As I move through my “GAME” plan (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009), I find that I am beginning to pull pieces together. I owe this principally to the networking I have recently experienced through English Companion Ning.  I have long belonged to a technology blog on this site, however I have not taken advantage of really using it until this past week.  We were required to reach out to colleagues to help resolve some of the obstacles and challenges encountered in our GAME plans.  As a result, I posted a question on this blog and was very gratified with the responses that I received.  I have received suggestions on ways that I can utilize remote response devices with vocabulary instruction, but more importantly with reading passages.  That was one of my greatest concerns:  trying to figure out a way to utilize these devices effectively with some sort of reading comprehension. 

Unfortunately, I have not received any guidance on the classroom management concerns of distributing and collecting  the devices efficiently.  I believe like most new practices or strategies utilized in a classroom (e.g. c ollaborative pairing, reciprocal teaching, portfolios, learning stations, etc.) , setting the stage with preparation and detailed expectations along with continual practice will lead to the desired results.  So, with that in mind, it is time to move into the action, monitoring, and evaluating stages of my GAME plan.  Next week I will have four other ELA teachers’ classes rotate into my classroom for instruction in the research process and I will be using the remote response devices to assess their learning.

Reference:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

I have to admit that I have been having a difficult time feeling a part of my own GAME plan.  It never occurred to me until this week’s reading and resources that the reason for my disconnectedness was that I was “out of context”.   My GAME plan focuses on the indicators of formative and summative assessments, and the application of current knowledge to new technologies.  I feel as though I finally got some substance in this week’s readings regarding the different types of assessment formats, the benefits and uses unique to each, and ideas for each particular type and application to purpose.  Of particular help or inspiration was the information regarding the use of data from forced-choice assessments, specifically remote response devices.  The use of my “Activotes” with my Promethean board is a particular goal for my GAME plan.  However, I don’t want to simply have the students use these instead of a traditional Scantron.  In fact, I’m an English teacher with a preferred assessment format of either open-ended response formats, performance assessments, or project-based assessments.  Frankly, Scantrons go against my “left-brain” grain.  As much as I would like to save trees and use the building Scantron reader for a boat anchor, I have to accept that using these to establish base-line data to 1) drive instruction, 2) differentiate student-learning, and 3) monitor teacher-effectiveness are currently in my present and will remain in my future.  I need to learn to live with them as best as I can “use” them. 

I am actually lucky in that I have an interactive whiteboard and I have the remote response devices which emulate the same assessment format as the Scantrons.  Short of testing the test, I need to design ways to use my “Activotes” to my students’ and my advantage.  The obvious is to find test bank resources for multiple choice questions (did I say that?).  According to Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, (2009), forced-response format assessments are more difficult to design than open-ended response format assessments and I can attest to that personally.  I am making use right now of the flipcharts that I find on the Promethean website (PrometheanPlanet.com), and many of them include formative assessments in the form of quick check quizzes.  However, I am reluctant to use the Activotes because I am uncomfortable with the management of getting them out to the students and getting them back in without taking up a tremendous amount of class time.  I have used them anonymously (not assigning a device to each student) , which is better than nothing.  Yet, this does not provide any opportunity for data recording or using the data to guide instruction.  I might as well be using my little paper “flippies” for formative assessment (flippy is a term I coined for notebook paper quartered with multiple-choice responses whereby students can respond immediately to formative assessment questions during instruction).  It never occurred to me that perhaps I need to investigate how to manage using the Activotes so I can begin to feel comfortable using them, thereby defining more of a purpose for them, and then creating more formative assessments.  Again, I find that my two NETS-T indicators (i.e. assessment and application of current knowledge to new technologies) are crossing paths.  I know that formative assessment is critical to informing my classroom instruction, and I know that my new technologies are the key to that.  I need to research and resolve the problem of feeling comfortable and confident (Cennamo, et al, 2009) utilizing a different formative assessment format (forced-choice response)  and throwing little technology devices ”out there” to my students to see how it all can work. 

 I suppose it’s time to put away the slate and chizel.  My first step after reviewing and reconsidering my GAME plan is to visit PrometheanPlanet.com and look for a teacher-assistance blog.  Perhaps there will be other technology novices that have had similar shifts in their pedagogical foundations, and they can offer advice (and consolation).  Do you have any suggestions?

References
Cennamo, K., Ross, J., & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

As I progress in my GAME plan integrating technology into my content and targeting NETS-T performance indicators in formative and summative assessment and the application of current knowledge to new technologies, I find that these two indicators are not separate; rather they are concurrent in their development and application.  I stated in my previous posting of 1/14 that my resources for this task will be content test banks, weblogs and discussion boards for English teachers, my interactive whiteboard and remote response devices, past assessment tools and data, and electronic data-base and spreadsheet software.  Additionally, I will collaborate with my co-teacher who specializes in exceptional education, the media specialist who has an interest and background in student-centered technology, and our technology instructor who also has an interest in developing technology enhanced performance assessments.  Further, I will maintain on-going dialogue with my administrative team to ensure that I will have the computer lab availability, administrative support in terms of responsible student internet usage,  and parental feedback.  I will investigate the experiences of other 8^th grade middle school ELA teachers to learn from their experiences what potential positive outcomes to expect and what possible hazards to avoid.  Lastly, in the area of spontaneous formative assessment, I will focus initially on remote electronic response devices which complement my interactive whiteboard.  This will require investigating the whiteboard website (Promethean Planet) for packaged lesson plans to use as models for my own flipchart development.  This will be no easy task since the software can be rather daunting.  Perhaps, as I become more familiar with the software and my students become more familiar with the content, we can collaborate to develop flipcharts for future classroom instruction, resulting in still another form of summative assessment of my student’s learning: creating instructional materials based on their own knowledge and problem-solving.

Welcome to the latest chapter of my pursuit of digital literacy to keep pace with my students and their education. I am now challenged with targeting and formulating my own plan for digital growth and outcomes.  After much review and reflection of the ITSE National Educational Technology Standards (NETS•T) and Performance Indicators for Teachers (ISTE, 2008),  I have decided that my focus should be on assessment and transference of current knowledge to new technologies. Using the model prescribed by Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009), I have formulated the following GAME plans for two of the ISTE indicators.

The first GAME plan is based on Standard 2, indicator “d”: provide students with multiple and varied formative and summative assessments aligned with content and technology standards and use resulting data to inform learning and teaching (ISTE, 2008). What I want to be able to do is determine if my instructional plans in content and technology are successful and if learning, my own included, is occurring. What I know is that this is only done through assessment, both formative FOR learning, and summative OF learning. If I can accurately determine whether a targeted instructional goal has been met, needs further instruction, and how to best instruct, I will know that I am successful in the application of this indicator. The actions I will take will be to design instructional plans with spontaneous opportunities for formative assessments that can also be student-centered and student-directed. I will also research and collaborate to design reliable and valid summative performance assessments. My resources for this task will be content test banks, weblogs and discussion boards for English teachers, my interactive whiteboard and remote response devices, past assessment tools and data, and electronic data-base and spreadsheet software. I will monitor my progress in this plan by using the district curriculum pacing guide to determine if I am in keeping with overall instructional timing and goals while initiating innovative assessment tools and strategies. I will evaluate my success in this indicator by determining if my formative assessments in content and technology improve my students’ summative assessment results, and ultimately if their scores improve on state standardized tests in content technology.

My second GAME plan (Cennamo, et al, 2009) focuses on indicator “a” of Standard 3: “demonstrate fluency in technology systems and the transfer of current knowledge to new technologies and situations” (ISTE, 2008). What I want to be able to do is confidently move about the world of technology to utilize it to enhance my pedagogical practices and maintain a high-level of life-long self-directed learning (Cennamo, et al, 2009). What I know is that the more I learn, the more I realize how much there is to learn and that this will not end. I will know that I am successful in this indicator if I continue to maintain dialogue with my students and colleagues regarding technology applications and developments. The information I need to meet my goal will be up-to-date educational and technological digital literacy professional articles and research and current applications as they develop. I will utilize self-directed learning to maintain a high level of information and data. Resources for this indicator will change as technology continues to develop. The most influential resource will be ICT’s to maintain contact within the venue of application. I will establish regular pacing and evaluation points to monitor my commitment, progress, and success. These pacing and evaluation points will also serve as my evaluative process to determine if I need to modify my actions or change my focus.

References:
Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach (Laureate Education custom edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
National Education Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) located at http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_T_Standards_Final.pdf.

Welcome! This is the next chapter in my blog experience and learning to learn in the world of technology.

I just completed a walk, no more of a run, through several websites demonstrating teachers’ use of technology in their classrooms and content.  I am out of breath from the endless opportunities I see my educational colleagues around the world providing their students.  I am beginning to wonder if I am big enough for the task of breaking through the abstract barrier of fear that my school and my district have created regarding the use of technology in the classroom.  

In the first course of the Literacy and Technology program, I learned the effect of technology on society.  That is, I learned that our world is no longer defined within the boundaries that I grew up understanding:  community, state, country, and other places to which I traveled (Prensky, M., 2001).  Today’s technology has created a global awareness and boundaries are perceptions; they are no longer physical, but rather they are broken down by the advent of the information technology and the Internet (November, A., 2008). 

In this course, the second course in the Program, I have learned the importance of this societal and informational globalization on learning and education.  Technology and literacy became real, not something that affected others.  I became keenly aware of the global impact that technology has on learning, specifically literacy.  Technology in education is not a choice; it is occurring.  As an educator, I must provide my students with the comprehension skills and ethical skills to survive and succeed within this informational environment.  It is not a matter of “it will happen,” because it “is happening.”  

The recognition of technology and literacy became most blatant to me when I was reading the chapter in the course text on reading comprehension strategies (Eagleton & Dobler, 2007).  I thought to myself how familiar all of the strategies were based on my previous experience as a reading teacher and a reading coach, and today as I co-teach struggling readers.  Then it occurred to me that what I was reading was an application of the same metacognitive skills but in a very different medium. 

My understanding and appreciation grew as I remembered how my younger son had learned how to read fifteen years ago, not in a first-grade primer, but the subtitles in a role-playing video game.  When I recognized the strategies that I knew how to teach and the spatial thinking that my younger son had so aptly demonstrated as a young child, I truly realized that my thinking of differentiated instruction needed a complete overhaul.  Differentiation wasn’t about changing instruction to meet the diversified needs of students.  Differentiation was about letting go of the instructional reins and facilitating the students’ learning as they needed to solve problems and become true self-learners. My insecurities and lack of ability was holding back my students!  

I now realize I need to get out of my students’ way. My job is to work diligently to get the bureaucratic system out of their way so they can do what they truly need to do to learn, really learn. The video of Vicki Davis in Camilla, Georgia, which is a rural area slightly smaller and south of where I teach, really hit me.  I thought to myself, “Here is a teacher who has refused to allow negativity and restrictions keeps her from taking her students outside the barriers that will keep them small.” As an educator, I must have the forward thinking to the extent of providing my students with sufficient skills to participate in the learning today, the workforce tomorrow, and the vision to parent their future generation. 

References: 

Eagleton, M. B., & Dobler, E. (2007). Reading the web: Strategies for internet inquiry. New York: The Guilford Press. 

November, A. (2008). Web literacy for educators. Thousands Oaks: Corwin Press. 

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved from Proquest Central database. doi: 1074252411 

Vicki Davis featured in Edutopia located at:  http://www.edutopia.org/digital-generation-teachers-vicki-davis. Retrieved October 31, 2009.

As I finish up my experience in EDUC 6710, I realize just how much I have learned in such a short period of time.  I began with stumbling my way through my first blog, jumped on the collaborative Wiki bandwagon with dragging feet, begged for mercy as I botched my first pod cast, and last night found myself posting a photo album on a social network page and contacting people that I have not thought of in years.  These are major changes for a simple middle aged technology “WannaBe” who still fights using a cell phone over a land line.  I believe the major by-product of taking this course is the level of confidence I have in technology resulting in a newly developed passion (yes, I do mean “passion”) for Web 2.0.  I do not feel that I have learned another tool or strategy, but more like another world.  Better still, I have learned another language (Prensky, 2001) and as a result, my ability to travel globally has increased exponentially.  Not too bad for an old lady!

I think one of the greatest effects of this course is how I view and feel my classroom learning environment.  I have always tried to maintain a humble attitude with my students in terms of I have not purported to know everything when it comes to content, etc.  In fact, I have capitalized on that “don’t know it all” perception as a means to teach my students about the life of language, i.e. historical and social linguistics.  However, now that I feel I am a part of their language, and not just an outsider looking in, I am very comfortable letting go of the perceived control of my classroom and learning this Knowledge Age language with them.  I am reminded of my foreign language instruction, whereby the instructors and students alike would experiment with sentence construction, vocabulary or lexicons, and pronunciation without fear of ridicule or error because it was recognized that this was all part of the learning process to absorb and immerse ourselves in the acquisition of the new language.  Good foreign language instruction meant that there were good laughs and a real comfort zone for learning.  Now I want to let go of the control of the learning process not just because I believe it is good instruction, but because I can see my own growth resulting from the collaboration I will have with my students.  Do not misunderstand me.  My classroom will still remain something of a democratic autocracy.  However, as a result of this course, I can feel my ears listening to my students differently and my movements more in sync with theirs.  I believe the result will be one of mutual learning with ramifications beyond anything that I can get from a pedagogical strategies text.  My students and I will be learning to speak and dance together. It can only result in a win-win for all.

I really liked the epilogue in the text (Richardson, 2009) as a model to strive toward in terms of fully taking advantage of technology to increase my instructional effectiveness and lessen the burden of teaching.  Also, I really want to learn how to use games in my instruction; this is not something with which I am even close to feeling comfortable.  Two goals that I intend to implement to keep myself professionally and personally growing and motivated in technology and the Knowledge Age are:

1) All students’ writing will be completed in a Web 2.0 format using Wiki’s and/or blogs resulting in writing with a purpose for real audiences, student-peer editing, and portfolio maintenance.  

2) Each unit (not lesson), will have some sort of game either for formative assessment, practice, or review.

I believe the completion of this course has given me sufficient knowledge to directly implement the first goal with stumbling blocks and a huge learning curve, and adequate resources to begin learning the second goal (Prensky, 2001).

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).

Retrieved from Proquest Central database. doi: 1074252411.

Richardson, W. (2009).  Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web

Tools for Classrooms.  Thousand Oaks:  Corwin Press.

http://flashattack.podOmatic.com

1.     Reaction to the website:

I was surprised that it had been around as long as it has…2002.  It made me realize just how far out of the loop I have been.  I was also extremely surprised at the variety of its board members.  However, not surprised that they were “heavy hitters” in terms of technology interests and the interests of the future.  It did surprise me that they have actually gone to the extent of participating in an organization looking to the future of education.  I have often lamented that no one really cares in business, they just complain…this has made a liar out of me.

2.     What information on the site surprised me?

I was very impressed and interested in some of the articles I found in the press releases, especially THE Journal.  I subscribed to its RSS feeds because I think it will of tremendous value to me in the future.

I got totally lost in the link with Primary Source which I found when I followed the information regarding Global Awareness themes under Skills Framework.  I had no idea that there were such organizations and so active.  It is very fascinating to see the world become small and available to all.

The list of states with initiatives for 21^st century skills did not include Georgia and yet Georgia standards include technology literacy.

Unfortunately some of the links in the frameworks sections were outdated and missing.  However, I was really surprised at the scope of information and participation in general in the frameworks explanation and links.  I will certainly be back.

Huge surprise that the website “21^st Century Literacies”  (http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/21stcent/index.html) is sponsored by AT&T.  I am seeing a trend here where private business is in fact mounting a presence in public education.  For a long time, the publishing companies have directed the curriculum…it appears that there is now a paradigm shift to the informational/technology companies directing the curriculum.

Another surprise…content/literacy map for English for my grade level.  Too cool that it overlaps with many things I am already doing and many things I want to do.

Wow!  Just stumbled onto the ICT and Literacy website…it’s sponsored by the Church of England…but the resources are phenomenal!

There were no links or resources for the framework Life and Career Skills

3.     Did I disagree with anything on the site? Why?

I didn’t find anything that I disagreed with.  Perhaps, I was just too taken aback to think beyond “Wow!”

4.     What are the implications for my students and for me as a contemporary educator?

As Ken Kay said in his podcast, we do not have time for dialogue…

One of the most profound things I read/heard was Ken Kay in his videocast say that we don’t have time for a prolonged dialogue regarding content versus 21^st century skills, or business versus civic, or the validity of incorporating these outcomes in our children’s education.  He is so right.  If we look at how quickly technology is developing and where it has taken us in just a short amount of time, we cannot afford to talk; we must simply DO and believe that the path is already determined. 

As an 8th grade langage arts teacher I see an incredible amount of potential for blogging.  Even the name Read/Write Web starts the pedagogical brain juices flowing.  After watching the video with K. Martin as a 6th grade teacher, I now more fully understand the potential in engaging and directing student writing. 

I have long used writer’s workshops to teach writing in my classroom.  However, there has always been some difficulty in simply getting to each student in a timely manner.  I have had students journal to develop and record ideas and techniques to put in their writing portfolios.  However, once again, I simply do not have the time or resources to do justice to my students’ endeavors. 

I am enthused about the idea of initiating blogging in my writing instruction.  I really liked the idea of the blog perpetuating itself as the students continued to progress in their education beyond the experience in Ms. Martin’s 6th grade class…specifically, she had ex-6th graders continuing to write as 7th graders to the rising 6th graders, etc.  I would like to do something similar, but perhaps initiate it with a blog audience in another part of the country, or even the world.  Since I teach 8th grade students, I would like to get my students to journal their thoughts, fears, insecurities, triumphs, as they progress toward high school matriculation.  I would really like to match my students up with a group of 8th grade students in a very different cultural environment so these adolescents could see that they are different, but the same.  We just finished reading The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton and upon completion, I realized that it would be a great activating strategy to initiate blogging because of the reflective “theme” the protagonist writes at the end of the novel.  Now, I see where I could take it a step further and have my students not only blog about the book and the theme of the book, but also use this as a means of introduction with fellow 8th grade bloggers in another state or country.  Perhaps we could even invite Ms. Hinton herself to join us in the blogging.

Regardless, I am excited about this adjunct to my writing instruction and am eager to share my ideas with my colleagues at my school, my district, and anyone else that would like work with me on this new medium.