Mar
12
MIT – offers up course material online
March 12, 2012 | instruction, learning, technology | Leave a Comment
MIT will make the MITx open learning software available free of cost, so that others — whether other universities or different educational institutions, such as K-12 school systems — can leverage the same software for their online education offerings
related link: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/mitx-education-initiative-1219.html
I read about this back in November 2011, and followed up today as they planned to have a beta version in the Spring of 2012. See: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/mitx-faq-1219
This is clearly the direction online learning is being taken. Course content, materials, etc. are being made open to all for free access. Some schools might argue that their material is private, accessible only to those who pay tuition fees. What they’re missing is that putting the material online is merely a resource, the instruction, assessment, interaction, and application that goes into learning still has to happen.
Yet by offering the material up, it means enabling the content to be better acquired globally. To quote the above article, President Hockfield called this “a transformative initiative for MIT and for online learning worldwide.”
Nov
19
Tech Help with Colleagues – a great experience
November 19, 2011 | technology | 1 Comment
Loving Helping People
If you asked a group of technology specialists how to best help people who are reluctant users of technology, what do you think they’d say? Well, I recently read a blog post listing the top ten tips for helping out a “tech-reluctant” colleague. You can see the full post here, and I’ve listed the ten ideas:
(1) Have them use tech for personal stuff first.
(2) Show the specific benefits to them
(3) Start with small steps
(4) Pair with a co-worker
(5) Let students lead the way
(6) Give paid leave time for training
(7) Offer continuous support – follow-up
(8) Have fun events
(9) Know that tech can be intimidating
(10) Make sure it all works – good tech infrastructure
I love all of these ideas, and picked up a few tips I’m eager to try. Though cooking breakfast for people might be a stretch, under #8, someone also suggested a speed-dating type exercise at a staff meeting. Depending on the number of faculty, this could be a very quick and fun way for people to share. For 30 seconds, you “date” someone who shares with you a tech-idea/resource they have used.
As I looked at the list of 10 Things, however, I felt something was missing. It’s probably assumed, and therefore not listed, but to me it’s the most important tip. So I’d like to add a #11, and promote it to first place: Love helping people with technology.
(11) Love Helping People With Tech.
Whatever the approach I use, I’ve found that what people appreciate the most when I help them out is that they know I’m genuinely happy to help them. This is shown in action. I don’t say, “I’m really happy to help you out with this…” Instead I want to achieve mutual feelings of respect and accomplishment. I feel like I’ve been a successful support person when there’s mutual feelings of respect and accomplishment. Here’s an overview of a recent help session:
Judy loves to teach and help kids, and she’s a dynamic teacher, but she’s sometimes frustrated with technology or might prefer to just “do it on paper” because it’s easier. In this case she’s not sure where to start. So she sends me an email asking how to use tech for student peer-review of work.
I begin by emailing back as soon as I can (about 40 minutes later) saying “Great…when’s a good time to come and see you?” We work out our schedules and the next day sit down together in her room. I feel It’s always best to go to the person’s main work-space or office. They’ll feel more comfortable and “at home”.
I begin by telling Judy I think her lesson idea is perfect for some tech application, and I ask her to describe a little more about what she wants the kids to learn. In the end, she says, the kids should have a ton of feedback and come away with three specific improvements to make to their writing.
We talk through several ideas, like using a moodle activity, or a wiki, or an online forum. Judy has heard of all of these things, and I start to understand that it’s not so much a reluctance to use tech that she has, but being overwhelmed with the various options and how they work. In the end, we realize together that google docs offers the most elegant solution in this situation. Then we work together to build the form and spreadsheet, and then use google sites to make it all visible for the students. Judy can see how easy it is to do, and she tries it out herself with me watching. She takes notes, and later I will email her a step-by-step of what we did, so she has that for the next time.
In the end, she’s really happy with what we created, and there’s a feeling of success/accomplishment we both walk away with. Judy thanks me a lot for the help, and I feel really good about the session and thank her too. I also mention that I’ll follow up next week, after the activity, to see how it went and talk through ideas for next time.
This is what #11 is all about. Feelings of mutual respect, success, and accomplishment. When this happens, fears and worries about tech integration vanish and it is empowering.
image found at: http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/59/51/595137_ca89e33e.jpg
Licensed under Creative Commons
see – http://www.geograph.org.uk/help/terms
Oct
24
Reading – screens vs. paper
October 24, 2011 | instruction, learning, reading, technology | Leave a Comment
A recently published study suggests that reading off paper is better than reading off screens (see: http://northwardho.blogspot.com/2011/10/mri-studies-show-reading-on-paper.html ).
There are some important questions that need to be answered to understand this more:
- the study was based on MRI imaging, not actual comprehension
- the study featured undergraduates
- not clear what type of reading was being done
- what about when instruction is factored in?
- does this mean there’s a need to teach comprehension off screen reading as a distinct skill?
- is motivation a factor here?
As the article states, more investigation into this is required, and this is a topic to watch as information develops.
image source and licence (creatice commons): http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Amazon_Kindle_3.JPG/220px-Amazon_Kindle_3.JPG
Sep
15
Writing Workshops – a la Lucy Calkins, and Carl Anderson – conferring with students
September 15, 2011 | instruction, writing | Leave a Comment
Lucy Calkins – Teacher’s College Columbia University
- 3 things kids need in writing: choice, feedback on their writing, time to write
Daily Writing Workshops:
- 10 minute mini lesson on a targeted writing skill/technique, with sample textx you bring in
- 20 minutes of writing by students
- 10 minutes partner time
Sample Mini Lesson: TARGET - Memoir Planing
(1) Share/Model (10 mins)
- as the teacher, you do it….you plan out a piece in front of them, creating notes or whatever, kids sit and watch, no questions, they are just following along with you. The key part of the planning is to get to the “so what” – or what Calkins is calling “the issue” – why are you writing this?
(2) Kids do it (20 mins.)- now the kid does it, they do what you just did. This is done alone. Teacher circulates and talks.
(3) Kids Partner Share (10 mins) – one kid reads their piece out loud to the other, the other offers praise and also some ideas.
———————–
Carl Anderson – conferring with students about their writing
(1) Basically, the idea is to sit down with a kid and interview them about what they are writing about. Ask them questions in order to come to understand the “so what” of their writing.
(2) Look at the writing – quickly zero in on some feedback to give, share a model text in this process,
(3) Then coach them on the editing they need to do to apply the feedback, help them through it as a start.
Apr
17
Eight Hours of Sleep a Night is Proven Optimal
April 17, 2011 | learning | Leave a Comment
The New York Times has published this article about a research study on sleep: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sleep-t.html
In Summary:
- 8 hours per night is optimal for 90% of people
- less than 8 hours, cognitive performance drops (sustained attention)
- you can’t have “make-up” sleep – it doesn’t work that way (another study is in the works on this)
- more than 8 hours doesn’t show any benefits
- this study done on adults (would like to know about children)
- sleep deprived people tend to think they are still performing well, when they are not
- previous studies didn’t control for people taking counter-measures (day naps, coffee, etc.)
- counter-measures don’t help much, and none at all after time
- some people see a performance drop the very next day, for others it might take a few days
Feb
2
Memory – pen and pencil vs. keyboards
February 2, 2011 | learning | Leave a Comment
A recent study at the University of Stavanger, looks at the role of hepatic feedback in memory. 
When we use a pen or pencil, there is a sensorimotor experience, the feel of the pencil on the paper, the movement of the fingers and wrist, etc. The study found that when people learn the letters of a new alphabet, they remember them better if they use a pen or pencil to write them, over using a keyboard.
This suggests that when learning letter shapes, a pen or pencil is the way to go. It’s not clear from the research, however, if this also means students will do better on essays, reflections, etc. if they hand-write them over keyboarding. It would appear to be two different processes – one is learning the shape of a letter, the other is expressing thoughts and knowledge on a topic.
I would be interested to read any research on the role of hepatic feedback in fosters conceptual understanding and expression.
article link: http://www.uis.no/news/article29782-50.html
To find out more:
Associate professor Anne Mangen, The National Centre for Reading, Education and Research (the Reading Centre) at the University of Stavanger. Tel.: +47 51 83 32 45, e-mail:anne.mangen@uis.no
Jan
21
Testing beats out studying?
January 21, 2011 | assessment, learning | Leave a Comment
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2011/01/19/science.1199327.abstract
In this study, reported also in the NY Times, researchers discovered that students who are required to take a test shortly after learning some new material, do much better on follow-up tests a week later than students who just “study” material.
As explained in the NY Times, after reading some material, the students:
“Took a retrieval practice test. … then … Without the passage in front of them, … wrote what they remembered in a free-form essay for 10 minutes. Then they reread the passage and took another retrieval practice test.”
The students who used this “retrieval practice test” method (the material is removed and from memory they must recall as much as possible) did 50% better one week later when asked to again recall the information then students who did other tasks, such as concept mapping – which is when you look at the material again and make connections between ideas.
Does this apply to younger (middle schoolers)?
(1) This study was done on college aged students.
(2) The retrieval practice test and the test given one week later were both “tests”. What if one week later they were asked to do concept mapping again, perhaps that group would have done 50% better than those who did the retrieval practice test.
As one of the scientists in the study said, “What we recall becomes more recallable in the future. In a sense you are practicing what you are going to need to do later.” There is, however, the idea that the difficulty of having to recall information right after leads to learning, whereas just re-reading or concept mapping is just playing with the same data in front of you.
To test out this theory, an experiment of my own will be carried out with my students.
(1) Students are already used to weekly vocabulary quizzes using the traditional method of completing an activity with the words and studying, but not using the retrieval practice test method.
(2) With one of the classes I will include a retrieval practice test (RPT) method.
(3) I will then compare the scores on the Friday quiz (4 days later, not a week). It is expected that the average grade in the RPT group will be higher than the previous week’s scores. which would not have had the RPT. Note that both groups will be doing some concept work as well. Some calculating will be needed, however, as the two groups are unlike. It is possible to measure the relative average scores, however, and the distance between them should have lessened.
The RPT Methodoloy
(1) share and explain the words for the week
(2) students then write about the words for 10 minutes
(3) the next day, give them a quick test – ask them to write the 10 words again
(4) record these scores
(5) Four days later give the vocabulary quiz
Results: (first trial)
- Vocab. Quiz One – mean score was 69 % (no retrieval test)
- Vocab Quiz Two - mean score was 80% (with retrieval test)
Jan
18
resonate – the power of presentation
January 18, 2011 | books | Leave a Comment
Professional Reading:
Permalink: http://amzn.com/0470632011
Chapter One
- resonance causes change, the audience feels significantly moved
- resonate – to instill a vibration, movement
- you must tune in to your audience’s frequency in order to resonate with them
- how ideas are presented determines if they gain traction or die out
- presentations are boring when nothing interesting happens, ideas have no contrast
- human connections, presenters are people, and so is the audience – showing and sharing emotion
Oct
12
Tech Tools for the Classroom – Oct-2010
October 12, 2010 | technology | Leave a Comment
Tech Finds:
(1) http://www.visuwords.com/ – similar to visualthesaurus.com, but words are grouped according to relationships such as:
- “is a kind of” —
- “is an instance of”
- “is a member of”,
- “is a part of”,
- “is a substance of”
(2) http://www.sourcemap.org/ – is a platform for researching, optimizing, creating, and sharing supply chains. Shows, for example, how much CO2 is released through the manufacturing and sale of a product, or what the social implications might be.
(3)
Sep
8
Oral Reading – Does it improve reading?
September 8, 2010 | goals | Leave a Comment
Notes form the article
Oral Reading Instruction: The Impact on Student Reading Development
Vol. 29, No. 1 (Jan. – Feb. – Mar., 1994), pp. 40-62
- historically, oral reading was used all the time in classrooms (turn of the century) only to be repalced with silent reading as the main way students know a story
- studies in the 1980′s showed oral reading to futher a student’s reading skill more than silent reading
- but at that time there was little research into what types of oral reading methods worked best
- so this research on the Shared Book Experience (SBE) and Oral Recitation Lesson (ORL) revealed these methods as effective in improving students’ reading growth
SHARED BOOK EXPERICNE (Holdaway):
- very much an elementary ”whole language” approach
- this uses big books that all readers can see
- teacher reads, others join in an read along, all reading out loud at the same time
- development of comprehension skill is indirect thorugh discussion, creating follow-on products, and sharing as astudents construct meaning
- mainly an elementary approach with clear gains for younger readers (primary school) – using this method of reading together and then shared discussions and activites, and repetitition of the content, was shown to have benefits in a grade 7 setting as well
Oral Recitation Lesson (ORL) Hoffman and Crone:
- it’s theoretical framework is the congnitive construction of meaning, but more directly taught than SBE
- the social context in which the reading is done is not considered as important in this approach
- studies, such as one on a grade 4 class, showed this method improved skills such as being able to summarize, but other reading skills stayed the same as compared to basal reading instructional methods
- students are given a certain section the text to practice and be prepared to read outload, as a solo performance piece
- at the same time story elements are directly taught (explained and shared in discussions)
The study then compared these two methods in an experiemental setting. The results showed that the social-context situation method (SBE) was overall more effective at imporving reading ability, though both methods were successful.
ORL Method as used in the research – but adapted from that practice to suit Humanities-8 context – essentially to build in a SBE type situation.
(1) All kids have a copy of the book
(2) Teacher introduces the book (or if this is not the first section of the book, reviews the story so far) and reads the covers, inside flaps, dedications, preface, etc. etc. Students follow along with the reading, but also should take part in the pre-reading discussion. Would be good to have the text up on the screen if possible (document camera).
(3) Discussion about the story – what will happen, who is this about, and the other story elements
(4) Teacher reads a section using pauses, stressing words, adding inflections, etc. as appropriate (maybe 5 minutes). Stop and discussion of the story elements, record vocabulary words or phrasing. As a group write up a brief summary statement for that section of the story that was just read.
(5) Students are given a section of the story to read aloud. They practice this first, trying to find the inflections, pauses, and stresses. Teacher helps with this.
(6) Students read aloud their section. For the first few times this can be volunteer basis; give the students who might be reticent time to be ready.
(7) Stop and discussion of the story elements, record vocabulary words or phrasing – write a summary statement as a group!
(8) Individual Student reflection – students summarize what is happening in the story, adding their insights, predications, revelations, epiphanies, etc.
(9) Assign a section of the story for the student to prepare to read aloud next time. Alternatively, assign a range of pages and have them choose a section to read aloud. You might end up with several people reading the same section, but then students hear different “voices” to the story, might be able to gleam new meanings.
