The 100 best Web 2.0 classroom tools

I came across this list of the 100 best Web 2.0 classroom tools as voted by teachers in the field. There are some really good resources in this list, many of which I had never heard before. Some of the tools might be less appropriate for the classroom (i.e. PayPal?), and there are many that may one day become indispensable. What is nice is that each tool is linked to its host site for further exploration.

It is interesting how I found this site, as I was researching Glogster and this list was linked to the site . Glogster is an online poster maker. What is attractive about “glogs” is that students can include text, audio, video, pictures, and more to make the poster quite interactive. In this way, glogs can further engage kinesthetic, visual, and auditory learners. In some ways Glogster is a more robust companion to Wordle, which focuses only on beautiful ‘word clouds’.

 

Financial literacy instruction remains important

I discussed the “case for financial literacy instruction” a few months back. Today, I came across some additional resources that may be helpful regarding this important recommendation. Adams (2011) noted that the possibility of accumulating student debt in college during these difficult times is pushing students to learn more about financial literacy. There are currently four states that mandate a financial literacy graduation requirement, and 19 additional states have integrated financial education into their high school curriculum. There is no such requirement in the state of Washington, but this is important enough an issue for student development and stewardship that I have been watching for financial literacy electives when reviewing possible online providers. I am also learning that there are numerous free resources available to help supplement a class curriculum on this topic, including Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy , National Endowment for Financial Education , National Foundation for Credit Counseling and the US Mint.

Reference:

Adams, C. J. (2011, Oct. 28) High schools, colleges push financial literacy. Accessed Nov. 2, 2011 through Education Week.

http://www.orangekids.com/teacher/additional-resources-literacy.aspx

Some ideas on teaching with an iPad

In this Edutopia blog post, the Johnson (2011) muses over what he would do if he had 30 iPads in his classroom. He focuses on two important aspects: using the iPad to engage kinesthetic learners and helping students connect beyond the classroom (access the Internet anywhere, share and collaborate with others, challenge students in creative ways, etc.).

He highlights the potential of an iPad in that it may be a tool that will transform instructional practice. He does warn, though,  “without good software, the Ipad is an expensive door stop, paper weight or frisbee. Fortunately, a dilligent person can find a lot of free stuff to get started.”

What is particularly helpful are the series of moderated comments by other teachers and how they are using iPads and various apps in their teaching. There are a lot of good ideas to consider.

Reference:

Johnson, B. (2011, Oct. 31) Teaching and learning: Using iPads in the classroom. Accessed Nov. 1, 2011 through Edutopia.

Why do we need a snow-day…

…when we can have an e-school day?

The Nurturing Faith blog  that I follow asked this simple question a few days ago. I hadn’t thought of this situation in all my reading on the transition to blended learning approaches in the classroom. Indeed, would we rather have kids make up for snow days at the end of the school year, or simply meet virtually when the weather doesn’t allow us to meet in person? It would seem appropriate for teachers to prepare for snow days by having online options planned and “ready to go.” Part of this would include preparing students on what to expect and how to proceed for these days.

The shift in thinking patterns of digital kids

In addition to the four implications discussed in my post on a foundation for 21st century schooling, I wanted to highlight a fifth, significant implication for the classroom that Kelly, McCain and Jukes (2009) associate with the reality of the online digital world and its relationship to schooling. Simply put, there is emerging evidence that today’s kids are thinking differently than their teachers. As a result, schools need to address the shift in thinking patterns of digital kids. This is, indeed, a novel observation that I had not considered before.

Kelly et al. discuss the theory of neuroplasticity, which refers to the brain’s ability to modify the organization of its neural pathways, thereby effectively rewiring itself in response to new demands placed upon it by the external environment. Neuroscientists suggest that such brain plasticity underlies the brain’s ability to learn, unlearn and relearn.

Neuroplasticity is the brain’s ability to reorganize how it processes information based on new input. If the brain encounters a new kind of input for sustained periods of time on a daily basis for an extended period of time, it will reorganize neural pathways to handle the new input more effectively. This is what happens when a child learns to read. With sustained exposure to textual input on a daily basis, the child’s brain reorganizes how the brain processes this new input so the brain can make sense of it.

In the same way, kids growing up in a digital world are being exposed to new kinds of input from digital experiences for sustained periods of time on a daily basis. Consequently, their brains are reorganized to handle the digital environment more effectively. This is creating a huge problem in our schools. Kids are quite literally thinking differently than those who teach them. (p. 23)

As a result of growing up in an increasingly digital world, it appears that the neuroplasticity of the brain has impacted student learning preferences. Kelly et al. suggest that the digital generation prefers:

  • receiving information quickly from multiple multimedia sources
  • parallel processing of content and multitasking
  • active, engaged learning
  • processing pictures, sounds and video before text
  • random access to hyperlinked multimedia information
  • networking simultaneously with many others (p. 23-24)

These learning preferences are more often than not in direct contrast to teachers who have learned, and therefore tend to teach, differently. They prefer slow and controlled release of information from limited sources, favor passive learning models such as lectures, choose to provide new information linearly, logically and sequentially, and ask students to work independently before they interact in groups.

Kelly et al. highlight the following implications for quality teaching and learning to reach the digital generation:

  1. Classroom instruction must shift from a predominantly lecture format to one that focuses more on discovery learning. Students should be provided with hands-on learning activities that allow them to master the digital tools for learning.
  2. Teachers must make a shift from the text-based instructional tools to include pictures, video and sound as appropriate media to convey information.
  3. Teachers must provide students with more access to hyperlinked information that can be navigated randomly. This ‘random access’ approach to navigating information in the World Wide Web is a mode of learning that students are already used to. Guided opportunities to develop these skills further are essential.
  4. Teachers must allow students to network and collaborate with each other and with experts from around the world on an ad hoc basis. (p. 24-25)

Without a doubt, these implications will impact teacher preparation substantially. Today’s students are developing skills from using new technologies that should be incorporated into the classroom. It is imperative for schools to provide the necessary professional development and appropriate collaborative planning time to help them succeed. Unfortunately, it appears that far too many of today’s teachers focus, instead, on of the skills that the students do not have because of the technologies.

Reference:

Kelly, F. S., McCain, T., & Jukes, I. (2009). Teaching the digital generation: No more cookie-cutter high schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Wesson, K. (2010). Neuroplasticity: Experience and your brain. Retrieved from http://brainworldmagazine.com/?p=717 on Feb. 1, 2011.

Categorizing my thinking

Peabody College of Education at Vanderbilt University recently launched the Developing Effective Schools Center (DESC), a national research and development center on identifying programs, practices, processes and policies that make some high schools more effective at reaching certain students than others. The DESC notes that consensus has grown among practitioners and researchers around the essential components of a successful high school. These include quality instruction, a rigorous curriculum, a culture of learning, professional behavior, connections to external communities, systemic use of data, system performance accountability, and learner-centered leadership.

Marzano (2003) reviewed 35 years of research of ‘what works in schools.’ He organized his results into three general factors of  influence on student achievement. These are 1) school-level factors (viable curriculum, challenging goals and effective feedback, parent and community involvement, safe and orderly environment), 2) teacher-level factors (instructional strategies, classroom management, classroom curriculum design), and 3) student-level factors (home atmosphere, learned intelligence and background knowledge, motivation).

As I reviewed the two lists, I wondered if considering these components and categories would be helpful as I continue to organize my thoughts regarding a new Christian high school. It seemed that each component and category could be applied to a Christian education context with little difficulty. I then recalled my recent site visitation experience at Monroe Christian School which introduced me to the accreditation standards that are central Christian Schools International. These are Standards 1) Community, 2) Staff, 3) Students, and 4) Curriculum. I mapped my understanding of the components suggested by DESC and the Marzano categories of what works in schools to the four CSI Standards and decided to include those additional components that a private institution needs to consider. This led to following organizing framework:

1. School

  • centrality of vision and mission of the Christian school (including the philosophical foundation of education/school)
  • connections to external communities (including parent and community involvement)
  • responsibilities & relationships among all participants in the learning process (including the student-level factors of home atmosphere, motivation, and learned intelligence and background knowledge)
  • systemic use of data to guide decision-making and inform system performance
  • facilities

2. Teacher

  • teacher development and support
  • healthy, professional, and biblical teacher leadership
  • developing a culture of learning

3. Students

  • discipleship and development
  • student services & programs
  • enrollment (admissions & retention)
  • graduation requirement

4. Curriculum & Instruction

  • a guaranteed, viable & rigorous curriculum
  • quality instruction & classroom management
  • learning environment
  • educational technology

I am going to start categorize and/or tag my posts in this blog according to this framework. This should help me as I continue to reflect and act upon this “whisper” for a Christian High School.

References:

Christian Schools International. (2006). Vision to action. Retrieved October 12, 2010 at http://www.csionline.org/.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Peabody College of Education. (2010, Fall). Ideas in action. Peabody Reflector. 11.