Write a description of the most recent staff development you implemented and describe how it went (good and bad) and what you would do to change it (if needed).
The last PD I did was on the SMARTboard. We have already had a vendor come in to do a PD for the 4th grade teachers in the beginning of the year. I had a vendor come in and do it because I had NO experience with the SMARTboard. The PD went well and the 4th grade teachers began using the SMARTboards in their rooms. Then it came time to purchase more SMARTboards and spark interest in more teachers.
So because the boards were in the 4th grade classrooms all year I never took the chance to get to learn how to use them. This never sat well with me. It was the only technology peripheral we had that I didn't know how to use. I think part of me decided to do this PD on my own because it would force me to learn how to use the SMARTboard. By this time it had been so long since the beginning of the year professional development that I couldn't remember a thing.
So, I rented how to videos and got a few off of youtube. I also searched websites for more information and great lessons. I wanted to make sure that I had a specific lesson to show off it's great points for each grade level. For two weeks straight I was a SMARTboard fiend. At the end of the 2 weeks I felt like I was ready.
Overall, the PD went very well, probably one of my better ones. If I decide to do another SMARTboard PD next year I think the main thing I would change is if I'm going to be specific to grade level again, like I was this time, then I'll do the PD in smaller groups. If I'm just going to show off the cool things about the board then I think I can stick to mixing grade levels.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Saturday, March 6, 2010
TIE 512- 5th Blog Posting
Reflect on the experience of creating and implementing a problem-based lesson, and on what you might do to improve the learning experience.
Well I just completed my problem based lesson, perfect timing! I decided to use the online interactive simulation called Gizmos, think virtual manipulatives. It's a web-based program through explorelearning.com. I signed up for a trial membership. Very worth it. They're fun and easy to use. They're challenging concepts done through inquiry and exploration.
I teach 3rd grade for Saturday School. I have a small group which gives me a great opportunity to find out which methods work and don't work for specific kids. I decided to focus on two different concepts in math that really give my kids trouble; graphing and function machines. Below are the learning objectives for both lessons
SMARTboard!
I added the SMARTboard into the lesson. It was a perfect way for the kids to interact with each other during the simulation. They ended up learning from each others comments and "mistakes". The use of the SMARTboard was a huge success. I actually did it mainly so I would have an easier time of getting it on video. This is the first time I've ever used it for something like this, to interact with a website, and I would definitely do it again. It was the first time these particular kids were able to use the board. They loved it.
Looking back on the lesson I know exactly what I would change. I may even go back and do it again next Saturday. I'm not sure if it was partly because this was the first time the kids had used the board and I thought I had to give more direction....or maybe that's just an excuse. I should have "stayed out of it" more. I should have let them explore more. I was way in the classroom mode and I didn't let the kids take full advantage of the experience. Don't get me wrong, it went well but I think that with the few kids I had, they could have had a much different experience with it if I would have shut up more.
Also, during the graphing lesson I could/should have asked some of the questions differently. I saw this as I was watching it back. I could have explored the analyzing part more in depth and I think I could have given them a different perspective on it.
There were some things that went well. At first they didn't seem to really understand the concept of the pie chart but once they were actually able to begin manipulating it themselves according to the data, they really had an "ah ha" moment. I love those. The same thing happened with the plotted point graph. This is the one graph where I felt they were beginning to understand analyzing a little better.
All in all it was a well worth it experience.
Well I just completed my problem based lesson, perfect timing! I decided to use the online interactive simulation called Gizmos, think virtual manipulatives. It's a web-based program through explorelearning.com. I signed up for a trial membership. Very worth it. They're fun and easy to use. They're challenging concepts done through inquiry and exploration.
I teach 3rd grade for Saturday School. I have a small group which gives me a great opportunity to find out which methods work and don't work for specific kids. I decided to focus on two different concepts in math that really give my kids trouble; graphing and function machines. Below are the learning objectives for both lessons
Function Machines:
- Write a function rule based on an input-output table.
- Create an input-output table for a given function.
- Find input and output values based on a function and/or an input-output table.
- Identify bar graphs, line graphs, pie charts and scatter plots.
- Learn to title and label graphs properly.
- Plot bars, points, or regions accurately on a graph.
- Interpret what is shown on a graph.
- Recognize positive and negative relationships from scatter plots.
SMARTboard!
I added the SMARTboard into the lesson. It was a perfect way for the kids to interact with each other during the simulation. They ended up learning from each others comments and "mistakes". The use of the SMARTboard was a huge success. I actually did it mainly so I would have an easier time of getting it on video. This is the first time I've ever used it for something like this, to interact with a website, and I would definitely do it again. It was the first time these particular kids were able to use the board. They loved it.
Looking back on the lesson I know exactly what I would change. I may even go back and do it again next Saturday. I'm not sure if it was partly because this was the first time the kids had used the board and I thought I had to give more direction....or maybe that's just an excuse. I should have "stayed out of it" more. I should have let them explore more. I was way in the classroom mode and I didn't let the kids take full advantage of the experience. Don't get me wrong, it went well but I think that with the few kids I had, they could have had a much different experience with it if I would have shut up more.
Also, during the graphing lesson I could/should have asked some of the questions differently. I saw this as I was watching it back. I could have explored the analyzing part more in depth and I think I could have given them a different perspective on it.
There were some things that went well. At first they didn't seem to really understand the concept of the pie chart but once they were actually able to begin manipulating it themselves according to the data, they really had an "ah ha" moment. I love those. The same thing happened with the plotted point graph. This is the one graph where I felt they were beginning to understand analyzing a little better.
All in all it was a well worth it experience.
Friday, March 5, 2010
TIE 575- 4th Blog Posting
Write your opinion of this definition of Professional Development.
NSDC's definition of professional development: The term "professional development" means a comprehensive, sustained, and intensive approach to improving teachers' and principals' effectiveness in raising student achievement.
They then break it down into smaller specific areas like courses, workshops, institutes, networks, and conferences.
Section 3(iv) states that it should provides job-embedded coaching or other forms of assistance to support the transfer of new knowledge and skills to the classroom
I can't tell you how many times I have been to a professional development, specifically one on technology, and during the middle of it I hear, "this is great, but if I don't go home and practice it right away....I'll never remember how to use it." And let's face it, we may have the best of intentions to go home, sit down and keep it fresh but do we? Well, I don't.
As I read through the main part of this definition it sounds exactly like what professional developments should consist of. However, there are so many different kinds of people who give them; current classroom teachers, principals, vendors, "professional" professional developers. I think this gives so much room for personal style and commitment to come into play that this definition gets translated into many different languages.
I have a friend who works in a charter school. They stay longer one day of each week for professional development. When she took the job this was the one part she dreaded. She couldn't imagine sitting through a professional development every week. She's been at the school for 3 years now and says that it has become the greatest advantages to her students and to her as a teacher. Each PD has a specific purpose and carries over into the next week's PD. They also have continued support following the professional development in the classroom during the week. I asked her if at anytime she felt like it was just too much every week. She said since it is all based on their specific needs, they attend very few sometimes no PD's outside of the school, that it's never overwhelming because they don't ever feel like yet another thing is being added. They have actually now hired someone who's job is to schedule and evaluate the PD's at her school
In my opinion this situation is how professional development is most effective. I'm not suggesting that it can't be effective if done outside the school but it seems that if we're going to take professional development seriously, which sometimes we can't, then we need to be committed to comprehensive, sustained, and intensive.
NSDC's definition of professional development: The term "professional development" means a comprehensive, sustained, and intensive approach to improving teachers' and principals' effectiveness in raising student achievement.
They then break it down into smaller specific areas like courses, workshops, institutes, networks, and conferences.
Section 3(iv) states that it should provides job-embedded coaching or other forms of assistance to support the transfer of new knowledge and skills to the classroom
I can't tell you how many times I have been to a professional development, specifically one on technology, and during the middle of it I hear, "this is great, but if I don't go home and practice it right away....I'll never remember how to use it." And let's face it, we may have the best of intentions to go home, sit down and keep it fresh but do we? Well, I don't.
As I read through the main part of this definition it sounds exactly like what professional developments should consist of. However, there are so many different kinds of people who give them; current classroom teachers, principals, vendors, "professional" professional developers. I think this gives so much room for personal style and commitment to come into play that this definition gets translated into many different languages.
I have a friend who works in a charter school. They stay longer one day of each week for professional development. When she took the job this was the one part she dreaded. She couldn't imagine sitting through a professional development every week. She's been at the school for 3 years now and says that it has become the greatest advantages to her students and to her as a teacher. Each PD has a specific purpose and carries over into the next week's PD. They also have continued support following the professional development in the classroom during the week. I asked her if at anytime she felt like it was just too much every week. She said since it is all based on their specific needs, they attend very few sometimes no PD's outside of the school, that it's never overwhelming because they don't ever feel like yet another thing is being added. They have actually now hired someone who's job is to schedule and evaluate the PD's at her school
In my opinion this situation is how professional development is most effective. I'm not suggesting that it can't be effective if done outside the school but it seems that if we're going to take professional development seriously, which sometimes we can't, then we need to be committed to comprehensive, sustained, and intensive.
TIE 512- 4th Blog Posting
What is the best way to get others at your school to use more technology in their teaching and in the students' learning?
Nothing beats seeing it work, from a teacher's perspective that is. Last year, my first year in the position, I had equipment in my office that teacher's were able to check out and use and it ended up sitting in my office all year long. This year I changed two things to try to make this less of an issue.
I started a grade level tech pilot. I took into consideration my conversations with the teachers during grade level meetings and the sub test analysis to target certain areas in each grade level that I thought could benefit from the introduction and integration of a certain technology. For example: We targeted fluency for 3rd grade. Teachers find it extremely difficult to motivate their kids to reread .... or read at all for that matter. Since there is really no other way to become more fluent then practice reading we decided to purchase digital recorders for the kids to use. We are now slowly changing this to using ipods. It has been pretty amazing to see motivation rise along with actually wanting to practice reading. I did this with each grade level. My goal is to have each grade level become "skilled" with that specific piece of equipment or software and then give their own professional development on it during the year. So far, I've had three teachers give a professional development on the technology that they're using this year. It has in fact encouraged other teachers to start using it. They're able to see first hand how it can be effective.
Nothing beats seeing it work, from a teacher's perspective that is. Last year, my first year in the position, I had equipment in my office that teacher's were able to check out and use and it ended up sitting in my office all year long. This year I changed two things to try to make this less of an issue.
I started a grade level tech pilot. I took into consideration my conversations with the teachers during grade level meetings and the sub test analysis to target certain areas in each grade level that I thought could benefit from the introduction and integration of a certain technology. For example: We targeted fluency for 3rd grade. Teachers find it extremely difficult to motivate their kids to reread .... or read at all for that matter. Since there is really no other way to become more fluent then practice reading we decided to purchase digital recorders for the kids to use. We are now slowly changing this to using ipods. It has been pretty amazing to see motivation rise along with actually wanting to practice reading. I did this with each grade level. My goal is to have each grade level become "skilled" with that specific piece of equipment or software and then give their own professional development on it during the year. So far, I've had three teachers give a professional development on the technology that they're using this year. It has in fact encouraged other teachers to start using it. They're able to see first hand how it can be effective.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
TIE 575- 3rd Blog Posting
What do you consider the most important aspects of 21st Century Literacy?
It was interesting to watch the video done by Clark & Bramhoff. We express our definition of literacy to include so many different parts. There were people who spoke of literacy to include critical and visual, even social/emotional literacy. I don't know that this is the part that becomes absolutely necessary for us to agree on.
The number one definition of being literate is being able to read and write. A little further down the list, it's defined as having knowledge or a skill in a specific field: meaning you could be computer literate.
We would be kidding ourselves to think that our ever changing means of communicating and expressing ourselves through the use of technology would not impact this term. So whether we decide to include technology into the actual term (if there even is one) of literacy or if we make it a separate component, shouldn't really matter.
We need to keep our kids in the game. We need to make sure that they're ready to become active participants in society. I'm guessing that this has always been the expected final outcome of education. The definition of what it means to be an active participant has changed several times over the decades and it continues to change. So, let's continue to change with it!
It was interesting to watch the video done by Clark & Bramhoff. We express our definition of literacy to include so many different parts. There were people who spoke of literacy to include critical and visual, even social/emotional literacy. I don't know that this is the part that becomes absolutely necessary for us to agree on.
The number one definition of being literate is being able to read and write. A little further down the list, it's defined as having knowledge or a skill in a specific field: meaning you could be computer literate.
We would be kidding ourselves to think that our ever changing means of communicating and expressing ourselves through the use of technology would not impact this term. So whether we decide to include technology into the actual term (if there even is one) of literacy or if we make it a separate component, shouldn't really matter.
We need to keep our kids in the game. We need to make sure that they're ready to become active participants in society. I'm guessing that this has always been the expected final outcome of education. The definition of what it means to be an active participant has changed several times over the decades and it continues to change. So, let's continue to change with it!
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
TIE 512- 3rd Blog Posting
Contribute to the debate over the use of computer games as educational tools.
There is quite a debate out there over this issue. I sit on the middle of the see-saw on this one. Not to say that I don't have a strong opinion ..... I just have one for both sides.
My number 1 question is: What's wrong with kids realizing that they're learning?
Most of the debate I hear FOR using computer games in education usually ends up getting around to this point, your kids will love it, they won't even realizing that they're learning. I don't get it. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with us that we're becoming so attracted to that idea? That phrase has become quite the marketing ploy and it's working! Are we setting our kids up to believe that learning new things will always come with "points" attached to it or the chance to put your name on the "high scorer" list? Or, is that ridiculous and should we give our kids a little more credit than that?
My answer: not sure.
The "what ever works" route is certainly one that we could take. If we're thinking long term and big picture then "what ever works" seems a bit cheap. Personally, I find nothing wrong with giving a kid 15 minutes to spend on the computer to "shoot" down some improper fractions. It's the same drill and kill we've been doing for years, just different delivery. I also think that programs that are interactive, non-linear, and somewhat of a simulation can be extremely effective.
I believe my problem lies not so much in the "game" but in the message we are sending by using it. A crutch, a tool, a substitute, a resource, a creative outlet....what is it? Have our teachers lost the ability to motivate?
and what's wrong with kids realizing that they're learning?
There is quite a debate out there over this issue. I sit on the middle of the see-saw on this one. Not to say that I don't have a strong opinion ..... I just have one for both sides.
My number 1 question is: What's wrong with kids realizing that they're learning?
Most of the debate I hear FOR using computer games in education usually ends up getting around to this point, your kids will love it, they won't even realizing that they're learning. I don't get it. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with us that we're becoming so attracted to that idea? That phrase has become quite the marketing ploy and it's working! Are we setting our kids up to believe that learning new things will always come with "points" attached to it or the chance to put your name on the "high scorer" list? Or, is that ridiculous and should we give our kids a little more credit than that?
My answer: not sure.
The "what ever works" route is certainly one that we could take. If we're thinking long term and big picture then "what ever works" seems a bit cheap. Personally, I find nothing wrong with giving a kid 15 minutes to spend on the computer to "shoot" down some improper fractions. It's the same drill and kill we've been doing for years, just different delivery. I also think that programs that are interactive, non-linear, and somewhat of a simulation can be extremely effective.
I believe my problem lies not so much in the "game" but in the message we are sending by using it. A crutch, a tool, a substitute, a resource, a creative outlet....what is it? Have our teachers lost the ability to motivate?
and what's wrong with kids realizing that they're learning?
TIE 575- 2nd Blog Posting
What was the last greatest PD you attended and why?
It's a feeling I get. Someone wise once said, "it's all in the presentation". I believe that it is mostly in the presentation. Within 10 minutes of the PD, you have me or you don't. Granted, interest in the "product" has to be there but even more than that the presentation HAS to incorporate creativity, deep knowledge and I'm always up for a different perspective. Make me think, impress me, and if you're so inclined, entertain me a little with your wit.
I attended a PD in Chicago that I not only thought about for a week after wards, I still remember it and I was willing to share about it with others. I even remember what the man looks like, and that's big because I would be the worst witness to a crime ever! So, it left an impression on me, it made me think and I still use what I learned back then, today.
He was an older man, AARP age, but sharp as a tack. He had a passion for the SMARTboard like no one else....should. He structured the PD in a way that led you to believe that even if you couldn't purchase a SMARTboard you still left with ideas and lingering thoughts that stretched far beyond the board. Everyone was engaged, you know there is usually "one" in every group...not in this group. We were wowed by his ability to think "outside the box". We were thankful for his CD of resources and business card with email that he sent us home with and we were never bored with is quick wit and the extra finger on his left hand.....I forgot to mention that.
This PD definitely had compelling value. He was honest and open about the things he struggled with in integrating technology and gave excellent suggestions as to how to overcome them. Absolutely worth my time.
It's a feeling I get. Someone wise once said, "it's all in the presentation". I believe that it is mostly in the presentation. Within 10 minutes of the PD, you have me or you don't. Granted, interest in the "product" has to be there but even more than that the presentation HAS to incorporate creativity, deep knowledge and I'm always up for a different perspective. Make me think, impress me, and if you're so inclined, entertain me a little with your wit.
I attended a PD in Chicago that I not only thought about for a week after wards, I still remember it and I was willing to share about it with others. I even remember what the man looks like, and that's big because I would be the worst witness to a crime ever! So, it left an impression on me, it made me think and I still use what I learned back then, today.
He was an older man, AARP age, but sharp as a tack. He had a passion for the SMARTboard like no one else....should. He structured the PD in a way that led you to believe that even if you couldn't purchase a SMARTboard you still left with ideas and lingering thoughts that stretched far beyond the board. Everyone was engaged, you know there is usually "one" in every group...not in this group. We were wowed by his ability to think "outside the box". We were thankful for his CD of resources and business card with email that he sent us home with and we were never bored with is quick wit and the extra finger on his left hand.....I forgot to mention that.
This PD definitely had compelling value. He was honest and open about the things he struggled with in integrating technology and gave excellent suggestions as to how to overcome them. Absolutely worth my time.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
TIE 512- 2nd Blog Posting
TIE 512- Duscuss the evaluation of students' use of technology tools
After reading the article, "Assessing Web 2.0 Projects Through Bloom and Time", my first thought surrounded the simplicity of the evaluation, specifically the multiplication of the number of days a student worked on that specific area.
I do think that the six areas of the breakdown are effective for assessment and I do agree that using these areas of assessment will help focus on the content learned and skills they used to acquire it rather than assessing their knowledge of the actual Web 2.0 tool, in this case.
As I read through the author's explanation of the number designated to each level of learning as it got higher, I suppose it makes sense within this model to multiply it by the number of days spent so that a higher level learning project receives a higher score than a lower level learning project where there was more time spent.
I can see this model being used in a project that calls for more than one of these areas of assessment. In this case we would have a way to have different areas of assessment weighted fairly. Outside of this situation though I don't see where this model would be of much use.
After reading the article, "Assessing Web 2.0 Projects Through Bloom and Time", my first thought surrounded the simplicity of the evaluation, specifically the multiplication of the number of days a student worked on that specific area.
I do think that the six areas of the breakdown are effective for assessment and I do agree that using these areas of assessment will help focus on the content learned and skills they used to acquire it rather than assessing their knowledge of the actual Web 2.0 tool, in this case.
As I read through the author's explanation of the number designated to each level of learning as it got higher, I suppose it makes sense within this model to multiply it by the number of days spent so that a higher level learning project receives a higher score than a lower level learning project where there was more time spent.
I can see this model being used in a project that calls for more than one of these areas of assessment. In this case we would have a way to have different areas of assessment weighted fairly. Outside of this situation though I don't see where this model would be of much use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)