Well I can't say that I have ever wanted to set up a Twitter account but I did like how I could see everyone's tweets and what their thoughts were. In saying this, I can see that our cohort all have a very similar understanding about how children learn technology.
I personally made the comment, "Children need to experience hands-on situations to learn. Investigation through play is how children learn about technology." I came to this conclusion by doing the readings and watching the various youtube videos that were recommended (my favourite being Kids react to Rotary phones- I emailed it my other friends at different University's). Seeing everyone's similar comments had me reassured that I was on the same page.
I enjoyed using Twitter for this part of the course and can see how it can be a valuable tool when working with cohorts. I wouldn't particularly use it to teach in a classroom but for this process I found it valuable.
I prefer to use the mind-mapping because it is neat and allows me to jot all my notes down that I have running through my head. I love how organised they make me feel.
I love being able to access cohorts work because I find it keeps me on track as well. I can see that I am putting a big effort into this subject and I am really starting to enjoy it, as I can see others are too. There are many learning benefits in this course, collaboration with others being a big part of it. I found it tricky at first but I really love working with my group. We all really want to help each other succeed and get through it together.
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Sunday, 22 March 2015
Reflecting on readings
I am feeling much happier now that I am part of a group! We decided to take on a reading each and reflect on it ourselves then post it to our wiki. I found this very helpful because I was able to read the key points in the article from my peers instead of reading all the articles by myself.
I did the reading “Beyond ‘The Design Process’: An Alternative Pedagogy for Technology Education" which I found quite interesting. Because I am a Kindy Teacher, I work with young children so I related to the article because I know that every child has their individual learning style and the "Design Process" doesn't work for everybody.
My reflection:
I did the reading “Beyond ‘The Design Process’: An Alternative Pedagogy for Technology Education" which I found quite interesting. Because I am a Kindy Teacher, I work with young children so I related to the article because I know that every child has their individual learning style and the "Design Process" doesn't work for everybody.
My reflection:
This article was about the Design
Process that is implemented throughout the schooling system and how when the
Design and Technology Curriculum was first introduced in England, that they had
a lineal approach which has proven to be problematic in our schooling system
today.
“. . . teachers often undertook a
linear process that emphasised the stages of planning and drawing, then
construction and finally testing. These stages followed each other successively
and were often discrete . . . (Moreland et al. 2000, p. 292). “
Emergence of the Design Process-
Johnsey (1995) identified that
there were many different attempts to define the design process in England
between 1971 and 1995. Although there were many different designs, he
identified many common process skills. One common reoccurrence was the persistence
of teachers in teaching a lineal design process.
Challenges-
Using a lineal model (end-on-end
process orientated) approach has been problematic. Some of the issues are that students using a
design-make-appraise model require students developing a design before the
process begins.
Although the design process and
the different components used are effective in the role of creating a
two-dimensional drawing in creating the design, the literature indicates that
this is not the preferred method for students.
Children are known to design orally and by exploring materials available
to them. Johnsey (1995) believes that the most important part of the design-making
process for students is the “making” part and the “design” part does not
naturally come first.
When faced with the requirement
to follow pre-scribed, linear model students tend to subvert the design process
by adopting their own strategies to get the job done, but ritualistically use
the teachers approach to satisfy assessment requirements (Williams 2000).
Student Technological Practice-
Gustafson and Rowell (1998)
identify five different types of initial problem solving strategies.
1. Guidance/direction
2. Modelling
handling
3. Imaging
4. Social
beginning
5. Reflecting
beginning
Through their studies, they realised
that the students initial course of action was influenced by the perception of
where ideas to solve the problem might lie. Lewis (1998) suggests that the
focus needs to shift from a problem solving approach to one that fosters
problem-posing by the students.
Teaching approaches-
With our new understanding of
technological practices, there are a number of current teaching practices that
no longer fit.
Alternative approach-
Children should be able to
explore the range of materials available to them during the exploration of
general knowledge and relevant information to the particular context. There
should be a scenario to introduce the topic that is authentic to their experience
and environment. The scenario should allow for many solutions to be created by students
which fit to their own learning styles. There should be open discussions about
each student’s process in small groups and with the teacher to clarify the
problem. Students should then be able to present their solutions to suit their
learning styles.
The role of the teacher in this
alternative approach is to manage the learning environment and model
technological practices. They will also promote discussion, offer supportive
and critical feedback and model strategies so that students have a clear
outline of the problem and challenges.
According to a study done by
Video Campus (2001) says that some challenges that have presented themselves in
this approach is that some students did not achieve their potential outcome
because some groups were held up due to the high demand of materials and
equipment needed that weren’t originally available. But with this alternative
approach, studies have shown that students had a great deal of enthusiasm and
involvement in creating solutions. There is a noticeable amount of
collaboration between students and their peers as well as their teachers.
Discussion-
This section of the article was summarising
about how New Zealand is still trying to make Technology a compulsory subject.
Although the design-process has been useful to teachers, it is time for
teachers to have a wider understanding of technological processes and the
implementation of class room pedagogy using these processes.
The attention of the design
process should be down played and more attention given to design skills and
technological practices. This enables students to have an approach that suits
their individual learning styles.
Reference-
Mawson, B.
(2003). BeyondThe Design Process': An alternative pedagogy for technology
education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13(2), 117-128.
Thankyou to Tess who has allowed me to post her reflection on one of the articles:
Reflection of article:
"Creativity in technology education: providing children with glimpses of their inventive potential"
This article discusses the importance of creativity in schools, linking to various theorists and other sources to justify their argument. He has discussed how Design and Technology allow for creativity without being touched by other subjects such as maths and science is continual battle. When referring to the decline in creativity for ages between 9-10 and onto adolescence, Lewis (2008) offered the theory that this was because of "insufficient opportunity for open-ended pursuits that are joyful, that draw on endowments not otherwise tapped, and where teachers do not always have the answers".
Focus on Design
This section of the article discusses the merits of 'problem solving' and 'challenges', mentioning the positives and negativities of Design Technologies, using it as a basis for Education. Some negatives points included that Students do not learn in a linear way as 'problem solving' suggests. Another belief was that the subject allows students to create what doesn't exist yet and therefore helps them further develop their higher order thinking. Whilst, Atkinson's study on the relationship between the creativity of student projects and their overall performance on the GSCE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) examination found that a lot of students that didn't perform well on the exam can design very creative projects. I found this interesting, as I did an assignment previously about this topic and found myself agreeing that students need more creativity allowance in Schools and that although some children aren't good at maths for example, they could be very creative and do extremely well in other subjects. We cant focus all our emphasis on 'main stream' subjects.
Emergent classroom practice
Lewis discusses how classrooms shouldn't be as strict, that students need to be allowed to make mistakes and learn from them and to be playful and humorous without getting in trouble for it. He also discusses the design process including a few examples with a wide variety of subject matter, going into much detail about each step. Many children enjoy technology education as it allows them the freedom to create without restrictions, which is a worry if other subjects begin to influence technology education to much it may not be as enjoyable for children anymore. There is theories about how children may not be interested in both phases of education technology (idea generation and evaluation) and how Teachers can further enhance their enthusiasm for both. He goes on to discuss how children that might be poor academic achievers might improve with more creativity incorporated in the curriculum including technology education.
Emergent on children designing
This heading discusses the difficulty in grading creativity and through various examples, discusses how each person is an individual and views things differently, how everyone is creative in their own ways but always different. Through observation of children developing challenges, it helps us to further develop technology education which allows students to "draw upon their creative urges" (Lewis, 2008). Allowing us to better understand how children think when posed with technological challenges.
Inventiveness and the curriculum
Discusses how inventiveness and design work hand-in-hand and more needs to be done across countries to make others more aware of the potential of this subject. It also provides examples of techniques used to include inventiveness in the classroom such as getting students to reinvent old inventions such as household appliances or mouse traps etc. There are three types of cognitive strategies used when inventing: mental models, mechanical representations and heuristics. Lewis (2008) states that:
"Mental models are constructions that can be animated in the mind of the inventor. Mechanical representations link thought with devices. Inventors have a set of stock solutions that are part of their cognitive resources. Heuristics are strategies including rules of thumb that inventors use to manipulate models and representations."
Dasgupta's framework "suggests that the act of inventing is (a) purposive (goal oriented), (b) opportunistic (relying on sub-goals), (c) gradualistic—large insights being composed of a network of small steps, (d) a reasoning processes involving application of rules, (e) knowledge intensive (science, theory heuristics, and (f) involves searching freely and associatively for knowledge" (Lewis, 2008).
For invention to become a stronger feature in technology education it is important for Teachers to become more familiar with its terms and modes of thought.
Coming to grips with creativity and invention
Following processes are more likely to occur in technology education then in other areas of the curriculum: "problem solving, divergent thinking, combination, metaphorical thinking, and analogical thinking" (Lewis, 2008).
Problem solving
It is discussed how their are many steps involved with problem solving, beginning with a problem or goal that cannot be reached. That problem solving is a manifestation of intelligence and there is metacomponents of intelligence: "problem solving, selection of a solution strategy, allocation of mental and other resources (such as time) to the problem, solution monitoring, and sensitivity to feedback" (Lewis, 2008).
It is also suggested that children's prior knowledge of how things work prevent the considerations of new possibilities, which I find interesting and could agree with.
Divergent thinking
Meaning more then one solution to a problem is possible. Guildford states four categories: "fluency (ability to produce a number of ideas), originality (ability to produce unusual ideas), flexibility (production of a variety of ideas), and elaboration (ability to embellish ideas)" (Lewis, 2008). These categories are useful in divergent thinking studies. Problem solving requires being open minded about possible solutions and other problems that may arise etc., divergent thinking plays a large roll in the beginning of the problem solving stages.
Combination thinking
Combination thinking involves the merging of two ideas into a third idea. It is believed that creative people will find this easier then people that are less creative e.g. " An engineer may find it necessary to marry electrical and mechanical systems" (Lewis, 2008).
Metaphorical thinking
Metaphorical thinking is described by Lewis (2008) as allowing "one to make conceptual leaps across domains from a source to a target, such that a new situation can be characterized and understood by reference to a familiar one".
It is believed that metaphors help us bring realism to a problem space. Teachers should demonstrate the use of metaphorical thinking in technology classes which will encourage students to arrive at their own. Using metaphorical prompts will help push students towards their solution.
Analogical thinking
"Analogies are special types of metaphors, where a structural feature from a base domain is mapped onto a new domain" (Lewis, 2008).
It is possible to solve a problem in one area by using an analogical problem from another area. Children should be engaging in solving real world problems, in keeping with the aims and practices of the education of technology.
Reference
Springer Science+Business Media B.V.: Theodore Lewis. (2008). Creativity in technology education: providing children with glimpses of their inventive potential. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=3922a349-01ef-40db-adfe-4df213d42855%40sessionmgr4003&vid=2&hid=4209
"Creativity in technology education: providing children with glimpses of their inventive potential"
This article discusses the importance of creativity in schools, linking to various theorists and other sources to justify their argument. He has discussed how Design and Technology allow for creativity without being touched by other subjects such as maths and science is continual battle. When referring to the decline in creativity for ages between 9-10 and onto adolescence, Lewis (2008) offered the theory that this was because of "insufficient opportunity for open-ended pursuits that are joyful, that draw on endowments not otherwise tapped, and where teachers do not always have the answers".
Focus on Design
This section of the article discusses the merits of 'problem solving' and 'challenges', mentioning the positives and negativities of Design Technologies, using it as a basis for Education. Some negatives points included that Students do not learn in a linear way as 'problem solving' suggests. Another belief was that the subject allows students to create what doesn't exist yet and therefore helps them further develop their higher order thinking. Whilst, Atkinson's study on the relationship between the creativity of student projects and their overall performance on the GSCE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) examination found that a lot of students that didn't perform well on the exam can design very creative projects. I found this interesting, as I did an assignment previously about this topic and found myself agreeing that students need more creativity allowance in Schools and that although some children aren't good at maths for example, they could be very creative and do extremely well in other subjects. We cant focus all our emphasis on 'main stream' subjects.
Emergent classroom practice
Lewis discusses how classrooms shouldn't be as strict, that students need to be allowed to make mistakes and learn from them and to be playful and humorous without getting in trouble for it. He also discusses the design process including a few examples with a wide variety of subject matter, going into much detail about each step. Many children enjoy technology education as it allows them the freedom to create without restrictions, which is a worry if other subjects begin to influence technology education to much it may not be as enjoyable for children anymore. There is theories about how children may not be interested in both phases of education technology (idea generation and evaluation) and how Teachers can further enhance their enthusiasm for both. He goes on to discuss how children that might be poor academic achievers might improve with more creativity incorporated in the curriculum including technology education.
Emergent on children designing
This heading discusses the difficulty in grading creativity and through various examples, discusses how each person is an individual and views things differently, how everyone is creative in their own ways but always different. Through observation of children developing challenges, it helps us to further develop technology education which allows students to "draw upon their creative urges" (Lewis, 2008). Allowing us to better understand how children think when posed with technological challenges.
Inventiveness and the curriculum
Discusses how inventiveness and design work hand-in-hand and more needs to be done across countries to make others more aware of the potential of this subject. It also provides examples of techniques used to include inventiveness in the classroom such as getting students to reinvent old inventions such as household appliances or mouse traps etc. There are three types of cognitive strategies used when inventing: mental models, mechanical representations and heuristics. Lewis (2008) states that:
"Mental models are constructions that can be animated in the mind of the inventor. Mechanical representations link thought with devices. Inventors have a set of stock solutions that are part of their cognitive resources. Heuristics are strategies including rules of thumb that inventors use to manipulate models and representations."
Dasgupta's framework "suggests that the act of inventing is (a) purposive (goal oriented), (b) opportunistic (relying on sub-goals), (c) gradualistic—large insights being composed of a network of small steps, (d) a reasoning processes involving application of rules, (e) knowledge intensive (science, theory heuristics, and (f) involves searching freely and associatively for knowledge" (Lewis, 2008).
For invention to become a stronger feature in technology education it is important for Teachers to become more familiar with its terms and modes of thought.
Coming to grips with creativity and invention
Following processes are more likely to occur in technology education then in other areas of the curriculum: "problem solving, divergent thinking, combination, metaphorical thinking, and analogical thinking" (Lewis, 2008).
Problem solving
It is discussed how their are many steps involved with problem solving, beginning with a problem or goal that cannot be reached. That problem solving is a manifestation of intelligence and there is metacomponents of intelligence: "problem solving, selection of a solution strategy, allocation of mental and other resources (such as time) to the problem, solution monitoring, and sensitivity to feedback" (Lewis, 2008).
It is also suggested that children's prior knowledge of how things work prevent the considerations of new possibilities, which I find interesting and could agree with.
Divergent thinking
Meaning more then one solution to a problem is possible. Guildford states four categories: "fluency (ability to produce a number of ideas), originality (ability to produce unusual ideas), flexibility (production of a variety of ideas), and elaboration (ability to embellish ideas)" (Lewis, 2008). These categories are useful in divergent thinking studies. Problem solving requires being open minded about possible solutions and other problems that may arise etc., divergent thinking plays a large roll in the beginning of the problem solving stages.
Combination thinking
Combination thinking involves the merging of two ideas into a third idea. It is believed that creative people will find this easier then people that are less creative e.g. " An engineer may find it necessary to marry electrical and mechanical systems" (Lewis, 2008).
Metaphorical thinking
Metaphorical thinking is described by Lewis (2008) as allowing "one to make conceptual leaps across domains from a source to a target, such that a new situation can be characterized and understood by reference to a familiar one".
It is believed that metaphors help us bring realism to a problem space. Teachers should demonstrate the use of metaphorical thinking in technology classes which will encourage students to arrive at their own. Using metaphorical prompts will help push students towards their solution.
Analogical thinking
"Analogies are special types of metaphors, where a structural feature from a base domain is mapped onto a new domain" (Lewis, 2008).
It is possible to solve a problem in one area by using an analogical problem from another area. Children should be engaging in solving real world problems, in keeping with the aims and practices of the education of technology.
Reference
Springer Science+Business Media B.V.: Theodore Lewis. (2008). Creativity in technology education: providing children with glimpses of their inventive potential. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=3922a349-01ef-40db-adfe-4df213d42855%40sessionmgr4003&vid=2&hid=4209
And Thankyou to Kelvin who has allowed me to post his reflection on one of the articles:
"Creativity - A framework for the Design/Problem Solving Discourse in Technology Education
The article stimulates conversations on the importance of creativity as a goal of technology education. It directs the attention to a subject that remains under-explored and a need for design and problem solving in technology education to allow opportunities for students to step outside the conventional reasoning processes imposed by the rest of the curriculum.
The article addresses:
What is creativity?
Creative cognitive processes
Schooling and creativity
Creativity and technology education and
Implications for technology education.
What is creativity?
Creativity is not easily defined. Bruner (1962) defined "that creativity is an act that produces 'effective surprise". which according to Bruner for the creative person, the surprise "is the privilege only of prepared minds - minds with structured expectancies and interests" and identified 3 kinds of surprise - predictive, formal and metaphorical. Creative people are governed by internal factors, especially personality and tend to be creative within particular areas.
Creative cognitive processes
Is about discovering and examining the logic behind exceptionally creative people Cross (2002) did a study that fashioned a model suggesting that exceptional designers use a broad systems approach to design but also frame problems in a personal way. Csiksezentmihalyi (1996) believed that a creative process has flow. That when in the act of creating your things, are going well, subjects report that their behaviour is almost automatic and unconscious. cognitive process can be broken down into areas of thinking and creation such as, metaphorical thinking - which is a powerful tool that allows comparison and categorization of materially unlike entities. Analogical thinking - is taking a map of knowledge from a base to a target facilitating one to one correspondence. combinatorial creation - is a design process that takes two or more concepts or entities and combine to yield and entirely new product. Divergent thinking - is broken into two forms, divergent and convergent thinking however divergent thinking yields a variety of solutions to a given problem, and the last one is productive thinking - can be seen as thinking outside the box that allow for multiple uses and ideas.
Schooling and creativity
Schooling is an important asset to children as a creative outlet for learning. As the curriculum is in place to help support the learning and taking the children's interests and individual needs into account. Creativity enhancement entails six resources identified by Lubart and Sternberg (1995) as problem definition, knowledge, intellectual styles, creative personality, motivation to use intellectual processes and environmental context. Cropley(1997) states that creativity should be a normal goal of schooling, that the curriculum should entail with overlapping of Lubart and Sternberg's approach content knowledge, encourage risk taking, building intrinsic motivation, stimulating interests, building confidence and stimulating curiosity. Instead of only problem solving within the classroom as that stimulates a semi creative approach as you find one outcome, problem finding allows students creative portals to be opened to find multiple formulations, discoveries, solution options and reformulation of the problem.
Creativity and technology education and
technology education is seen as a creative portal for children to explore their inner imagination and ideas. early curriculum sought teaching technology and creative design as basics, tool use, the ins and outs how things are made. where curriculum now allows children more freedom of use of their own imagination and are given hurdles, and objects in which they must create something to help it, over come it or make it their own.the american standards for technology literacy has a focus to help enhance creativity, that there is no right or wrong answers and that there is multiple ways to achieve an outcome. Reeder (2001) sets forth how things run at his university explaining both traditional methods such as steps to follow to achieve the solution as well as conceptual ways with open ended thinking. Teacher of technology must support both analogical and metaphorical thinking, conceptual combination, productive thinking and divergent thinking, as these are the means in which humans come to novel products. failure is a positive thing as helps your creative imagination realise not all come to the right conclusion but the path you take lead to other interesting discoveries. there is a high need of technological design and the benefits that come with it for both the mind and the products and discoveries opened.
Implications for technology education.
The subject is still a work in progress. At this point it takes cues from science, but could also benefit from aligning with other subjects (art / music), where students are encouraged to use knowledge in support of creative expression.
5 problems were discussed on creativity and included :
a) implications for design/problem solving pedagogy
b) implications for assessment
c) implications for professional development
d) implications for curriculum theorizing and
e) implications for research
Reference
Lewis, T. (2005). Creativity - A Framework for the Design/Problem Solving Discourse in Technology Education. Journal of Technology Education. Retrieved from:
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v17n1/lewis.html
The article stimulates conversations on the importance of creativity as a goal of technology education. It directs the attention to a subject that remains under-explored and a need for design and problem solving in technology education to allow opportunities for students to step outside the conventional reasoning processes imposed by the rest of the curriculum.
The article addresses:
What is creativity?
Creative cognitive processes
Schooling and creativity
Creativity and technology education and
Implications for technology education.
What is creativity?
Creativity is not easily defined. Bruner (1962) defined "that creativity is an act that produces 'effective surprise". which according to Bruner for the creative person, the surprise "is the privilege only of prepared minds - minds with structured expectancies and interests" and identified 3 kinds of surprise - predictive, formal and metaphorical. Creative people are governed by internal factors, especially personality and tend to be creative within particular areas.
Creative cognitive processes
Is about discovering and examining the logic behind exceptionally creative people Cross (2002) did a study that fashioned a model suggesting that exceptional designers use a broad systems approach to design but also frame problems in a personal way. Csiksezentmihalyi (1996) believed that a creative process has flow. That when in the act of creating your things, are going well, subjects report that their behaviour is almost automatic and unconscious. cognitive process can be broken down into areas of thinking and creation such as, metaphorical thinking - which is a powerful tool that allows comparison and categorization of materially unlike entities. Analogical thinking - is taking a map of knowledge from a base to a target facilitating one to one correspondence. combinatorial creation - is a design process that takes two or more concepts or entities and combine to yield and entirely new product. Divergent thinking - is broken into two forms, divergent and convergent thinking however divergent thinking yields a variety of solutions to a given problem, and the last one is productive thinking - can be seen as thinking outside the box that allow for multiple uses and ideas.
Schooling and creativity
Schooling is an important asset to children as a creative outlet for learning. As the curriculum is in place to help support the learning and taking the children's interests and individual needs into account. Creativity enhancement entails six resources identified by Lubart and Sternberg (1995) as problem definition, knowledge, intellectual styles, creative personality, motivation to use intellectual processes and environmental context. Cropley(1997) states that creativity should be a normal goal of schooling, that the curriculum should entail with overlapping of Lubart and Sternberg's approach content knowledge, encourage risk taking, building intrinsic motivation, stimulating interests, building confidence and stimulating curiosity. Instead of only problem solving within the classroom as that stimulates a semi creative approach as you find one outcome, problem finding allows students creative portals to be opened to find multiple formulations, discoveries, solution options and reformulation of the problem.
Creativity and technology education and
technology education is seen as a creative portal for children to explore their inner imagination and ideas. early curriculum sought teaching technology and creative design as basics, tool use, the ins and outs how things are made. where curriculum now allows children more freedom of use of their own imagination and are given hurdles, and objects in which they must create something to help it, over come it or make it their own.the american standards for technology literacy has a focus to help enhance creativity, that there is no right or wrong answers and that there is multiple ways to achieve an outcome. Reeder (2001) sets forth how things run at his university explaining both traditional methods such as steps to follow to achieve the solution as well as conceptual ways with open ended thinking. Teacher of technology must support both analogical and metaphorical thinking, conceptual combination, productive thinking and divergent thinking, as these are the means in which humans come to novel products. failure is a positive thing as helps your creative imagination realise not all come to the right conclusion but the path you take lead to other interesting discoveries. there is a high need of technological design and the benefits that come with it for both the mind and the products and discoveries opened.
Implications for technology education.
The subject is still a work in progress. At this point it takes cues from science, but could also benefit from aligning with other subjects (art / music), where students are encouraged to use knowledge in support of creative expression.
5 problems were discussed on creativity and included :
a) implications for design/problem solving pedagogy
b) implications for assessment
c) implications for professional development
d) implications for curriculum theorizing and
e) implications for research
Reference
Lewis, T. (2005). Creativity - A Framework for the Design/Problem Solving Discourse in Technology Education. Journal of Technology Education. Retrieved from:
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v17n1/lewis.html
Friday, 20 March 2015
Isolating Key Words
I found it quite difficult at first to create a Tagxedo at first. My computer wanted me to download different software and at first it wouldn't work. I thought I would have another try again at it today and YAY it worked! So here my Tagxedo that I created isolating key words from the aims and rational of the Australian Curriculum.
I love how I am learning something new everyday in this course and it is becoming a very interesting subject that I am really starting to enjoy (even though I still need to squeeze into a group-fingers crossed I can get in one on Monday so I can get some peer feedback!)
I love how I am learning something new everyday in this course and it is becoming a very interesting subject that I am really starting to enjoy (even though I still need to squeeze into a group-fingers crossed I can get in one on Monday so I can get some peer feedback!)
Reconstructing the Technology Design Cycle
I really loved the experience of using an online mapping program because I am a visual learner and it really helped me to get a better understanding of the cycle. I personally used Popplet because it was the easiest site for me to navigate. It was neat and tidy and I was able to colour code the boxes (which helps me too!)
Here is a picture of how I did my map:
For me, using the online mapping site, it really helped me to retain the information that was given to me because I created it myself and was able translate it in a way I understood. I can see how it is a valuable tool for students to use because it allows them the flexibility of retaining information in a way that suits them.
"The mind likes patterns and the brain is always trying to create meaning." - Taken from the reading at the Stanford University site:
http://web.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/projects/ireport/articles/concept_maps/ConceptMapsOnlineLearningEnvironment.pdf
Here is a picture of how I did my map:
For me, using the online mapping site, it really helped me to retain the information that was given to me because I created it myself and was able translate it in a way I understood. I can see how it is a valuable tool for students to use because it allows them the flexibility of retaining information in a way that suits them.
"The mind likes patterns and the brain is always trying to create meaning." - Taken from the reading at the Stanford University site:
http://web.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/projects/ireport/articles/concept_maps/ConceptMapsOnlineLearningEnvironment.pdf
Reading: Skills for the 21st Century: Teaching Higher-Order Thinking
I thought that this reading was very interesting. As a Kindy Teacher, I like to think that I place importance of teaching higher-order thinking through my weekly plan for my students.
I love how the reading gave examples of how we teach higher-order thinking, Bloom's Taxonomy being the most widely used. Bloom divided learning into three domains of educational activity.
1. Cognitive (Knowledge)
2. Affective (Attitude or self)
3. Psychomotor (Skills)
The reading about Higher Order Thinking related to the domain of Cognitive development. Bloom listed the abilities and skills and separated them into 6 different categories (see table).
Lorin Anderson then revisited the cognitive domain and made a slight change of changing the categories from nouns to verbs.
What I took away from this article was the framework available to us that allows us to scaffold children's learning and scaffold teaching thinking skills in a structured way through these stages.
1. Teaching the Language of Higher Order Thinking - Tell the students what they are doing and why it is important for them to use Higher Order Thinking Skills.
2. Planning discussion time about Higher Order Thinking- Carefully planning lessons, having discussions and getting students to reflect on their learning so they understand their thinking strengths and weaknesses.
3. Teaching subject concepts- Making students aware of the key concepts they must learn and deciding what kind of process their learning is e.g. Concrete, abstract, verbal, nonverbal or process.
4. Providing Scaffolding- Giving the students temporary support without giving too much scaffolding as this could be detrimental to their learning.
5. Encourage Higher Order Thinking- Encouraging students to think about the thinking strategies they are using.
A part of the reading that stood out to me was the following:
Brookhart (2010) argues that if teachers think of higher-order thinking as problem solving they can set lesson goals to teach students how to identify and solve problems at school and in life. This, she says, involves not just solving problems set by the teacher but solving new problems that ‘they define themselves, creating something new as the solution’.
I look forward to improving on teaching Higher Order Thinking in my Kindy classroom as well as teaching it in a grade when I am a qualified teacher. I will use the process that was explained throughout the article as well as using effective language and reflect on how the skills could be incorporated into every lesson.
I love how the reading gave examples of how we teach higher-order thinking, Bloom's Taxonomy being the most widely used. Bloom divided learning into three domains of educational activity.
1. Cognitive (Knowledge)
2. Affective (Attitude or self)
3. Psychomotor (Skills)
The reading about Higher Order Thinking related to the domain of Cognitive development. Bloom listed the abilities and skills and separated them into 6 different categories (see table).
Lorin Anderson then revisited the cognitive domain and made a slight change of changing the categories from nouns to verbs.
What I took away from this article was the framework available to us that allows us to scaffold children's learning and scaffold teaching thinking skills in a structured way through these stages.
1. Teaching the Language of Higher Order Thinking - Tell the students what they are doing and why it is important for them to use Higher Order Thinking Skills.
2. Planning discussion time about Higher Order Thinking- Carefully planning lessons, having discussions and getting students to reflect on their learning so they understand their thinking strengths and weaknesses.
3. Teaching subject concepts- Making students aware of the key concepts they must learn and deciding what kind of process their learning is e.g. Concrete, abstract, verbal, nonverbal or process.
4. Providing Scaffolding- Giving the students temporary support without giving too much scaffolding as this could be detrimental to their learning.
5. Encourage Higher Order Thinking- Encouraging students to think about the thinking strategies they are using.
A part of the reading that stood out to me was the following:
Brookhart (2010) argues that if teachers think of higher-order thinking as problem solving they can set lesson goals to teach students how to identify and solve problems at school and in life. This, she says, involves not just solving problems set by the teacher but solving new problems that ‘they define themselves, creating something new as the solution’.
I look forward to improving on teaching Higher Order Thinking in my Kindy classroom as well as teaching it in a grade when I am a qualified teacher. I will use the process that was explained throughout the article as well as using effective language and reflect on how the skills could be incorporated into every lesson.
Similarities and Differences between Design Thinking and Computational Thinking
The
similarities between Design Thinking and Computational Thinking are that they
both involve the breakdown of many components in order to create solutions. They both take into consideration of economic, environmental and social factors throughout their process.
Design Thinking uses a design process that encourages and
requires students to identify and investigate a need or opportunity and then
going through the steps of generating a plan, designing solutions and evaluate
the product and process. I believe that this process allows for more
investigating whereas the Computational Thinking process seems to be more procedural.
Computational Thinking focuses on problem solving methods
with the use of digital systems. It is about interpreting patterns and models
as well as organizing data logically.
An example of Design and Technologies, where design thinking
is used, would be creating a sustainable vegetable garden at school with a
compost bin and worm farm. Whereas Computational Thinking would involve
recording UV ratings, designing the garden in the best location where it will
get rain and run, measuring rainfall etc.
Verbs: What students do and associated pedagogy
Verbs: What students do
|
Associated Pedagody
|
Assess
|
Students should be supported in
developing criteria with which to assess ideas/elements/design that meet
their brief. This requires scaffolding and support in thinking. It also
requires collaboration as students negotiate a range of perspectives on issues
and success criteria.
|
Manage
|
The implication here is that students
are managing... and therefore the teacher's role must change to that of
facilitator and support. Students should be managing their own projects, and
will be required to develop timelines and plans to manage the process.
|
Design
|
When students design a solution to a problem they consider
how users will be presented with data, the degree of interaction with that
data and the various types of computational processing.
Students develop a design for their selected solution by breaking down the outcome into defined, simple tasks. The teacher supports the students and offers feedback. |
Plan
|
Students are taught to plan for sustainable use of
resources when managing projects and take into account ethical, health and
safety considerations and personal and social beliefs and values.
|
Identify
|
To identify one must establish or indicate who or what
someone or something is.
|
Investigate
|
This could be implemented through a group task where
students are evaluating designed solutions. The teacher supports the students’
investigation.
|
Reflecting on my Journey
I am beginning my journey through the Design and Digital Technologies course. I understand that my learning journey is going to be unique and different to everyone else. Through this blog, I will be reflecting on my understanding of the Australian Curriculum's Technologies curriculum as well as my personal reflection on the course material, the activities, group work and my progress throughout the subject.
I am starting a week later than everybody else so I am feeling a bit overwhelmed at the amount of group work that is involved in the subject so far. I look forward to catching up though and being on the same page as everybody else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)