Posts
After reviewing both the NET-S standards and the NET-T standards there is actually a very simple answer for how to develop student proficiency with technology: come up with a simple activity that relates to what you are doing, incorporate a certain element of technology, outline your requirements and standards, and have the student work through the problem. I know this sounds simple because it is. We have spent the past few weeks developing a GAME Plan to do just this. The GAME Plan basically spells out everything a teacher goes through when creating a lesson or unit plan, whether it involves technology or not. We all go back and evaluate our lessons plans to see what worked and what did not. The only major difference is that the GAME Plan pushes the teacher to incorporate technology, so incorporate technology we will.
As I have stated in a prior blog posting, the best way to learn is through trial and error. So, sitting the student down in front of the computer and showing them how to start the program is a great way to start. After that, we must encourage the students to explore the program and its features. Once the student realizes what can be done, they will feel more comfortable with the program and experiment with it. When I initiate my video editing project outlined in my GAME Plan for next year I know I will have to help get the students started, but once they understand the basics they will be fine.
As both the NET-S and NET-T standards dovetail nicely into one another developing the student's proficiency with technology and the teacher's proficiency will work in tangent. We will learn from our own use of technology as the students will learn from their own use.
Shawn
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Shawn,
ReplyDeleteGreat points about the NET-S and NET-T standards fitting nicely with student's proficiency and teacher's proficiency. We all learn through modeling and practicing. For example, when we were young children we learned through daily practice and instruction. I see that with my students now. I'll teach them a new skill or tool on the computer and within a few days, they are teaching me something I didn't know the technology program did. It's a work in progress and it is such a great thing to be able to witness with our students.
Trial and error IS one of the best ways to really learn a technology. Lecture is rarely and effective way to get kids to understand. I’m reminded of baseball and how difficult to explain why a runner must advance when the ball is in play (I think there is some movie with Brendan Fraser that illustrates how irrelevant the explanation is until you can see it). As a student, I love a good lecture but baseball and technology are making me wonder if trial and error should be incorporated in even more areas. While it has always seemed less direct than, well, direct instruction, I’m beginning to wonder if trial and error can really be the more efficient instructional method.
ReplyDeleteIt is funny that you mention learning technology through trial and error because it is the “error” part that made me apprehensive about learning new digital tools in the first place. Going through our graduate courses, however, has taught me that “error” is not only inevitable, but also an essential component of learning to navigate and explore digital technologies. Luckily, with the right prodding and direction, the digital natives that we teach seem less hesitant and are more willing to jump in and explore.
ReplyDeleteI will say that accepting trial and error as part of the process has been a freeing experience for me. Before Walden, I seldom searched the Web; now I’m creating wikis, blogs, screencasts, podcasts, digital stories, and still actively seeking out new technologies. What a difference these mont1hs have made!
Here’s to our continued growth
Mary