http://youtu.be/fitTn23tFTU
Iconoclast1967
Rubrics
Very knowledgeable about chosen current technology and provided an insightful and in-depth analysis.
Very knowledgeable about chosen earlier technology and provided an insightful and in-depth analysis.
Thoroughly described the differences and similarities
between the two technologies and used each to highlight aspects of the
other.
Utilized multimedia and technology in a creative and inspiring but also relevant presentation format.
My goal is to express myself knowledgeably about current technology in order to provide an insightful and in-depth analysis of both current technology, and older technology. In terms of the older technology I want to consider 8mm films and in so far as the new technology is concerned, a website: iCivics. The civics game has as its goal to provide a fun and educational experience for the next generation of citizens. They want to demonstrate that participation is important and they promote the ideas of democracy. Although the age range is essentially K-12 they do seem to overlook some of the intricacies and complexities of the actual government. For example, the three branches of government are not precisely three equal branches currently. I would have preferred that they demonstrated the concept of the Imperial presidency and how the two other branches, the legislative and the judicial, have been superseded.
The student has some choice however and can move through various aspects of the site at their own pace and by choice. The site does seem to favor the view that participatory democracy is the ideal political state. Not surprisingly, it has been endorsed to promote Common Core principles as funded by Bill Gates. The site states:. "Overview:The Next Generation Learning Challenges (NGLC) initiative, provided grants to 19 organizations for implementing proven and emerging technology-enabled instructional and assessment materials to improve students’ mastery of Common Core-aligned content for grades 7 through 9." In addition, the "Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation contracted with the nonprofit research institute SRI International for an independent evaluation of the NGLC Wave II grants." Along these lines, one other site examined, the Khan Academy, also complies with the politics of Common Core: "We're working hard to ensure our math content rigorously and comprehensively covers the Common Core Standards, a set of math standards that most of the states in the U.S. have adopted." In short the iCivics site is a very engaging site in that the design is clean and clear and indeed bright colors and interesting graphics are sprinkled throughout. The student will learn because not only are they memorizing facts and reading they are actually experiencing the dynamic process of democracy. They state their intention clearly enough: "democratic action," which is code for progressive politics.
What do you think are some of this technology’s goals?
The goal of the technology is to allow the student to manipulate the data in such a way that they actually understand the promoters of the living Constitution and the progressive ideals advocated by the organizers. In the exercise to Know Your Rights clients come in to interact with the lawyer who may or may not have the expertise needed and then go to trial: it's an interesting approach.
What does the user “do” when s/he uses the technology?
The student may choose four main exercises in which they have to interact and think through the issues within that module. It means they have to think while making decisions based on their understanding of the Constitution.
Does the technology direct the learner toward a specific goal or is it more open-ended?
The learner is directed towards participatory, direct action progressive politics. It is similar to the Greek notion of direct democracy, as the Founders had written a Constitution to head off such a direction.
How does it seek to engage and/or motivate the learner?
The learner is engaged and motivated by moving through various modules. The student is given a semblance of choice in that they could move from preselected silos and categories of thinking.
How might the learner learn from it?
The learner might see themselves as oppressed (Pablo Freire) and the learner may raise their consciousness. The designers of the site seemed to intend that the learner understand that activism is the route to pursue.
Who was/is its intended primary audience?
The audience of the older technology was school-age in high school kids. I will anticipate part three by contrasting it with the newer technology.
The intended primary audience of young people are those without a knowledge about American history and a constitutional background. There is no discussion of America as a Republic, or a description of the Res Publica.
What were/are its goals?
The older technology had as its goal to stimulate thought and to encourage conversation and discussion
The new technology goals are to be engaging and relevant while acquainting a student with the living Constitution as one that can be interpreted and expanded upon.
Based on your personal experiences with it, did the technology meet its goals? Why or why not?
Yes, the older technology met its goals because it is very memorable even after several decades.
Yes, the new technology meets its goals in that it is well-designed, attractively arranged, and well laid out to involve a younger, impressionable student to enjoy.
Did it have other potentially unintentional effects (either positive or negative)?
The older technology had unintentional effects in that it was bombastic and it turned some students off.
Insofar as the new technology is concerned the following is one of the more intriguing passages in the game. The game actually shows you how to violate the Constitution of the United States of America. It is an unabashed appeal to the unbridled use of tyrannical power. The site states:
"Do you like running things? Branches of Power allows you to do something that no one else can: control all three branches of government! You'll have the power to write any laws you want about issues you choose. Careful, though, there's a lot to juggle when you're playing all three branches. Good luck!"
There is no instructive background to explain a figure like George Washington for example who actually refused the title of Excellency. It appears to take the history out of its context and with no readings or learning objectives that have to do with the times and the culture of the day it is difficult to really grasp why the Founders wrote the document that they did.
Are their approaches similar or divergent?
The approach of the older technology is to provoke thought and enjoyment because films in the old days were technologically challenged but very exciting for the day and age. At this time the newer technology is striving to keep up with the better produced more highly commercial products that students have access to already.
Pick one aspect of the experience across both technologies and contrast them.
One aspect of the experience across both technologies can be contrasted since the older technology, although not technologically sound, provoked a great deal of excitement and expectation among students. The newer technology by contrast does not enlighten and inform. It appears to titilate but not engender fun and the joy of learning and reading seems missing.
How do they compare? Did you find one more engaging? More thought-provoking? More memorable? More playful or structured? More motivating?
They compare in the sense that both want education to be fun. The older technology involved us because it was something very different and out of the ordinary. The newer technology is something that kids experience every day because they've grown up with and have been surrounded by technology. There's no question that the newer technology is more engaging in that the older technology was a more passive medium. We were excited by it since we really had to socialize and discuss the content to make sense of it. But considering the question of which is more thought-provoking I think you can still make a case for the older technology. I have retained the memories of Mr. Deeds and those history classes over several decades but I doubt if students today will remember technology in the same way after several decades. The older technology is more memorable because it really stood out in a day when there was much less technology. It was really something out of the ordinary. I think the newer technology is both more playful and more structured and does not allow for the freedom of thought as the older technology did. You also do not interact and socialize in the new technology. In the older technology there are no limitations of thought. You were free to think of the material as you saw fit including as I suggested in my video presentation. Some students simply laughed at how ridiculous the propaganda was. The newer technology is more structured in that there are silos of thought confining the student to certain pathways to learn. In the case of motivation they probably are just about equal in that the older technology allowed students to think what they wanted. The newer technology motivates students to be activists.
Why do you think this is the case for you? Is it likely the case for other users as well?
I see the technology as I do more simply because of the culture of the time and my age. The country is much different and therefore what is most likely be the case is that other users will have a very different experience.
What other differences or similarities struck you about these tools?
I found the older technology more engaging in that it is open-ended. Contrast the more narrowly focused iCivics site. The student has only one of four areas: Lawcraft, Election Resources, One Big Party?, or Citizen Me. What if the student had other ideas about civics? There are only four choices to pick from. If you pick Lawcraft for example, you can only be a Democratic or a Republican. Thus, you only have two choices. The student may pick from numerous characteristics to advocate within the confines of those two parties. The provided definition of liberty is misleading. In politics, liberty is freedom from government coercion; however, in the game, it is defined as "people have the freedom to do things that they want to do." Generosity is defined that "the government is providing large benefits or services to citizens." Can non-government NGOs be generous? Perhaps institutions such as churches, synagogues, or non-profits are providing benefits or services too. The difference, not mentioned in the game, is that government is collecting taxes first. The NGOs are simply generous.
Common Core References
Lawcraft and the Annenberg Foundation
To be posted:
March 28, 2015
Liberty Beats Common Core
https://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/b/post-preview?token=xBPhNUkBAAA.90JQYy3n40_pLZzMVQvqMA.z9qg37U9oJCeIFdKJU0J6Q&postId=889523697381562301&type=POST
March 24, 2015
Rare to Common Core: College Degree Over 40 Years
January 29, 2015
How to Make Math Hard: Common Core
Harder Math Harder Subtraction
December 31, 2014
Conform Common Core
December 22, 2014
Governor Jindal Sues Feds Over Common Core
November 30, 2014
Common Core History Nonsense
Enochs High School principal Deb Rowe in charge in California, social studies teacher Janeen Zambo read from a breakup note to the students ab Nonsense
October 29, 2014
10 Catholic Facts Against the CommonCore
http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/Portals/0/Mail/Renewal%20Report/pdf%20for%20web%20Final.pdf
Media Fawned Over Common Core
http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/10/media-fawned-over-common-core.html#axzz3GoFkxdc0
Common Core Promotes Islam
American Common Core Pro-Islamist
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/10/common-core-promotes-islam.html#ixzz3GoG5thci
Common Core Toxic
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/04/public-school-teacher-has-some-harsh-words-for-common-core-and-the-toxic-culture-of-education/
PA Against Common Core
http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/08/common-core.html#axzz3GoFkxdc0
Iowa Ditches Common Core
http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/08/iowa-ditches-common-core.html#axzz3GoFkxdc0
Catholics Battle Church Officials Against Common Core
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/18/catholic-parents-clash-over-common-core/
10 Reasons to Oppose Common Core
http://youtu.be/na-JmnHdlZw
Common Core Data Collection of Every Child
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/22/Study-New-Technology-Development-Pushed-By-Feds-Allows-For-Data-Collection-on-Every-Child
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/05/common-core-data-collection-of-every.html#ixzz3GoHHhbNk
Common Core Motivator: White Privilege
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2014/05/21/teacher-involved-common-core-development-my-white-privilege-motivated-me http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/22/listen-to-the-audiences-reaction-when-teacher-reveals-why-he-helped-write-common-core/
Common Core Government Propaganda
https://mobile.twitter.com/ColetteMoran/status/395967716382629889/photo/1
Feds Threaten Indiana Over Common Core
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/07/federal-govt-issues-warning-to-state-that-wants-to-opt-out-of-common-core/
Comedian Comes Out Against Common Core, Standardized Testing – See If You Can Get the Answers to His Kids’ Homework
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/28/when-the-famous-comedian-who-once-said-i-really-love-barack-obama-says-this-about-common-core-it-makes-news/
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/04/comedian-comes-out-against-common-core.html#ixzz3GoHnA0a6
Another Common Core Progaganda Site
opened.io
Common Core Opponent Suspended
http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/04/common-core-opponent-suspended-for.html#axzz3GoFkxdc0
Teacher Tearfully Describes Bullying and Intimidation She Suffered for Opposing Common Core
Speaking before the Missouri Senate Education Committee, Susan Kimball said she has been “strongly discouraged from saying anything negative about Common Core by my administration and some school board members.”
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/04/teacher-tearfully-describes-bullying.html#ixzz3GoIpTjSx
http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/04/teacher-tearfully-describes-bullying.html#axzz3GoFkxdc0
SAT Dumbing Down for Common Core: Gov't to Put Companies Out of Business
SAT test prep companies out of business and aligning the test to the Common Core Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/sat-test-prep-makeover-104291.html#ixzz2v81LnhTc
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/03/sat-dumbing-down-for-common-core-govt.html#ixzz3GoIxbi2K
Common Core Principal Against Common Core
http://nepc.colorado.edu/author/burris-c-c
Click the "play" arrow for the Common Common Core audio report
Common Core audio report http://www.grassrootsaction.com/201105/offer.asp?Ref_ID=25183&p=1&CID=201107&RID=41539123 See more at: http://www.grassrootsaction.com/201105/offer.asp?Ref_ID=25183&p=1&CID=201107&RID=41539123#sthash.v8WrYqgf.dpuf
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/03/click-play-arrow-for-common-common-core.html#ixzz3GoJBcZLj
Common Core, Wrong
http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/02/common-core-wrong.html#axzz3GoFkxdc0
Panelist at Podesta Think Tank on Common Core: 'The Children Belong to All of Us' - See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/panelist-podesta-think-tank-common-core-children-belong-all-us#sthash.g7hUMfGo.dpuf
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/02/panelist-at-podesta-think-tank-on.html#ixzz3GoJRWMxV
Catholic is Our Core, Not Common
Catholic Schools Standards Project known as the Common Core Catholic Identity Initiative (CCCII)
http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicIsOurCore/CatholicIdentityConcerns.aspx
http://ohioansagainstcommoncore.com/2013/08/catholic-school-parents-your-revolt-is-way-overdue/
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/common-core-commotion-is-new-curriculum-catholic-school-friendly/
http://www.cccii-online.org/images/Resources/CCCII_Project_Overview_Ozar_June_2012.pdf
http://www.catholicschoolstandards.org/
http://www.cccii-online.org/images/Resources/Guidelines/CCCII-Guidelines-01-15.pdf
http://www.ncea.org/events/common-core-catholic-identity-initiative-conference
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/02/catholic-is-our-core-not-common.html#ixzz3GoJXPfty
FreedomWorks Common Core Course
Course: Activist Involvement: Common Core
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/01/freedomworks-common-core-course.html#ixzz3GoJdQir9
Fed-Up Mother Tackles Common Core in Viral Video: ‘Parents Have No Voice’
Karen Lamoreaux, an Arkansas parent who appeared in a viral video tackling some of the issues associated with the Common Core, appeared on the Glenn Beck Program Wednesday to discuss the “dumbing down of American kids.”
Read more: http://blogsmithconsulting.blogspot.com/2014/01/fed-up-mother-tackles-common-core-in.html#ixzz3GoJkWDGl
The following are some current educational technologies you are welcome to explore:
Assignment 1.1: Ed Tech Then and Now
INTRODUCTION
As we begin our explorations of the theory and design of educational technologies, we start by developing a framework for considering and discussing educational technology. As we continue through the weeks together, our models of individual learners and the contexts in which people learn will develop. But it’s useful to see some concrete examples right away to start analyzing the designs of existing technologies built for learning and teaching.PART 1: CURRENT TECHNOLOGY
So as a starting place, we’d like you to jump right in, find a new piece of current educational technology and try it out yourself. Some examples you might want to consider are listed on the next page. We’ll get the most variety as a class if everyone chooses something they find or know about independently, but if you’re stuck for ideas feel free to work with one from the list. We’ll refer to this as your “current technology”. Spend some time using the technology as a learner would - you don’t need to become an expert in it, but work with it until you feel like you have accomplished something cool, and you could explain to a friend what the technology is all about.Now do some critical thinking about the technology and your experience with it. There are many ways to analyze and reflect on this experience, but as a start, consider these questions:
- What do you think are some of this technology’s goals?
- What does the user “do” when s/he uses the technology?
- Does the technology direct the learner toward a specific goal or is it more open-ended?
- How does it seek to engage and/or motivate the learner?
- How might the learner learn from it?
PART 2: EARLIER TECHNOLOGY
Now, think back to a technology which made an impression on you in your own learning experience. This can be positive or negative, and can be from the recent past or something from your childhood. We’ll refer to this as your “earlier technology”. It can be anything you’ve used in an educational context - for example Speak and Spell, a filmstrip, laserdisk, PC software, Excel, etc.Give a quick description of the technology for those who might not be familiar with it. Then describe your recollections and impressions of this “earlier technology” and its impact on your learning.
- Who was/is its intended primary audience?
- What were/are its goals?
- Based on your personal experiences with it, did the technology meet its goals? Why or why not?
- Did it have other potentially unintentional effects (either positive or negative)?
PART 3 - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Finally, compare and contrast your experience using the “current technology” with your experience with your “earlier technology”.- Are their approaches similar or divergent?
- Pick one aspect of the experience across both technologies and contrast them.
- How do they compare? Did you find one more engaging? More thought-provoking? More memorable? More playful or structured? More motivating?
- Why do you think this is the case for you? Is it likely the case for other users as well?
- What other differences or similarities struck you about these tools?
DELIVERABLE FORMAT
Your actual turn-in for this assignment may vary from student to student, but the important thing is that it include background information about your chosen technologies, and your responses to the questions (or similar ones) in each of the 3 sections. We imagine that most turn-ins will take the form of a written document, in which case it would also be helpful to include images or screen shots of the technologies being discussed. If you would prefer to create a presentation, video, or other multimedia deliverable, that’s great too. Choose the format that you think best conveys what you want to communicate, and that you will have the most fun with.TURN-IN AND EVALUATION
When you’re ready to submit your assignment, go to the last unit in this ribbon, which is the peer assessment. Since the platform does not conveniently allow document uploads, you will need to post your work online somewhere then paste the link(s) and any special instructions into the submission form. (See these tips on posting shareable documents online.) You’ll then be prompted to evaluate some of your classmates’ work, and in turn some of your classmates will also evaluate your work. The evaluation will be based on the criteria in the rubric, which can be found on the next page. So you will want to look through the rubric ahead of time and keep those criteria in mind as you work on your project.Due Date
Technically the only due date is to submit this assignment by the end of the course. However, to get the benefit of peer feedback, we stronly suggest you submit it by the end of Week 1: October 21st. After that time the majority of course participants will be moving on to Week 2 work and won't be focused on this specific topic.Share (External resource)
Part 2
Mitch Resnick and Ricarose Roque describe the inspiration for Scratch and how it makes programming easy for kids to get into. They talk about the goals for Scratch as making programming more tinkerable, meaningful, and social.
The Turtle Art gallery shows how complex and artistic Logo creations can get - definitely worth a quick browse.
Start here for a basic step-by-step tutorial.
Turtle Academy has lessons and sample programs if you want to delve deeper. Just create an account and go to the Playground to get started.
It seemed redundant to “create” things that were already created. Then, I tried to mix and match to make something original but the coding was too glitchy for me and my skills were not up to par. As a result, I went back to a simple tree but I couldn’t get a screen shot on the computer I was using at the time. I did attach Logo Interpreter.htm though.
Logo Interpreter.htm: Sorry, this file type is not permitted for security reasons.
This browser-based logo compiler lets you write and run your logo programs quickly and easily on the web site.
Hal Abelson's bio
MIT App Inventor, one of Logo's descendants, originated by Hal.
The Logo Tree Project showing the descendants of Logo.
"But the real magic comes when this [computation] is combined with the conceptual power of theoretical ideas associated with computation (p. 353)." Herein lies the rub. Most of the technology so far outstrips the conceptual power of the student to explore their own ideas. You can not let the technology dazzle you into submission.
Papert's Teaching Children Thinking paper
Papert video
Part 3
Part 2
History of Logo
Piaget, Childhood
Papert
Piaget
Zone of Proximal Development
11.132x: Design and Development of Educational Technology
- Starts: 8 Oct 2014
- Instructors: Eric Klopfer
- MITx
Video
About this Course
To be effective, educational technologies must be designed based on what we know about how people learn. Through interviews with multiple experts in the field, this course examines educational technologies, outlines the theories that influenced their development, and examines their use. The course leads up to a final project – a kickstarter style pitch for a new educational technology - which is worked on iteratively across the weeks. It involves active weekly participation.
In week 1, we’ll talk about the history of educational technologies and how they change the way we learn. We’ll also discuss two important educational theories that focus on student-centered learning.
In week 2, we’ll explore what it means to learn something and examine several different approaches to deepen learning. We’ll begin by introducing a specific framework for thinking about learning. We’ll then take a close look at how educational software developers are more deeply engaging learners and even providing feedback to students as they learn.
Week 3 will focus on forms of Active Learning, where students choose and pursue activities based on their own interests. We’ll also talk with experts about designing to help build important non-cognitive skills, like persistence and developing mastery.
Week 4 will move from individual learning to collaborative learning in a range of forms, from apprenticeships to communities of practice. We’ll speak with experts about the many ways learning in groups can manifest itself. No matter what the medium, collaborative learning has a lot to teach us.
Week 5 focuses on assessment. All the clever educational technology design in the world isn’t very useful if we don’t know whether students’ learning is being enhanced by it or what changes need to be made to increase its effectiveness. We’ll talk with teachers, students, and assessment experts who will provide an overview of the different types of assessment and how technology is changing the field of assessment.
Finally, in week 6, we’ll talk about design-based research, a methodology for research and design of educational innovations in which you create projects that embody the educational change you wish to study.
Week 0 of this course is a 'ramp-up' week for participants to introduce themselves to one another and become familiar with the forums and other course platform features.
This course is part of the EdTechX series from the MIT Education Arcade. Build your understanding of the use and design of technologies for learning. Check out the other course modules.
Behaviorism (or behaviourism), is an approach to psychology that combines elements of philosophy, methodology, and theory. It emerged in the early twentieth century as a reaction to "mentalistic" psychology, which often had difficulty making predictions that could be tested using rigorous experimental methods. The primary tenet of behaviorism, as expressed in the writings of John B. Watson, B. F. Skinner, and others, is that psychology should concern itself with the observable behavior of people and animals, not with unobservable events that take place in their minds. The behaviorist school of thought maintains that behaviors as such can be described scientifically without recourse either to internal physiological events or to hypothetical constructs such as thoughts and beliefs.
From early psychology in the 19th century, the behaviorist school of thought ran concurrently and shared commonalities with the psychoanalytic and Gestalt movements in psychology into the 20th century; but also differed from the mental philosophy of the Gestalt psychologists in critical ways.[4] Its main influences were Ivan Pavlov, who investigated classical conditioning although he did not necessarily agree with behaviorism or behaviorists, Edward Lee Thorndike, John B. Watson who rejected introspective methods and sought to restrict psychology to experimental methods, and B.F. Skinner who conducted research on operant conditioning.
In the second half of the 20th century, behaviorism was largely eclipsed as a result of the cognitive revolution. While behaviorism and cognitive schools of psychological thought may not agree theoretically, they have complemented each other in practical therapeutic applications, such as in cognitive–behavioral therapy that has demonstrable utility in treating certain pathologies, such as simple phobias, PTSD, and addiction. In addition, behaviorism sought to create a comprehensive model of the stream of behavior from the birth of a human to their death (see Behavior analysis of child development).
In psychology, cognitivism is a theoretical framework for understanding the mind that gained credence in the 1950s. The movement was a response to behaviorism, which cognitivists said neglected to explain cognition. Cognitive psychology derived its name from the Latin cognoscere, referring to knowing and information, thus cognitive psychology is an information-processing psychology derived in part from earlier traditions of the investigation of thought and problem solving. Behaviorists acknowledged the existence of thinking, but identified it as a behavior. Cognitivists argued that the way people think impacts their behavior and therefore cannot be a behavior in and of itself. Cognitivists later argued that thinking is so essential to psychology that the study of thinking should become its own field.
Constructivism is a theory of knowledge (epistemology) that argues that humans generate knowledge and meaning from an interaction between their experiences and their ideas. During infancy, it was an interaction between human experiences and their reflexes or behavior-patterns. Jean Piaget called these systems of knowledge schemata. Constructivism is not a specific pedagogy, although it is often confused with constructionism, an educational theory developed by Seymour Papert, inspired by constructivist and experiential learning ideas of Piaget. Piaget's theory of constructivist learning has had wide ranging impact on learning theories and teaching methods in education and is an underlying theme of many education reform movements. Research support for constructivist teaching techniques has been mixed, with some research supporting these techniques and other research contradicting those results.
The Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education
Writing Learning Objectives: Beginning with the End in Mind
Posts
