to replace but don’t usually have the processing power and storage capacity that stationary devices have
  • Social inclusion: Choices and variety are a necessity or certain students can become distracted or isolated if constraints are imposed by the ALC
  • Cultural shock: K-12 students may become accustomed to a particular classroom environment and then need to adapt to differences in higher education if the implementation of ALC is inconsistent at different levels of education
[edit | edit source]

References

[edit | edit source]

Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ERIC Clearinghouse Products. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences of the United States of America. 111(23), 8410-8415. Retrieved from http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/111/23/8410.full.pdf

Handelsman, J., & Brown, Q. (2016, October 25). Active learning day in America. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/10/25/active-learning-day-america

Kim, J., (2018, January 3). An alternative list of 7 trends for 2018. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/technology-and-learning/alternative-list-7-trends-2018

Medina, M. S. (2017). Making students’ thinking visible during active learning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(3), 3-41A,41B,41C. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/1928619098

Park, E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: Traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68(5), 749-771. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org./10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0

University of Minnesota. (n.d.). Active learning classrooms. Retrieved from https://cei.umn.edu/support-services/tutorials/active-learning-classrooms

Yale University. (n.d.). Active learning classrooms. Retrieved from https://ctl.yale.edu/faculty-resources/managing-classroom/active-learning-classrooms

[edit | edit source]

Frydenberg, M. (2013). Creating a collaborative learning community in the CIS sandbox. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 10(1), 49-62. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17415651311326446

Gwo-Dong, C., Chi-Kuo, C., Nurkhamid, & Liu, T. (2012). When a classroom is not just a classroom: Building digital playgrounds in the classroom. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1) Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/1288341650

Evidence Based Practice

[edit | edit source]

What is Evidence-Based Practice?

[edit | edit source]

Evidence based practice (EBP) “requires the integration of the best research evidence with our clinical expertise and our patient’s unique values and circumstances” (Straus, Richardson, Glasziou, & Haynes, 2005, p. 1). This is contrary to methods where decisions are made solely on the fact that it has been done in the past. An evidence-based approach encourages you to examine the facts from reliable research before moving forward. It allows the clinician to base decisions on proof.

In health care fields, the term is often also referred to as evidence-based medicine (EBM). Both EBP and EBM involves “formulating clinical questions, finding evidence in the medical literature that addresses the questions, critically appraising the evidence, and applying the evidence to specific patients” (Reiser, 2017, p. 170).

Why is Evidence-Based Practice a Current Trend?

[edit | edit source]

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is quickly becoming the standard in various health care fields. It is important for students to understand what EBP is, why it is important, and how to apply it in real-world situations. Applying this method to a curriculum helps students to become better at consulting current information sources with the purpose of keeping current in actual practice (Reiser, 2017).

Thanks to advances in technology, medical clinicians now have access to a wealth of information from recent research studies. The research field has made incredible discoveries in the past few decades that have illuminated new understandings in medical knowledge. Most importantly, students can now access databases more easily than in the past. EBP is all about evaluating the current information. The first step in EBP is becoming familiar with the best sources for the latest research. With a strong understanding of research, one can engage in EBP by utilizing various technologies, especially medical databases, to stay current.

Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice in Educational Settings

[edit | edit source]

It is important for educational technology leaders to promote the use of evidence-based practice as a form of problem-based learning (PBL). According to Davis (2009), “PBL, developed in the field of medicine, is an instructional method in which carefully crafted open-ended problems are introduced at the beginning of the instructional cycle and are used to provide the context and motivation for the learning that follows” (p. 217). Instead of teaching information, the students engage in self-directed learning through analyzing real-world problems (Davis, 2009). Instructors need to be flexible and must be able to guide the students through the facts, laws, principles, theories, etc. that are pertinent to the problem (Davis, 2009).

There are three modes of teaching EBP as suggested by Straus, Richardson, Glasziou, & Haynes (2005, p. 200):

(1) Role-Modeling EBP:

  • Learners see evidence as part of good patient care.
  • Teaching by example: “actions speak louder than words”.
  • Learners see us use judgement in integrating evidence into decisions.

(2) Teaching Clinical Medicine with Evidence:

  • Learners see evidence as part of good clinical learning.
  • Teaching by weaving: evidence is taught along with other knowledge.
  • Learners see us use judgement in integrating evidence with other knowledge.

(3) Teaching Specific EBP Skills:

  • Learners learn how to understand evidence and use it wisely.
  • Teaching by coaching: learners get explicitly coached as they develop.
  • Learners see us use judgement as we carry out the five steps with them (asking, searching, appraising, applying, and evaluating).

Whichever mode is use, “it is important that higher institutions always strive for the most effective approach to teaching students the knowledge and skills required for EBP, so that commencing clinical practice they can confidently incorporate research evidence into their clinical decision-making” (Kyriakoulis, et. al., 2016, p. 34).

Key Issues Surrounding Evidence-Based Practice

[edit | edit source]

Individual professionals need to be informed, motivated and perhaps trained to incorporate the latest evidence into their daily work. The largest barrier to EBP, according to Baig, Sayedalamin, Almouteri, Algarni, and Allam (2016), is that “knowledge and practice are not up to the mark” (p. 53). The transfer of evidence into practice is often restricted. This is often due to the business of practices, lack of resources, and/or lack of time to search and read the literature (Baig, Sayedalamin, Almouteri, Algarni, & Allam, 2016). Other barriers exist to include: individual characteristics, organizational structure, the nature of research information, and the healthcare environment (Malik, McKenna, & Plummer, 2016).

Ultimately, professionals need to put in the extra effort to decrease the widening gap between best practice and actual clinical care. Malik, McKenna, and Plummer (2016) note that a recurrent theme in the literature is that “EBP is perceived as a huge task” and practitioners “are reluctant to embrace it when there is lack of support from the organization or available mentoring” (p. 545).

[edit | edit source]

References:

Davis, B. G. (2009). Tools for teaching. Second ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-bass.

Baig, M., Sayedalamin, Z., Almouteri, O., Algarni, M., & Allam, H. (2016). Perceptions, perceived barriers and practices of physicians towards evidence-based medicine. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 32(1), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.321.8841

Kyriakoulis, K., Patelarou, A., Laliotis, A., Wan, A. C., Matalliotakis, M., Tsiou, C., & Patelarou, E. (2016). Educational strategies for teaching evidence-based practice to undergraduate health students: systematic review. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 13, 34. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2016.13.34

Malik, G., McKenna, L., & Plummer, V. (2016). Facilitators and barriers to evidence-based practice: perceptions of nurse educators, clinical coaches and nurse specialists from a descriptive study. Contemporary Nurse, 52(5), 544–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/10376178.2016.1188017

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2017). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. New York: Pearson.

Straus, S. E., Richardson, W. S., Glasziou, P., & Haynes, R. B. (2005). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. Third ed. New York, NY: Elsevier.

VanLunen, B. L., Hankemeier, D. A., Welch, C.E. (2015). Evidence-guided practice: A framework for clinical decision making in athletic training. Thorofare, NJ: Slack.

[edit | edit source]

Mobile Robotic Telepresence

[edit | edit source]

What is Mobile Robotic Telepresence

[edit | edit source]

Mobile Robotic Telepresence (MRT), sometimes known simply as Telepresence, in the classroom is the use of robotics to allow students to be present in their classroom via technology when they are unable to be there in person. This is most commonly used for students who are not able to attend school for health reasons, although other uses may include distance to school or the ability to take a class that is not offered in their home school. In general, the student controls a robot equipped with a camera, a screen, and microphones to navigate the school in much the same way as their peers. They have the ability to attend class as well as to be present for the social interactions of a typical day.

Why is Mobile Robotic Telepresence a current trend?

[edit | edit source]

As technology improves, Telepresence is becoming more feasible as a solution for students who are not able to be present in their classroom. The student can control the MRT robot from wherever they are, including their home, doctor’s office, or hospital. The MRT robot can generally be controlled with a computer, tablet, and sometimes even a smartphone. The advent of easier and smaller methods of controlling the robot improves the ability of younger children or people with disability to use them. Similarly, the robots themselves are becoming more reliable and easier to fit into the day to day life in the classroom. As MRT becomes easier to use, schools may become more open to students using it for reasons of distance, to attend classes not offered in their home school, or for other reasons beyond illness. In any case, the use for students who are otherwise unable to attend school due to illness is one that is becoming more and more popular.

Implementation of Mobile Robotic Telepresence in the K-12 environment

[edit | edit source]

Numerous schools are allowing students with chronic illnesses to utilize MRT to attend school with their peers. Here are a few examples from around the country:

Key Issues of Mobile Robotic Telepresence

[edit | edit source]
  • Cost of MRT system – while costs are going down, the equipment and related technology costs approximately $6000 (Bloss, 2011)
  • Buy-in from all stakeholders – in particular, the school has to be willing to participate in the program, the teacher has to be willing to have the device in the classroom, and the parents have to be able to provide in-home supervision for the student (Newheart, Warschauer, & Sender, 2016)
  • Security concerns of utilizing the internet connected device between the home and school, including the idea of a camera being on in the classroom all day
  • Connectivity concerns – if there is an internet outage the student cannot attend school. Inadequate broadband may hinder the student from fully utilizing this technology, leading to concerns surrounding attendance policies and ability to compete coursework.
  • Acceptance of robot in the classroom as a stand in for the student. Research indicates there are both positive and negatives to this issue. Some students embrace the use of this technology in their classrooms, but in some cases children using it were bullied in social situations like lunch (Newheart, Warschauer, & Sender, 2016)
  • Social interactions via the MRT (lunch, special classes, etc.) provide beneficial opportunities for students who are relatively isolated to interact with their peers.
  • Students are able to keep up their coursework and social relationships during a time that could otherwise be quite isolating. Being sick does not leave them struggling to catch up on their school work.
[edit | edit source]

Beeman, R. Y. & Henderson, C. J. (2012). Video-conferencing technology brings a homebound middle grades student to the classroom. Middle School Journal, 43(5), 26-33. Accessed from: https://www.proquest.com/docview/1282258742

Bloss, R. (2011). High school student goes to class robotically. Industrial Robot: An International Journal 38(5), 465-468. doi: 10.1108/01439911111154027.

Maor, D. & Mitchem, K. J. (2015). Can technologies make a difference for hospitalized youth: Findings from research. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 31, 690-705. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12112.

Meyer. B. (2015). Learning through telepresence with iPads: placing schools in local/global communities. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 12(4), 270-284. doi: 10.1108/ISTE-09-2015-0027.

Newhart, V. A., Warschauer, M., & Sender, L. S. (2016). Virtual inclusion via telepresence robots in the classroom: An exploratory case study. The International Journal of Technologies in Learning, 23(4). Accessed from: https://www.digitallearninglab.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/A-FINAL-COPY.pdf

Soares, N., Kay, J. C., & Craven, G. (2017). Mobile robotic telepresence solutions for the education of hospitalized children. Perspectives in Health Information Management, 14(1e). Accessed from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5653953/.

[edit | edit source]

Flipping the Language Learning Classroom

[edit | edit source]

The flipped classroom is a current trend in technology application in academia that is gaining momentum. The most basic structure of a flipped classroom is using a learning management system to deliver instruction and content outside of class, so that time together between educator and learner can be maximized by engaging in activities that practice skills and support construction of knowledge. Originating at the university level, its application has become increasingly popular at the K-12 level (Muldrow, 2013). While there is also growing interest and research into the use of a flipped classroom approach in language learning, there are unique aspects of the discipline that warrant further consideration before promoting the approach (Basal, 2015; Soliman, 2016).

Description of the Trend

[edit | edit source]

Flipped instruction is an approach to learning where instruction occurs outside of the classroom and practice is done face-to-face, flipping the traditional structure of classroom-delivered instruction with afterschool practice, usually in the form of homework (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). In general, it involves the digital delivery of content through lectures and presentations to students, so material can be viewed on their own time (Kahn, 2011). Basic follow-up communication can occur digitally as well as via email, discussion boards, or other electronic means. When students return to class, time with the instructor and peers is spent in application, practice, and assessment of already-taught skills. In a flipped language classroom, content is also delivered electronically. Lessons can include grammatical rules, pronunciation, and culture. Beyond videos, there exist also a growing number of applications that design exercises that permit more individualized progression based on the fluency level and skill strength of a student in the target language. Presentation materials might come from professional outlets, teacher creations, or even student productions (Engin, 2014). In a language learning classroom, time in the classroom can be used for constructing meaning, solving problems, and maximizing discussion opportunities in the target language (Evseeva & Solozhenko, 2015). Regardless of the materials used or the application of class time, flipping a classroom creates a shift in the teacher-student transaction from one of directed learning to supported investigation (Al-Harbi & Alshumaimeri, 2016).

Rationale

[edit | edit source]

Flipping a classroom can afford several advantages for language learning. Content is available on student-time, so students can view, review, and move through material at their own pace (Soliman, 2016). This is especially helpful for remediation or for students who miss classroom time. Basic-level tasks can also be presented in advance, so students have time to practice concepts in a low-risk environment before entering the public space of a classroom and being asked to perform in front of peers (Muldrow, 2013). This creates a point-of-need system of delivery whereby students can exercise a degree of control over and ownership of the learning process (Cunningham, 2016). For language learning, students may be more willing to grow their own level of language acquisition beyond the curriculum if the means of learning are at their disposal. Activities outside of the classroom do not have to and should not be unidirectional. Learning management systems can provide students production opportunities that extend beyond the textbook or the class time slot. Follow-up practice and feedback can occur digitally in the form of online discussions, chats, videos, and forums. There are benefits to providing students opportunities to develop writing and speaking skills in digital environments that may be more like environments where they could engage the target language beyond an educational environment.

Implementation in a K-12 Setting

[edit | edit source]

One of the more critical aspects of flipping a classroom in a K-12 setting is the preparation not only of the teacher but of the students as well (Muldrow, 2013). Flipped learning must be modeled and practiced (Moran & Young, 2015). Students must have before, during, and after activities that build continuity, motivation, and accountability, both in behavior and performance (Cunningham, 2016; Soliman, 2016). It also helps to integrate regular reflection to check the pulse of comfort with the structure, degree to technological fluency, and effectiveness of the process, affectively and cognitively. Not all students are comfortable with online learning environment and not all are willing to admit lack of knowledge using technology. Educators must be savvy in designing reflections that sort the differences between content and context challenges. Additionally, teachers must be attuned to concerns over screen time, especially for younger students (Cunningham, 2016). Judicious use of technology can balance time spent in front of a digital device and activities that engage face-to-face interaction. Implementation of a flipped classroom strategy in a K-12 environment can shift the learning process, so that students become “protagonists” in their own learning journey (Chilingaryan & Avereva, 2016). Providing students with learning choices can help them develop higher order thinking and behavioral skills necessary to be successful beyond school. At all levels, students can learn age-appropriate investigation skills combined with collaborative strategies to develop creative approaches to issues and potential solutions to real-world problems (Acedo, 2018). Instead of telling students what to think, flipped classrooms afford strategies to develop a thinking process that builds both confidence and motivation, both essential to successful student-centered learning. It should be noted that more often, schools that implement flipped classroom approaches use computers or depend on students having access to hardware at home. One study suggests that it might be more effective to have students use mobile devices, such as tablets or smartphones (Obari & Lambacher, 2015). Many students have smartphones and often possess a degree of comfort in their use. Tablets tend to offer fewer distraction, as it is more difficult to open multiple windows on a tablet than on a computer. Again, when deciding on the device, schools need to take into consideration access to necessary programs or internet service, availability of hardware, and technical support for their students within the district and at home. === Beyond concerns that affect flipped classroom instruction, there are issues related to foreign language instruction that differ from other content areas in that learning a language requires the acquisition of functional level vocabulary, not just specialized words, in order to carry out focus tasks (Lyddon, 2015). The level of communication skills in a classroom can vary significantly, especially at the early levels of instruction. Added to this, differing cognitive abilities more frequently share the same instructional space, as language classes are less likely to be leveled for ability the way that other core content subjects often are (Evans, 2012). Additionally, languages are generally treated as electives by high schools but considered necessary for college acceptance or employment consideration (Friedman, 2015). This creates mixed signals regarding the value of language learning, which can affect students’ levels of interest and investment in the content (Snow, 2017). The result is the existence of some of the largest academic and cognitive territory to be traversed in a single classroom setting. It is essential that the teacher design instruction that reaches all language, cognitive, and interest levels. Flipping the classroom would seem at first glance to provide an ideal solution to address differentiation of style, ability, and prior knowledge (Chilingaryan & Avereva, 2016). However, because language is about communication and development of linguistic skills that heretofore may not have existed or are present only in limited form, constant feedback and direction are necessary. Consideration of distance between instructor and students is a far more critical matter when the immediacy of interaction is part of the learning process (Basal, 2015). Online learning requires a high degree of motivation on the part of the student. This is compounded by the degree of motivation language learning requires (Suo & Hou, 2017). Teachers must build a library of media that provides variety with a high degree of interest. There also must be activities that hold students accountable for completing the work and which motivate them by seeing success in the feedback such activities can provide (Chilingaryan & Avereva, 2016). The pedagogical shift required of teachers who elect to flip a classroom includes a need for a high degree of both content and technical knowledge. Teachers must consider their student population, administrative support, and time investment (Moran & Young, 2015). There exists a developmental curve in designing and constructing adequate material and activities, both online and in the classroom. Educators must be careful not simply to recreate the traditional classroom structure in an online environment. Effective flipping means that the online activities frontload, review, extend, and support the in-class activities that engage, enliven, practice, and reinforce what was viewed or presented since the last class meeting. Flipping a classroom should do more than move the location of information; it should transform the learning process.

[edit | edit source]

Acedo, M. (2018, Mar. 2). 10 Pros and Cons of a Flipped Classroom. TeachThought. Retrieved from https://www.teachthought.com/learning/10-pros-cons-flipped-classroom/

Al-Harbi, S. S. & Alshumaimeri, Y. A. (2016). The flipped classroom impact on grammar class on EFL Saudi secondary school students’ performances and attitudes. English Language Teaching 9(10), 60-80. doi: 10.5539/elt.v9n10p60 

Basal, A. (2015).  The implementation of a flipped classroom in foreign language teaching.   Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 16(4), 28-37.  Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1092800.pdf

Chilingaryan, K. & Avereva, E. (2016). Methodology of flipped classroom as a learning technology in foreign language teaching. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 237, 1500–1504. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2017.02.236

Cunningham, U. (2016). Language pedagogy and non-transience in the flipped classroom. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning 20(1), 44-58. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1112349.pdf

Engin, M. (2014). Extending the flipped classroom model: Developing second language writing skills through student-created digital videos. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 14(5), 12-26. doi: 10.14434/josotlv14i5.12829

Evans, E. J. (2012, Spring). Managing the foreign language classroom: Reflections from the preservice field and beyond (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3237&context=etd

Evseeva, A. & Solozhenko, A. (2015). Use of flipped classroom technology in language Learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 206, 205-209. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.006

Friedman, A. (2015, May 10). America’s lacking language skills. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/05/filling-americas-language-education-potholes/392876/

Kahn, S. (2011). Let’s use video to reinvent education. [Video file]. TED. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/salman_khan_let_s_use_video_to_reinvent_education/up-next

Lyddon, P. A. (2015). The flipped side of flipped language teaching. In F. Helm, L. Bradley, M. Guarda, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), Critical CALL – Proceedings of the 2015 EUROCALL Conference, Padova, Italy (pp. 381-385). Dublin: Research-publishing.net. doi: 10.14705/rpnet.2015.000362

Moran, C. M. & Young, C. A. (2015). Questions to consider before flipping. The Phi Delta Kappan 97(2), 42-46. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/24578374

Muldrow, K. (2013, Nov.). A new approach to language instruction – Flipping the classroom. The Language Educator. Retrieved from https://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/TLE_pdf/TLE_Nov13_Article.pdf

Obari, H. & Lambacher, S. (2015). Successful EFL teaching using mobile technologies in a flipped classroom. In F. Helm, L. Bradley, M. Guarda, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), Critical CALL – Proceedings of the 2015 EUROCALL Conference, Padova, Italy (pp. 422-428). Dublin: Research-publishing.net. doi: 10.14705/rpnet.2015.000371

Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J. V. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Snow, C. (2017, Aug. 1). The true failure of foreign language instruction. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/the-true-failure-of-foreign-language-instruction-80352

Soliman, N. A. (2016). Teaching English for academic purposes via the flipped learning approach. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 232, 122-129. Retrieved from https://ac.els-cdn.com/S187704281631268X/1-s2.0-S187704281631268X-main.pdf?_tid=eefa685a-0a46-11e8-9909-00000aab0f01&acdnat=1517816220_6ea529364cc94b256a61766de9dd50f2

Suo, J. & Hou, X. (2017). A study on the motivational strategies in college English flipped classroom. English Language Teaching 10(5), 62-67. doi: 10.5539/elt.v10n5p62

[edit | edit source]

Prototype and Makerspace Classrooms

[edit | edit source]

What is a Prototype/Makerspace Classroom?

[edit | edit source]

A prototype classroom is a type of learning environment which encourages learners to focus on engagement. In these environments, teachers hope to increase student achievement by increasing student involvement in various activities that drive instruction.[2][3]

Why are Prototype/Makerspace Classrooms a Trend in Technology?

[edit | edit source]

Prototype classrooms are currently a trend in technology and education because of how they are revolutionizing the way a classroom looks and how information is learned. These classrooms give students the ability to explore different strategies and methods while strengthening critical thinking and collaboration – key components on which the standards of STEM seek to increase.[2][4][5]

Benefits in the Classroom

[edit | edit source]

Prototype classrooms offer a variety of benefits for the educational setting when implemented correctly. In addition to promoting the standards of STEM, students have an open space to collaborate and work together while learning in different and unique ways to which they are previously accustomed.[3][6][7]

  • Makerspace rooms[8]
  • Addresses several standards of STEM
  • Promotes collaboration
  • Promotes inquiry[9]
  • Extends learning
  • Incorporates different learning modalities into curriculum

Key Considerations with Implementation

[edit | edit source]

While Prototype Classrooms have several advantages, there are several considerations that a school should take into account before rushing to incorporate this on a mainstream level. While the list is not exhaustive, districts that focus their efforts on addressing them should expect to see more efficient and effective implementation.[3][6][7]

  • Resources are expensive and required for successful integration
  • Traditional classroom layouts might not be conducive to this learning environment
  • Effective training is necessary for educators to understand how and why this works
  • A revolutionary way of teaching requires support and therefore it is necessary to establish trust and an open line of communication with all stakeholders so everyone understands the benefits[10]
  • Educators need to revolutionize their way of instruction, which can be challenging at any level
  • Time for planning and collaboration between educators
  • Considerations on how these rooms may affect IEPs
  • Proper and continual support for educators
[edit | edit source]
  • https://davidjakesdesigns.com/classroom-makeover-hack-prototype-and-design/
  • https://www.teachthought.com/pedagogy/45-design-thinking-resources-for-educators/
  • http://fcl.eun.org/toolset4
  • http://masterydesign.org/prototype/
  • http://kluberinc.com/prototype-elementary-schools/

References

[edit | edit source]

Computers Science in K-12 Curriculum

[edit | edit source]

What is computer science?

[edit | edit source]

Computer science focus on the theory of computation applications. The understanding of “why” behind computer programs. Computer science uses algorithms and advance mathematics to manipulate and create information.[11]

Why is computer science a current trend?

[edit | edit source]

The drive for computer science is due to workforce development and economics. Students in computers science will benefit in the industry, national, and workforce, therefore, schools must raise skills and find ways to teach curriculum to students.[12] This allows students to set career and future college goals. By offering computer science classes throughout K-12 education empowers students to increase their understanding of the requirements to continue their education in computer science. This will minimize the need for computer scientists in the future.

Implementation of Computer Science in K-12 Setting

[edit | edit source]

As education more towards implanting computer science in classrooms new lessons and curriculum arise[13].

  • As education more towards implanting computer science in classrooms new lessons and curriculum arise.
  • Education of computer science principals would close the gender gap and culture gap in computer science careers
  • Students will be empowered by managing their achievement and course work in the subject of computer science.
  • There are many free resources for teachers to implement computer science principles and for school districts to adopt computer science classes.
  • Decisions on what material to use to implement computer science, such as: Code.org, Codecademy, College Board, Project Lead the Way, etc. Once a decision is made, teachers can decide and organize curriculum or lessons.
  • For computer science integration to work all administration, teachers, and students need work together.
  • Professional development would be required for all teachers and building administrators involved.
  • Course work and applications are immediately engaging for students from K-12.
  • Computational thinking can be taught without computers.

Key Issues with implementation of computer science in a K-12 setting

[edit | edit source]

Several issues to be aware of when considering computer science integration[14]:

  • Lack of computer science material or curriculum for students with disabilities.
  • Assessment of computational thinking and computer science knowledge through “game-like” resources
  • Availability of computers and Internet access.
  • Availability of teachers with prior knowledge or interest.
  • Technological support within the school
  • Time for implementation and/or professional development.
  • Lack of interest in students.
  • Lack of parent support === Related and Recommended Resources for computer science implementation ===
  • www.code.org
  • www.codecademy.com
  • www.girlswhocode.com
  • www.pltw.org
  • https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/apcourse/ap-computer-science-principles
  • www.scratch.com
  • www.alice.org
  • http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/DigitalEducation/2017/05/emerging_research_k-12_computer_science_for_all.html
  • http://www.gettingsmart.com/2012/07/integrating-computer-science-everyday-subjects/
  • www.commonsense.org
  • https://learnit.hoonuit.com/?from_auth=1

Mindful Use Of Technology

[edit | edit source]

What Is Mindful Use Of Technology

[edit | edit source]

There are two components to consider when creating a definition; technology and mindfulness. According to Collins Dictionary (n.d), technology “refers to methods, systems, and devices which are the result of scientific knowledge being used for practical purposes” (para. 1). According to Aaron (2017),: Mindfulness is, in its simplest form, an awareness and total acceptance of the present moment without judgment. This can be an awareness and acceptance of our thoughts, feelings, actions, emotions, sensations or intentions. What are our thoughts right now? What are we feeling? How are we feeling? See it, feel it, sense it but then accept it, allow it, don’t judge it (para. 21). Based on these definitions, mindful use of technology is a technology trend that encourages the individual who is using a technological device to become aware of their present moment. It is awareness of thoughts, feelings, actions, emotions, and sensations. It is the intentional use of the technology. The purpose of being mindful of the use of technology is to not allow oneself to become lost in the technological device but to remain consciously aware.

Why Is The Mindful Use Of Technology A Trend?

[edit | edit source]

There is a need for teachers to consider the mindful use of technology in their classrooms as a part of their professional obligation to support student learning through the use of technology. A first step is understanding, through education, and a next step is to implement supports that can be used to empower students to be mindful when they are engaged with technology. Rushkoff (2012) sums up this critical issue facing educators. :Bulleted list item First, and probably most important, it's because the classroom is the one place where we are supposed to notice things. When we teach literature, we don't just teach the content on the page – we teach the historical context of the writer, the choice of medium and ways in which the medium was used. No book is just a story.

Likewise, no program is just a tool, no website is just information and no social platform is a neutral meeting place. To use any of these unconsciously in the real world is bad enough; to use them unconsciously and thus uncritically in the classroom is even worse.
So the first requirement to using any technology in the classroom is for us to be prepared to talk about it, assess its influence over our interactions and evaluate its role in an ongoing way.
Second, it's our role as educators to judge whether a given piece of technology is really going to enhance our ability to educate. Will it help us engage with our students, or help them engage with each other and the subject more meaningfully? I know that sounds like an easy one, until we consider the very real classrooms I've visited where the very opposite has been true (par. 5-8).

Implementation Of Mindful Use Of Technology In A K-12 Setting

[edit | edit source]

The first step in implementing the mindful use of technology is educating students so that they have an understanding of what mindfulness use of technology is. It is important that students are informed on how not being mindful with technology can be harmful by distracting and undermining learning. Then students need to be empowered with resources that can support their mindful use of technology. This learning can then be used to create classroom norms to which all stakeholders hold each other accountable.

Understanding

[edit | edit source]

Students should be educated on the mindful use of technology. Through research and engaging classroom lessons that use technology, teachers can assign authentic learning activities that are specifically intended to help students understand the pitfalls of using technology without being mindful and the benefits that can be gleaned from using technology with mindfulness.

Support

[edit | edit source]

One of the best approaches teachers can use to supporting their students use of technology is to put guidelines in place on the use of technology and when and how it should be used to support learning. This should be done collaboratively with the students so that they have understanding and ownership. Tech leaders, as an example, put strict limits on the technology use for their own children. Steiner Waldorf Schools do not allow students to use technology in the classroom before the age of 12. Many technology company employees send their children to these schools in both the United Kingdom and California (Flemming, 2015). The American Academy of Pediatrics (2013) discourages any screen time for a student under two years of age and recommends no more than 2 hours a day of entertainment screen time for children. It also recommends that approaches to technology should involve a team approach that encourages using technology, when it is not already in place, such as to promote student learning through online education programs for students.Teams should include students, teachers, parents, administrators and Technology Coordinators (when there is one). Henrique’s (as cited in Stokes, 2015) strategies for mindful use of technology can be adapted to teaching objectives for classrooms.

  • Reclaiming mindfulness by increasing the focus on your intended learning goals and set limits for when you will disengage and then re-engage with technology to meet these goals
  • Old habits of being easily distracted by links, videos and connected topics that are interesting but take you off of your intended learning goals should be broken
  • Replace old habits with new habits by ensuring you have gained all that you can learn from a technology tool (game, application, Website, video etc.), document the learning, bookmark the resource if applicable, determine the intentional next step before re-engaging in the use of technology Ducksworth (2017) offers six practices that can be adapted and taught as a guide for students to use technology mindfully.
  • Center on why you are going to use the chosen technology
  • Examine your beliefs around how much time you will need and re-evaluate once that time has passed
  • Set a learning intention as a result of using the technology.
  • Create a personal learning vision or goal and determine how your technology interface will help you meet it
  • Introduce movement breaks into your technology time
  • Feel gratitude for the gift of learning that the technology brings. Educators can introduce their students to the numerous applications that have been created to promote and maintain mindfulness when using technology. Some of these can be found in the section on recommended resources for mindful use of technology.

Key Issues With Mindful Use Of Technology

[edit | edit source]

Technology is an integral part of the life of a student and will increasingly be integrated into all aspects of daily activities, including learning. Used with mindfulness, it can enhance the learning possibilities. When used without mindfulness, it can distract a student’s learning potential and possibly even derail learning through disruptive habits. There are both positive aspects and obstacles that need to be tackled in the mindful use of technology.

Positive

[edit | edit source]

There is mounting evidence that technology, used mindfully, can enhance the learning experiences in a classroom setting. Tablets and computers and the applications they run offer a learning experience that is inherently highly interactive. This creates a challenge to a child’s cognitive load, creating an optimal opportunity for learning (McEwend & Dubé, 2015, p. 9). Even smartphones, when used mindfully, have been shown to increase learning potential in young adults. This is because the technology encourages students to initiate in learning activities significantly faster than if they had been using a traditional pen and paper approach. Those who use smartphones mindfully have the ability to have higher levels of task engagement, are able to overcome external distractions and prevent disengagement that could be encountered because of the length of the learning session (Sarhandi, Bajnaid & Elyas, 2017).

Obstacles

[edit | edit source]

There is growing evidence that technology, if not used thoughtfully, is actually a distraction to learning. As an example, when laptop computers are used in the classroom, if not implemented intentionally and considerately, they can increase off-task behaviors instead of increased student engagement (Donavan, Green & Hartley, 2010). Dopamine Labs, named after the molecule in our brains that creates desire and pleasure, is a company that writes computer code for applications. Companies are creating applications that are intended to distract users from being purposeful and are intended to prevent the mindful use of technology and their applications. Companies want to hold a person’s attention for as long as possible and then when a distraction breaks that attention, they want to create a desire to reengage with the technology. It creates an experience that students can become lost in (Cooper, 2018). When a person checks their phone, it is like gambling or pulling the lever on a slot machine. Sometimes you get a reward, a text or social media response, and sometimes you do not. The intention is to hijack your attention and create the formation of a habit. This design component can be built into almost any technological device (Harris as cited in Cooper, 2017).

[edit | edit source]
[edit | edit source]

References

[edit | edit source]

Personal Learning Networks

[edit | edit source]

What is a Personal Learning Network?

[edit | edit source]

Personal learning networks are a form of professional development that can be accessed through any device, at any time, to address an abundance of topics that can be tailored to your needs. These networks have been developed as a way for learning to happen across peer groups. Personal learning networks appeal to educators because of their flexibility, range of content, and ease of use. "Self-regulated PD, in which adult learners determine what they want to learn and how they will learn it, is aligned with the theory of andragogy, the science of adult learning" [15]

Why are Personal Learning Networks a Current Trend?

[edit | edit source]

They provide an opportunity to pull ideas and resources from PLN’s through chat forums, videos, and specific content groups. "They offer peer-to-peer learning with participants who engage in various ways according to their interests, skills, expertise, and needs."[16] Through personal learning networks, educators can receive personalized content through self-direction. Educators have access to an entire network of peers, which they have selected, and can use their knowledge and resources to support, advise, and provide feedback to strengthen the educational field.

Implementation of a Personal Learning Network in the K-12 Setting

[edit | edit source]
  • Connect with educational professionals whose beliefs align with your values or desired new content. i.e. join their organizations, email lists, follow them on social media,
  • Find personal niche groups that meet your personal needs i.e Twitter niche groups, Pinterest, private communities
  • Find personal learning community colleagues and mentors
  • Build your foundation of support, expand your vision/perspective
  • You make the choices: what tools you use, who you connect with, how you want to learn, and when you want to learn.

    • Key Issues with Personal Learning Networks

    [edit | edit source]
    • Fear Transparency of ideas, fear of failure and judgement by colleagues within the learning community
    • Time Management of daily educator tasks while engaging in PLN’s
    • Technology Concern Lack of knowledge on how PLN’s work, get connected, or are maintained
    [edit | edit source]

    Antoine van den Beemt, Evelien Ketelaar, Isabelle Diepstraten & Maarten de Laat (2018) Teachers’ motives for learning in networks: costs, rewards and community interest, Educational Research, 60:1, 31-46, DOI: 10.1080/00131881.2018.1426391 Cho, V. (2016). Administrators' professional learning via twitter. Journal of Educational Administration, 54(3), 340-356. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1780799036 Harding, A., & Engelbrecht, J. (2015). Personal learning network clusters: A comparison between mathematics and computer science students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 173-184. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1707773419

    [edit | edit source]

    References

    [edit | edit source]

    Digital Citizenship

    [edit | edit source]

    What is Digital Citizenship?

    [edit | edit source]

    Digital Citizenship focuses on preparing “students to safely navigate the digital world and take advantage of the wealth of information that defines life online” (Tan, 2011, p.30). A Common Sense Media White Paper (2011) explained digital citizenship involves using technology competently, which includes creating, researching and communicating with the tools afforded to the consumer. Individuals need to learn how to make safe and appropriate choices while interacting online.

    Why is Digital Citizenship a Current Trend in Education?

    [edit | edit source]

    Educators have now incorporated digital citizenship into the curriculum to ensure students have an understanding of the digital world. The one that many schools defer to is digital communication due to the trend of social media. Social media is often used as a topic of discussion when teaching the responsibilities of digital citizenship. Social media has been an ongoing trend for some time; and it will continue due to the social media applications that continue to be developed each day. Vanessa Monterosa (2015) mentions that according to Lenhart et al. (2010), over 90 percent of teenagers use social media daily. Snap chat, Instagram, and Facebook are some of the most common social media applications used by teenagers. By teaching students how to make well informed decisions in the digital world, they will have more positive outcomes.

    Due to the extensive implementation of technology in schools; students need to have an understanding of what it means to use technology correctly. Vanessa Monterosa (2015) states, “By harnessing social media as a tool for teaching and learning, we help students develop a positive digital footprint and engage in positive practices online. This also has implications for college and career success” (p.31). Due to the high percentage of students using social media platforms, it is necessary for teachers and administrators to have an understanding of social media themselves.

    Incorporating knowledge of digital communication in social media platforms can help prevent many obstacles from occurring. Cyber bullying has been an ongoing issue across the nation and taking the initiative to teach students about digital communication will help pave the way to defer that from occurring. Too often, students lack the understanding of who can view their content online. Once information is put out on the internet, it is impossible to erase permanently. Monterosa (2015) explains that research has shown many students have lost their jobs or have been denied from colleges due to the information they have put on social media. This strengthens the rationale for educating students early on of the repercussions of negative digital communication.

    Implementation of Digital Citizenship in K-12 Settings

    [edit | edit source]

    Three Stages of Implementing Digital Citizenship: Godfrey (2016) includes the three stages of implementing digital literacy in the classroom which was proposed by Ribble (2015):

    Stage One: Ask the students to reflect on their technology use at both school and home. Have the students determine if they use it appropriately.

    Stage Two: This involves guided practice to ensure the students understand the guidelines to assist them in determining what is appropriate in technology.

    Stage Three: The teachers need to model and demonstrate appropriate digital citizenship habits in their own lives and in front of students.

    Digital Citizenship Week: Monterosa (2015) explained that in March 2013, the Los Angeles Unified School District had a “Digital Citizenship Week.” They partnered up with Common Sense Education which focuses on technology education. This week proved to be successful because it involved having students engaged in various activities to teach them how to be safe online.

    Digital Portfolio: Boyd (2014) mentions teachers can teach students how to create a portfolio of their school projects which can help foster an understanding of a positive digital footprint.

    Diverse Team for Social Media Standards: Monterosa (2015) states that by creating a diverse team of students and teachers that create standards and guidelines for social media will help others make appropriate decisions online outside of school.

    Key Issues

    [edit | edit source]

    There are nine elements of digital citizenship; all of which can be defined as “norms of appropriate, responsible behavior with regard to technology use” (Tan, 2011, p.31). These include, “digital access, digital commerce, digital communication, digital literacy, digital etiquette, digital law, digital rights and responsibilities, digital health and wellness, and digital security” (Tan, 2011, p.30).

    Digital Access: This involves a full participation in the digital society (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Commerce: This involves the buying and selling of items online (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Communication: This involves the basics of technology and its use (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Literacy: This incorporates the basic use of technology (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Etiquette: This includes following the electronic standards of conduct (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Law: It is the electronic responsibility of actions and deeds (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Rights and Responsibilities: This provides the freedoms for the digital world (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Health and Wellness: This involves the physical and psychological well-being of the individual on the digital platform (Ribble, 2015)

    Digital Security: This includes the electronic precautions to ensure the safety of digital citizens (Ribble, 2015)

    [edit | edit source]

    Digital Citizenship Skills: http://www.p21.org/news-events/p21blog/2172-digital-literacy-a-the-importance-of-the-4-cs-in-a-global-context

    [edit | edit source]

    Godfrey, R. V. (2016). Digital citizenship: Paving the way for family and consumer sciences. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 108(2), 18-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.14307/JFCS108.2.18 Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1819408926

    ISMAN, A., & GUNGOREN, O. C. A. N. A. N. (2014). Digital citizenship. TOJET : The 

            Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1) Retrieved from
        https://www.proquest.com/docview/1519878257

    Monterosa, V. (2015). DEVELOPING DIGITAL CITIZENS. Leadership, 44(3), 30-32. 

             Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/1645566359

    Ribble, M. (2015). Nine elements all students should know. In Digital citizenship in schools (3rd 

             ed.), pp. 24-–54. Arlington, VA: International Society for Technology in Education.

    Tan, T. (2011). Educating digital citizens. Leadership, 41(1), 30-32. Retrieved from 

             https://www.proquest.com/docview/888584897
    1. ↑ Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.). New York: Pearson.
    2. ↑ a b Smay, D., & Walker, C. (2015). Makerspaces: A creative approach to education. Teacher Librarian, 42(4), 39-43. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1774311185
    3. ↑ a b c Kurti, R. S., Kurti, D., & Fleming, L. (2014). Practical implementation of an educational makerspace. Teacher Librarian, 42(2), 20-24. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1637635965
    4. ↑ Okpala, H. N. (2016). Making a makerspace case for academic libraries in nigeria.New Library World, 117(9), 568-586. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1830312066
    5. ↑ Kurti, S. (2015). Ordinary educators exploring the extraordinary makerspace blast off! Teacher Librarian, 42(3), 54-55. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1774311187
    6. ↑ a b Kurti, R. S., Kurti, D., & Fleming, L. (2014). The environment and tools of great educational makerspaces. Teacher Librarian, 42(1), 8-12. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1609564098
    7. ↑ a b Oliver, K. M. (2016). Professional development considerations for makerspace leaders, part two: Addressing "how?". TechTrends, 60(3), 211-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0050-7
    8. ↑ Monte, L. D., Elam, J., & Fyfe, P. (2016). Remaking teaching: Prototyping new technologies for the classroom. NCSU Libraries. Retrieved from https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/stories/remaking-teaching-prototyping-new-technologies-classroom
    9. ↑ Miller, R. H. (2016). Prototype classroom focuses on student engagement. WSU Insider. Retrieved from https://news.wsu.edu/2016/02/11/prototype-classroom-focuses-on-student-engagement/
    10. ↑ Taylor, D. (2016). Prototype classroom combines technology and new techniques. Tuscalosanews.com. Retrieved from Monte, L. D., Elam, J., & Fyfe, P. (2016). Remaking teaching: Prototyping new technologies for the classroom. NCSU Libraries. Retrieved from https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/stories/remaking-teaching-prototyping-new-technologies-classroom
    11. ↑ www.hamiltonproject.org
    12. ↑ Reed, D. (2011). A balanced introduction to computer science. Pearson.
    13. ↑ Schneider, G. M., & Gersting, J. L. (2013). Invitation to computer science. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
    14. ↑ Iwona Miliszewska , Gayle Barker, Fiona Henderson, Ewa Sztendur Journal of Information Technology Education: Research Volume 5, 2006, p. 107-120 https://doi.org/10.28945/237
    15. ↑ Moreillon, J. (2016). Building your personal learning network (PLN): 21st-century school librarians seek self- regulated professional development online.Knowledge Quest, 44(3), 64-69. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview//1755881068
    16. ↑ Trust, T., Krutka, D.G., & Carpenter, J.P (2016). Together we are better: professional learning networks for teachers. Science Direct, 15. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036013151630135X
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Trends_and_Innovations_for_K-12_Ed_Tech_Leaders/Part_II&oldid=4410799"