Final Blog Entry 541

Part I

All good things come to an end. This class is no different in that regard. John See stated years ago that technology should not be taught out of context of the material at hand (1992). I have learned and experienced first-hand Tech-PACK in context. I built on the three essential elements needed to guarantee positive technology integration: learning theory foundations, integration planning model & Tech-PACK and the essential conditions for integration (Roblyer & Doering, 2013, p. 34).  In my opinion that was the greatest value of this course.

I completed every project at a high level of excellence, not because I was grade-driven; but because I wanted to insure I could communicate what I learned with educators and students upon completion. I experimented with tools, apps, lessons and various ways of reaching a goal to insure I was mastering the material. I feel my body of work in this course meets the mastery criteria for each of the AECT course-specific standards.

Productive struggles, though frustrating in the moment, serve to show me what I am truly capable of achieving. I still need to work on communication to better articulate what I want or need to say. One can always improve and I wish to do better here.

As a learner who has struggled in the past and still struggles in some areas, I want to encourage the use of well-designed lessons and sites by my own students and teachers. I wish to strive for Accessible sites with goals that are articulated clearly.

The shift to Constructivism occurred some time ago. As a Theatre teacher, my curriculum has always leaned in that direction. Offering the students choices in early in the process and inviting them to share a seat at the planning table enriches the theatrical process. Adding a more modern touch with Connectivism seems a natural fit as we truly integrate technology beyond the crew positions and into the entire process of both education and performance. I was cognizant of both theories as I developed my lessons.

Part II

I feel my blogging efforts this term were solid across the board. Exploring the Blog Rubric now in hindsight, I still hold that view.

  • Content – 100/100 – My blog entries meet the criteria for Outstanding as I always went into depth on each topic. As a learner who sees things through a different lens, I shared my viewpoint with clarity, rich content and depth to articulate my point of view to the best of my ability.
  • Readings and Resources – 35/35 – Again, I feel I met the Outstanding criteria attempting to validate my points of view with grounded research and documentation worthy of a student enrolled in a Masters-level course.
  • Timeliness – 20/25- Being a harsh self-critic, if I had a shortcoming it was here. I would say I met the Proficient level. I would like to have been the first to post each and every week. Caring for an elderly father and enrolling him in Hospice during this term has been draining emotionally. Combining those issues with my own learning differences and needing to read, read and read again passages for comprehension meant time spent and posts occurred later in the week in a few instances. These are not excuses. I made choices and placed other priorities, my father and family and my own learning pace above being one of the first to post each and every week.
  • Responses to Other Students – 30/30 – I feel I met the criteria for Outstanding here as I embraced the opportunity to offer feedback to my peers. I offered true and honest feedback in a timely fashion. In many cases, I offered more than just feedback to two peers. I attempted to offer detailed feedback in a manner I would like to receive it – Praise, Correct, Praise. I started with a compliment, offered constructive points and finished with a positive comment. In many cases, I researched as much for their feedback as I did for my own posts.
  • Total – 185/190

Overall, the course has proven a valued rung in the ladder as I climb toward my goal. I appreciate the new tools in my toolbox as I feel they will be useful going forward.

References:

AECT Standards (2001) Retrieved from:  http://www.aect.org/standards/initstand.html

Dunaway, M. (2011). Connectivism: Learning theory and pedagogical practice for networked information landscape. Reference Services Review, 39(4), 675-684. Doi:10.1108/00907321111186686

Roblyer, M.D. and Doerling, A.H. (2013). Integrating educational technology into teaching (6th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

See, J. (1992). National Center for Technology Planning. Retrieved July 30, 2014, from http://www.nctp.com/html/john_see.cfm

Advertisements

About "B" Bernheim
“B”, his nickname, returns to the other side of the desk after many years. Graduating from UNC-Charlotte in 1983 with a BA in Education (K-12), he entered active service with the US Army. He began teaching high school upon completion of his tour of duty. B taught Language Arts and Social Studies for one year at the middle school level. English, Composition, Public Speaking, Theater, Forensics, and Technical Theater are among the subjects he has taught in public high school settings. Most recently, he was a Strategies of Instruction teacher, Assistant Dean of Students, dorm parent, girls’ hockey coach and rock climbing instructor at The Forman School in Litchfield, CT. The Forman School is a 9-12 boarding school specifically targeting students who learn differently.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: