INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGY INTO THE CLASSROOM 2014

In what ways have you grown as a professional while taking this course? How can you use the knowledge gained to increase your leadership within the corporation?

I have increased my knowledge about technology while taking this course.  I will use this knowledge in my classroom, in my role as a member of the technology committee, and in providing professional development for the faculty.

Philosophy and theory of how to incorporate technology into the curriculum is one of the areas in which I learned the most in this class.  It was not one of the reasons I signed up for the class and some articles addressed issues I had not considered yet with 1:1 implementation.  Discussions about digital citizenship or digital reputation brought different insights into a problem that is very frustrating to me.  Responsible students who are well behaved in the real world display behavior in the digital world which is not consistent with their personalities.  They post things online and make up personalities or lie about their age to see if they can get by with it.  Internet safety rules don't seem to have much meaning or value to many of them.  Although digital education can offer new level 4 activities that involve higher level thinking skills and projects not possible prior to devices, what devices are actually being used for falls far short of those goals.  Digital worksheets are just expensive workbooks.

New websites and software opportunities were plentiful in this course.  I used Symbaloo, Mendaley, and Padlet in class activities.  I shared class articles with my personal PLC group and with writing consultants in my National Writing Project group.  My PLC group created their own Symbaloos and a science teacher tried a couple of the websites in her classes.  I took the class to learn more about current software and website trends and to learn what some of the latest developments are and I was not disappointed.

The third reason I took the course is to learn about 1:1 technology projects for my technology committee.  Our school corporation will probably go 1:1 in the 2015 to 2016 school year.  I am concerned about whether or not 1:1 will work.  Our greatest obstacle will be the lack of connectivity in the community due to dead zones.  Our second greatest obstacle will be our school network.  My fear is that when we buy the devices and spend a lot of money, they won't work.  The school has a history of technology projects that were planned, purchased, and did not work as hoped.  We have five i-Touch carts from a grant project.  The carts and the Wi-Fi worked well in some areas of the building, but did not work well in other areas.  My classroom is in a hall where Wi-Fi is not reliable.  It is hard to buy into a project that will die in the middle of class.  Although I love technology myself and go back to Apple IIe, I can list easily the well-intended projects that did not work because of interconnectivity or the school network blocking websites that needed to work for the webquests to be successful.  Our technology committee hopes to put several steps in place before we begin a 1:1 implementation.  Our first step this school year is a schoolwide survey of the staff to if people buy into the proposed project.  Buy-in from the students, parents, and community will follow.  Curriculum planning, studying devices, seeing what needs to be fixed in the network and infrastructure are other steps in the overall success. It has been helpful to read articles and discussions from people who have actually done 1:1.   I have enjoyed this class and happy that I had the opportunity to participate.

How “connected” is my classroom?

I took this technology class to learn about the latest cutting edge in technology and software.  I consider myself to be a “connected” teacher in that I have used technology in my classroom since the Apple IIe arrived and I’ve always been inspired by  new innovations.  But, this class has asked me to really look at how technology is being integrated.  Am I using the device to really teach higher level thinking skills, or am I just using technology to glorify technology without thinking about the results (SMAR model of substitution, augmentation, modification and redefinition).  I now explore the impact of integrating technology on both teaching and learning.  I am teaching in a Blended or Flipped Classroom, not a 1:1 environment.  Therefore, learning takes place with and without technology.

Can’t I do Padlet on the blackboard using paper and tape?  Do I really need a computer?  Is it more engaging for the class to collaboratively participate in active learning the old-fashioned way?  Technology standards attempts to outline a progression that educators follow in their journey toward redefining teaching and learning with technology.  It’s more fun to do Padlet than to post pencil/paper replies on the real classroom wall or blackboard, but it’s not any higher level in Bloom’s taxonomy.  Students may be more motivated to engage in class discussion if they are typing their response in Padlet and seeing it project through the In-Focus projector, but what are they really learning?  

Kids can see through learning for the sake of using the devices daily and if the learning is not active and engaging, they will grow tired of the new shiny device.  Teachers feel pressure to show they are using the new technology in their lesson plans, but are we really modifying and redefining or just substituting?  These are hard questions and have made me stop and examine how really innovative my classroom is.

Some technology class members have expressed opinions about the digital natives (younger teachers and students) and the non-natives (the veterans who did not grow up with electronic devices).  I don’t really think age has anything to do with success in technology one way or the other.  Focus and intent are the most important variables.  A digital native can be totally unconnected to the environment around him and clueless about his digital reputation as he feels entitled to do or say whatever.  A non-digital native may have to try harder to be comfortable with the devices, but if the desire and interest is there, he/she should not be written off because of the generation in which he/she grew up.  The veteran set can be just as hip and because they have to try harder since it doesn’t come naturally to them, they may see faults in the implementation that the younger set doesn’t even think about.  I’ve seen both younger and veteran teachers become uncomfortable using devices or technology in the classroom.  Engaging students in technology with a specific purpose that rises above simply making paper/pencil worksheets into digital worksheets is certainly the first step.  Basic classroom management will also play a huge factor whether the environment is 1:1 or Blended. 

Since I teach English 10, a large focus of my job is preparing students to pass the End of Course Assessment (graduation test).  I encourage creative thinking.  Every unit covered has an essential question.  Sometimes students may discover “new” essential questions as there are many different ways to look at curriculum and no absolutely right answer.  I’m not teaching math, where 2 plus 2 always equals 4.  I’m teaching values, ethics, character development and obligation.  While some students may think that Brutus was noble when he listened to the conspirators and tried to save his city from Caesar, others think he should have seen them for what they were and saved his best friend.  Is it possible to teach students critical thinking and technology skills and still prepare them for the knowledge based state tests?  I think the SMAR model applies well.  I can ramp up the content by having the students analyze and evaluate.  When they do that and collaboratively create a final presentation for the class, the learning sticks.  Sometimes they create an amusement park flyer using Publisher that includes creative rides (the Fountain of Fire) and interesting restaurants.  Sometimes they write Shrink poems about the characters.  Occasionally, the Ghost of Caesar makes an appearance, but they are taking elements of the play and redefining them.  

The concept of collaborative learning, the grouping and pairing of students for the purpose of achieving an academic goal, may be accomplished using various Google Doc applications, but in a blended classroom such as mine sitting around the table and talking in small groups while putting together a class project does not require a computer.  Active learning occurs with or without the devices as the students are engaged in the learning.  The group includes students at various levels working together in small groups toward a common goal with each choosing a level of expertise suited to their chosen task.  The artistic student chooses to create something hands-on, the writer chooses to work on the speech or script, and the student gifted in speaking to the class takes on the task of bringing the project “to life” for the class presentation. The students are responsible for one another's learning as well as their own. Thus, the success of one student helps other students to be successful.

How can we teach students to demonstrate their mastery/understanding when they aren't given explicit requirements?  Although Ben Johnson and Lindsey Wright both advocate turning the classroom over to students and letting them decide what to teach and learn, my school is far from that philosophy.  I give them rubrics which are open-ended enough that they may collaborate, analyze, evaluate, and organize products or projects while following the state standards and the curriculum for my class.  As with Julius Caesar, there are many different options they may use to think critically and create, but they have stated parameters about what an exceptional product/project should contain.  It will be at least a year before my school system goes 1:1, or longer, but there will have to be a major shift in the management of schools and how education is implemented in Indiana before the classroom instruction is turned over to the students without explicit requirements.

Googling My Digital Footprint

Many people are named Patricia Keefe so Goggling myself often makes me smile.  Today the first result was a recent grave in Richmond, Kentucky.  Thankfully, that is not me - yet.

Only five of us live in Indiana.  I located myself and clicked.  Sleuths can find my address, phone number, probable relatives, and a map marker.  A Google Earth ariel view of my home may be zoomed out and in.  For $2.95, I may access eighteen public records in my profile that include birth certificate, property information, college degree, teaching license, and others.  Sometimes I am tempted to pay the fee to see if I might learn something I don't know about myself.  Data systems do make mistakes.

My name will come up for various websites.  I have a resume typed up on Linked In, which includes references and accomplishments of my career.  I have a blog of professional writing that includes articles about education, but does not share with the Internet what my religious or political viewpoints might be.  I have a "secure" account on Facebook that users are not supposed to be able to access unless I have accepted them as friends.  I am not stupid enough to believe that it is really secure and even know how you may easily hack into it.  I am careful about what I post to update my status and what pictures I share.  I'm sure that my profile could be evaluated as "boring" and Facebook is continually asking me where I live, where I went to high school, and other information that I have not added.  You can't even see my birthdate.

You could learn that my passions are pontooning on Patoka Lake and writing. There are pictures from writing retreats I have attended and a blog entry "Connect with your Inner Muse in North Carolina" that will appear.  I often post about how super wonderful the day at the lake was AFTER I return home from the lake.  The Extending Lilly Teacher Creativity Workshop picture from last July is my large profile picture.  These things I am not afraid to share with whomever might want to learn more about me.

I do not gossip in chatrooms or on Facebook.  I don't post that I'm going to be gone on the weekend, nor do I post anything negative about people or work.  As a journalism minor, I am well aware of libel and slander laws and I am shocked by what I see posted by others.  My philosophy is that the glass is always half full.  There are new challenges out there; I just need to find them.

Maintaining a positive footprint is not difficult.  Think about what you post and remember that even if you delete pictures or posts, the internet has a long memory and there are programs that can retrieve what was posted even if you think it is gone forever. 

Discussions in class about the current events and things that happen regarding the internet can encourage students to think about what image they are projecting.   If you would not say something face to face to another person, should you really post it online?  Who is going to see the picture of your friends and you drinking at Saturday night's party?  What kind of a message is it going to send to others about you?  Maybe you don't like a political figure, is making fun of him/her online a good idea?  Do you really want people to know you will be in Florida during spring break and no one will be at your house?

A former Assistant Principal included many of the students as Facebook friends and learned a great deal about what was happening at school and beyond from their posts.  Students did actually upload pictures from shopping trips they took when they were home "sick".  Sometimes they tried to bully others into fights at school, which gave him a forewarning of what might happen in the cafeteria during 6th period the next day.  Discussion about what happened on field trips or in classes also provided useful feedback.  Duh?

I have been filling out job recommendations for summer employment for students and have reminded them (again) that employers may Google their names and see what comes up online.  Negative posts about others, posts that include inappropriate language every other word, and horrible spelling or grammar may cost a student an interview for a job they would have been great at doing.  Online behavior often does not reflect classroom behavior or behavior that a student would be smart enough to use in a job setting.  Pictures, political views, inappropriate religious statements, and slams against "hating this stupid town and all the people in it" will not win friends.  

The best advice to give students is to think about what they are doing when creating their digital footprint and not posting things they will regret.