Week 5 Reflection

This week we explored Web 2.0 tools that could be used to engage students in learning. I watched the series of Web 2.0 videos on the Discovery Education website. The tools are broken down into categories of application such as Presentation, Video, Mobile, and Community. Additionally the site provided an overview of resources known as The Best of the Best. This video shared Web 2.0 tools that could be used in numerous ways in the classroom. I explored the tools that I had not used recently or that were new to me. I found that, as they mentioned in their video, some of the Web 2.0 sites were no longer in existence. Some of the tools that were free now have fees associated with different levels of services, and still others had been bought or merged with other tools. For example, Gizmoz is gone, GlogsterEDU that was originally free now has a small but reasonable charge, and JOTT has been integrated into Nuance, which offers speech to text services such as Dragon Dictation.

More importantly this week however, was reading about the different ways that my classmates incorporate web 2.0 tools. Many of the students are obviously using iPads or other tablets in the classroom, because many of them recommended apps such as ShowMe or StoryKit. My students are not allowed to use personal devices, and their screens have to be large enough for an adult to fully supervise 2-3 students 100% of the time. There are often computer based Web 2.0 tools that are similar to the apps that were suggested. I use http://awwapp.com/, which is sort of like ShowMe, and www.StoryJumper.com, which is a digital storytelling tool that my students can use on laptops or desktop computers. One new tool shared by classmate, Jennifer Barcavage, was Popplet. Using Popplet groups, a teacher could set up accounts for the school year for as little as $2.00 per student. It is basically a visual organizer or presentation tool, or a place to curate ideas, images, and videos. I could see many uses for this tool. Students could use it to present what they have learned about a particular subject, as a pre-writing tool, to summarize something they have learned or read, or even as a note-taking device during lectures or movies. Teachers could use it to introduce new concepts, to help students develop meaning for new vocabulary, or as a review at the end of a unit.

Another learning point this week was on communicating for inquiry based learning. The way to communicate is based on the scientific method, but could be applied to any content area. A question is created, the students form a hypothesis or make a claim, the students collect data and supporting evidence, and then, based on the evidence, students formulate a conclusion. Our activities this week asked how we might use Web 2.0 tools to communicate a scientific explanation. Again my classmates provided several explanations for how this could be done including using Prezi, Blabberize, and Animoto. Many also suggested uploading the work to be published on class Edmodo sites, Blogs, or wikis. I already use many of these tools regularly for my students to communicate in various ways, so the real lesson for me was on how to apply what I have always seen as the scientific method to other content areas. Corinne Altham shared how to use what she calls Power Answers to respond to literature, and Darryl Chriss shared ideas for how the method could be applied to a social science theme.

I know that we will move into designing inquiry based lessons this next week. I am hopeful that the plans that we use will be easily integrated with the formats of planning that I am expected to use to address and communicate learning to 8 different Massachusetts districts.

Web 2.0 and Inquiry

I was planning to critique Gizmoz, but as mentioned in the Discovery Education introductory video on Web 2.0 tools, these tools come and go.  Gizmoz is gone.  So I looked around for some alternatives and found GoAnimate and Blabberize. GoAnimate allows you to make videos for free, but to have an educator account it costs at minimum $99, which is too much for one tool to use with 8 students. My students would not be able to freewheel on the GoAnimate site because they are not permitted to have email accounts in the highly restrictive residential school setting. With adult supervision, however they could use the basics through a free account set up using my teacher email.  Blabberize allows you to upload your own photos and animate the mouth for free. It is sort of comic, and it is sure to gain the attention of your students while giving instructions, or for introducing content specific vocabulary.  As a teacher, I could use either of these tools to present new information or to spark a discussion. Students could use GoAnimate and Blabberize to summarize something they have read or learned in any content area.  They could also use either tool to explain how they solved a math problem, how they tested an idea, or even to demonstrate a role-play of a social situation.

Web 2.0 tools are categorized on the Discovery Education Web20.12 website as Presentation, Video, Mobile, and Community tools. 

Web 2.0 Presentation tools are websites where students and teachers can create dynamic presentations to share with an audience.  Some examples of Web 2.0 Presentation tools are Prezi, SlideShare, and Glogster.

Web 2.0 Video tools allow students to create and edit slide shows, and videos using still or moving images integrated with audio.  These videos can then be embedded in other presentations or can be shared on the web. Some examples of Video Web 2.0 tools are Animoto, GoAnimate, and PhotoPeach.

Mobile tools are Web 2.0 tools that can be accessed with a mobile device such as a smartphone or tablet. Students and teachers can use apps to podcast, create digital stories, or create instant polls and quizzes.  Some examples of Mobile Web 2.0 tools include PollEverywhere, Storyrobe, and Socrative.

Community tools are web 2.0 sites that promote communication, collaboration, and shared work spaces.  Some examples of Community Web 2.0 tools are Wikispaces and Edmodo.

Web-based technology tools can be used to engage students during a lesson by bringing visuals and audio to the classroom via Video and Presentation tools.  Video and audio provoke discussion and stimulate student senses.  Additionally, interacting using mobile devices to check-in using a quick poll, or by having students use the tools to create their own videos, presentations, and polls will help students to stay active and engaged during lessons.

Using web-based technology tools such as PollEverywhere and Socrative  teachers can preassess student understanding at the beginning of a unit of study.  Teachers can also use a series of still images through SlideShare or Animoto to stimulate student thinking, and then have them share what they know about the images or how the images connect to a single theme.  Students could use a quick response feature like Padlet to share what they already know on a topic.

Web-based technology tools can be used to support the process skills associated with inquiry.  Community tools such as Edmodo or Wikispaces can provide a platform for students to question, plan and formulate explanations, make predictions, analyze data, and communicate discoveries to each other both in and out of school.  Video tools and presentation tools can also be used for students to formally communicate their findings from their investigations.

Web-based technologies such as the mobile tools,  PollEverywhere and Socrative can be used to assess students' understandings of a concept.  Additionally, presentation projects using communication tools such as Glogster or Prezi, or video tools such as Animoto or GoAnimate can be assessed using a rubric to measure conceptual understanding as well as presentation skills.

Web 2.0 tools can be used to actively engage learners in the inquiry process and are essential for learning skills that are deemed desirable for graduates of 21^st century schools. 

Inquiry-Week 4 in Review

The Week in Review

This week has been difficult for many reasons. The first activity we were asked to do required us to sort facts and concepts.  Facts are discrete pieces of information that can easily be tested or proven.  Concepts are overarching ideas that are often abstract. The task was challenging for me, because there are some things that seem to be abstract for my young learners that as their experience and knowledge increases become known facts.  It was also difficult for me to sort the facts and concepts, because I really like being right, and I could tell that this was one of those activities in which I would never be 100% certain.  This realization made me think of my students who erase and rewrite and erase again in class, afraid to take a risk and be wrong. 

I also learned the differences between investigable and non-investigable questions.  It was very helpful to have had the opportunity to read my classmates examples.  Additionally I found an excellent resource that contained suggestions for teaching students the difference between these types of questions and also how to compose their own investigable questions.  The book, Picture-Perfect Science Lessons: Using Children’s Books to Guide Inquiry, is also available to read online, and has many good inquiry-based lesson examples for elementary and middle school students.

It was most helpful this week to integrate these two activities in practice.  I chose a “Big Idea “ and a related concept from the www.pdesas.org site, and then developed a list of facts, and investigable questions to support inquiry of the related concept.  This practice was very concrete and it is something that I will be able to use with my current students. 

u03a02 Inquiry-Theory to Practice

Another week of eye-opening information about Inquiry Based learning!  Literally eye opening as we had the opportunity to view an Annenberg Learner video titled the “Physics of Optics.”  The video showed a very skilled teacher as he guided his high school students through an inquiry lesson on “light, lenses, and the human eye.”  We also had the opportunity to read and analyze three different case studies describing different levels of inquiry learning.  The case studies were described as “Secondary Classroom Case Studies,” but at least one of the classroom examples seemed to be more of an elementary classroom.

The examples helped me to see that inquiry can occur anywhere on the continuum from totally teacher directed to totally student directed.  Because of this new revelation, I am viewing inquiry learning in a broader context.  Prior to this week, I viewed inquiry more as what our notes describe as open inquiry, or totally student centered.  It seems that inquiry is defined less by who is directing the learning and more by whether or not a lesson has any of the 5 Essential Features of Classroom Inquiry:


The learner engages in questions that can be investigated.
The learner gives priority to evidence in responding to questions.
The learner formulates explanations from evidence.
The learner connects explanations to knowledge.
The learner communicates and justifies explanations.

Based on these Essential Elements, I believe that I have been teetering on the threshold of inquiry in my classroom for a while.  I just tend to teeter more toward the structured end of the continuum with the intention of working toward more guided inquiry where the students can begin to take responsibility and be more actively engaged in their learning.

One thing that was clear to me from watching the “Physics of Optics” video is that I need to work on developing my questioning skills.  The teacher did an excellent job of asking questions that helped students find the answers themselves, without actually giving them the answers.  He also helped students to feel good about moving forward by affirming their new knowledge, and their questions.

Some questions for me, are how can I adopt a more guided approach up front rather than always starting out so structured in my lessons, and where can I learn more about developing my own questioning skills as a teacher?

http://www.learner.org/resources/series126.html?pop=yes&pid=1414

u02a2 Inquiry Process Skills

This past week, two of the resources really contributed to an improved understanding of what inquiry based learning looks like in the classroom. The first was the framework put together by the Partnership for 21^st Century Skills.  The framework explains how different skills and content knowledge can be developed using modern-day interdisciplinary themes such as Global Awareness; Financial, Economic, Business and Entrepreneurial Literacy; Civic Literacy; Environmental Literacy, and Health Literacy.  The P21 skills are broken into 3 categories; Learning and Innovation Skills, Information, Media and Technology Skills, and Life and Career Skills.  The site is loaded with resources to support each of these skill domains, which easily connected to the skills presented in the SCANS report too.  This will be a site that I will be able to refer to regularly for help as I learn to develop inquiry based lessons.

The other resource that actually helped answer one of my questions was the Indicators of Development of Process Skills from the Math & Science Collaborative, Life Science Institute.  The Indicators of Development of Process Skills is a list of questions regarding observable student actions that allow the teacher to answer yes or no.  There are many uses for this list of questions including assessing individual skill development for a single student or whole class.  An answer of “no” would indicate a skill that needs development and would help teachers to plan lessons accordingly, or special education teachers, like me, could use the information to develop IEP goals and objectives.  After I use the information to plan a lesson, I can also assess the lesson using the same list of indicators.  Did the lesson produce the desired set of student outcomes? Were there any unexpected positive or negative results? What changes should I make, or what can I do differently to help students develop these important process skills?

In order to make the Indicators of Development of Process Skills more user-friendly, I put the questions into the table below.

Process Skills	Yes	No
OBSERVING --Do the students:
1. Succeed in identifying obvious differences and similarities between objects and  materials?
2. Make use of several senses in exploring objects or materials?
3. Identify differences of detail among objects or materials?
4. Identify points of similarity among objects where differences are more obvious than    similarities?
5. Use their senses appropriately and extend the range of sight using a hand lens or microscope as necessary?
6. Distinguish from many observations those that are relevant to the problem in hand?
QUESTIONING--Do the students:
1. Readily ask a variety of questions that include investigable and noninvestigable ones?
2. Participate effectively in discussing how their questions can be answered?
3. Recognize the difference between an investigable question and one that cannot be
4. Suggest how answers to questions of various kinds can be found?
5. Generally, in science, ask questions that are potentially investigable?
6. Help in turning their own questions into a form that can be tested?
PLANNING AND INVESTIGATING--Do the students:
1. Start with a useful general approach even if details are lacking or need further thought.
2. Identify the variable that has to be changed and the things that should be kept the same for a fair test?
3. Identify what to look for or what to measure to obtain a result in an investigation?
4. Succeed in planning a fair test using a given framework of questions?
5. Compare their actual procedures after the event with what was planned?
6. Spontaneously structure their plans so that independent, dependent, and controlled variables are identified and steps taken to ensure that the results obtained are as accurate as they can reasonably be?
FORMULATING EXPLANATIONS--Do the students:
1. Attempt to give an explanation that is consistent with evidence, even if only in terms of the presence of certain features or circumstances?
2. Attempt to explain things in terms of a claim based on data from the investigation and previous experience even if they go no further than naming it?
3. Show awareness that there may be more than one explanation that fits the evidence?
4. Give explanations that suggest how an observed effect or situation is brought about and that could be checked?
5. Show awareness that all explanations are tentative and never proved beyond doubt?
MAKING PREDICTIONS--Do the students:
1. Attempt to make a prediction relating to a problem even if it is based on preconceived ideas?
2. Make some use of evidence from experience in making a prediction?
3. Make reasonable predictions based on a possible explanation (hypothesis) without necessarily being able to make the justification explicit?
4. Explain how a prediction that is made relates to a pattern in observations?
5. Use patterns in information or observations to make justified interpolations or extrapolations?
6. Justify a prediction in terms of a pattern in the evidence or an idea that might explain it?
ANALYZING DATA--Do the students:
1. Discuss what they find in relation to their initial questions?
2. Compare their findings with their earlier predictions?
3. Notice associations between changes in one variable and another?
4. Identify patterns or trends in their observations or measurements?
5. Draw conclusions that summarize and are consistent with all the evidence that has been collected?
6. Recognize that any conclusions are tentative and may have to be changed in the light of new evidence?
COMMUNICATING--Do the students:
1. Talk freely about their activities and the ideas they have, with or without making a written record?
2. Listen to others’ ideas and look at their results?
3. Use drawings, writing, models, and paintings to present their ideas and findings?
4. Use tables, graphs, and charts when these are suggested to record and organize results?
5. Regularly and spontaneously use reference books to check or supplement thei investigations?
6. Choose a form for recording or presenting results that is both considered and justified in relation to the type of information and the audience?

Math & Science Collaborative, Life Science Institute, (2011).Adapted from Wynne Harlen, Teaching, Learning, and Assessing Science

 I teach reading, writing, math, science, and social studies to my students, and I see easy fits for inquiry in my science and social studies units, and even for math, but I am having difficulty imagining an inquiry lesson for one of our literature studies.  Perhaps it will be more about using literature as part of the inquiry process for another unit of study.  I am hopeful that the next few weeks will help me put the pieces together.

Math & Science Collaborative, Life Science Institute (2011). Indicators of Development

of Process Skills. Adapted from Wynne Harlen, Teaching, Learning, and Assessing Science. Retrieved from http://msclifescienceinstitute.wikispaces.com/Day+3.

Partnership for 21^st Century Skills (2007).  Building 21^st century skills.  (Retrieved from         

http://route21.p21.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=2.