‘Vast quantities of information fuel this global society, and the ability to locate, evaluate, and use appropriate information for creation and innovation is essential’ (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2007, p. 2). This statement from ‘Guided Inquiry – learning in the 21st century’ encapsulates so much of what we are about in school today, and the onus is on us as educators to ‘develop independent learners who know how to expand their knowledge and expertise through skilled use of a variety of information resources employed both inside and outside of school’ (p. 3).
I have used the inquiry process in my classroom with great
success, and Bloom’s revised taxonomy has been a useful tool in enabling
students to build on their understandings, fostering motivation and higher order
thinking. I have found technology and the internet to be both a source of great
help and great frustration in achieving student success in the location of
information and the presentation of student learning.
I found working through the Bloom’s resource task for Module
1.2 a difficult task and it was good to be put in the place of our students,
and what is sometimes asked of them, with little support. I came away with a
number of thoughts that I think are worthy of consideration when planning
inquiry / project based learning tasks with the intention of using technology
as an integral aspect of the task.
Access to information
is key
Firstly, as I had no background knowledge of South
Australian ecosystems, and was solely reliant on the web for information, I
started off, as many of our students do by ‘googling’ it, with limited success.
While information on ecosystems is abundant, the more specific criteria of
South Australian ecosystems, greatly limited the amount of relevant
information. This highlighted the need for teachers of specific subjects to
source what information is readily available for their students on the web
before students begin the task. This doesn’t necessarily mean hand the website
addresses over to the students, but discussing relevant and specific Boolean
search terms with the students may enable them to bring up the relevant
information faster than just a google search of ‘South Australian ecosystems’. This
is also a situation that would lend itself to class discussion on the diversity
of other sources of information available beyond the web: such as databases,
non-fiction texts, local community resources (assuming you are focused on South
Australian ecosystems because that is where you are located) and scientific
organisations.
Higher order thinking
tasks are built on the knowledge and understanding already acquired
On the website ‘Mimanifesto – Jaye’s weblog’, the author
states her opinion that ‘Knowledge acquisition,
or remembering, in this day and age is now not going to be the cognitive base
level any more’ (April 2103). I disagree. In the past, it may have been the
case that much more importance was placed on knowledge acquisition than what
was placed on what was done with that
knowledge. Today, I would argue that knowledge acquisition is still important,
but we now place more importance on what we do
with that knowledge once we have it. How can we create solutions to
ecosystem issues if we don’t first understand what an ecosystem is, and how to
apply and analyse that knowledge of what it should be versus what it is in
2014?
It is important
that we ‘google proof ‘ our questions in order to encourage higher order
thinking. It is equally important that we teach our students how to locate
information on the web, verify its accuracy, authenticity and authority so that
they build their understandings with the correct knowledge.
Build on what the students / teachers are
familiar with
I also found this task difficult as I put myself in the
position of attempting to locate new apps / web 2.0 tools that I was unfamiliar
with and fit them to the task listed. I found this to be a very time consuming
and ineffective method. Had I been working in a school for this task, my method
would have been different. First, I would have looked at what apps / web 2.0
tools were currently being utlilised by my students ie: what is already
available on the school ipads / what the
students are familiar with and looked at where they could be used by the
students in completing some of the tasks listed. Then I would look at the gaps
and investigate what apps / web2.0 tools could be added to enhance the teaching
and learning experiences of the staff and students. It is important to
remember, especially in the primary school setting, that explicit teaching of
the functions of new apps / web 2.0 is essential if we want the students to be
able to utilize that tool to the best what it can offer.
There is a time consuming element of having staff and
students become familiar with the function of an app, and how it’s features and
tools can be utilised to meet learning needs.
Ultimately, we want our students and staff to be so familiar
and comfortable with the use of a range of apps and web 2.0 tools that they can
choose for themselves, what app or web 2.0 tool they need to best meet their
learning task needs, rather than having the TL or classroom teacher define what
they need to use.
Use apps and web2.0
tools with flexibility, ingenuity and creativity
I admit that having a webpage like Kathy Shrock’s ‘Bloomin
Apps’ is a great resource to be able to tap into when trying to find new apps
and where they might in to teaching and learning experiences. One of the issues
I have though, is allocating a particular app to a particular stage of blooms.
There will always be that staff member or student, who, when you suggest using
a particular app to meet a particular stage of blooms who will answer ‘ oh but
that app is only for analysis’.
It is essential, that in our role as TL, we emphasis that
often the limits of an app or a web2.0 tool are lack of experience from the
user. As students and staff become familiar with an app or a tool, they should
be able to see the potential for the different tasks and creations that are
possible.
For example, should the site www.exploratree.org.uk only be
considered as an appropriate tool for creating diagrams in the application
phase of Blooms, then it limits the user from exploring what else they could
use this site for. It would be more preferable, for this site to be used in a variety
of teaching and learning experiences, where the students can see its
versatility. Then, when it comes to the situation of considering for themselves,
what tools best supports the delivery of their understandings, they posses
enough working knowledge to either choose or dismiss this tool as an
appropriate vehicle for publishing their thinking.
Be aware of the need
to use selection criteria against all apps and web 2.0 tools
While there are many sites that educators can go to for
suggestions of apps and web 2.0 resources that can fit into the new Bloom’s
taxonomy, it is important that the TL looks into the site, and how students
will interact within that site / app to ensure it’s suitability for student
use.
Using a specific selection criteria will assist in assessing
the sites / apps suitability. For example, on Kathy Schrock’s page ‘Bloomin
Apps’, the simulating app suggested in the applying box, links through to
Animation Creator HD, a free app, rated 12+ with infrequent / mild sexual
content and nudity etc. This app would not be suitable for use in a primary
school, where the majority of students are below the age range.
There are advantages and disadvantages to using both of
these tools. Apps on school ipads, mean there is not usually issues with
connectivity and use, apart from the need to connect to wifi for web based
searches or export. The cost involved in provision of apps on a bank of ipads,
can be considerable, but generally is a one off cost, with continual connection
to upgrades at no cost.
Web 2.0 can be free, but are reliant on the schools wifi
access, broad band width and student access when needed. There can often be an
issue with needing to register to gain access to tools such as saving, printing
and exporting. Advertising can also be a concern. Some apps and web2.0 require
payment for full use, though a ‘lite’ version may provide enough access.
So, while it is great there are people who are out there
making attempts to curate suitable apps and web 2.0 technologies for use with
Bloom’s, and make our jobs that little bit less time consuming, we must be
certain to be checking these tools against our school’s selection criteria
before use with students, or suggesting to teaching staff.
This was a great activity to do – I am more inspired now to
continue my curating of apps, web2.0 tools and shared professional knowledge of
all things ‘technology’.
Futurelab. (2007). Exploratree. In Exploratree. Retrieved from http://www.exploratree.org.uk
Kuhlthau, C., Maniotes, L. & Caspari, A. (2007). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st
Century. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited Inc.
Mimanifesto (April 1st 2013). I’m not really sold
on Bloom’s Taxonomy. In Mimanifesto –
Jaye’s Weblog. Retrieved from http://mimanifesto.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/im-not-really-sold-on-blooms-taxonomy/
Shrock, K. (2014). Bloomin’ apps. In Kathy Shrock’s guide to everything. Retrieved from http://www.schrockguide.net/bloomin-apps.html
No comments:
Post a Comment