9/23/2017 3 Comments Is disrupting education possible?
3 Comments
When considering both the TPCK and SAMR models, it is difficult to choose which one fits me best. It is actually difficult for me to distinguish how these two models are used in isolation of one another. First, let’s discuss the TPCK model TPCK considers technology, pedagogy, and content as knowledges intertwined with each other rather than individual units. Let me take a step back to detail a few definitions provided by Punya Mirsha and Matthew Koehler in their article “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge,” or-- if you’d prefer-- watch this short video from Common Sense Media for an Introduction to the TPACK Model. The first thing a teacher typically considers when planning any lesson is what they need to teach. This is their CK… Content Knowledge (CK) is knowledge about the actual subject matter that is to be learned or taught. A teacher can’t deliver their CK without… Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) which is deep knowledge about the processes and practices or methods of teaching and learning and how it encompasses, among other things, overall educational purposes, values, and aims. It is important to note here that teachers must consider their students’ prior knowledge when determining the best pedagogy. A strong teacher needs to consider their PK when planning the delivery of their CK. That is where PCK comes into play… Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) includes knowing what teaching approaches fit the content, and likewise, knowing how elements of the content can be arranged for better teaching. A teacher also considers his or her TK which is… Technology Knowledge (TK) is knowledge about standard technologies, such as the Internet and digital video. (I would argue that there is a need here for clarification of the term standard. Although word processors, spreadsheets, and e-mail are “standard” in most US classrooms today, they are not in other countries. Thus, incorporating our “standard” software tools into classrooms may pose difficulties for students coming to us from different countries.) When thinking about lesson delivery, the teacher must consider how their content can be delivered with the use of technology… Technological Content Knowledge (TCK) is knowledge about the manner in which technology and content are reciprocally related. An effective teacher is able to tie together their existing PK with the use of technology which is how we get TPK… Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) is knowledge of the existence, components, and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in teaching and learning settings, and conversely, knowing how teaching might change as a result of using particular technologies. (As with PK alone, it is important to consider the individual students when combining PK with TK.) An expert teacher considers all three aspects and is able to create a lesson with the CK, PK, and TK all in mind… Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) is an emergent form of knowledge that goes beyond all three components (content, pedagogy, and technology). When implementing the TPCK model, teachers need to be mindful of how the three knowledge sets intertwine with each. Viewing them in isolation causes a disservice to students (p. 1030). Not every lesson may be suited for a socratic seminar, whereas not every lesson may call for the use of an ipad or laptop. Now, let’s look at the SAMR model Teachers can view the SAMR model as a continuum for technology integration. SAMR stands for substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition. In his video on applying the SAMR Model, creator Ruben Puentedura, explains that this model is designed for teachers to go at their own pace. When researching learning technology, Sue Bennett and Martin Oliver discovered Mary Thorpe’s research on the pedagogic shift from materials and instruction to social competence and collaboration. They use this to explain how “some changes may not always be seen as improvements” (p. 181). This directly ties into Sue Cusack’s point in Susan Patterson’s podcast titled TPACK & SAMR about the dangers of using technology just for the sake of using technology. She describes a classroom teacher who implemented a handwriting without tiers program on iPads. This substitutional change may not have been the most effective use of technology in a classroom. Puentedura mentions that teachers should have a “continual re-examination of practice to make the best possible use of technology.” Some lessons may call for a substitutional technology to be included in the lesson, while others may be better enhanced by a redefinition technology. Why I believe TPCK and SAMR overlap As Valerie Shinas said in Susan Patterson’s podcast, I too can “see the value in both models.” As you’ve learned, TPCK is a framework used to guide teachers into considering content, pedagogy, and technology when planning and delivering lessons. The SAMR model is a framework for considering how different uses of technology are being used in specific lessons. Why then, can SAMR not be implemented into TPCK? Some teachers are apprehensive to embracing or acquiring TK because they may have a fear of change or do not have the time needed to learn the skills necessary. These teachers, while apprehensive, would be best encouraged at using basic technologies as substitutions in their lessons. This may open up their minds to other possibilities. Common Sense Media’s introduction video suggests using a technology coordinator to better integrate your TK into your PCK. A technology coordinator can also help teachers move beyond the substitution phase of technology integration into the augmentation phase. When considering my own TK, and more importantly my TCK, I find it imperative to realize how this technology is being used. It is great to have the TK to design a webquest and incorporate it into your lesson plan, but you also have to keep in mind if it is enhancing your lesson, or just substituting a research paper. Sue Cusack pointed out how Google Docs used to be considered a redefinition of a lesson, but is merely a substitution now. This connects beautifully with Mirsha and Koehler’s assertion that technology is always changing and that teachers’ TK needs to change as well (pgs. 1027-8). Even though technologies may disappear, it is important for teachers to remember that their willingness and ability to adapt to new technologies is the key to successful teaching whether it be through the TPCK or SAMR model. At the end of their article. Mirsha and Koehler maintain that “no single framework can provide all the answers. The TPCK framework is no exception” (p. 1047). This furthers my belief that the SAMR model can be applied within the TPCK framework. The most important point drawn from all of my research on this topic is to refrain from designing lessons around technology but rather to find ways to effectively incorporate different technologies that fit well with the content you are teaching; otherwise, you may be causing a disservice to students. This week I have two questions for readers, unrelated to each other:
References:
9/9/2017 3 Comments Enthusiast or skeptic??Am I a "technology enthusiast" or a "technology skeptic?" I think the answer to this question is more complex than a simple either-or response.
I decided to take this question to a friend of mine who is an application developer. I hoped he could provide me better insight into this topic than I could give myself. His initial response was that I am "technology illiterate." He semi-jokingly explained that he knows I want to use technology, but just can't. He also described me as a "technology outsourcer" adding that I am successful in finding others to set up, maintain, and fix my technology needs. He was impressed, however, with my DonorsChoose initiative of trying to secure 10 laptops for my classroom. After reading literature on the topic of technology in 21st century education, I have come to the conclusion that I definitely lean toward the realm of "technology enthusiast," but don't fully have the means or desire to embrace it completely. This by no means fully refutes my friend's assertion that I am technology illiterate though because as J. Voogt and O. Erstad explain, "digital literacy is a broad concept that has different aspects." My relationship with different technology varies. The ten or so articles I read leading up to this blog post could have very well been read online, however I still printed every one and read the paper versions. And even though I have a MacBook Air in the other room, I find myself typing this entry on my iPhone. (I should add that it required a laptop to setup the blog platform itself.) I think the reason to these two actions is because it's what I am used to doing. I didn't have a laptop throughout my Master's program, so I became accustomed to printing readings at the library to take them home to read. I also grew to be a fast iPhone typist for the same reason. My habits haven't changed now that I have a Mac, but does that make me a technology skeptic? No. It makes me a person used to doing the same thing. Technology skeptics argue that technology in the classroom isolates small groups of students and causes classroom management issues because many classrooms aren't 1:1 yet. This, however, should not be seen as a challenge. If a teacher has strong classroom management skills, he or she should be able to run a computer center while working with another group just as easily as if he or she was running a dictionary center. Students, when left to their own devices, will misbehave. A well prepared teacher, however, will have a solid lesson in place where the students on the computers are just as engaged as the students working with the teacher. If a teacher just recreates a worksheet to be filled out on the computer, he/she is bound to have bored students. Worksheets glorified by a computer screen are still worksheets. This is why it is important to realize that even 1:1 classrooms may not be the most beneficial. When discussing the billions of dollars spent on technology in schools, Will Richardson wrote: "it's not about the tools," and I couldn’t agree more. It is one thing to have the tools in the classroom, it’s another to know how to properly instruct a classroom filled with them. Possessions such as these are nothing without proper professional development. My district is not a 1:1 to district. In fact we only have roughly 60 Chromebooks for a district of nearly 1,500 students (which is less than the American average of one per every five students.) As a budding technology enthusiast myself, I was sure to reserve a class set several times a week last year for my senior English class. I felt it necessary for today’s seniors to learn how to work on an online platform both independently and collaboratively. I also wanted to teach them research skills necessary for college coursework. After slowly integrating Edmodo, Google Docs/Forms, and Remind 101 into my senior English class last year, I saw a tremendous rise in student work engagement and completion. (I only wish I were in a PhD program back then so I would have tracked the exact data!) I do believe a lot of the engagement comes down to the fact that "change motivates and challenges" (Embracing Change). Teachers need to be the first to embrace this change because as Peggy A. Ertmer asserted, "We are not going to be able to ignore technology in our teaching." My question to you is: Assuming your school provides you the "tools," what type of training do they provide you to effectively incorporate the tools into your daily plans? |
Amanda GOddardESL Department Head ArchivesCategories |