ICT Current Trends

Since 2002 the Queensland Government proposed its plan to incorporate a
three-year ICT for Learning Strategy. This strategy came off effectively and provided students with the opportunity for learning in real-life settings (Finger, 2007). Following on from the success of ICT integration, the Queensland Government then released another ICT strategy within all Queensland schools. Commencing in 2005 the Smart Classrooms Strategy was based on the approach that ‘the critical mass of classroom integration reached during the past three years will be the foundation of the next step in the evolution of ICT and learning: making ICT integral to learning’ (Finger, 2007). 

 

At the time of reading the Finger (2007) article, nostalgia of 2002 and 2005 came to my attention. Within that timeframe I was commencing my last four years of primary education, and therefore I classify myself as a ‘guinea pig student’ who experienced these integrated ICT Learning Strategies. In remembering that time and looking at where I’ve come now with my education, I understand and see myself as proof of how the integration of these ICT Learning Strategies influenced my learning and in the long run have been beneficial to my learning outcomes and living of everyday life within this digital age. For this reason, I must commend my teachers on their use of ICT when I was at school. Although the concept of ICT integration was a new concept to education and teachers, in my learning experience, my teachers were able to facilitate their classroom content through different models of learning and teaching with ICT that involved more student-centred use, allowing me to construct my own knowledge (Finger, 2007).
 

Since then technology has advanced in many ways, including its evolvement for educational purposes. Today the use of Interactive Whiteboards (IWB) is now the latest ICT trend within schools. An IWB is a large interactive display that connects to a computer and projector (Howell, 2012). Its purpose is built on providing high levels of intellectual quality for students (Kent, 2010), in its potential to help teachers facilitate learning through exploring concepts by placing them in various contexts, making connections with previous knowledge and promoting discussions that develop students understanding and ability to become pioneers of their own learning. As Gage (2006) states, using an IWB increases the pace and depth of learning experiences, resulting in more time for discussion, questioning and investigating.

Upon coming into the lectures and tutorial workshops, my knowledge of the Interactive Whiteboards was very scarce. This was due to the commencement of IWB integration being in my final year of secondary education. At that time, similar to that of when I was in primary school, IWBs were a new concept to teachers and therefore they did not have the necessary knowledge to be able to incorporate the IWB into their pedagogy. Fortunately enough for me, after reading the Kent (2010) and Gage (2006) articles, and submitting the IWB assessment piece, I have been given the opportunity to engage with the software and use it to its full potential. After this experience I now understand how to properly incorporate the IWB in my future practice to maximise experiences. 

Interactive Games

As stated, there are many benefits in utilizing the technology, in my current experience I found the IWB to be fairly user friendly, which I believe most teachers will like, as I personally did. Other positive qualities include its ability to cater for all learners (auditory, visual, kinaesthetic), its use of multimedia and ability to connect to the internet, its flexibility and engaging interactivity that enables concrete learning and full depth of class content. 

Ultimately though as Finger (2007) states, the way in which teachers facilitate the use of ICT in their classrooms should be determined by their understanding of how students learn, and by their expectations about the knowledge and thinking skills students should acquire. This means that teachers should incorporate technology in the classroom, however they shouldn’t let the technology take over their role. Instead teachers should recognise the ways in which technology can help improve learning experiences before integrating them into their own pedagogy.

References

Coolmath-Games.com. Retrieved May 27, 2013 from http://www.coolmath-games.com/1-strategy-games-01.html

Finger, G., Russell, G., Jamieson-Proctor, R., & Russell, N. (2007). Transforming learning with ICT: Making it happen. ICT planning issues and ideas: How do teachers plan for ICT integration and for transforming learning with ICT? (pp. 110-150). Frenchs Forest: Pearson Educational Australia. 

Gage, J. (2006). How to use and Interactive Whiteboard really effectively in your secondary classroom. Pedagogy. (Chapter 3). London: David Fulton Publishers.

Howell, J. (2012). Teaching with ICT: Digital Pedagogies for Collaborating and Creativity. SouthMelbourne: Oxford University Press.

Interactive teaching and learning in Australia. YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BJjbAI7whU

Kent, P. (2010). Secondary Teaching with Interactive Whiteboards. Promoting intellectual quality with an IWB. (pp. 13-40). Melbourne. Macmillian Digital.

Retrieved May 27, 2013 from Google Images: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=constructivism+in+the+classroom&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=qsyiUZ2PEYaTigeGgoHoDw&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1233&bih=606#tbm=isch&sa=1&q=ICT+tagxedo&oq=ICT+tagxedo&gs_l=img.3...43810.53755.4.53980.11.11.0.0.0.0.228.1573.0j6j2.8.0...0.0...1c.1.14.img.Rz6ZBcp4NbI&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47008514,d.aGc&fp=94c67da1c7db37cb&biw=1233&bih=606

Telstra Case Study – Queensland Department of Education & Training (QDET). YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjUOW9Zp2Hs

Wikis and Collaborative Learning

In my previous learning experiences, the familiarity of Wikis and Collaborative learning was at a bare minimum. Not once had any of my past educators incorporated these facilities into my learning experiences.  Coming into the lectures and tutorials of these topics I was very unaware, due to my lack of knowledge, of what Wikis were and the benefits that Wikis and Collaborative learning can provide for students.

Maloy (2011) states that wikis are websites or blogspaces in which a group of people collaboratively edit and maintain. Its functionality entitles individuals and/or groups to edit the same web spaces, visit,

read, re-organise and update the pages structure or content.  It is due to this design that Wikis enable collective writing and editing, and overall enhance high levels of collaboration and interaction among students. 

Upon reading Transforming Learning with New Technologies by Maloy (2011) it is evident how and why wikis and collaborative learning technologies have attained such positive reception. From using technology in meaningful ways, to synthesizing and explaining the content learnt through written and different multimedia expressions, to the enabling of publishing these works and receiving feedback about students work both inside and outside the classroom, it is clear as to how wikis and collaborative learning can be used effectively and productively in the learning environment to increase student outcomes and incorporate engaging teaching strategies.

Aside from Wikis, other collaborative learning mediums include social-networking sites (i.e. Facebook, Twitter), Blogs, WebQuests and Discovery Missions. All are examples of how Web 2.0 can be used, and provides the familiarization of Web 2.0, a necessary consolidation skill needed across all disciplines commencing secondary schooling (Howell, 2012). With the purpose of collaborative learning to promote students to work together in questioning processes, making mistakes and overseeing each others reasoning, it is clear that the use of Web 2.0, despite being partial to negative reviews, considerably encompasses the basic functionality required to base these collaborative learning environments upon. Ultimately Web 2.0 is the way of the future, with pros being its currency, popularity, teaching students how to use social networking sites responsibly, and the automatic engagement students will have towards it. Web 2.0 provides the knowledge students will need when being employed in the work field.  

Reflecting upon my own schooling experience I recognise how the incorporation of Wikis and Collaborative learning could have benefitted my own learning experiences and increase my overall educational outcome. However at that time Web 2.0 and more specifically social-networking medias were still a new experience to all and weren’t considered as a safe learning environment. Howell (2012) states that in order to use these forums, they should be done so in safe and secure environments. Websites such as EduBlog would be one to fit this criterion, consequently alleviating any concerns had by parents and the community. It wasn’t until reading O’Shea (2013) and Howell (2012) articles that I believed the lack of knowledge and in some cases the fear of capably using these technologies appropriately on behalf of teachers may be difficult to overcome, especially in my case where teachers weren’t aware of Web 2.0 educational purposes. It was through participating and collaborating effectively with my peers in the Discovery Mission set in my tutorial, that I was able to experience first hand the outcomes and benefits my students would receive if I incorporated these learning experiences in my own teaching. As this process wasn’t as stressful as perceived, I believe this showcased how easy it can be for teachers to adopt these new technologies and incorporate them into their own learning environment. Nevertheless even after reading the articles and attending the lectures and workshops I still believe, considering the digital age we live in today, that blogs, wikis or more specifically social-networking forums aren’t a secure and safe enough learning environment for students, unless of course it is to be facilitated through something alike to Blackboard or EduBlog, with the permission of parents and school administration.



References

Howell, J. (2012). Teaching with ICT: Digital Pedagogies for Collaborating and Creativity. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Maloy, R.W., Verock- O’Loughlin, R., Edwards, S.A., & Woolf, B.P. (2011). Transferring learning with new technologies (MyEducation Kit). Communicating and Networking with websites, blogs, and more. (pp. 206-239). New Jersey: Person.

O'Shea, P. & Kidd, J. (2013). DiscoveryMissions: An Educational Tool for Web 2.0. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (pp. 4008-4012). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

     Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/p/48744.z

Retrieved May 27, 2013 from Google Images: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=collaborative+learning&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ei=XcGiUa0zgu6IB_LggKAH&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1233&bih=606#tbm=isch&sa=1&q=wikis+and+collaborative+learning&oq=wikis+and+collaborative+learning&gs_l=img.3...31340.34343.2.34656.10.10.0.0.0.1.284.1446.0j4j3.7.0...0.0...1c.1.14.img.zBY7Qdq4kgE&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47008514,d.aGc&fp=94c67da1c7db37cb&biw=1233&bih=606 

Retrieved May 27, 2013 from Google Images: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=wikis+in+education&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=FMOiUaiwK_CSiAeVuIGQAg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1233&bih=606#imgrc=_ 

Digital Storytelling

Prior to attending the lectures and tutorials of EDUC1049: ‘Learning Tools for the 21^st Century’, Digital Storytelling was somewhat a vague concept to myself. Although I have touched upon it in my previous learning experiences, I still wasn’t aware of its functionality and how it can benefit student educational outcomes and learning environments.

In a nutshell, digital storytelling enables the processes of selecting a topic, conducting research, writing a script, and developing an interesting story (Robin, 2009), transforming computer users into creative storytellers and giving traditional stories life. With its availability to incorporate various multimedia, sound files, video clips, graphics and text, digital storytelling advances students knowledge in more ways than just creating the classic narrative. Even so its ability to also be played on the computer, uploaded onto a website, burned on a DVD (Robin, 2009) or even its ability to be processed on either Apple (iMovie) or Windows software makes the software an accessible facility and teacher/student friendly. 

In regards to reading the Robin (2009) article, it was brought to my attention how by incorporating Digital Storytelling in the classroom students will be given the skills needed to ‘thrive in increasingly media-varied environments’ (Robin, 2009). With the integration of visual images, enhanced by text, students reap the advantages in student comprehension. All the more, the facilitation of digital storytelling engages students and promotes discussion on the content, enabling abstract and conceptual content to be equally understood. Essentially, in agreeing with the Robin (2009) article, Digital Storytelling is an efficient learning technology tool for collecting, creating, analysing, and combining visual images with written text.

However in stating the above, the only problem found was the unrealistic perception that all schools can afford the equipment needed for the application to function. Even though Robin (2009) suggests that these tools have become more affordable and accessible, it is naïve to believe that every school is provided with such funding. On the contrary though, in the case that this is evident, it could be asked that the students capture pictures, audio recordings or videos in their own means and bring them in on a USB, as done in the tutorial workshop I attended.

As my experiences in using digital storytelling are minimal, I found throughout the lecture the meaningful ways in which teachers can use this tool. Originally I thought that digital storytelling only had one purpose or function, but I soon learnt that this technology is more flexible than just simply communicating a narrative. Other ways in which teachers can use the tool is through personal narratives, stories that inform or instruct, and stories that examine historical events. Due to this flexibility it is evident that digital storytelling can be used across all curriculums. Another point I found valuable was how user friendly and comfortable it was to use, I personally adapted to the application quite easily and I’m sure in future my students will too. Regardless of the technology being a little different by then, digital storytelling will encompass students in 21^st Century Literacy, Digital Age Literacies or 21^st Century Skills (Robin, 2009).

Digital Stories in the Classroom - YouTube Video

References

Digital Storytelling in the Classroom.YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufVnMDVskLo

Digital Storytelling in the Elementary Classroom. YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 2013from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUZXBc6yRhU  

Improve Learning Through Digital Storytelling. YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mNQaR50FUE  

Robin, B.R. (2008). Digital Storytelling: A powerful technology tools for the 21^st century classroom. Theory Into Practice, 47: 220-228.

Assessment Using ICT

As stated by Kent (2013), using technology in both assessment and teaching is one of the most effective ways to improve student learning. Until participating in the EDUC1049 lectures and tutorials, I did not have the knowledge or understood as to what degree ICT in assessment can further enhance my learning. Although in my years of education I have used a vast majority of technologies, and used these technologies in various spectrums, and to various degrees, it has never occurred to me the value and purpose of implementing the technology within my assessment tasks. Within reading the Simmons (2009) and Kent (2013) articles it has been brought to my attention the benefits of implementing ICT in assessment.



First and fore mostly though, when implementing the use of ICT in assessment, Simmons (2009) explains there are two different forms of assessment, formative and summative. Summative assessment takes place after a learning experience (Simmons, 2009), however this form of assessment generally doesn’t give much or gives very little critical feedback to students. Contrary to this, formative learning is the latest approach taken by teachers when implementing ICT in assessment. Formative assessment differs from summative assessment as it is used consistently throughout the learning process, this may be in the form of continuous feedback from what needs to be done in order to reach an achievement and how to move beyond that point once the achievement has been made (Simmons, 2009). By privileging formative assessment, as opposed to summative, teachers are able to support the learners in their own independent learning and provide student-self learning rather than teacher-talk rote learning.

Furthermore, when setting these assessment tasks, teachers should link the assessment to a rubric that consists of the advantages gained by the students, on completion of the assessment (Kent, 2013). As a result of this, not only would the criteria assist in giving students the guidance needed to gain greater outcomes, but also these criteria will assist those who struggle academically, to make greater improvements and gains way beyond that of their fellow peers. 

In my own personal teaching practice, I believe I can facilitate ICT in assessment and formative assessment through the use of many ICT mediums. As Kent (2013) states, formative learning can be achieved through blogs, as they are compatible to producing assessable learning outcomes. Liking to blogs, Wikis, Twitter and also social media forums are also great facilities of formative learning. All offer many functions and can be used for all sorts of educational purposes from note taking, to knowledge management, and right through to developing learners’ knowledge and understanding. All of these applications of technology will help students, reflect and recall on previously learnt material, promote digital responsibility, encourage collaborative learning, increase their motivation to learn through the interactivity of the technology, and supply an endless need for concrete learning of all educational curriculums.

Ultimately, I personally agree with Simmons (2009) in that all ICT tasks can offer pupils a broad range of choices in how to execute all their work. From collaboratively creating informative Wikis, to authentic and engaged tweets about classroom activities and assignments, posts and comments on social media forums or even filming and uploading a video onto YouTube, all of these technologies possess a multitude of values both for the students development of learning and for their understanding of how ICT functions. It should only be encouraged that this type of learning be incorporated into the classroom as technology incorporation actually educates students.

Assessment for Learning: Peer-assessment and ICT - Youtube Video

References

Assessment for Learning: Peer- Assessment and ICT. YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1YoCx384GQ

Engage Me! Robin Hood pupils, Birmingham. (2008). YouTube. Retrieved May 27,    2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1YoCx384GQ

Kent, P. & Campbell, C. (2013). Technology for Assessment. Assessment for Teaching Today: A guide to assessment strategies and activities. (Chapter 5). Sydney: Macmillan.

Simmons, C. & Hawkins, C. (2009). Teaching ICT. LA: Sage. Retrieved from http://library.uq.edu.au/search~S7?/reduc1049/reduc1049/1,1,1,B/frameset~2499534

Social Constructivism

Founded by one of the grandfathers (Piaget) of educational theories, constructivism is a theory of knowledge or epistemology, which bases itself off the notion that individuals gain knowledge and meaning from their own experiences and ideas. As Yilmaz (2008) states, constructivism is a theory of learning, not a theory of teaching, and thereby its purpose in the classroom is to assist the facilitation of learning on the understanding of the students’ previously attained knowledge. In his research Piaget states there is four stages of which knowledge is developed by learners; sensorimotor ages 0-2, preoperational ages 2-7, concrete operational ages 7-11, and formal operational ages 11-16. On the contrary though, in some cases, depending on their level of knowledge developed, not every individual or student will be compatible cognitively within these categorized stages. As a result this may be due to the child’s cognition having matured past the supposed stage or even be lacking the knowledge needed to meet the requirements of their supposed knowledge development stage for their particular age. Furthermore Howell (2012) states, that these theories are important in the education landscape as they equip us with an understanding on how learners create new knowledge, build on existing knowledge and apply knowledge to new ideas.

On a practical level, constructivist theory is used to focus on the cognitive development of students, and their deep understandings of curriculum matter, and habits of mind that will assist in future learning (Yilmaz, 2008). To further develop and implement the strategy in their pedagogy, teachers may resort to Bloom’s Taxonomy. By doing so, it will further nurture the student’s knowledge of learning and application taken within completing tasks, but also it enables concrete learning. However I believe, as Rowe (2006) points out, that students can also be disadvantaged by the constructivist theory if the teacher is under the assumption that students already obtain the skills and knowledge to interact with constructivist theories and gain new learning. Assumptions like so, greatly disadvantage learners, as via the lack of teacher facilitation, students will not be able to engage in activity, discourse, or reflection. 

 

When implementing constructivist theory in my own pedagogy, I will use it to my best ability in advancing meaning-making and knowledge construction for my students. This may come in the form of finding material that is easily recognized by my students and further extrapolating the material to develop deeper high-order levels of cognition. I will endeavor to acknowledge the ways in which constructivists theory posits knowledge as temporary, nonobjective, internally constructed, developmental, and socially and culturally mediated (Yilmaz, 2008).  Alongside these notions I also recognise constructivism on a larger scaled perspective, in which these previously constructed knowledges created by individuals are ways of which people use to make sense of their world and surroundings. This not only means that knowledges aren’t just passively acknowledged by the world, but they are apparent in the individuals cognition, and throughout development are active sources in which individuals rely upon in order to make sense of the new information being taught. 

Ultimately as Yilmaz (2008) clarifies, constructivism asserts that knowledge doesn’t exist outside the realms of our cognition; truth is not absolute; and knowledge is not discovered but generated by the experiences of individuals. On this note it is important to address that if applying this theory to your practicum, teachers must be able to understand that all students are different and therefore even though Piaget puts forth a rubric of the four stages of knowledge development, this may not always be an accurate classification of how developed the knowledges of each individual student within your class may be.



References

Howell, J. (2012). Teaching with ICT: Digital Pedagogies for Collaborating and Creativity. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Rowe, K. (2006). “Effective teaching practices for students with and without learning difficulties: Constructivism as a legitimate theory of learning AND of teaching?” Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/learning_processes/10

Retrieved May 27, 2013 from Google Images: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=education+concept+maps&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=npSiUaqABeS8iAf-voCYAg&ved=0CDkQsAQ&biw=1196&bih=609#tbm=isch&q=education+constructivist+concept+maps&spell=1&sa=X&ei=0JSiUd6jHOajigea_oDoCg&ved=0CE0QBSgA&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47008514,d.aGc&fp=c85caae84c8b27b8&biw=1196&bih=609   

Yilmaz, K. (2008). Constructivism: Its Theoretical Underpinnings, Variations, and Implications for Classroom Instruction. Educational HORIZONS. (pp. 161-172). 

Mobile Learning in the Classroom

Mobile Learning - Technology and Education Today Podcast

As the innovation of technology grows, so does the landscape of education and how teachers implement and facilitate their pedagogies.  Consequentially, mobile learning can be described as the epitome of having the world at your fingertips and an example of the evolving technology that is rapidly changing the way we educate. Essentially mobile learning is elearning through mobile computational devices (Sharples, 2009). Functioning as a new and inventive way to extend education beyond the classroom context, mobile learning also employs the advantages of flexible learning, creative learning, sensory learning, personalized learning and collaborative learning. Aside from these advantages listed, mobile learning’s most important function is its ability to carry on everyday conversations and interactions after school hours. This aspect of mobile learning has become most critical to the success of this innovation as not only does the ability to constantly interact differ from that of traditional learning, but it also enables the classroom content and learning to be more engaging, instant, and flexible. By implementing mobile learning in your pedagogy students (secondary students to be exact) are able to adapt to a freestyle learning routine and can access material at a suitable means for them. However in regards to this point, if mobile learning is adopted in the classroom for a purpose of online interaction with fellow peers, Sharples (2009) states that the flow of conversation and interaction must be constant in order for this particular use of mobile learning to work. 

IPods themselves can stand for generating a creative learning environment, conveying a sense of self-empowerment and autonomy to the individuals (Dale, 2009). In agreeing with the Dale (2009) article, in my own personal experiences I myself specialize in the creative arts therefore (mainly in my secondary education) the use of IPods benefitted my learning greatly. Such advantages of using an IPod in my education were that of being able to source podcasts, mp3 files, videos, images, taking photos and filming my work to watch back, view my progress and critically analyse, and recording sounds and music I had composed for further critical analyzing also. I believe by having the facility of an IPod I was given the ability to correct my mistakes and errors, learn from them, perfect the execution of my work and most importantly grow as not only a learner but as a performing artist as well. 

 

However as handy a tool mobile learning can be it is not always suitable for every learner. As mobile learning is still a current trend within the education landscape there still lays surfacing issues. The main of these issues is inclusiveness for meeting all individual learners needs, as Dale (2009) explains. Aside from those capable students who have different learning styles this issue of inclusiveness mainly targets those who are visually or hearing impaired. Therefore teachers when implementing these mobile learning strategies need to be considerate in their decisions for how they wish to facilitate the use of IPods in their classroom, as they must cater for all students. Overcoming this issue though can be easily adjusted as Sharples (2009) explains, that this use of mobile technologies doesn’t have to fulfill the whole duration of class, it can be used in small groups for part of an activity, or even as a means of support for double checking work. All in all no matter what, the ultimate function of mobile learning tasks within the classroom should be directed by specific learning objectives.

References

Dale, C. & Pvmm, J.M. (2009). Podagogy: The iPod as a learning technology. Active Learning in Higher Education. 10(1). (pp. 84-96). Retrieved from http://alh.sagepub.com/content/10/1/84

Pirate Style (San Pedro High School Gangnam Style Parody). (2012). YouTube. Retrieved May 27, 
    2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P21OZ7X55CQ

Retrieved May 27, 2013, from Google Images: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=education+concept+maps&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=npSiUaqABeS8iAf-voCYAg&ved=0CDkQsAQ&biw=1196&bih=609#tbm=isch&q=education+constructivist+concept+maps&spell=1&sa=X&ei=0JSiUd6jHOajigea_oDoCg&ved=0CE0QBSgA&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47008514,d.aGc&fp=c85caae84c8b27b8&biw=1196&bih=609

Sharples, M., Arnedillo-S’anchez, Milrad, M., & Vavoula, G. (2009). Mobile learning small devices,
   big issues. In Balacheff et al. (Eds.), Technology-Enhanced Learning (pp. 233-249). 

Smith, R. & Crawford, C. (2011, April 9). Education and Technology Today. Mobile Learning. Retrieved May 27, 2013, from https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/mobile-learning/id293253394?i=93553169&mt=2