New York Yankees’ slugger and Baseball Hall-of-Fame member Babe Ruth literally re-wrote the record books during the course of his fabled career. In fact in 1920 his home run total of 54 was better than every other team in the game. That’s right … you read that correctly … every other team. When asked about his theory of hitting Ruth was said to have replied: I just grip the bat as hard as I can, and swing.
This was certainly not the answer that most reporters had hoped for – or expected – but to Ruth the game’s core element was pure instinct. Boston Red Sox great Ted Williams, by contract, divided the invisible strike zone into nine different cubed areas and had an approach for hitting a pitch thrown in each area.
The same holds true when one discusses theories of education and the integration of technology into the classroom. Every teacher has (to some degree) an individualized approach that varies from his or her colleagues. When I began my teaching career I literally just ‘went for it’. I would take a quick glance at the course syllabus, think of a way in which to relate the topic to my student’s lives, and then spoke to that selection with them. I called it ‘free form’ and it drove my colleagues crazy. Especially when my students regularly fared slightly better on the state tests than theirs.
It wasn’t until a few years later that I came to the realization that I actually did have an educational theory. It was quite simply: to apply conceptual knowledge to shared experiences.
As I reflect back, my colleagues had taken issue with my instructional technique, not my educational theory. They critiqued me in that I rarely used vocabulary tests or filled the black/white board with a massive amount of information. I noticed quite a few cringes when they would walk passed my classroom and see the students working on PowerPoint presentations or life simulations (SimCity 2000, Caesar III) rather than reading textbooks. But that was application, not theory that they quietly took issue with.
I feel that I applied my educational theory with great efficiency and success. I look at the course outline for the required content, I find a concept (finances, video games, sports, cooking, politics, humor, etc.) through which to share the content and then I develop a dialogue that will help the students understand and be able to apply the concept in relation to the content.
I have found that this approach helps to develop good problem-solving skills, assists in enhancing student-to-student and student-to-instructor interaction, and allows for differentiated instruction. I tell my students that no one is going to ask them ‘what happened in Belgium in 1839’ or ‘what is the atomic weight of Californium’ during a job interview. Rather, they will attempt to asses if you can effectively problem solve and if you can work – reliably – alongside others. For I continue to hold that it is true that most employers will give you the tools and equipment to succeed if you can both problem solve and work with others.
I’m not sure if my educational theory has a name, but I have discovered that it certainly isn’t as ‘free form’ as I – or others – thought when I began my career.
I am pleased to note that two particular technological resources fit well into my style of instruction: concept mapping (via Spinscape) and the VoiceThread program.
My current Walden University Masters Degree course (EDUC-6711I-4 Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology) offered me my first experience in using a concept map, and in using a multimedia presentation site.
I had been aware of other teachers employing concept maps from time to time, but I considered them to be largely an issue of organization.
Using Spinscape, (http://www.spinscape.com/features) however, allowed me to realize that the very process of creating a thinking map assists the teacher in developing a cogent and interesting lesson plan. I was absolutely amazed at the thought process I myself went through that would only enhance my lesson, and yes – prepare – for an effective lesson plan.
I chose to walk my students through a virtual tour of the White House. Prior to doing so, I drew out my concept map on the class white board. We read through it together. In doing so, my students then had a sense of what to expect and felt comfortable that they knew what might be emphasized. It also allowed them to express their new found knowledge when he arrived at a certain room.
I directed my students to the White House web site: http://www.whitehouse.gov.
The site is very informative, nicely illustrated, and contains a room-by-room description of the White House in Washington D.C.
Many of the students were surprised that this information was online, and several wondered if a virtual tour might be better than the real thing as it saved money, time and as one student put it: “We don’t have to worry if the President is home when we are there.”
I now consider myself a ‘believer’ in concept maps and understand how the brief amount of time preparing them can assist a great deal in the education process.
Additionally, I was amazed at the versatility of the VoiceThread program. Many times teachers discuss the difficulties of meeting the needs of our students when they have so many different educational learning styles. But with the VoiceThread program, you can add voice notes (for audio learners); photographs (for visual learners) and there is even a drawing component for those who enjoy using their hands (manual learners). It is a gold mine for those teachers who are looking to address the area of differentiated instruction in the classroom.
Because simply having the potential to reach out to students is not enough. I have come many programs I the past that, while meeting certain pedagogical requirements, fail to inspire either teacher or students to any meaningful educational result.
VoiceThread is decidedly different. And I say this not simply due to the fact that I am in awe of the sheer potential of the program, but because both of my children (ages 20 and 16) quickly stopped what they were doing and watched me as I created my very first VoiceThread (http://voicethread.com/share/1219351/).
My children were amazed that something ‘so cool’ has gone undetected by the masses unlike YouTube and Facebook for so long. I think this is a key component for continuity in terms of use for a program: interest.
Not only does it allow for options in the creation of a topic by the posting agent, but the same holds true for those who are responding to the topic. This then gives the students as much creative control over the exercise as the teacher, which is almost unheard of in education, and presents itself as a real way in which self-esteem can be developed as the students can truly respond in a manner, and time, and method of their choosing. Additionally, unlike other educational situations (raising hands, versus being called on, vs. team response techniques) there is no ‘wrong’ or inappropriate way in which to respond in terms of approach. It is almost as if the students can – to a degree – direct the way in which the teacher interacts with them, and in turn develop real hands-on technological skills in the process.
Like my children, I remain thoroughly perplexed as to why VoiceThread hasn’t skyrocketed into the public’s social consciousness yet, but I am convinced that it is only a matter of time before it does. And the beauty of the program is that the way in which it is designed (similar to most concept maps) allows for structured learning in the midst of all the creative, free-form options!
Finally, as with many other popular interactive programs, VoiceThread allows the user to communicate with others across cultures, social strata and geographic location. I suppose the concept of a ‘pen pal’ may have just taken a giant technological step forward.
As a teacher who is interested both in effective instruction and the integration of technology into the classroom, I am going to incorporate both of these programs into my yearly lesson plans as they can be used for any content area and virtually any key concept within a curriculum. I need to thank my instructor, Susan Krauss, who provided access to resources and discussions that made EDUC-6711I-4 Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology my most interesting – and practical one – to date.
Posted in Uncategorized