Thing 4: Teaching, TAKS, Creativity, Duty, Options

I found the blog How to Prevent Another Leoardo da Vinci very interesting for it is true in my perspective. In today's educational environment we do limit creativity. We teach to the test. We waterdown our curriculum for the masses. We do what we have to do for the "STATE" and "DISTRICT". Does this make us bad teachers? Are we providing our student the education they deserve?

One item that is alternating this process is techology integration. Technology integration has become a definite catalyst for change in regards to how teachers are teaching. The classroom is evolving from a classroom confined by brick and mortar to a classroom open not only to its own community, state, or country; but also to the world. Our teachers are redefining their role in the classroom, for the educators of today are shifting from lecturers to facilitators. The whole definition of technology and it’s role in the classroom is changing, and it is our duty as educators to adapt and prepare quality lessons that will provide our students with the best possible learning environment. Technology is not only changing the outward appearance of the classroom, but most importantly it is changing how teacher’s teach and how students learn. Teachers are connecting with the 21st century student and adapting to their needs. But is it enough?

The most obvious proof of technology acting as an agent of change is the basic fact that it is causing changes in how schools operate, teachers teach, and students learn. As we search for proof of this catalyst we must first look at its epistemology. Teachers often allow the textbook or the provided worksheets to determine the manner in which they are going to teach their class. They search for bold words and end of chapter quizzes to reinforce the material that has been presented in some fashion. Teachers enjoy crystal clear definitions and stated facts where students can easily draw conclusions. The days of opening the file cabinet and pulling out the Pumpkin unit from 1969 are over, and we must embrace the emerging technology to truly provide an enrichment of student learning. Technology can release teachers from the repetitive structure of a textbook and allow both the students and teachers to utilize current, newsworthy, exciting, and invigorating content to gain knowledge in a particular area (Cavanaugh & Girod, 2001). Teachers are creating moodles, blogs, and wikis. They are changing how they deliver the information, but is it enough?

Even though it is extremely hard to measure, technology is changing how students learn. We can evaluate an environment of little or no technology that often has the students merely receiving the knowledge rather than acting as a true participant in the learning process versus an environment of technology enriched curriculum that allows the students to act as participants in the learning process. We are not only changing the vehicle in which students learn, but we are changing the tasks that students will complete to signify mastery of a lesson or skill. In addition to the changes that affect students we are changing the learning activities that teachers create. Technology has allowed teachers to create activities that encompass real time news, video, and data that ultimately allow students to bring together ideas that build upon their own strengths and weaknesses. Just at Mesquite High School this year we are using iPod Touches in six classrooms targeting at-risk student. It is changing the perceptions of how to connect with these students, how to teach these students the content, and more importantly how much or little students can learn when they are not provided the learning strategies for which they have become accustom. It is only five weeks into the project but the revelations have already been eye-opening to teachers and campus administrators. Stay tune for more, but the question still remains the same, are we limited creativity? Does the use of iPod touches elevate our students to Bloom's II or simply provide another alternative for content delivery?

Technology has also changed the roles of student and teacher in the classroom (Wexler, 2000). Technology has opened the floodgate, and it has become a dual responsibility of both the teacher and the students to ensure that neither drowns. Technology has created a unique situation to where the teacher is often not the most knowledgeable individual in the classroom when it come a particular software package, browser, or various technological equipment. Teachers must embrace their new role as facilitator. The tide has shifted and students often feel empowered to explore and embrace the multitude of knowledge that is available, and teachers must recognize the shift and fully empower the learner. Would you not love to teach in this environment?

Open the floodgate to student learning is our goal, but can we do it in today's data and standards driven environment? Are our students learning less or more? Does the data matter? At what cost to our students is this "new data driven teaching environment?" Are we killing furture da Vincis? What is killing them? Do we have a choice?

Cavanaugh, Shane & Girod, Mark. (2001). Technology as an Agent of Change.
The Journal, 28(3), 40-47.

Cudiner, Shelley, Harmon, & Oskar. (2000). An Active Learning Approach to Teaching Effective Online Search Strategies. The Journal, 28 (05), 52-57.

Drake, Chuck. (2001). Putting the bang back into science? Technology and Learning.
www.techlearning.com/

Wexler, D. (2000). Integrating computer technology: blurring the roles of teachers, students, and experts. Educational Studies, 31 33-43.

Post 1 and 2 References

Angeli, C., Bonk, C., & Valanides, N. (2003). Communication in a web-based conferencing system: the quality of computer-medicated interactions. British Journal of Educational Technology. 4, 31-43.

Arafeh, S. & Levin, D. (2002). The digital disconnect: the widening gap between internet-savvy students and their schools. Pew Internet & American Life Project Report.

Ariza, E., Knee, R., & Ridge, M.. (2000). Uniting teachers to
embrace 21st century technology. The Journal, 27, 22-30.

Axelson, M. (2001). Education as commodity: who owns the online content
your teachers create? Electronic School, 28-31.

Baker, E. & Gearhart, M. & Herman, J. (1990). Apple classrooms of tomorrow,
educational study: first and second year findings? Apple Computers, Inc.
www.ali.apple.com

Barron, A., Hogarty, K., & Kromrey, J. (1999). An examination of the relationships
between student conduct and the number of computers per student in Florida schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 98-107.

Benson, S. (n.d.) Computer anxiety: impediment to technology integration. Retrieved February 19, 2003 from http://pt3.nmsu.edu/educ621/sharon2.html .

Bell, L. & Rappold, R. (2001). Faculty use of technology at RIT: what online strategies are they using, how did they learn them? Retrieved July 12, 2003 from http://www.tltgroup.org/resources/f_eval_cases/rit_fac_study.htm.

Cavanaugh, S. & Girod, M. (2001). Technology as an agent of change.
The Journal, 28, 40-47.

Chin, O. (n.d.). Assessment of staff attitudes towards computers and its implications on the sue of IT in school. Retrieved April 10, 2002 from http://www.mow.eu.sg/iteducationa/edtech/abstract-b6.html

Cradler, J. (n.d.). Implementing technology in education: recent findings from research and evaluation studies. Retrieved April 15, 2002 from http://www.wested.org/techpolicy/reapproarch.html.

Cudiner, S., Harmon, A., & Oskar, W. (2000). An active learning approach to teaching effective online search strategies. The Journal, 28, 52-57.

Drake, Chuck. (2001). Putting the bang back into science? Technology and Learning.
www.techlearning.com/.

Gallagher, S. (2002). Distance learning at the tipping point. Retrieved April 15, 2002 from http://www.educventures.com/ .

Gilmour, Kim. (2001). What’s the internet going to do for you? The Future’s Bright!. Internet Magazine, 38-45.

Hulser, R. (1998 Feb.) Integrating technology into strategic planning.
Information Outlook, 2, 24-27.

Milone, M. (2000). Staff development: getting it right the first time.
The Journal, 21, 58-61.

Norris, C., Smolka, J., & Soloway, E. (2000).
Extracting value from research: A guide for the perplexed. Technology & Learning, 20, 45-48.

Tucker, S. (2001). Distance education: better, worse, or as good as traditional education? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 4, 1-13. Retrieved June 15, 2003 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter44/tucker44.html.

Wexler, D. (2000). Integrating computer technology: Blurring the roles of teachers, students, and experts. Educational Studies, 31, 33-43.

Vail, K. (2001). How young is too young? Electronic School, 14-17.

Zisow, M. (May 2000). Teaching style and technology. Tech
Trends, 44, 36-8.

POST 2: Thing #2 - Thoughts about Web 2.0 ... The Future

As the evolution of education matures k-12 education must address the effects of eLearning (web 2.0 tools) on the curriculum, student development, and institution integrity. For example at most high schools the traditional methods of instruction are exhausting efforts to engage students in the learning process while enters of higher education are turning to new innovative instructional methods to encourage students to learn. From web 2.0 tools to Distance Education, education is reaching out to faculty to develop curriculum and instructional methods that represents the changing face of education and incorporates the technological advances of the 21st century.

As society enters the 21st century it is the responsibility of educators to adapt to the changes of society, to the advancement of technology, and to the evolution of teaching strategies to incorporate innovative teaching methods in curriculum delivery. One of the greatest evolutionary advances affecting higher education is the emergence of eLearning as a primary instructional delivery method preferred by higher education instructors and students. According to John Chambers of Cisco Systems the next big killer application for the Internet is going to be education and education over the Internet is going to be so big it is going to make e-mail look like a rounding error (Chambers, 2002). The evolution of higher education is just beginning and it is now the responsibility of colleges and universities to establish a framework to incorporate eLearning in all curriculum areas. Brick and mortar no longer confine classrooms or students, and technology allows faculty members to explore new horizons with their dated and stagnant curriculum. eLearning and the World Wide Web are changing perspectives, attitudes, and learning environments that are altering the educational landscape. Educators must now embrace the future and line up for the training, the tools, and the knowledge that will not only define the future of their students but also the future of eLearning education.

When one examines the principles of eLearning and the impact of innovative technologies on education, one must explore the origins and foundations of eLearning. Rapid changes in technology are having a massive impact not only on students in the K-12 environment, but also on students of higher education. eLearning has become an estimated $23 billion dollar industry that is revolutionizing how educators teach and how students learn and has become the instructional medium of choice of many in higher education. eLearning offers a new innovative approach to teaching and enhances traditional face-to-face classroom courses. Not to mention that eLearning is cost effective and in some occasions replaces “traditional” face to face course offerings. eLearning is the use of network technology to design, deliver, select, administer, support, and extend learning (Masie, 2001) and is used to create and establish new methods of instructional delivery. These new methods have become a definite catalyst for change in regards to how teachers are teaching (Cavanaugh & Girod, 2001) and were demanded by the technological savvy students of the 21st century. eLearning is the use of online, digital, or televised instruction that expand the classroom beyond a physical classroom and typical instructor, thus expanding and revolutionizing instructional content and learning experiences in higher education.

eLearning is different from traditional instructional approaches for many reasons. First of all, curriculum design and development reflects the changing priorities with disciplines and a continuous curriculum redesign becomes increasingly necessary. eLearning allows instructors to manage these changes in priorities, growth, and information while engaging student learning. The use of the Internet and digital technologies to create experiences that educate are a flexible innovative approach to adapt to the changing demands of students. Through the ages education has consisted of physically bringing together students who are provided knowledge in a “traditional” face-to-face content heavy instructional delivery method. Today, due largely to technology, the digital age is changing how curriculum is delivered, as well as how educators view the roles of learners and the roles of instructors. eLearning seems to teach students at a faster rate increasing student comprehension and retention and it can save money by reducing the facility cost for institution and the travel and time considerations for students and faculty members (Horton, 2002). eLearning is allowing students and faculty to explore an era of flexibility that allows a collaborative unit to develop that is immersed in the content rather than the college experience.

The increase in eLearning on college and university campuses have increased exponentially in the last couple of years, for institutions are offering more and more web-enabled, web-enhanced, and online courses. The original emergence of eLearning was a result of the Internet and the emergence of technology platforms that encouraged and made distance education possible, but now eLearning has evolved and is requested by both students and faculty. It is estimated that fully online-distance education is growing in excess of 40 percent annually, with approximately 350,000 students generating $1.75 billion in tuition revenues alone (Gallagher, 2002). Universities and colleges are rapidly adopting eLearning strategies simply for economic fulfillment and curriculum necessity. Institutions are beginning to recognize that in order to have a quality and successful eLearning program one must have a clear institutional vision with a high level of administrative and student support as well as the reliable technical infrastructure. Once the foundation is in place what remains is the actual use of eLearning as a teaching tool in the classroom.

Creating active and useful learning environments is our goal and educators must teach our students the skills necessary to survive in the ever-changing academic environment (Cudiner, Shelley, Harmon, & Oskar, 2000). eLearning allows educators to progress into the 21st century and prepare themselves and their students for the technological age that is upon us. Educators must take an active role in determining how to effectively embrace this coming age and address the issues in and out of their classrooms (Ariza, Knee, Richard, & Ridge, 2000). eLearning is changing how we work and how we think, and educators are tasked with the responsibility of creating units, lessons and activities that will mirror the real world and seamlessly blend the use of technology with their content and curriculum. Educators are becoming even more creative with the integration of technology in our daily curriculum with the use of online and eLearning resources. The glory or the advantages of eLearning has yet to be fully accepted, but with the introduction of other forms of technology in our classrooms, eLearning is becoming a seamless resource and tool (Cavanaugh & Girod, 2001).

Several institutions across the nation have initiated eLearning programs with great success, but along the way they also learned some important lessons. Institutions that have had success with eLearning recognize fully that eLearning programs first of all require an institutional focus, a high level of administrative and student support, and undoubtedly reliable technical infrastructure. Bismarch State College in North Dakota had a vision to incorporate an online program into their university. Due to demographical trends and a reduction in the amount of “traditional” students ages 18-20 years old the university had to create programs to increase enrollment. Bismarch State College responded to this growing concern by establishing web-based distance education coursed to help grow enrollment (Gallagher, 2002). Bismarch researched their student body, conducted surveys, and analyzed their curriculum to determine the best solution and formula for integrating eLearning into their overall curriculum and degree plans. Through proper planning and program execution Bismarch was able to prepare students for careers in the energy-related fields that are crucial for the North Dakota area. Since the first online classes in the fall of 1998, Bismarch has grown to 85 online courses with nearly 750 students currently enrolled in online education. The key challenges in creating such an impressive program was with developing the program infrastructure from the colleges policy, existing technology, and available student services. In addition students and faculty members needed to be trained to successfully implement eLearning into their curriculum. Lastly, Bismarch had to establish the technology infrastructure and technical staff to support this project (Gallagher, 2002). Throughout this entire project it was imperative for Bismarch College to maintain it’s perspective and vision, for it was strategic planning that made this program a success. Bismarch College’s President, Dr. Donna Thigpen, stated, “Historically, colleges look at the past to forecast the future. Instead, we looked at the trend lines and asked -- What is going to happen? What trends will impact the institution? Which positive trends can we make work for us, and which negative trends can we mitigate (Gallagher, 2002)?” Bismarch College provided the framework and the determination needed to lead and guide other institution into the 21st century vision of learning.

Another institution that is making great strides in the expansion of it’s eLearning program is the University of Wyoming. Unlike Bismarch College’s local challenge, the University of Wyoming not only wanted to expand it’s enrollment, but it would like to expand it’s enrollment inside the state of Wyoming and beyond. The University of Wyoming designed a program to offer web-based programs from nursing to instructional technology and was determined to make their program a success. From the early initiation of the program the online course offering have grown 700% (Gallagher, 2002) and total more than 3000 students for the year of 2002. The goals of the University of Wyoming was not only to expand enrollment and it’s reach, but also to answer critical questions as to “How students can be reached and degrees be delivered in this new medium?” The University of Wyoming and many other colleges and universities simply replay that they are delivering the instruction in the manner requested and demanded by students. eLearning allows students and faculty members to explore uncharted waters and to discover new horizons and knowledge. These two examples are merely the tip of the iceberg in regards to institutions engaging in powerful successful eLearning programs.

Everyone agrees that eLearning is necessary in today’s society and university makeup, but unfortunately educators have yet to draw a consensus as to how to design and manage curriculum in an online and distance ed environment. Even though one model is more effective in one area or for one university, it does not necessary mean that it will be for another. Universities and faculty members of the academia community must organize to plan and to execute a model to integrate eLearning into the Higher Educational curriculum, for not only is technology ready for this expansion, but also the students of universities are changing. Education must adapt to the changing society and bridge the technological gap of students and faculty members to connect the converging rivers of education. So what are you going to do? What and how are you going to use 23 things to bridge the technological gap?

Post 1.1: Thing 1: The Questions

Which habit(s) may be most challenging for you to employ as part of your Learning 2.0 experience?

Staying on task and remembering to play. It is difficult at time to explore when I have short time periods to learn a new task. I miss the days of childhood when play and exploration was a why of life.

Which habit(s) will be easiest, or are most resonant for you as a lifelong learner?

Mentoring is the easiest it comes naturally.

Which habit do you think will be most important for you as you work through this course, and why?

Filling my “23 things” toolbox so that I can refer back to it later.

POST 1: Thing #1 - Reflections on Lifelong Learning

Living in the 21st century deems that one becomes entrusted to be a lifelong learner. We must always explore new ideas, new technologies, and be looking toward the ever changing horizon.

Would you of imagined pausing live TV when you where a child? Did you ever think that everyone in your family would own and use a cell phone on a daily basis? When you used to sit around that black and white tv as a youngster did you imagine a world with over 500 channels available 24 hours a day with the “click” on the remote. What about the Internet? Did you ever imagine a time when information would be available to you with the tap on your iPhone or the click on your blackberry. What about teaching, what about the classrooms of today, what about the tools you have as teachers in a classroom? The classroom of today is far from the one room classrooms of the days of Little House on the Prairie and who would of guessed. Who would of thought, who would of imagined.

How can you be an effective teacher without being a life long learner and changing with the times. Adapting to new technology and new teaching strategies to teach the students of the 21st century.

Now enter today and your responsibility. What as a citizen of the 21st century is your responsibility and how do you plan on staying on top of the curve. Well, back to topic, life long learning is the constant search for new knowledge and skills. Life long learning is adjusting to the times, the technology, and the sociality changes. Life long learning is the bridge that connects yesterday with today and will forge the roads to the future.

Take for example this case study below. It points out the divide between tech savvy and not. What about tech savvy teachers and not…..

Case Study: The digital disconnect: the widening gap between internet-savvy students and their schools.

Arafeh, S. & Levin, D. (2002). The digital disconnect: the widening gap between internet-savvy students and their schools. Pew Internet & American Life Project Report. http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=67

The world of technology is greatly impacting how teachers teach and how students learn. A prime example is how distance education and eLearning are changing the curriculum and teaching styles in universities across the globe. The fact of the matter is that the world of eLearning is evolving so quickly that educators are experiencing the great “digital disconnect”. That is, students are quickly becoming Internet savvy as their schools and educators fall further and further behind with access and skills. A study was commissioned by the Pew Internet & American Life Project to conduct a review of the Internet’s Impact on Schools. The study explored how middle schools and high schools used the Internet for school and learning activities.

The data for this study was collected over a six-month period using focus groups and online solicitation of student stories. The focus groups were drawn from three major urban areas across the country of 12 middle and high school students each that were heavy Internet users. They were administered a questionnaire to help determine their school-related Internet use both in and out of school. In addition to the focus groups the study also gained further insight to student experiences and attitudes by the nearly 200 postings from students on the study’s web site.
Once the data was collected the researchers used content analysis to analyze the participants’ responses and stories. Many of the storytellers disclosed personal information to allow the researchers to characterize them, and of those the researchers were able to learn that they were not as diverse a group of students as our focus group participants. While our online storytellers were balanced by gender, the vast majority reported themselves as being White (85 percent) and in middle school (70 percent). Our online storytellers also reported being from 13 different states across the country, with the majority being from Midwestern or Southern states. The study produced data that represented a revolution in regards to how students learn and interact with society. A large number of today’s teenagers fall into the “internet savvy” group; that is they have been online for five or six years already, are highly technologically literate, have multiple e-mail addresses, multiple instant messaging identities, and usually multi-task quite well while online. It is suggested that 30% to 40% of teenagers fall into this group, and thus are growing a large cohort of the technologically-elite students that most definitely are going to define and create eLearning (Arafeh & Levin, 2002).

The students overwhelmingly mentioned and acknowledged that they could not live today without the Internet, for it has quickly become integrated into their daily lives. They conduct online research, they communicate with friends and relatives, and they buy movie tickets and music online as they download applications and music at the click of the mouse. They create web pages of self-expression and generate presentations for classes at school with the ease of breathing or opening a traditional textbook. One of the first differences indicated in this study is how different these students are from their parents, older siblings, and from the Internet not so savvy. They understand and believe that the Internet allows them to gain a clearer understanding of their schoolwork more clearly and more efficiently than without the Internet. The Internet also allows students to multi-task their academic and social calendars by balancing their schoolwork and extracurricular activities online (Arafeh & Levin, 2002).

The Internet served many purposes for these students. It provided supplements and acted as a virtual textbook that can be used as sources and references for reports and school activities. The Internet acts as a personal virtual tutor that students can use at the click of a mouse, and it also provides an online collaborative study group that is open 24 hours a day and seven days a week. Lastly the Internet serves as the student’s personal assistants by providing guidance on dating, careers, and academic paths as well as storing important files and information needed for school and their daily lives. The implications of the Internet on these students have been astronomical and the debate surrounding the use of the Internet in education continues (Arafeh & Levin, 2002).

The debate lingers on as the needs of the students and to what degree that schools need to adapt their curriculum, technology programs, technology access, and teacher training programs to prepare for these technology savvy Internet students. One item that I believe needs to be added is to include the non-Internet users to determine why they have chosen other paths than technology. As a whole the information in this study reported the overall trends in education and technology use and were a valid determination as to how students are learning and acquiring information in the 21st century. The world is changing at a pace unprecedented since the end of World War II and educators must adapt to the changing perspectives and expectations of students. Students themselves are now changing because of their use and reliance on the Internet; and with that they have different skills, different resources, and different expectations of what they should receive from education. The great “digital divide” becomes apparent when frustration reigns as the Internet savvy students become disenchanted with their schools, teachers, and peers who are naïve, illiterate, and often afraid of going online (Arafeh & Levin, 2002). This study most importantly indicates that a choice must be made. Educators must either step onto the information superhighway or be left behind by society and their technologically-elite students.

What will you choose?