Coming up with a lesson effectively using technology for language arts can be difficult to do without sacrificing important elements. It seemed we simply used technology because it was there and because we had to rather than used it to assist us in the lesson delivery. All in all, I think we touched on some important aspects of characterization but did not do as much as we could have to assist students in learning the knowledge we had intended to teach.
5. Application of Content: This aspect of our lesson could have used some work. We wrote the lesson plan to model how to develop a two dimensional character in writing and then had them create a character for performing. While some of the qualities are the same, we should have focused more on elements that would be apparent in action rather than wasting time discussing aspects of the written character, such as thought. We also should have used technology to capture students' attention with visuals. Showing a picture or video clip of bold, memorable characters would have benefited the students' thinking and understanding of character. By pointing out specific characteristics of a character they see in front of them, they would have been able to relate previous knowledge with their newfound creativity to depict a bold character of their own. They definitely succeeded in collaborative problem solving by working with a partner to find out more about a foreign culture and new ideas about character to create something concrete.
8. Instructional Strategies: A big mistake I think we made in our lesson plan is time management. The students spent more time researching a religion, when they should have been focusing on what we were supposed to be teaching them about—characterization. I think we scratched the surface of characterization and students definitely got a grasp of the important elements that go into creating a character, but we could have done a lot more with character development had we allowed students to create more in-depth characters and focused on what they already knew. It would have been more beneficial to have visuals for the students and allowed them to ask/answer questions using technology.
6. Assessment: The students working together to create different aspects of character was a great way to measure they're understanding of character. We gave them a character and they developed it. We were able to monitor they're creation of the character by being there as they worked together to answer any questions and make sure they were headed in the right direction. It was interesting to see how each student envisioned a character just based on the name and how he/she guided that character into a live production. It would have been better to let the students act out and direct each other in the production of the final character. In a way, they would have been able to assess themselves and each other, while we assessed their understanding of character.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Lexipedia
http://lexipedia.com/english/boring
Description of and rationale for how the technology might be used with and preferably by students (Bloom's)
Lexipedia is a language tool used to reference the meaning and use of words. I would use this tool in a number of ways. I would first use it to show students how the alteration of one word can change the tone of a sentence. I would give them a simple, boring paragraph and ask them to use Lexipedia to change the sentences and make them more complex and exciting to read. Each person would then share his or her new paragraph, so the class can see the various combinations the of the same paragraph they could come up with. I would also use Lexipedia is to give students better understanding of complex words. I would then give the class a complex paragraph and have them make it simpler. I believe this exercise touches on all levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. The use of this tool will give them a better understanding of words, while helping them to remember meanings because they are not just given a definition of a word; they are given numerous words that relate to a word and ways to use it in different parts of a sentence. They apply their understanding of the word by using it correctly in a sentence. They analyze and evaluate the sentence when choosing which word best fits the sentence and its intended purpose. And finally, they are creating new sentences and newfound knowledge that will help them become better writers and readers in the future with a helpful resource at their fingertips.
Consideration of struggles for implementation (student, systemic, and/or hardware)
The main struggle for this technology is the use of Internet. Technology is great when it works, but, let's face it, it doesn't always cooperate when we need it to. In this particular activity, it will require students to look up a lot of words, and if the Internet connection is not fast, this project will take a lot of unnecessary time.
Consideration of the biases and trade-offs of the technology
A bias of the technology is students' dependency on the technology. It is assuming that all students understand the parts of sentences and when and where to replace certain words. Ideally, most high schoolers should know the difference between an adjective and an adverb, but not all students take time to remember these terms. A trade-off is that students may take advantage of having this information at their fingertips. It will most likely prevent them from trying to figure out the meaning of words and phrases on their own or search for a better understanding of concepts.
Explanation of how the project meets the selected teacher standard and students standards
INTASC Standards:
This project best meets #5 of the INTASC standards. I would be giving students the tools necessary to apply their understanding of different parts of sentences and create new sentences from the original ones I give them. They are figuring out how to change and better a sentence with my guidance.
ISTE Standards:
This is a fun way to get students to understand and create something not so exciting. It meets ISTE standard #1. Not only will this tool better students' writing, but it will help them to communicate more effectively because they will gain a broader vocabulary and be able to understand more difficult concepts.
Description of and rationale for how the technology might be used with and preferably by students (Bloom's)
Lexipedia is a language tool used to reference the meaning and use of words. I would use this tool in a number of ways. I would first use it to show students how the alteration of one word can change the tone of a sentence. I would give them a simple, boring paragraph and ask them to use Lexipedia to change the sentences and make them more complex and exciting to read. Each person would then share his or her new paragraph, so the class can see the various combinations the of the same paragraph they could come up with. I would also use Lexipedia is to give students better understanding of complex words. I would then give the class a complex paragraph and have them make it simpler. I believe this exercise touches on all levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. The use of this tool will give them a better understanding of words, while helping them to remember meanings because they are not just given a definition of a word; they are given numerous words that relate to a word and ways to use it in different parts of a sentence. They apply their understanding of the word by using it correctly in a sentence. They analyze and evaluate the sentence when choosing which word best fits the sentence and its intended purpose. And finally, they are creating new sentences and newfound knowledge that will help them become better writers and readers in the future with a helpful resource at their fingertips.
Consideration of struggles for implementation (student, systemic, and/or hardware)
The main struggle for this technology is the use of Internet. Technology is great when it works, but, let's face it, it doesn't always cooperate when we need it to. In this particular activity, it will require students to look up a lot of words, and if the Internet connection is not fast, this project will take a lot of unnecessary time.
Consideration of the biases and trade-offs of the technology
A bias of the technology is students' dependency on the technology. It is assuming that all students understand the parts of sentences and when and where to replace certain words. Ideally, most high schoolers should know the difference between an adjective and an adverb, but not all students take time to remember these terms. A trade-off is that students may take advantage of having this information at their fingertips. It will most likely prevent them from trying to figure out the meaning of words and phrases on their own or search for a better understanding of concepts.
Explanation of how the project meets the selected teacher standard and students standards
INTASC Standards:
This project best meets #5 of the INTASC standards. I would be giving students the tools necessary to apply their understanding of different parts of sentences and create new sentences from the original ones I give them. They are figuring out how to change and better a sentence with my guidance.
ISTE Standards:
This is a fun way to get students to understand and create something not so exciting. It meets ISTE standard #1. Not only will this tool better students' writing, but it will help them to communicate more effectively because they will gain a broader vocabulary and be able to understand more difficult concepts.
Monday, December 5, 2011
MindMeister
Description of and rationale for how the technology might be used with and preferably by students (Bloom's)
MindMeister takes an ancient idea of brainstorming and transforms it into a more organized and visually pleasing arrangement of thoughts. Making concept maps was extremely frustrating for me in middle school and high school. I always had a brilliant idea, but came up with a better one ten minutes later. I would erase or redirect my ideas only to end up with a mess on my paper. MindMeister allows students create a clean visual of their train of thoughts. For a project, I would have students create a concept map on MindMeister before writing a story. I would first teach them about the six elements of a narrative to help come up with fully developed stories. This will require them to apply the knowledge of story they are taught. By creating a map on MindMeister they are able to ensure that they are including all parts to a story. They will analyze their map before continuing on to the next stage of writing a story, which will help eliminate unnecessary story content or rambling. I believe students will be less overwhelmed in writing the story if they have a clear direction of where they hope to take it.
Consideration of struggles for implementation (student, systemic, and/or hardware)
This may be difficult because it is more time consuming than simply drawing a map up on paper if the students are unfamiliar with the technology. Students will also only be able to edit it when at a computer, so, if they suddenly come upon a better idea, they will have to wait until they have access to a computer to alter/add it. It also requires use of the Internet and a Website that only allows free trials. The school or students would have to invest the $5 a month into the program if we planned to use it for multiple projects.
Consideration of the biases and trade-offs of the technology:
A trade-off the amount of time for preparation and creation required compared to drawing it out on paper. It is also harder to view the entire map if it expands past a normal screen size. Another limitation is that it only allows you to create one mind map per page. I like to compartmentalize things, so I become frustrated when I can't set other ideas off to the side. Everything must connect to the original idea.
Explanation of how the project meets the selected teacher standard and student standards
INTASC Standards:
The use of MindMeister satisfies INTASC standard #6: Assessment because teachers are able to observe students' understanding of the six elements of a story. Students are required to include all six elements in their concept maps and stories. Having students complete the concept map including their made-up elements of the story, I will be able to assess their understanding of the elements. If their ideas in their concept maps do not prove their full understanding of the six elements, I will be able to address the issue before they attempt to write a meaningless story.
ISTE Standards:
The use of MindMeister satisfies the first ISTE Standard: Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity. I will be facilitating and inspiring students by giving them guidance as to how to create their own story ideas utilizing the six elements of story. I will also foster their creativity by having them write their own short story and by planning it out first. This is important in story writing because anyone can simply come up with a mediocre story on the spot and write it as they go. Students will be required to think more in depth and find a story within themselves to share with the rest of the class.
Cite and evaluate educational research related to the tech use (261)
Croasdell, David T.; Freeman, Lee A.; and Urbanczewski, Andrew (2003) "Concept Maps for Teaching and Assessment, "Communications of the Association for Information Systems: Vol. 12, Article 24. Retrieved at http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3190&context=cais.
This article brought new ideas for concept map use to my attention. It mentioned having students make concept maps for note taking, which I think is a great idea, because then they are forced to make the connections between what the teacher is talking about for themselves. One thing I don't agree with is the idea of replacing tests with concept maps. This may work in some areas of study, but I see it being a bias way of assessing students. I think it's a great tool for formative assessment that may be used to understand where students are at and how you can help them better understand material. However, giving a student a grade base on their ability to make connections doesn't seem logical. How do you determine an A from a B or a B from a C based on them creating a concept map. Also, not everyone thinks the same or makes the type of connections a teacher may be looking for, so having such an open-ended "test" is not a good assessment of a students understanding of a broad range of information.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)