Pixiclip Tutorial

Below is a tutorial about a tool called Pixiclip.  Since part of my method is posting videos for my students to use as review problems and help with homework, I am always looking out for new ways to do it.  Pixiclip has a couple of features that I like and a couple that need to be worked around.  Overall, it is something you can use if you do not have access to a SMARTBoard on a regular basis.

Reaction, Module2, Week 2

Should the learning theories that we have been studying and discussing since Education 101 be reexamined in the light of today's society?  Clearly, advances in technology have altered the way we go about our day, but have they also changed the way that we think and learn?

The article by Siemens posits that Connectivism is the natural learning theory for use in the digital age.  I agree that Connectivism, with its  emphasis on the role of social and cultural context would seem to be well-suited for today's world.  As society in general, and schools more specifically, embrace trends in technology, social and cultural lines will most likely keep changing.  Well-prepared students will have the characteristic of understanding these changes.

I appreciated Siemens' idea that "knowledge is growing exponentially" and his reiteration of Gozales' notion of the "half-life of knowledge."  Siemens continues by stating that the acquisition of all the knowledge that we need to act is no longer possible through personal experience and that the vetting of the knowledge that is available to us has become the key to learning.  I certainly see that change in my daily pursuits.  I see teachers in my school almost incessantly teaching about how to tell a valid source of information from a spurious one.  In the article, the author lists the principles of Connectivism.  The one that resonated most with me was "Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning."  I absolutely agree with that statement.  In mathematics, those connections are the key to progress.  Students must be able to connect the new concept to the old in order to succeed.  Those who try to remember what to do in every situation are doomed to mediocrity at best.

Of course, the article made some statements that gave me pause, especially under the heading of significant trends in learning.  One of these trends is that "formal education no longer comprises the majority of our learning."  To the extent that formal education has ever comprised the majority of our learning, I do not think that that has changed.  I do not see students in our school extending themselves outside of their assignments to gain more knowledge than the teacher is asking of them.  Another such statement is that "many of the processes previously handled by learning theories (especially in cognitive information processing) can now be off-loaded to, or supported by, technology."  The very idea that cognitive information processing can be off-loaded to technology seems absurd to me.

Two of our readings were chapters from The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.  Greeno's chapter on what he refers to as a "situative approach" was dense and made some interesting points, but ultimately did not serve my purpose as, by its own admission "situativity is a general scientific perspective and as such does not say what educational practices should be adopted."  My needs are a bit more immediate and so I set that article aside for this discourse.

I enjoyed the second chapter much more.  That one, by Scardamalia and Bereiter, on Knowledge Building, made a more immediate connection with my practice.  One of the tenets of Knowledge Building is that students should be assessed on idea improvement as opposed to strict concept acquisition.  In the example given in the chapter, the students were successful because they improved their understanding of gravity.  They still had a way to go to completely understand it, but they added to their knowledge and that is the goal.  I like that theory, but do so with a caveat.  If the students are curious and the building of knowledge ultimately leads to complete understanding, that sounds great to me.  I worry, however, that, when teaching higher level math concepts, students need to acquire skills completely pretty much right away- the ACT is just around the corner.  I am not sure if I have time to gradually build their understanding of each topic.

So, the answer to my opening questions is still "I don't know."  The internet has certainly changed the landscape of where information can be found and how much there is to find, but I remain unconvinced that what it means to acquire knowledge, and the ways we go about that acquisition of knowledge have undergone a significant metamorphosis.

Reaction, Module 2, Week 1

I think that everyone needs to relax a little.  "Experts" feel that we need to completely overhaul the educational system.  (Are these the same "experts" who brought us No Child Left Behind?)  Apparently, the influx of new tools made possible by advancements in technology means that we, as teachers can no longer maintain the status quo.  Largely, I agree.  The whole job of the status quo is to be challenged.  But we need to be careful and thoughtful.  We need to keep in mind that traditional education works for the most part.  Consider that the "experts" and the advancers of technology were probably educated in a traditional manner and they seem to be doing pretty well for themselves.  Alterations that we make need to improve the educational system, not just change it.  We need to be sure that the changes will lead to improvements before we make them.

While I was reading our assigned articles, I went through a roller coaster of reactions from excitement to confusion to anger to hunger (but that was because I was reading at dinner time.)  The NMC Horizon report was very interesting and it raised some very valid thoughts and concerns, but, to me, it shot itself in the foot by making statements such as "Many experts believe that learning by creating and doing will engage students in their education, prepare them for college . . ." (pg. 8) Many experts believe?  What does that even mean? Is that proof? Is that evidence? Is that anything that we can use to support the call for change.  Doesn't that mean that most experts don't believe that to be true?  I cannot change what I do in my classroom based on "many experts believe."  I do, however, agree with much of what the report said.  Teachers do have to understand and be able to interact with technology in order to survive today.  The role of the teacher should be examined to see if the role of coach or guide is a better fit.  Regarding Open Educational Resources, on page 10, the report states that "The notion of sharing is inherent to the philosophy of open content . . . "  That is also true of the notion of teaching.  Teaching is sharing.  Most teachers I know use content they find in books or on-line in a way that best serves the students, without much thought of the legalities involved.  If a shift to Open Educational Resources means that there will be more material for me to borrow, then I am all for it.

When relating the challenges facing the integration of technology into schools, the report mentioned Integrating Personalized Learning.  I believe that all of education needs to be personalized learning and I find it interesting that the writers of the report feel that removing the teacher, a person, can improve the personalization of learning for the student.  They say that there are two paths being explored.  One path is "organized by and for the learner," (pg 22) and "school goals and interests are driving the other path . . . "(pg 22)  Those two quotes are a clear statement that schools are seen as having agendas that are at odds with the needs of the learner.  I find that notion to be ridiculous and insulting.

The article from the PewResearch Internet Project titled Digital Life in 2025 was both informative and disturbing.  As it was mostly a collection of quotes describing the future of the state and use of technology arranged in categories of decreasing hopefulness, it did not seem to have its own agenda. I liked that about it.  I did disagree with the placement of Judith Donath's quote on page 3 of the article.  Donath speaks of how we will be able to create an accurate picture of exactly how people spend their day.  Listed as one of the more hopeful theses, I found it to be a disturbing picture of the future.  Rather 1984-esque to me.  Without a doubt, the most engaging part of the article to me came in the form of the quote from Google Chief Economist Hal Varian on page 4: "The smartest person in the world currently could well be stuck behind a plow in India or China.  Enabling that person - and the millions like him or her - will have a profound impact on the development of the human race."  I love that quote and, to me, it effectively speaks to the power of the internet to reach everyone on the planet and allow them to make their mark on the world.  That is a hopeful statement,

The final article, written by Allan Collins and Richard Halverson was more infuriating than informative.  The two authors made statements that they can not possibly defend.  They insulted teachers as a whole and were wrong about a host of things.  If these are the experts that are shaping our future, stop the bus and let me off.  I do not wish to dignify the article with further comment.

And now I am hungry again.

Take-Aways from Module 1

I joined this class thinking that I knew a decent amount of information regarding the on-line classroom.  It turns out that there is much that I never considered.  I know that I am supposed to remark on what I learned, but instead, I will remark on what struck me the most.  I have spent more time since the beginning of the course thing about synchronous vs. asynchronous methodology than anything else.

The articles that were posted on the topic were very interesting.  Maha Bali and Bard Meier weighed in in favor of asynchronous classes and they made valid points about how synchronous learning is biased against certain time zones and is also culturally unaware.  On the other hand, Glen Cochrane's article discussed the work of Ursula Franklin which, although upwards of 25 years old, raises some very important points in favor of synchronous classrooms.  Franklin feels that people develop better when interacting in a live way.

So I have gone back and forth in my mind on the issue.  Of course, we have been immersed in a blend of the two and that seems to have worked well for us, but it does not settle the issue to say that a compromise is the best approach.  Then you have to decide the mix.  Is it best to have 80% synchronous and 20% asynchronous?  Would it be better to be 80 - 20 the other way?  Given my own experience so far, I would estimate that we are operating at about 25% synchronous and 75% asynchronous.

Of course, Bali and Meier would opine that even 25% synchronous is biased against some groups.  Where does that leave us.  I like the synchronous aspect of the class.  I like seeing faces and hearing voices and knowing that everybody is involved in the same way that I am right now.  It is important to have that aspect in a class.  It is important to have that aspect in any exchange of ideas.

Bali and Meier are just going to have to deal with that.

My Photo Story, Assignment and Excuse Combined.

I was given an assignment in my online class from Penn called VOLT.  I was going to learn something new that I may wish to include in my classroom instruction, so I was excited!

Can you just feel the excitement?  Well, but excitement was relatively short lived because I could not use the programs that were suggested.  That's okay, I thought, I will find another that is just as good.  So I was excited again.

I tried finding an app on my phone, but there were none that seemed promising.  They all had very bad reviews.  Then I checked on the app store on my Mac.

Apps like these are available, but they do not have the "story" feature that I wanted.  I was disappointed.

Then I tried finding an app on iTunes.  

That did not turn out well, either.  Again, I was disappointed.

Then I thought . . . 

I can do the assignment on . . .

So that is what I did and then I lived happily ever after.

No, wait.  That is the wrong picture.  That picture is actually terrible.

There.  I lived happily ever after.

The End